Counter-Currents
890 words
For any leftists who are lurking on this website, let me disappoint you from the outset: this essay is not about why whites should call blacks “the n-word.”
Not long ago I saw an old high school friend I had lost touch with for several years who, most unfortunately, has joined the ranks of our reigning elite. Now a Social Justice Warrior (SJW) at a prominent law school, she is one of those people who genuinely thinks Slavoj Žižek is a deplorable racist who must be cast out of leftist thought. I am fairly upfront about what I believe, so our reconnection got off to a rocky start. As is often the case though, things eased up a bit after a few drinks, and I was reminded of why we were friends so many years ago.
Then a funny thing happened: I used the word “negro” and she went ballistic. I used the word because I was quoting someone who had used it, a black guy I used to know, while telling an anecdote. After her tirade, I pointed out the context to her—as if she were somehow unaware of it—and asked if I was not allowed to quote black people. She assured me that I was not unconditionally allowed to quote blacks, no. I told her that that seemed silly, and that, moreover, it was clear I had intended no malice when I said it, and on top of that, no blacks were around to hear me say it and be hurt. I waxed philosophical: “Is it really hate speech if only white people hear it?” She was clearly annoyed, but relented, and said, “just finish your story.” I intended to, and picked up slightly before my prior point of interruption:
“So like I was saying, then K-Lo told me, ‘What you need to do is find yourself some big ass negro and—’”
“Did you really fucking need to say it again!?” she screamed, rhetorically. I couldn’t help myself and started laughing. Once again we went around in circles over whether we have some kind of “right” to use that particular word or not. Like every censor who is without the power or will to use violence, she glibly recommended a great number of alternatives that could, in her eyes, replace my offending syllables. And like every censor, she also went to great lengths to explain to me why my offensive word was “unnecessary” and “unneeded” for what I was trying to communicate. After a few minutes, I was allowed to finish my anecdote, which I managed to do without saying the word “negro” again.
But that was hardly the end of it. Over the course of the evening, I said “retarded” once and “faggot” once. Both words sent her over the edge and required a whole tangential conversation to “unpack” what had happened. I was not trying to offend her, by any means—I am not a troll. “Faggot” and “retard” are just words I use in casual conversation. I grew up using them, and more importantly, I find them descriptive and vibrant. “Negro,” is not a word I use, but when I quote someone, I am going to do so accurately. None of this bothered my friend when we were both teenagers, but since then she’s attended more than one elite institution of higher emoting.
The next day, in thinking the evening over, I had an epiphany. It was a realization so obvious, I did not have it until well into my twenties: by being so sensitive, my friend was granting me a unique power over her. Had I wanted to, I could have upset her as frequently as I liked. All it takes is the verbalizing of a few key words and I can send her into conniptions. This power is akin to a “cheat” in a video game, a voodoo doll, or some kind of pagan spell that delivers great injury to someone by saying just a few magic words.
You and I have no such weakness. There is no word in the English language (or any other) that when uttered, sends me into fits or bouts of moralistic shouting. SJWs, meanwhile, can have their entire days ruined by accidentally overhearing a word or two. Remember, these sorts of reactions to “nigger” and other outdated epithets are learned—not organic. SJWs have chosen to make themselves this way. SJWs view it as virtuous to be so sensitive. Put another way, they view weakness as a moral good.
So why not exploit that? SJWs deserve to be reminded of how backwards their worldview is, and how insane it is that they have elected to adopt an ideology that makes them weaker. One superb (and low-cost for you) way of doing that is to mercilessly weaponize the very weakness they have donned in an attempt to signal their moral superiority over the rest of us. In this sense, hate speech makes us powerful—so use it.
If you cannot think of a good way of introducing this tactic with the SJW in your life, consider asking him this: “Hey, did you know that Martin Luther King Jr. used the word ‘negro’ fifteen times in his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech? He even positively cites a ‘negro spiritual’ at the end of it. Isn’t that interesting?”
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
17 comments
Blacks don’t really hate the “N-word.” In fact, they love it. They just hate it when Whitey uses it. It’s their special little expression that only they can use. They relish condemning and demoralizing Whites when they dare to say it too.
Blacks claim to have taken a negative and ‘racist’ expression and empowered it for their own good. It’s incredulous that anyone would believe such nonsense. In truth, Blacks often use it to degrade each other which is anything but ‘uplifting’ and ’empowering.’
Think about it: How often do you hear Chinese people refer to each other as ‘chinks’ or ‘slant-eyed’ or ‘slope-heads’? How often do Japanese people greet each other with the expression ‘Jap’? Do Vietnamese people call each other ‘gooks’? Of course not. They have much more personal honor and integrity than to stoop to such slang. Yet Blacks, in contrast, continuously refer to each other as ‘N-words’!? This is because Blacks are in large measure a race of primitive, low-intelligence and dysfunctional misfits. They lack even the most basic common sense to realize that using degrading and insulting expressions to refer to one’s own kind is less than ’empowering.’
