suzyrice.com Rotating Header Image

LIBERALS’ CONTINUED OBSESSION WITH THOSE OF US WITH “LIGHTER SKIN TONE”

If you think the putridity of Frank Rich (fading whites fear the rise of Obama…) is preposterously resource wasting (as I do), consider this article I happened upon while trying to make a getaway from the latest Rich article, this one, just as Leftwing-putrid and preposterous:

“Book Review: WHO’S WHITE?”

By LINDA GORDON
Published: March 25, 2010

Nell Irvin Painter’s title, “The History of White People,” is a provocation in several ways: it’s monumental in sweep, and its absurd grandiosity should call to mind the fact that writing a “History of Black People” might seem perfectly reasonable to white people. But the title is literally accurate, because the book traces characterizations of the lighter-skinned people we call white today, starting with the ancient Scythians. For those who have not yet registered how much these characterizations have changed, let me assure you that sensory observation was not the basis of racial nomenclature.

There’s a big photo of writer, Gordon, adjacent her jaw-boning backporch article — does she really spend any moment of her life ruminating with others about the mysteries (“sensory observation”!) of those pesky “White people,” the ones with that “lighter skin” that tests the patience of others in their “darker skin escapism”?

Pardon me for a bit of a rant here but I have always found the (seemingly, everywhere, among all people who are not Caucasian) contest they engage in among their own kind and with “other kinds” — that one wherein the “lighter skinned” are favored, the “darker” have problems buying enough skin bleaching creme and powder to conceal who they are — to be the actual racism that permeates humanity. But let a “White person” or even “lighter skinned” one among another race make any note of this and, yikes, “racist“!

The actual racism is among races other than Caucasian who devote such keenly emotional attention to analyzing, evaluating and judging if not condemning others based upon how light or dark they may be within their own race and among races other than their own.

And now they have a book about “the other,” those “White people” who, apparently, are to now be subjugated to those “lower classes,” complete with a graph labeled with all those words-for-people they deem among those lowdowners: “Norse, Jewish, Europeans, Celts, Caucasians, Greek, Roman, BARBARIAN“!

I thought this line from that patently racist book review was the truly despicable pebble among the peas:

…writing a “History of Black People” might seem perfectly reasonable to white people.

Oh, reaaallllyyy? As an individual among “white people,” I share here that I have never, ever, not once, considered it to be “perfectly reasonable to” write a book or even consider looking into a book about “the history of black people.”

And take a bit of a pause with that book title (sorry if I am by this point testing anyone’s patience), “Who’s White?”. The New York Times, their “reviewer” writer and the book author find it unnaturally difficult to believe that “White” even exists — they project their own “dark skinned” quandary onto the rest of humanity, as in, since their realities consist of frequent and ongoing pushes and pulls about who is lighter, who is darker, who wants to be the other, perhaps hates the other but seeks to possess that which they are not (racism, racial animosity, desire that which one isn’t or does not ‘own’ and seek to eradicate the one who has ‘it’ by assuming what they have) — the very book and article title (as also it’s contents, the review itself that ensues) makes it a contestable, if even disbelievable unreality: “who IS White,” “does it even exist,” “it can’t exist” and other de-valuing snorts.

I’ve read numerous snarls on the internet in the last five years or so from people who clearly were not “White” vowing that no “White people” even exist — can’t be, they (we, I’m Caucasian — Norse and Anglo-Saxon, specifically) ~just CAN’T exist, we’re not REALLY “White”, we’re all hiding some past history of being Black by some degree~, or so the snarling goes.

Of late, I read and hear this type of unhappy grousing in media and related politics very often and it ALL originates with “darker skinned” (Black or otherwise) people. Their object of argument is always “White people” (or, the “lighter skinned” among humanity). Or among the Leftwing socio-politically who are not only obsessed with labelling others a despicable term (“racist” and/or “hater”) based upon the Left’s inherent, own character failings: politically, it’s an emotionally agitating term, so the Left deploys it for that purpose, while disregarding that they foment and regenerate actual “class warfare” issues. Mostly, it comes down to cosmetics and personal achievements or lack of either or both, but in a Marxist, class-warfare based politic of wealth/personal property redistribution, personal achievement is subjugated to the political class (and the political class gets the ‘elevation’).

By declaring there are “lower classes” that are to be “empowered,” then, one is declaring an active racism based upon assigning one race (or some races, race as “kind of people” selected out to distinguish from others) to “lower” and another (or others) to “upper” — switching the races (as “classes”) around does not change the racism involved, but that’s the current political movement (Marxism-Communism) being waged by Barack Obama and so many of his associates. It’s certainly the operational characteristic observed by most Liberals.

And that is the snarling disparity born from among jealousy and animosity of others. Unfortunately, it’s also the reason why actual racists blame everyone ELSE for being “racist” especially when/if anyone objects to that sort of stone-age (or stoned age) rock tossing: object or consider it the silliness that it is — you’re “White,” they aren’t, does it really matter?

To racists, yes, it matters, because though they carry suspicions about your “Whiteness,” they also want to be among the “lighter skinned” but they don’t want you to be, though you are born with it.

About that, witness Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee on television (CAVUTO, 03/25/10) brazenly, braggerdly proclaiming that the “health care legislation” was (actually):

“…a matter of empowering people from third class status to first class status…what we’re doing with this health care bill is moving all people to first class status…it has taken people from second class status…”

This sheds more light (pun intended) on the ongoing nastiness and pejoratives levied against Americans by the likes of Rep. John Conyers if not by Barack Obama himself (whose indecent denigration of his grandmother as “a typical white person” was beneath contempt, and his audience laughed at that, a racist-response affirming his racialist nastiness and lack of decency even about his own kin). I am aware of Obama’s later-attempts at revisionism directed at us “stupid White people” — he says he really didn’t mean whatever but meant whatever instead — though what he said and what he meant the first time he said it (video, quote) is clear to even the most dull-witted among us lesser-than-grandiose “White people”: he meant it racially, he and audience (mostly Blacks) laughed at the stupidity of the “typical White person”.

Back to the “empowering of the lower classes” boombast by Sheila Jackson Lee, Barack Obama and the rest of the racialists who today populate a great number of the Democratic Party…

…it really is about redirecting the property of others to those these Black Racists deem “should have it” more than those who generated it, and, in doing so, “de-classing” or subjugating others to suit their demands. It’s an issue of “class” to them, changing class: “empowering people from third class status…to first class status” and in doing so, required for that “empowering,” lowering the class of those they are victimizing.

If you object, you’re “a racist hater” and if you ask about their preferred-to-be-empowered “class,” you’re a “racist hater” who is, in their heads, likely as anything to also “White.” “White,” as in, to be used by them, lowered, ridiculed, disbelieved as to very existence…

It’s their process of racism.

Maybe the New York Times can earn a bit of money by reproducing that graphic of theirs that appears with this dreadfully racist “review” of theirs and what’s left of their readership can frame and commemorate it for perpetuity on their Simpering Loser Walls of Jealousy — along with such a book being reviewed, “Who’s White?”. Maybe a button with Frank Rich’s mentally ill declaration about “fading whites…” could raise them a few bucks.

Publisher, the book and the book reviewer should find themselves well situated on a garbage barge floating away from New York: racism, the Leftwing’s leading (and only) export.

175wde_HappyWhitePersonDayMeanwhile, those of us among the Muscle Tribe of Danger and Excellence will be right here…


C O M M E N T S : now closed