How Hating White People Became the New National Sport ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

Politics

How Hating White People Became the New National Sport

Anti-white books have been forced upon millions of intimidated white employees and upon vulnerable children

Published

on

Reviewing an advanced copy of Ed Brodow’s The War on Whites: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport is a major education. The author makes it abundantly clear that amidst political correctness and the cancel culture, Americans are afraid to discuss the issue of race.

Not Remaining Quiet

Anyone seeking to express honest views on the race problem is labeled a racist if he is white, or an Uncle Tom, if he is black. Most people simply keep quiet.

Ed Brodow has elected not to remain quiet and his new book, The War on Whites, explores the truth about such provocative topics as systemic racism, white supremacy, and diversity.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: A Nation of Unsung Heroes

The War on Whites unmasks what Brodow calls the “anti-white racial inquisition that is poisoning America.” While we are accustomed to defining racism as discrimination aimed exclusively at black people, Brodow expands the definition to encompass discrimination against whites, which he says is just as onerous as discrimination against blacks or anyone else.

Code Language

What the Left calls “anti-racism” is merely code language for racism against white people. Trashing whites, he says, has become an acceptable part of American life.

Brodow expounds upon how whites are being demonized, marginalized, stereotyped, denigrated, and suppressed at every turn. “We have reached the point where legions dislike white people,” he says. “It’s not just people of color. Even white people dislike white people. It is open season on whites and, as strange as it might seem, large segments of the white population are all for it.” Many gullible whites are ashamed to be white and apologize at every turn.

The War on Whites exposes the insidious reality of diversity training. These popular trainings are now a multibillion-dollar industry. They fail, however, to create more diversity, Brodow says. They are all about racial indoctrination, not racial sensitivity. Their actual purpose is to suppress white people.

Undo Who You Are

Training sponsored by the city of Seattle and the Coca-Cola Company are typical of programs that demand white employees “undo their whiteness.” The media do not report this, yet, if black people were required to “undo their blackness,” he says, riots would ensue.

Citing the opinions of leading black thinkers – Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Bob Woodson, Candace Owens, Larry Elder, and John McWhorter – the author offers a convincing argument that systemic racism and white privilege are myths invented to demonize whites and foment racial division. “Systemic racism no longer exists in the United States,” he says. “Individual instances of racism are occurring and always will occur, against both blacks and whites, but to suggest that racism is institutionalized ignores the progress of the past 60 years.”

Rather than exhibiting systemic racism, white Americans have bent over backwards to make life better for blacks and other minorities. With the civil rights legislation of the 1960s, he says, “whites made it possible for blacks and other minorities to become full partners in the American Dream.

For the Good of Everyone

White power was unchallenged up to that time. Yet willingly, unilaterally, they relinquished it. No one forced them. They acted because it was the right thing to do. 58 years later, what are they receiving in return? Contempt, hatred, and intolerance.”

Brodow critiques Joe Biden’s executive order on equity. Biden, he says, is attempting to replace America’s belief in equality with an illegal policy that marginalizes whites. The objective of equity is not equality of opportunity, but rather equality of outcome. Everyone should have the same income, job success, house, neighborhood, etc.

Biden’s policy, Brodow says, will ensure that all new federal employees will be selected based upon their skin color so that preference can be given to non-whites.

Antiracist Literature That is Racist

Brodow analyzes popular racist literature exemplified by Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility and Ibram X. Kendi’s How to Be an Antiracist. These anti-white books have been forced upon millions of intimidated white employees and upon vulnerable children. Brodow says that the purpose of White Fragility is make whites feel guilty about being white.

DiAngelo asserts that if you are white and doubt that you are a racist, it is proof you are a racist. Kendi’s book advocates that “the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” DiAngelo and Kendi, both of whom hate white people, demand that all whites should confess their racism.

Actually, anyone who is coerced into reading either or both of these books should read The War on Whites.

The Whole Story

At a time when national unity, cooperation, and understanding are needed more than ever, vast segments of our population are doing all they can to demonize white people. The War on Whites tells the whole story.

– – – – –

 

 

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.


Jeff Davidson is the world's only holder of the title "The Work-Life Balance Expert®" as awarded by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He is the premier thought leader on work-life balance, integration, and harmony. Jeff speaks to organizations that seek to enhance their overall productivity by improving the effectiveness of their people. He is the author of Breathing Space, Simpler Living, Dial it Down, and Everyday Project Management. Visit www.BreathingSpace.com for more information on Jeff's keynote speeches and seminars, including: Managing the Pace with Grace® * Achieving Work-Life Balance™ * Managing Information and Communication Overload®



 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Politics

Pink Pussy Hats Deliver a Strong, Wrong Message

If the D.C. pink pussy hat wearers had had a unified message, then donning such hats did not help

Published

on

Donald Trump received numerous awards from the NAACP and other such groups, years before he ran for president. At one point, he had a black girlfriend for two years. Yet, the nanosecond that he circulated his MAGA hats, standing for “Make America Great Again,” those on the left called him a racist.

Automatically, The Worst Interpretation

Congress representatives such as AOC said that America was never great. Making America great again was attacked by the Left as referring to when white people ruled, and black people were subservient. MAGA suddenly meant ‘make the white majority supreme and keep minorities down.’ Do everything you can to return to the days of Jim Crow, redlining, and prejudice!

Donald Trump had no inkling that anyone would stumble over the phrase, “Make America Great Again.” It was his vision that every citizen who wanted to participate could be part of a glorious future. Leftists would have none of that.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: A Nation of Unsung Heroes

From inauguration day on January 20, 2017, and then beyond, women on the Left protested the Trump administration and G.O.P. policy by wearing what some have called pink “pussy” hats. Perhaps the protesters who wore these hats, in the shape of female genitalia, thought that somehow they brought appropriate attention to their cause.