This is one of many reason why American Blacks as a whole can never be ‘fixed.’ They will continue to lag far behind all other racial groups because, essentially, they’re too stupid and self-entitled to recognize their own genetic predicament and shortcomings. They are a people who cannot and will not be reformed.
Nurture cannot “reform” nature.
“Nurture cannot “reform” nature” – This is not quite the entire truth. You see, Blacks can still reform some aspects of their lives if they so desire. There have indeed been some individual Blacks who have changed the direction of their lives in positive ways, although admittedly it will always be an uphill struggle for them. There is volition that is involved and regardless of one’s more natural proclivities, the conscious will can still override poor life choices. Humans have the capacity to do this in spite of the pull of our innate impulses.
Such personal reforms, however, has not happened on any large scale when it comes to American Blacks and I do not believe it ever will. On a collective or corporate level, they cannot be reformed as a race of people. It is delusional, as you are quite aware, that they can be turned into the kind of people Whites are. This, however, does not provide them any justification for either giving in to their natural desires nor absolving them from having to live responsibly and civilly within our societies.
Moreover, possessing low-IQ and being raised in poverty does not guarantee that one must turn to a life of crime and thuggery. There are millions of illiterate third-world peoples who are much poorer than any ghetto-dwelling Dindu in America, yet they consciously choose not to steal, rob and kill others. Thus, poverty, low intelligence and less desirable genetic traits are not a barrier to living honorably and circumspect in one’s life.
Blacks, then, have no excuse. If they were to argue that their innate criminal proclivities are the result of their genetics, it would be refuted by the sheer fact that Blacks possess human volition which makes them personally accountability for their choices, that on a rudimentary level they understand the difference between right and wrong, including the fact that not all Blacks have given themselves over to a life of crime. In other words, it can be done.
Thus, in a real sense, Blacks cannot be reformed because they will not be reformed.
Bring back your website!!!
You wrote: “This is because Blacks are in large measure a race of primitive, low-intelligence and dysfunctional misfits. They lack even the most basic common sense to realize that using degrading and insulting expressions to refer to one’s own kind is less than ’empowering.’”
This is such an important point. Blacks are the only group who use their own slur against each other, and they are serious. Anyone with abstract thought would give the second grade reply: “If that’s what I am then what are you?” Black’s are in-the-moment people. They see a black person in front of them, and that is the insult used against black people. The book Face to Face with Race gives numerous examples of blacks giving their intellectual abilities away.
Very good observation, thanks.
At that occasion, I would like to give my interpretation of SJWism:
very simply, it´s about “group”. And consequently, it´s about: who belongs, and who doesn´t. In-group and out-group.
Now… obvioulsy, “group” equals surviving
-> so that explains the maximal emotionality of the whole subject: the SJW conceives himself as the protector of group integrity, i.e. protector of life itself: you must not question the group consensus or otherwise the group implodes and all die! It is the life-and-death struggle, and only the SJW in his fight against the evil non-SJWs guarantees the continuation of life.
We can add an element to even increase the emotionality: by common, if hypocritically denied, consensus, the White is the adult and the negro is the child
-> so not only does the SJW save life but he saves the life of the children! The vulnerable, weak and dependant against the evil predator!
So that explains the touchiness of the SJW.
Interestingly… maybe it´s not true that we don´t have a similar spot: let the SJW claim that the n*gger belongs to us, that race-mixing is ok… and, at least I, am triggered like the SJW for the rest of the day (hey… right here is the article about race-mixing in advertising… let me see my local grocery prospect with the inevitable n*iggers and, worse, mixed-race n*gglets… !! )
: because it is exactly the same: we, too, want to protect the group, and by consequence, life: ONLY if our race, our gen-pol, can remain unpolluted, is there a future! No less than for the SJW
and actually more so because it´s real and not just fantasized, WE fight the struggle of life and death.
Is there a solution to the conflict? Of-effing-course: get the f*** out with your n****** and just leave us the f*** alone !
Not difficult!
To the author: you need to choose your “friends” more carefully.
The most insidious thing that blacks have accomplished (yes, they have accomplished something) is the insertion of “White Boy” into the American vernacular. You see it all the time, white men describing themselves as “White Boys.” It is degrading, and emasculating.
You think black’s came up with that? You know (((who))) thinks that stuff up. Anyway, I would rather be a white boy than anything these other groups are.
I prefer to be referred to as a white man, however if you are comfortable with being called a boy by non-whites–drive on.
WWWM: Reminds me of one of the lines of dialogue on the Ken Burns’ PBS series The Civil War in which a White (at the time of the ACW) said “anything was preferable to being one of those niggers (on a plantation, but really, any nigra)”. Something very close to that, but you get the picture.
