tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post6441569737974436322..comments2023-10-18T03:46:43.663-07:00Comments on AWM: Anti-White Media: Near To Hellneoswabianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00475859928794823114noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post-63218183616029587712011-03-14T17:08:15.819-07:002011-03-14T17:08:15.819-07:00Jews. So predictable.Jews. So predictable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post-31372265745061695232010-12-13T12:48:50.671-08:002010-12-13T12:48:50.671-08:00crimesofthetimes.blogspot.com addresses this issue...crimesofthetimes.blogspot.com addresses this issue nicely. <br /><br />please read; please contribute.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post-45440878766690849122010-12-04T05:19:41.048-08:002010-12-04T05:19:41.048-08:00continued from anonymous:
Factually Incorrect Fir...continued from anonymous:<br /><br />Factually Incorrect Firemen<br />Which brings us back to that pesky fireman statue. Intended to commemorate those who died in the 9/11 attack, the proposed sculpture was to borrow the now-familiar image of those firemen raising the flag amidst the rubble like the Marines did at Iwo Jima. But, as we all know, the City and its contractor have decided that instead of depicting the three white guys who actually raised the flag, they’re going to change them into a black guy, an Hispanic guy and one token white guy (it goes without saying, that if the firemen had been three black guys, this controversy never would have arisen).<br /><br />Now, I’ve already covered all this in my syndicated column, which I think is pretty good. (Oh, by the way, the San Francisco Chronicle just decided to carry it, if you can believe that.) And I learned only now that they’ve put the kibosh on the statue. But my point remains. Let’s pick up where I began before we got into all of the postmodernism stuff.<br /><br />Remember that black fireman’s declaration: “I think the artistic expression of diversity would supersede any concern over factual correctness.”<br /><br />“Factual correctness”! I just think that’s brilliant, even if it was by accident. We think the politically correct are silly because they elevate “inclusiveness” over all other criteria. The handicapped are “physically challenged,” failures are “non-traditional successes,” ex-convicts are members of the “ex-offender community” (a serious voting bloc in your nation’s capital; see “Make it a State“), and so on. We deride political correctness as a fad of certain kinds of liberals terrified to speak plainly. Conservatives have managed to define political correctness — an age-old lefty term — as something a bit silly and unserious.<br /><br />Well, now there’s a term for us too. We’re just being “factually correct.” The truth is just one more perspective — and not even a very useful one, since the highest value is no longer capital-T Truth, but diversity, inclusiveness, whatever. Women don’t make good soldiers? Oh, that’s just so much “factual correctness.” Black cooks during World War II probably didn’t know how to drive German submarines? Please, peddle your factually correct wares someplace else. You claim that reality isn’t a socially constructed linguistic artifice? Well! Now you’re just taking this factual correctness thing too far.<br /><br />And since artistic expression of diversity supercedes any concern over factual correctness, you can just imagine how Hollywood and Harvard can now get the 9/11 story right. First of all, those planes were hijacked by homophobic Catholic priests and the senior management of Enron. Let’s change the name of Osama bin Laden to… hmmm… “Newt Gingrich.” And he destroyed the World Trade Center out of a homophobic desire to erase the implied phallic competition inherent in the male-oriented capitalism presented by those towers. The “firemen” were actually the faculty of the New School for Social Research, with Asian and homosexual women in wheelchairs leading the charge up the stairs of the burning building. Rudy Giuliani was mayor, but he refused to help any non-white, taxpaying victims. And, oh yeah, the planes were fueled by the adverbs in Dubliners…neoswabianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00475859928794823114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post-60518096037086758562010-12-01T13:04:50.244-08:002010-12-01T13:04:50.244-08:00Blonde woman paired up with a black guy.
Why do t...Blonde woman paired up with a black guy.<br /><br />Why do the writers and casting agents in Hollywood (many of whom are jewish interestingly) pick this combo when they want to portray their interracial crap?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1025376597501187735.post-18119455137333553922010-11-27T14:14:28.798-08:002010-11-27T14:14:28.798-08:00I know what you mean. I agree. It’s phony. And as ...I know what you mean. I agree. It’s phony. And as such, nauseating. What you describe is so well known, that it has a name. It’s called “The Magic Negro” syndrome. And it effects many of Hollywood’s liberal elites. These are the ones who love to portray every black male as handsome, friendly, honest, moral, brave, and highly intelligent; endowed with deep wisdom that he uses to save and redeem the white man, who they love to portray as ugly, wimpish, dumb, cowardly, weak, and helpless. <br /><br />Here is a cartoon that illustrates the “Magic Negro”: <br /><br />http://www.bendib.com/newones/2003/july/large/Magic-Negro.jpg <br /><br />Here is another term for it, described by Jonah Goldberg in National Review:<br /><br />“The Numinous Negro”<br /><br />“Last August, the incomparable Richard Brookhiser (okay, he’s comparable, but only to really talented and impressive people) wrote a wonderful essay for National Review entitled “The Numinous Negro: His importance in our lives; why he is fading.” Brookhiser described the pervasive habit in American culture, high and low, of portraying blacks as “numinous.” Numinous is defined in the dictionary as “of or pertaining to a numen,” the Roman word for “the presiding divinity … of a place.” It also means “spiritually elevated.” Numinous Negroes are the cadres of blacks, real and imagined, that our culture chooses to put on a pedestal — to treat as if they are somehow more capable of seeing the important truths, spiritual and moral. <br /><br />Brookhiser uses the word Negro simply because we still used the word Negro when we first started painting blacks in numinous hues. The Numinous Negro can be seen “in the gooey prose of white liberals whenever a Negro appears,” writes Brookhiser, or in any of scores of movies, like ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ and ‘The Green Mile’. <br /><br />The most famous Numinous Negro was, of course, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose real gifts and real flaws have alike been enshrouded in a holy veil of secular divinity. Blacks themselves are active participants in this cultural project. For example, the Congressional Black Caucus frequently calls itself the “conscience of the Congress” — because, well, because they’re black. I myself have written about my habit of spotting the “anachronistic black man” in movies. These are black characters who, for Numinous reasons, are portrayed in ways which make no sense historically. My favorite recent example was the black galley cook in the WWII movie U-571 who not only bossed around all the white sailors (our armed forces were still decidedly segregated in WWII) but, when given the chance, turned out to be capable not only of driving a submarine, but of driving a German one. The all-time classic anachronistic-black-man movie, however, was 1978’s The Norseman, in which Deacon Jones (the black NFL Hall of Famer) plays one of the self-described “blonde warriors.” END OF ARTICLE EXCERPT<br /><br />Continue in next post...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com