Undesirable Attention

Where is the gravitas in wearing a pink pussy hat? Whatever attention it does bring, is not the sort that they necessarily seek. Can you take someone seriously who dons a hat that symbolizes the middle part of the female body?

For moment, suppose that men were marching to generate greater attention on, say, prostate cancer. Would they gain advocates by wearing hats that appeared to be symbolic of male genitalia? Would people regard them in earnest? Would their message have a strong impact? Or would their hats be a distraction?

We know that people at rallies wear hats intended to invoke a particular reaction. If one accepts that symbology has impact, then any fool with any kind of hat only needs to wear it. If the D.C. pink pussy hat wearers thought that they were making an impact, they had only to look to history to see that the hats were both inappropriate and unnecessary.

Many of the most effective messages in our history occurred in Washington, D.C. Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1963 didn’t resort to props as he appealed to the nation. His words were powerful, his logic was simple, and his emotional impact was strong.

Unified and On Target

Other than Madonna dreaming about blowing up the White House, can anyone recall their words? If the D.C. pink pussy hat wearers had had a unified, coherent message, then donning such hats did not help. Their hats spoke louder than their words.

Were any messages of eloquence included in any editions of Vital Speeches or in other speech compilations? Did any speech make it into textbooks? Can anyone recite any selected verses uttered that day? Did anything said get taught in classrooms? Will speech coaches employ the words spoken that day to demonstrate rhetoric skills? Do students in debate clubs reflect on such words?

The answer: ‘no,’ five consecutive times.

Pretend that a speaker is coming to your group to deliver a message. You’re not sure of the content, but you know it will be political. You’re eager to attend. The speaker shows up and as she’s introduced and delivers her message she’s wearing a pink pussy hat. Honestly, can you say that her impact is as great as it would have been without the ridiculous adornment?

Hats Off

The vital difference between MAGA hats and pussy hats is that MAGA hats are baseball caps with lettering which makes a statement. Both men and women wear them. There are no sexual organs or innuendos involved. The same is true for those wearing baseball caps with other messages.

“Let’s Go Brandon,” which is meant to mock Joe Biden, offers a message on the front of the cap. If you remove the lettering, or cover it, you have an everyday baseball cap. The only message that lasts from the protest on January 20, 2017, is that a large gathering of women who sought to make an impact beclowned themselves.

What symbology will they employ for the 2024 election?

– – – – –

Continue Reading

Life

What Does the Term African American Mean?

The Left vehemently champions racial division

Published

on

I’ve never understood why Black Americans for several decades running were referred to as African Americans. Even if their ancestors were from Africa, the majority of the nation’s 44 million Black Americans has never been to Africa, have no viable connection to the continent itself, and have little or no concern about it.

Please Explain it to Me

Now here’s the really confusing part. Black Canadians, to my knowledge, generally have never been called African Canadians. Black people in Mexico have not been called African Mexicans. There’s little use of this type of terminology in Europe such as African French, African Italians, African Spanish, or African Portuguese.

Why, only in America, did the description of Black Americans, namely African Americans ever take hold? Overarching names for the various races have fallen out of favor in recent years. White Americans generally are not referred to as Caucasians. Black Americans are not referred to as Negroes.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: A Nation of Unsung Heroes

Endless Morphs

You have to wonder how and why terminology, for various segments of our population, keeps morphing into something new. At one time white Americans referred to black people as colored people. If I were a member of the black community and was referred to by white people as a colored person, I would be upset. We all have a color!

Later, the most appropriate way to address someone of color was to say they were a person of color. However, that is also a misnomer as once again, we are all of some color.

Scientists, anthropologists, social researchers, and others have pointed out that theoretically there are no races. If you lined up every single person on Earth from the lightest skin to the darkest skin the gradation from person to person would be so slight as to be virtually undetectable.

I like the approach that actor Morgan Freeman has taken, and I wish that more people would adopt it. He has eloquently stated, on many occasions, that one way to stop being obsessed with race is to stop talking about it.

Obsessed with Race

A large faction within the U.S. – Democrats — are populated by subgroups with overlapping views: liberals, progressives, socialists, and Marxists. They want to keep race at the forefront of all public discourse. In their eyes, virtually any topic that you can address – the total eclipse in April, for example – has some underlying racial component embedded within it. Not all topics have a racial component, but that is what they propagate on a daily basis.

What’s more, people on the Left are on the ever-present lookout for anything which they regard as a transgression when others are referring to minorities. They particularly are focused on anything that a Conservative says, at any time, even if it was 30 or 40 years ago, that to the Left some way represents a slight or lack of respect for minorities, particularly Black Americans.

For these ‘race police’ it’s like a game. They are delighted when they are able to find something, anything, that they can aggrandize to the hilt, have the mainstream media pick up, and whip into a social and cultural frenzy.

This bit of historical news might be hard to recall, but four years before Barack Obama was elected U.S. president, the topic of race was less contentious. A Gallup Poll revealed that 74% White Americans and 68% of Black Americans felt that race relations in the country were good. 19 years later, 43% of White people and 33% of Black people reported the same.

If we could only return to those pre-Obama days when Americans, of all types, had some common goals and shared the same types of aspirations such as succeeding in their professions, building a strong financial base for their family, and raising happy and healthy children.

Divided Forever?

Alas, with so many on the Left vehemently championing racial division it looks as if we don’t have good prospects, at least for the immediate future, to return to those hallowed, pre-Obama days. As an eternal optimist, however, I believe that one day the clamor will die down, and once again, we will simply all be Americans.

—–

 

Continue Reading

 

Trending