This is Charles Martel coming to you from Florida for the Canada Free Press because without America there is no freedom.
I’m going to digress from my usual direct political take to discuss something that while oblique, is often determinative in our political outcomes.
Did you see or are you familiar with the Rasmussen survey last year in which he asked of blacks and whites “Do you agree or disagree with this statement: “It’s okay to be white.”
Among blacks, 8% responded “somewhat disagree”; 18% said “strongly disagree”; and 21% said “not sure.” So while 1 out 5 black people absolutely don’t think it’s okay to be white, 47%, nearly half, couldn’t affirmatively state that it was okay to be white.
The overwhelming amount of racial hatred in America, of racism, of judging someone by their color is on the part of blacks toward whites. I am in no way suggesting that all black people are racist and hate white people, nor am I ignorant to the fact that there are white racists. What I am saying is that there is an enormous disparity in percentages and even raw numbers between the two, and the hugely greater percentage and number rests with African-Americans.
The fact is, white racists, when you find them, are the assistant night manager on the grave yard shift in a 24-hour convenience store, they have neither voice nor standing in the white community; whereas black racists are found in academia, church pulpits, and elected positions. Racism in the white community is unacceptable; the individual will suffer social and economic penalty; whereas in the black community while there are many people who may disagree with racist attitudes toward whites, there is no ostracization, no punishment to be suffered.
As evidence, think of Louis Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, and Jeremiah Wright. Farrakhan is as despicable a creature to ever parade across the country’s public stage; Sharpton, in addition to the Tawana Brawley hoax that made him infamous, was directly responsible for inciting the riots at Freddie’s Record Mart in which 8 people died, as well as the Crown Heights riots in which Lemrick Nelson murdered rabbinical student Yankel Rosenbaum.
Support Canada Free Press
Reverend Wright’s anti-white rhetoric was so inflammable that then presidential candidate Barack Obama was, quote, “saddened,” and felt constrained to distance himself from both the reverend and his remarks.
None of these men have ever suffered any lack of standing in the black community because of word or action; indeed, it is impossible to compile a top 10 list of black leaders at any time over the last 30 to 40 years that does not contain the names of Farrakhan and Sharpton. By the way, for anyone too young to recall these events, there is an abundance of information easily available with any search engine.
Most often, if you suggest to a black person anything untoward about any of these three men, you will be told they will pick their leaders and it’s none of your business. Fair enough; then I will conclude, as I have, that the overwhelming amount of racism in this country is owned by blacks, as I would expect them to believe of whites if we looked to David Dukes for leadership.
Let’s consider some black academics. Start with Rutgers professor, Brittany Cooper, quote “We got to get these mother******* out. Whiteness is largely, you know, an inconvenient interruption.” Or this from Texas A & M adjunct, Tommy Curry “In order to be equal, in order to be liberated, some white people might have to die.” This paragon of scholarship has a blog with the motto “White people are the problem.”
Or how about the psychiatrist, Aruna Khilanani who said to a Yale School of Medicine audience that she “had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step.”
Then there is the University of Georgia teaching assistant who wrote on Facebook “Some white people may have to die for black communities to be made whole.”
Just a few days ago, at the University of California, San Francisco, guest speaker Dante King declared that “whites are psychopaths. I think whites are psychotic.” Mr King, a surname obviously not applicable to his intellect, has also averred that, quote “in America we have written into law, you can rape black women.”
It took me less than 10 minutes to find these examples, and note that I’ve taken them from different sections of the country. None of these people suffered professional damage. I suppose this could be labelled black privilege.
How would you like to have your child being taught or lectured to by one of these folks? How do you feel about your tax dollars supporting them? Replace “white” with “black” and put the words in the mouths of any white person. What do you think would be the repercussions? For me, what is most disturbing, is what happens when this message reaches the ears of an angry and disturbed young black person?
Most Academics and black leaders will argue that for the minority race, the one, in their construct, being oppressed, it is impossible to be racist; instead, they insist on substituting the word “biased.” Blacks who hate whites are said to have a “white bias.” First, to those who propound that notion, I’m afraid they will have to come to terms with -- or don’t and I invite them to perform unnatural acts upon themselves –that I do not and will not abrogate my right to define what is racist.
(As an aside, by their definition the country of South Africa is so over teeming with racists that I think our Congress and indeed the world should immediately institute trade embargoes. I’m sure all fair-minded progressives will agree.)
To return to my thread, to acquiesce to the progressive definition is to give up debate. You see, if you can’t properly define something, then you can’t discuss it; and if you can’t discuss it, then you can’t fix it. In fact, given the effort on the left to make this subject unnecessarily complex and difficult, the obvious conclusion becomes that they don’t desire to fix it; that blacks hating whites and the manifestation of that hatred in violence is okay, it’s a good thing.
I’m not surrendering myself to their arbitrary rules and definitions. So here it is put simple: If you hate someone because of their skin color, then you are a racist, case closed. As easy as it is obvious, isn’t it? Filled with logic and common sense.
Further, I can think of no greater oppression than robbing, beating, raping or murdering someone. Is there anyone, anywhere, no matter their political stripe, willing to argue that taking someone’s life isn’t oppression? That strikes me as the ultimate oppression.
If that person exists, he or she is an idiot, or perhaps, I don’t know, maybe a racist. Compare these 2 statements: The killer was a white racist; the killer had an anti-black bias. One sounds abhorrent and reprehensible; the other as if it were incidental to the crime. The contrast is laughable, or would be if the subject weren’t so terrible. And certainly no one on the left would allow, and nor should they, for that kind of euphemism if a white person murders a black person. The fact is to tackle this problem or any other, a common currency of language is imperative. The same framework must be applied to all.
And this is a problem that must be tackled. While we are all more likely to be victimized by someone of our own race, study, after study, after study has shown that overwhelmingly interracial crime is a crime of blacks on whites. Of course, this is empirically obvious to anyone paying attention to their local news. But if you want more codified evidence, look up any year’s FBI crime statistics.
Just a couple of examples…Per the NYTimes, a white person is 20X more likely to be shot by a black person than a black person is by a white person. Assault and rape have similar disparities. By the way, Mr King’s lunatic ravings notwithstanding, FBI tables find that rape of black women by white men is N/S, that’s statistical jargon for Not statistically significant, meaning it’s simply a chance number, not significant of any pattern.
Often, when faced with the stats on rape, you’ll hear apologists, black and white, respond with “Yeah, but white men used to rape black women.” Well, if that’s their rationale I wish they’d be more direct with something like “Because of past injustices it’s okay for blacks to rape white women today.” I mean, that is what’s implied.
The truth is there is no decent rationale for crime of any kind. At some point, there is a reaction: prisons fill or vigilante’s react. No one is well served.
After the acts of violence, the critical point for me is that politicians, white and black, gin up racial hatred, using envy as the pot stirrer, in order to receive and maintain black voters. Dems can’t win without overwhelming black support, we’re talking 85% or higher, so the implied message to blacks is that anything wrong in your life is the fault of white people. Historically, among all people, envy is an easy sell; that’s why it’s one of the original sins.
Today, as we move ever further from personal responsibility, envy is the easiest card to play in any politician’s hand…as well as the worst.
For the first time in a long time, we may have reached a point where a significant number of blacks are so weary of the new plantation to which progressives have yoked them, that they may, it seems, be willing to take a look and even try the other team. It is a consummation devoutly to be wished. Turning away from the Marxist divide and singing from the same hymnal of personal responsibility is the path to peace and prosperity for all of us. This is Charles Martel for the Canada Free Press. You can catch me on Instagram and CharlesMartelCFP.
View Comments
Charles Martel, laying down the Hammer for Canada Free Press
Charles can be found on Rumble and on Spotify as @CharlesMartelCFP