I do, however, agree with Peter Quint in not allowing the boy label to put upon us. My father once blurted out knee jerk quick, when called a boy by someone, “Boy???? I ain’t no damned nigger”. He evidently always associated boy with only negroes. Which has a lot of merit because most adult negroes I have encountered eventually exhibit the same behavior as 10, 11, 12 year olds. The are essentially pre-teens in adult bodies; dangerous when getting physically violent.
Negroes are much more like this percentage wise than Whites.
If you want to be strategic with it, recognize that most third-parties to your conversations with commies have internalized the language-policing. Best to stick to recently-banned words or words which haven’t yet been formally prohibited. “Transgendereds”, for instance.
Hahah
I have had simular experiences. Yeasterday at work I asked a co-worker How his trip to New Orleans was. He is a Young Guy, maybe 20 years old. We work in Germany, and he had visited family in USA. He said it had been great, But in the next breath he mentioned that you can Buy a Gun in a supermarket over there. And then he said “and you know, They are all so… you know, towards the blacks”. I answered “Yeah, americans are great. Always encouraging and friendly”. He said “yes yes.., the whites are” and then smiled and expected a “you-know-how-it-is”-smyle back from me. I answered “Oh, so the blacks are all unfriendly”. He seemed really disturbed by that, But went on Talking about “My family there are very Christian, chatolics…” and, like a worse then ever: “you know.., They all voted Trump”. I smiled and got exited, “‘man What an experience!” And jokingly shounted “Trump, Trump”. This Guy it a german. He dont fake his emotions. He has hate in his eyes But is convinced it is Love.I dont think he ever have encountered someone with a different opinion. They learn their children here that germany is evil.
In actual fact a lot of liberals slip up and get into hot water with the ever-evolving, fast-changing pace of correct politically-correct terms, especially the intelligent ones who don’t watch a lot of trash TV/read the msm, eg Benedict Cumberbatch. Perhaps the funniest encounter I ever over-heard was a young trendy liberal female, fresh out of college, berating her older liberal brother for him using the word ‘normal’ ! ”Never, never, ever use the word ‘normal’ – its the worst thing you can say!!” Apparently the correct politically correct term THAT WEEK was ‘white, cis-gender, non-disabled person’.
Your info on the Martin Luther King’s speech is of a value far above rubies!
“If you cannot think of a good way of introducing this tactic with the SJW in your life, consider asking him this: “Hey, did you know that Martin Luther King Jr. used the word ‘negro’ fifteen times in his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech? He even positively cites a ‘negro spiritual’ at the end of it. Isn’t that interesting?” “
That MLK (“Michael King”) won’t cut any ice. Black’s say whatever they want, and say nigger all the time. This politically correct speech is designed to tell white people what to say so we will always lose the debate. It is a tactic, and an effective one. Pointing out their hypocrisy is only fund amongst ourselves. The anti-white crowd love their hypocrisy.
I must disagree with you analysis. The purpose of her screaming and forced “unpacking” is policing speech. After two or three times a western man, will out of courtesy, refrain to use words that upset someone. Desired effect achieved.
It is a minor variation of the old gambit “Did he die a quick death?” lie to the battlefield comrades widow. Do you tell the truth or do you lie and say that her husband died after two days of terrible agony? Most Whites pick the comforting lie. So you self censor the word “faggot” or “negro” and use the latest term just to avoid the “unpacking” EVERY TIME the person you are talking to is triggered.
It is Pavlovian training regime that is astonishingly effective. In the space of 40 years Nigger has become Colored becomes Negro becomes Black becomes African-American becomes Person of Color (but NOT colored!). These changes are because we are a rule based race (See the book: “You Gentiles”) The real embarrassments come when you talk about institutions that have set their names in stone, like the United Negro College Fund. As the new terms for whatever float past, these act as sign posts for language changes. It is as insidious as Orwell’s 1984 as each old term falls down the Memory Hole.
Resist this mind control as much as possible, you will sleep better.
I have noticed the same. It is as if they are using the name changes to exert some kind of control over mighty Whitey. To exercise some kind of power over Whitey until that day when they have an absolute majority of the population, in all states and localities. And Whitey keeps letting them do it. They hijack words such as “liberal”, “progressive” and use meanings contrary to the original. Nothing liberal or progress with the political LEFT.
Orientals are in on it, too. Oriental was someone from the orient. Orient is from the past participle of the Latin verb meaning to come out into the open, come out of hiding. So, Orient was the direction (from the Roman world) from whence the sun came up. Being Latin it is a White man’s (Roman) word.
Now, the Orientals demand that Asian be used, as if they should be lumped into a category with muslims and hindus and pacific islanders. Which Orientals would vociferously resist. But Asia is a White man’s word as well; Latin for the land mass from the Levant (eastern shores of the Med) toward the Orient.
Essentially we went from the mongoloid (race) to Oriental to Asian. I suspect one day in the next decade or two a new name will be required and “asian” will be claimed a pejorative.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment