Shocking racist tweets follow high school basketball win by all-white team

HOWELL, MI -- Shocking tweets celebrating a "white" team's victory erupted Thursday following the Howell boys basketball win over Grand Blanc.

Several students in Howell are now facing disciplinary action, according to the high school principal.

Grand Blanc lost 54-49 to Howell in the Class A regional final at Linden High School Thursday.

Among the Twitter messages posted after the game the night of March 13:

"Not only did we beat Grand Blanc but we're all white. Howell's the definite winner tonight."

"All hail white power. #HitlerIsMyDad"

"Tonight was probably one of the most racists nights of my life. I heard so many slurs and expressions. I also said a few things..."

Hastags with other tweets included  #kkk, #lightthehcross, #rosaparks, #wewhite.

Howell High School Principal Jason Schrock said he's well aware of the tweets, and disciplinary action has been taken against those involved.

http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2014/03/members_of_howell_high_school.html

Chief U.S. District Judge sends racially charged email about president

Link


HELENA — Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull on Wednesday admitted to sending a racially charged email about President Barack Obama from his courthouse chambers.
Cebull, of Billings, was nominated by former President George W. Bush and received his commission in 2001 and has served as chief judge for the District of Montana since 2008.
The subject line of the email, which Cebull sent from his official courthouse email address on Feb. 20 at 3:42 p.m., reads: "A MOM'S MEMORY."
The forwarded text reads as follow:
"Normally I don't send or forward a lot of these, but even by my standards, it was a bit touching. I want all of my friends to feel what I felt when I read this. Hope it touches your heart like it did mine.
"A little boy said to his mother; 'Mommy, how come I'm black and you're white?'" the email joke reads. "His mother replied, 'Don't even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you're lucky you don't bark!'"
Cebull admitted Wednesday to sending the email to seven recipients, including his personal email address.
The judge acknowledged that the content of the email was racist, but said he does not consider himself racist. He said the email was intended to be a private communication.
"It was not intended by me in any way to become public," Cebull said. "I apologize to anybody who is offended by it, and I can obviously understand why people would be offended."
Cebull said his brother initially sent him the email, which he forwarded to six of his "old buddies" and acquaintances.
He admitted that he read the email and intended to send it to his friends.
"The only reason I can explain it to you is I am not a fan of our president, but this goes beyond not being a fan," Cebull said. "I didn't send it as racist, although that's what it is. I sent it out because it's anti-Obama."
Travis McAdam, executive director for the Montana Human Rights Network , said the email contained highly racist rhetoric unbecoming of a federal judge.
"It's one thing if the judge is not a fan of President Barack Obama, but you would think someone in his position would articulate that in a way that criticizes his policy decisions or his position on issues," McAdam said. "We have a hard time believing that a legitimate criticism of the president involves distributing a joke that basically compares African Americans with animals."

Cebull said he does not consider himself prejudice against people of other races or ethnic backgrounds, and that his actions in his courtroom have demonstrated that.
"I have never considered myself that way," Cebull said. "All I can emphasize is I've treated people in my courtroom all these years fairly. I don't think I've ever demonstrated racism. Nobody has ever even implied it."
Montana immigration attorney Shahid Haque-Hausrath was on the receiving end of a racially charged email sent by a top Immigrations and Customs Enforcement official last fall. That official was suspended after sending Haque-Hausrath an email implying that Muslim Americans must prove their allegiance to the United State.
Haque-Hausrath, who is in an interracial marriage and recently fathered a child with his wife, said Cebull's e-mail was "deeply troubling."
"Another federal official who is entrusted to do his duties fairly and impartially has yet again sent an email from his work account during work hours that espouses deeply racist and bigoted views," Haque-Hausrath said. "The reason why I think it's so troubling, is it espouses the deeply racist view that interracial sex is equivalent to bestiality. For a federal judge to be equating the two, and say since Barack Obama is of mixed racial background, that his mother was somehow committing acts of bestiality is incredibly racist and troubling.
One of the recipients of the email Cebull sent forwarded it to another person, who in turn forwarded it to another person. The email was eventually pass along to the Great Falls Tribune, who contacted Cebull. Cebull said he was surprised the recipients of the e-mail passed it along with his name on it.
"This is a private thing that was, to say the least, very poor judgment on my part," Cebull said. "I did not forward it because of the racist nature of it. Although it is racist, I'm not that way, never have been."

the white supremacist kommando camp that turns boys' doubts to hate

link



Thick clouds of diesel smoke fill the air outside a run-down guest farm outside the town of Carolina in Mpumalanga. As the stench dissipates, a group of boys, aged between 13 and 19, spill from the bed of a rusty truck. The trip from the city to the country was long and hypnotic in the old jalopy.

It is after midnight when the boys heft bags full of military clothing. "There are old blood stains on my uniform," one of them says, as he trades his sneakers for army boots.

Shouted orders ring out. The harsh intimidation begins immediately. Groaning, the boys raise 4m tent poles among the cowpats dotting the grassland. The large army tent will be their home for the next nine days.

Thirteen-year-old Jano, the youngest at the camp, spreads his sleeping bag on the bumpy floor. He is at the camp because he wants to prove to his father that he isn't a sissy but a real man, he says with a shy smile.

At 18, Riaan is already a little more self-assured. His lily-white skin is recovering from acne. "I want to learn how to camouflage myself in the veld." He, too, seems excited to be camping out and playing soldier, as if he's living an adventure out of a boyhood novel.

But soon they will realise this survival camp is different to others held in the veld.

The boys run from the tent to the mess hall. Before them, under the glare of fluorescent lighting, stands 57-year-old Franz Jooste. Old army decorations gleam on his apartheid-era uniform. The uniforms of the boys also come from that era.

"We're going to make men of you all," he tells them in Afrikaans.

'Protecting its own people'
Jooste is the head of the Kommando-korps, a small, little-known right-wing group bent on breeding hate and banking on some young Afrikaners' sense of not belonging in the new South Africa to get there. 


On its website, the Kommandokorps describes itself as an elite organisation "protecting its own people" in the event of an attack, it writes, necessary "because the police and the military cannot provide help quickly enough".

Last year, it signed a saamstaanverdrag (a unity pact) with the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB) and the Suidlanders -- a small whites-only group that is awaiting the racial apocalypse -- to coordinate their security strategy together.
The organisation claims to have trained more than 1 500 Boere-Afrikaner jongmanne in defence skills over the past 11 years. Jooste, who spreads his message by e-mail and in newsletters, says that 40% of boys sign up themselves. The rest are volunteered by their parents.

The teenagers at the camp all know crime horror stories and feel responsible for protecting their families. "We always have to lock our doors at night," 18-year-old Nicolas says. "This camp will teach me how to protect my father and mother, and little brother and sister."

At 4.30am on the first morning of camp, the boys are sent out on a 2km run in their heavy army boots, down a rocky country road filled with potholes. The organisation aspires to instil discipline through sweat. The war of attrition has begun. Indoctrination takes root best in exhausted ground.

Sixteen-year-old EC is in the middle of the panting troop. He is one of the smallest boys here, a childlike teenager who is thrilled at being able to shoot his paintball gun.

'I don't like racism'
"I want to be able to defend myself. And I am also doing this for my paintball career," he says with a smile. His mother is a single mom and sent him to the camp because she feels it will be good for her boy to be surrounded by men.

After they catch their breath, we talk about their country. The teenagers say they believe in the idea of the rainbow nation but the contradictions soon emerge.

"People generally get along pretty well," Riaan says. "We have to fight racism." EC has two black friends, Thabang and Tshepo. "I don't like racism."

"I don't know what apartheid is," Jano says. "But a long time ago, Nelson Mandela made it so everyone has the same rights." Then EC adds he would never marry a black woman and Jano says he is afraid when he walks past black people.

The group is called to a small field next to the community hall. They line up in military formation while a camp leader unfolds the old South African flag. They fill their lungs with air and start singing: "Uit die blou van onse hemel, Uit die diepte van ons see, Oor ons ewige gebergtes waar die kranse antwoord gee."

Some struggle with the words of the apartheid national anthem.

Meanwhile, Jooste sits in the mess hall. Kitsch paintings of buffalos, elephants and rhinos hang on the walls, and the wicker furniture is covered in zebra print. He looks through the glasses on his nose at the camp's schedule. It is written down in military style and every minute seems accounted for.

Proud veteran
There are slots for self-defence techniques, radio communication and how to patrol, as well as lectures on patriotism and the history of the border wars.

Jooste is a proud veteran. He fought on South Africa's borders with Zimbabwe and Mozambique and in Angola. He is scarred, he says, by what he calls treason; while
he was fighting for the white regime, his leaders were making peace with Nelson Mandela. After his army service, he was active in the AWB.

Before his most important lecture, "Die vyand en bedreiging" (The enemy and the threat), Jooste boasts that it will take him just an hour to change the boys' minds. "Then they'll know they aren't part of the rainbow nation but part of another nation with an important history."

His cadets sit cross-legged on the ground in the mess hall. When he speaks the teens listen quietly. "Aside from the Aborigines in Australia, the African black is the most underdeveloped, barbaric member of the human race on Earth," he says. He tells the boys that black people have a smaller cerebral cortex than whites and thus cannot take initiative or govern effectively.

"Who is my enemy in South Africa? Who murders, robs and rapes?" "Who are these creatures?" he asks. "The blacks," he answers.

He picks up the current South African flag and lays it before the entrance to the mess hall like a doormat. He orders the boys to wipe their filthy army boots on it. They laugh uncertainly, then they do as they are told. Only Nicolas stands back.

Jooste tells them that they should love the old South African flag and the old national anthem.

Fear and superiority
An extreme form of patriotism runs through groups like this one; the cadets at this camp are taught that the country should not return to apartheid but, rather, they must work to acquire their own independent nation. Jooste last year got elected on to the Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie (People's Council Electoral Commission), a group that fights for Afrikaner nationalism.

Hermann Gilomee, a renowned writer on Afrikaners and an extraordinary professor in history at the University of Stellenbosch, says apartheid stemmed from two sources: fear and a sense of superiority. You can still see them in Jooste. The primary fear is for the loss of Afrikaner identity -- their culture, language and symbols -- as a separate people. Jooste is desperate to conserve this sense of separateness and create a new generation of Afrikaners who carry his ideas. It is his mission to indoctrinate young Afrikaners like Nicolas, Riaan, Jano and EC, who are struggling to determine their position in the country.

Born after the end of apartheid, they feel unwanted, says Unisa associate professor Eliria Bornman of the department of communication science who did research on Afrikaner identity. "They know they're different from the rest of the population. Any leader can take their frustration and channel it in a negative way."

Outside the tent, the cadets are made to crawl across the ground, army-style, gripping a wooden beam they call liefie in their arms, their knuckles bleeding. "Persevere! You've got to learn to persevere," Jooste shouts. The sound of crying rises from the rearmost ranks. Jooste's assistants, older members of the Kommando­korps, grin as they take photos of the boys with their cellphones.

EC is struggling. The beam weighs almost a third as much as he does. The nights, too, are hitting him hard. "We sleep on the ground and our sleeping bags get wet. In three nights, I've slept six hours. Every day I think about giving up." But his paintball career seems to keep him going.

'You should hate black people'
The next night they move from the army tent to a nearby forest where they set up two camps. They each get one small tin of canned beans or vegetables to eat and warm themselves near the fire. At first light, one of the groups launches an attack. With the sleep still in their eyes they point and shoot their paintballs.

The young faces are increasingly marked by exhaustion as the days pass, yet the boys seem to grow more and more confident. "The training has taught me that you should hate black people," EC says. "They kill everyone who crosses their path. I don't think I can be friends with Thabang and Tshepo anymore."

Riaan repeats what he has learned in nine days almost word for word. "There's a war going on between blacks and whites. A lot of blood will flow in the future. I definitely feel more like an Afrikaner now. I feel the Afrikaner blood in my veins."

Jooste insists his job is to teach them to defend themselves. He doesn't want to force the boys into any particular direction. "All we want to do is channel the feeling they already carry within them. We don't want them to hate."

But in nine days, boys who once carried a budding belief in South African unity have become toughened men with racist ideas.

At the end of the camp the two boys who performed best are selected. They will get the next course, the gevorderde weerbaarheids kursus (advanced preparedness course), for free. There the paintball guns will be traded in for the real deal.  

link

A racist flag in a racist war

Racism an essential tool for the 1%

February 14, 2012

By Kevin Baker

The author is a former Staff Sergeant in the U.S. Army infantry who served 28 months in Iraq.




The U.S. Marine Corps is in hot water once again over leaked images that give a glimpse into its inner workings.
Just like the recent release of a video showing Marines in Afghanistan urinating on the corpses of Afghan men, the new photo of Marines posing with a Nazi SS flag doesn’t shock me at all, either.
These two situations emerged in different times and locations in the country, but are completely bound together. They are bound with the racism, sense of superiority and sense of nationalism that the military itself embraces and promotes.
Racism is embraced, coddled and on full display by the top leaders of the U.S. military. We see it everywhere, in plain sight. In my time in the U.S. Army, I wore a patch on my shoulder of the 2nd Infantry Division, bearing the image of an “Indian head,” a racist image that Native Americans have fought for decades to have removed as an icon from sports teams, commercial products, and so forth. An image, ironically, once used to dehumanize the people who were being killed and colonized.
But the racism is far more brazen than that. Anyone who has served in the U.S. military knows that, despite the official line of its “Equal Opportunity Program” and official rules and regulations against racism, use of racist terms to dehumanize Muslims and the peoples of the Middle East and South Asia are so common they are part of the everyday vernacular.
Nazi paraphernalia is not uncommon
Many were shocked to see U.S. troops flying a Nazi flag, and there was the immediate excuse that “they didn’t know what it meant.” They must have only meant “Scout Snipers,” with no knowledge that it was a Nazi flag, or that it could be interpreted as such.
That is an absolute joke. In my time as an infantryman, I saw Nazi paraphernalia regularly. Soldiers complained to me that in the barracks of Ranger Regiment on Fort Lewis, Nazi flags being hung in soldiers’ rooms without repercussion. My first tour in Iraq was the first time I remember seeing the “Deaths Head” pin, a symbol of the Nazi SS, placed on the front of soldiers’ vests. It was not the last.
Especially in Special Operations units—such as the Marine snipers in the photo—Nazi symbolism is revered. Why? Quite simply because the Nazis are famous for mercilessly killing and terrorizing millions of people. It fits right in to the mentality expected of Spec Ops.
In fact, when the U.S. military was experiencing a recruiting shortfall in 2005, the Department of Defense changed its supposedly strict policy against allowing self-avowed Nazis to join, and adopted an official “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding members of neo-Nazi and white-supremacist organizations. They could get “moral waivers,” as long as they could “perform satisfactorily” in combat.
The Pentagon needs racism
As the Marine Corps denounced the leaked photo, they announced that there would be no disciplinary action for the Marines flying the Nazi flag, which is not surprising at all. Why would a military so reliant on racism punish racist behavior?
The reality is that U.S. troops have far more in common with the people we are sent to fight than the millionaire politicians who send us. We are told to fight people who also just want a decent life for their families; people who also needlessly suffer under bogus policies of corrupt governments; people who are doing the same thing we would be doing if we were in their shoes. The last thing the Pentagon wants is for rank-and-file troops to identify with the people we are sent to fight, relate to them as human beings, and correctly identify that they are not our enemies.
So in order for the Pentagon to continue sending poor people in the United States to kill and die fighting poor people in Afghanistan, all for the super-profits of a handful of billionaires, they need to wrap the mission in racism, national chauvinism and a sense of superiority.
This is why service members must take a strong stand against racism: it’s a barrier to unity within the ranks of the military, hindering our ability to collectively advocate for our interests, and it distorts who our real enemies are in the world.
A racist war
The rationale for the war rests on several racist assertions. On one hand, there are the assumptions that the people of Afghanistan are too backward or inferior to determine their own destiny; that they’re too helpless to survive without the U.S. occupation; that they need saviors from the West to teach them about democracy, human rights and modernity. On the other hand, there are the assumptions that the people of Afghanistan are somehow responsible for the 9/11 attacks and will launch more attacks; that it is a country of “terrorists” or people who “harbor terrorists”; that they are somehow the aggressors, motivated to fight by anti-American extremism and not by the daily misery and humiliation of life under foreign occupation.
The result is that the lives of the people of Afghanistan are seen as inferior. When Afghan civilians are killed—like the eight children massacred by a NATO aircraft revealed this week—it is supposed to be acceptable collateral damage, barely a footnote in the media. The tens of thousands of innocent people who have been buried, and the hundreds of thousands wounded and displaced, is considered acceptable. It is “acceptable” because we are told it is to somehow save American lives, which by implication are more valuable than Afghan lives.
Without racism and Islamophobia, the reality of the war in Afghanistan would be on full display: An unpopular war waged by millionaire politicians and incompetent generals, who tell us flat-out lies, aimed at nothing other than expanding the reach of Big Business in yet another resource-rich region of the world. Because people in the United States would never want to send their loved ones to die for such an absurd cause, and troops would never want to die for it either, racism becomes an indispensable tool for those who say we must continue to fight.
Those wanting a “kinder, gentler” war, where the troops do not urinate on dead bodies, kill innocent civilians or fly Nazi flags, will continue to be shocked and disappointed. This is an imperialist war. It does not get any “kinder and gentler” than this.
Similar leaks will continue to show—not examples of a few “bad apples”—but the real and inevitable manifestations of the core nature of U.S. foreign policy.

PETA a racist "animal rights" organzation comparing enslaved Black Americans to Whales

link

Five killer whales got their day in court Monday.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the vocal group behind those eye-popping anti-fur ads, filed a lawsuit against SeaWorld for capturing and "enslaving" orcas named as plaintiffs in the case.

At a Monday hearing in San Diego, PETA Attorney Jeffrey Kerr argued that the big mammals should be protected under the 13th Amendment.

"Tilikum, Katina, Kasatka, Ulises and Corky have been captive and subjected to treatment that we feel is slavery," Kerr told U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller, who is now weighing SeaWorld's request to toss the case, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Miller noted that there is no legal precedent for protecting animals under the 13th Amendment.

SeaWorld argued the consequences of setting such a precedent could be difficult to contain and may lead to cases brought against police departments and the military for their use of service dogs.

"We're talking about hell unleashed," The San Francisco Chronicle quoted SeaWorld attorney Theodore Shaw as saying. "Neither orcas nor any other animal were included in the 'We the people' ... when the Constitution was adopted."

Judge Miller said he would review all the information before deciding whether to dismiss or proceed with the case.

PETA officials heralded the hour-long hearing as a victory in and of itself.

"This is truly a historic day for the law and for the animals," spokesman David Perle said. Kerr added that "for the first time in our nation's history, a federal court heard arguments as to whether living, breathing, feeling beings have rights and can be enslaved simply because they happen to not have been born human."

SeaWorld called the lawsuit a "publicity stunt" without merit.

Woman filmed hurling racist abuse at Tube passengers in yet ANOTHER video of a vile rant on London transport

link



Police are investigating yet another video of a London Underground passenger hurling racist abuse at foreign passengers.
The film shows the middle-aged white woman direct a tirade of abuse at Asian passengers on a Central Line train between St Paul’s and Mile End stations.
She begins by shouting 'all f****** foreign s********' in a shocking seven-minute long expletive-ridden rant in front of stunned onlookers.

The woman - with shoulder-length black hair and a thick Cockney accent - then asks 'where do you come from? F****** like, f****** all over the world'.
Footage of the incident emerged on YouTube on January 24 after a string of similar rants by women were made public last year. It is believed to have been filmed on January 23.
It shows the woman, whose name is not known, sitting between two Pakistani men.

After saying that they come from all over the world, she asks: 'I'd like to know if any of you are f****** illegal, I'm sure 30 per cent of you are. It's taking the f****** p***.'
The woman then becomes aggressive towards the Asian man sitting next to her. 'I hope they f****** catch up with you and shove you off,' she says.
She adds: 'I shall punch you in the f****** face. Ninety per cent of you are f****** illegal. I wouldn't mind if you loved our country.'

After singing in his language, he defends his native country as other passengers on the carriage laugh at his gestures.
The woman then turns her attention to the man who is filming the abuse on his mobile phone, who says he is British.
He tells her to 'watch what you say' but she responds: 'I used to live in England now I live in the United Nations.'
The woman then appears to become increasingly aggressive in an argument that lasts for another four minutes.

At one point she appears to try to attack the Pakistani man before she is thrown into a seat on the other side of the train.
She gets up and screams: 'As long as you're f****** working, and not claiming benefits.'
A second clip uploaded on the video sharing site shows her standing up as she waits to leave the train.
She says to another foreign traveller: 'This is what we've got to put up with... that's what we don't like about you people. I'll show you what kind of government lets people like you in.'
The video emerged after similar clips were uploaded onto the internet.

One, recorded on a Croydon to Wimbledon tram, showed a woman holding a toddler as she shouted at passengers.
Emma West was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence in connection with the incident in December.
West, a 34-year-old mother from New Addington, Croydon, will appear at Croydon Crown Court at a later date.
Another video called 'Welcome to London' showed a woman holding a pink rose on the London Underground as she abused passengers.
Another was of a drunk woman who tried to punch a black passenger on a London bus, but ended up falling over herself then being thrown into the street.
A British Transport Police spokesman said: 'BTP is aware of the videos posted on YouTube which show a woman making alleged racist comments on board a Central Line Tube train between St Paul’s and Mile End stations during the evening of Sunday, 23.
'Detectives were made aware of the videos on January 24 and immediately launched an investigation.
'Anyone who witnessed this incident, or who has information which they believe can assist police, is asked to get in touch and help us build up a full picture of what took place.
'BTP treats all allegations of racism on the London Underground very seriously and would urge anyone with information about this incident to contact us.'

Sources say Ron Paul signed off on racist newsletters

if this man is not a racist as the Paulbots are saying, why was he involved in publishing racist newsletters?


link



Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul has consistently denied having written — or even read — the inflammatory racist and anti-gay remarks that went out under his name in newsletters he published in the early 1990s. Although numerous associates agree that Paul does not hold racist views, however, it appears that he may have known more about the racist articles than he has been willing to admit.
The Washington Post reported on Friday that three people with first-hand knowledge of Paul’s operations say “he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day.”
“It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. … He would proof it,’’ former company secretary Renae Hathway told the Post.

According to these sources, the main author of the racist passages was Lew Rockwell, who was then the vice president of Paul’s company.
The Post also details how closely entangled Paul’s political career, his business ventures, and members of his own family were during those years. According to one source, who chose to remain anonymous, Paul and his associates made a deliberate choice in the late 1980s to increase sales of the newsletter by making it more provocative.
“It was playing on a growing racial tension, economic tension, fear of government,’’ the source stated “I’m not saying Ron believed this stuff. It was good copy. Ron Paul is a shrewd businessman.’’
Cato Institute President Ed Crane, who frequently lunched with Paul during this period, similarly told the paper that when the two of them discussed how to increase the circulation of Paul’s newsletters, they agreed that “people who have extreme views” were most likely to respond. Paul told Crane his best response had come when he used a mailing list from the racist and anti-Semitic newspaper, Spotlight.
If that was the strategy, it apparently worked. According to the Post, political disclosure forms show that between 1984 and 1995, Paul went from being up to $765,000 in debt to having a net worth of up to $3.3 million.
A Paul spokesperson contacted by the Post for comment expressed doubt about the assertions made by Crane and the other sources.

New Study: Racists And Right-Wingers Tend To Be Dumb

link


Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, served as lead researcher for a study that had some not so surprising results. According to his team’s findings, there is a significant positive correlation between prejudice, low intelligence, and social conservative ideology, reports LiveScience.
SEE ALSO: How GOP Racism Has Become The Norm
Not only are children with low IQs more likely to be prejudiced adults, Hodson uncovered a hidden bias that exposes the relationship between prejudice and conservatives:

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an e-mail to LiveScience.
Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood.

Briain Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia, believes that this study will trigger a storm of controversy:

They’ve pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics, said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. When one selects intelligence, political ideology, and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it’s bound to upset somebody.

Interestingly, politics seemed to be the connecting force between “brains” and “bias.” The study found that the inability of children with low intelligence to understand and empathize with the perspective of others — especially those of different ethnicity and class — was a clear indication that they would embrace right-wing ideology:

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions. The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this,” Nosek said, referring to the new study. It’s not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists.

The working definition for “social conservatives” for this study’s purposes relied upon participants’ agreement with statements such as:

‘Family life suffers if mum is working full-time,’ and ‘Schools should teach children to obey authority.’ Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as, ‘I wouldn’t mind working with people from other races.’

Hodson is very clear that he doesn’t want people to think that he is characterizing all conservatives as unintelligent. He points to the example of men, in general, being taller than women — though there are some women who are taller than men — as evidence of the generality of the study.

My speculation is that it’s not as simple as their model presents it, Nosek said. I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where ‘people I don’t know are threats’ and ‘the world is a dangerous place‘. … Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful.

In simplified terms for any conservatives that may be reading, this study seems to prove the popular wisdom that all Republicans may not be racists, but all racists are more than likely Republican.

Black Duke University Students Outraged At “Racist” Study

 another day more racism from Anglo-America's universities

link



DURHAM, N.C.— A group of about two dozen Duke University students urged administrators Tuesday to create a better climate and provide more financial support for black students, saying they’ve been disappointed so far in how top officials have reacted to their viewpoints.
The students, almost all of whom were black, unsuccessfully sought a meeting with university President Richard Brodhead at his campus office in hopes of explaining a document they describe as a call to action for the prestigious, private southern school.
Concerns range from the future location of a black culture center to the lack of support for a black student group’s annual event and a recent study that suggested African-American students switched to less-difficult majors.
“The university has affirmed through media outlets that it has a commitment to meeting the needs of all its students, including black students,” said Nana Asante, a senior psychology major and president of the Black Student Alliance, who led the procession Tuesday. “We have yet to witness any action that reflects this supposed truth.”
The most immediate cause for students’ anger is an as-yet unpublished study by Duke researchers saying black students match the GPA of whites over time in part because they switch to majors that require less study time and have less-stringent grading standards. Opponents of affirmative action are citing the study in a case they want the U.S. Supreme Court to consider.
But the students say the research is just one example of an environment in which many black students feel uncomfortable. The document they gave to administrators cites concerns over the future location of the Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture and the status of the Black Student Alliance invitational weekend, an annual event the students say is in jeopardy because of the administration’s lack of support.
“These are really just symptoms of a contentious and strained racial climate here,” Asante said.
Some of the students’ recommendations include establishing an endowment to create a stable funding source for cultural events and academic programs involving black students, and for the creation of a special university working group to assess whether blacks feel the climate at Duke is unwelcoming.
Brodhead was not in his office Tuesday morning, but an administrator came out to shake each student’s hand and promised to pass the document to the president.
“We welcome their call to action and we welcome their recommendations,” university spokesman Mike Schoenfeld said. Administrators plan to discuss the issues with students, he said.
“These are not new issues at Duke,” Schoenfeld said. “Many people have been working for a long time to create a positive environment for African-American students at Duke.”
The Durham university has about 6,500 undergraduate students, about 47 percent of them white and 10 percent black. The largest group of non-whites is Asian-American, representing 21 percent of the undergraduate population. The university community has been embroiled in racially charged debates before, as during the fallout over accusations of rape — later found to be false — leveled at white Duke lacrosse players by a black woman six years ago. Bad feelings over that case linger in Durham to this day.
Asante said the students will wait to hear the university’s response to their call to action before deciding on what steps to take next.
“We will do what is necessary to ensure that our voices are heard,” she said.

Ron Paul Was Implicated In Failed White Supremacist Island Invasion

more proof that Ron Paul is a white supremacist

In 1981, a lawyer tried to subpoena Ron Paul to testify in the trial of Don Black, a Grand Wizard for the Ku Klux Klan who would later go on to found the white supremacist, neo-Nazi website, Stormfront. Black was charged along with two other Klansmen with planning to violently overthrow the small Caribbean country of Dominica in what they called “Operation Red Dog.” While a judge refused to subpoena Paul, Don Black would come back to haunt him many years later.
In 1981 a group of American and Canadian white supremacists lead by Klansman and mercenary, Michael (Mike) Perdue planned on taking over a small West Indian country called Dominica by overthrowing the government and Prime Minister Eugenia Charles and restoring its previous prime minister, Patrick Johns into power. The group planned to create an Aryan paradise in Dominica and make money through casinos, cocaine and brothels.
On the day the group of white supremacists were supposed to travel to Dominica, they were arrested by ATF agents and were found with over thirty automatic weapons, shotguns, rifles, handguns, dynamite, ammunition, a confederate flag and a Nazi flag. The plan would be dubbed “The Bayou Of Pigs” after the failed invasion of Cuba.
The leader of the group, Michael Perdue, would plead guilty to planning the coup and turned state’s evidence. Perdue would testify that several other people helped organize and fund the coup and that two Texas politicians were aware of the plan. Among those Perdue implicated were infamous white supremacist, David Duke, former Texas Governor, John Connally and Congressman, Ron Paul whom he claimed knew about the plot. Connally was credited with helping Paul win his first congressional election.
A judge refused to subpoena Paul and Connally despite the fact that Perdue had claimed that both of them were aware of the plot. Don Black’s friend and fellow KKK Grand Wizard, David Duke was called to testify before a grand jury but claimed that he would take the Fifth Amendment and never testified. While Duke was never charged with a crime, several books points to Duke as the organizer who connected Perdue to the other mercenary Klansmen and the people who funded their endeavor. (1 2 3) Everyone else implicated by Perdue was charged with the plot.
Perdue implicated three men as funders of the plot, L.E. Matthews of Jackson, Mississippi, James C. White of Houston, and David Duke’s close friend and backer, J.W. Kirkpatrick. Kirpatrick would kill himself before he could stand trial and White and Matthews would be acquitted in court. Former Prime Minister of Dominica, Patrick Johns would be sentenced to 12 years in prison for his part of the plot. Michael Perdue, Don Black and seven other Klansmen would be sentenced to only 3 years in prison.
Ron Paul has never made a statement denying knowledge of the plot despite the fact that he was implicated by Perdue and almost subpoenaed. Two of the people involved in the plot, Don Black and David Duke have gone on to become two of the most prominent white supremacists of the modern era, and also two of Paul’s most controversial supporters.
Top 10 Racist Ron Paul Friends, Supporters
Paul would be once again tied to Don Black 26 years after the Bayou Of Pigs. After it was revealed that Black donated $500 dollars to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign, Ron Paul’s campaign refused to give it back. Paul was photographed with Black and his son by David Duke’s former assistant, Jamie Kelso who was an organizer for Ron Paul and the owner of white supremacist sites, WhiteNewsNow.com and TheWhiteRace.com and a moderator for Black’s neo-Nazi website, Stormfront.
Black would become one of Paul’s most enthusiastic supporters and helped rally the white supremacist community around Paul, through Stormfront. Paul would praise another Operation Red Dog planner, David Duke in his newsletters and Duke would return the favor calling him “our king” and endorsing him for President.
This would not be the first time Paul was tied to white supremacists. In 80s, Paul claimed that the best source of his campaign donations came from a list from notorious neo-Nazi, Willis Carto’s publication, The Spotlight. In the 90s, Paul’s newsletters were originally discovered from an online neo-Nazi directory. As recently as 2006, Paul was scheduled to appear on David Duke’s white supremacist protégé, James Edwards’ radio show, “The Political Cesspool.”
Ron Paul’s White Supremacist Radio Connections
Given the scrutiny given to presidential candidates, shouldn’t Paul’s connection to an attempted violent invasion of a small island by white supremacists be re-investigated. If the media investigates every accusation of affairs or sexual harassment for Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich, shouldn’t they investigate accusations that Paul knew about a white supremacist plot to violently overthrow the government of a small Black island, especially with Paul’s other connections to white supremacists?



He along with his white supremacists friends he support the confederate states during the American Civil War

Ron Paul has made no secret the fact that he thought that the South was right in the Civil War. Here he is giving a speech in front of a giant Confederate Flag about why he believes the North was wrong in the Civil War and why the South was right.
Ron Paul is a neo-Confederate, and proud member of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, which has been labeled as a neo-Confederate organization. In the video he claims that the North should have paid to buy slaves from southern slave owners to avoid the war, rather than the South renouncing slavery. Paul also fails to bring up the fact that it was the South that started the war by attacking the North in 1861.
Ron Paul was also was the only member of congress to vote against honoring the Civil Rights Act Of 1964 in on its 40th anniversary in 2004. Paul would also claim that he wouldn’t have voted for it at the time, putting him on the side of the racists in both the fight against slavery and the fight against Jim Crow segregation, the two defining struggles of Black people in America.
Several Ron Paul supporters have asked that the video be taken down, from the pro-Confederate channel, Patriot Review but Patriot Review believes that the video could help Paul win South Carolina. If they do take it down,  Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has downloaded a copy of the video.

Hollywood racism and whitewashing: Casa de mi Padre and Argo (2012)

link

Racist Hollywood decides to make a "Spanish language" film choosing a White American actor Will Ferell to play a Mexican/Latino character Armando Alvarez who is the lead, protagonist role. Latinos make up 16-17% of the American population and make up the largest minority group in the U.S.



A similar racist whitewashing upcoming movie Argo is currently in production. the racist brothers aka warner brothers is letting Ben Afleck to play real life CIA operative Tony Mendez   who is latino descent.

'Akira' Production Offices Shut Down As Warner Bros. Scrutinizes Budget

The Racist Brothers company having casting, budget and script issues.


link

Warner Bros is pushing the pause button on Akira. The project, which has been through several incarnations, is being shut down in the face of casting, script and budget issues. The production offices in Vancouver are being closed, with below-the-line talent and crew told to stop working. “Everybody is being sent home,” according to an insider.

Producers, who include Appian Way’s Jennifer Kiloran Davisson and Mad Chance’s Andrew Lazar, will hunker down with director Jaume Collet-Serra for the next two weeks to iron out the script. It is unclear if Harry Potter scribe Steve Kloves, who did a pricey rewrite on the project a year ago, will be brought in to help out.
If the issues cannot be resolved, the project could end up being shelved entirely, say insiders.
Collet-Serra already had halved the budget from the incarnation that Albert Hughes was going to direct. He now is working on a budget in the $90 million range. But with only Garrett Hedlund (Tron: Legacy) signed on to star, and Kristen Stewart, Ken Watanabe and Helena Bonham Carter in various stages of dealmaking, the studio feels that the price tag is still too high for a sci-fi project with that level of star wattage. The goal, says an insider, is to bring the budget down to between $60 million and $70 million. However, another source close to the production says the script, rather than the budget, has skidded the production. The project, this person says, will remain in the $90 million range.
An adaptation of the classic Japanese manga, Akira is an Americanized story set in a postapocalyptic New Manhattan, where a motorcycle gang leader (Hedlund) must stop his brother and fellow gang member from abusing his newly acquired telekinetic powers.

Akira already has “died” three times only to rise phoenix-like from the ashes. Ruairi Robinson and Hughes were previously deep into the project as directors before dropping off. Collet-Serra got the project green-lighted and has come the closest to going before cameras.
This isn't the only Warner Bros. project whose budget is being scrutinized. Arthur and Lancelot, the period fantasy being directed by David Dobkin, also has come under increased budget pressure.
Sources close to the project say Akira isn't dead yet.  “It’s a very resilient movie,” says one insider. “Warner Bros. just won’t let it die.”
Warner Bros. declined comment.

Hollywood Racism and WhiteWashing: Johnny Depp playing "Tonto" a Native American in remake of "The Lone Ranger"

 Racist Hollywood continuing their white washing of non-white characters


link

Jerry Bruckheimer, Walt Disney Studios and Johnny Depp may just supply the proverbial silver bullet for the flagging New Mexico film industry.

On Friday, the Governor's Office announced that Disney/Bruckheimer's film version of The Lone Ranger will indeed shoot in and around Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Shiprock and other locales in the state starting in February.

Gore Verbinski of Pirates of the Caribbean fame will direct Depp as Tonto and Armie Hammer as the Lone Ranger.

"It's great news," said Nick Maniatis, director of The New Mexico Film Office. "This is a large-budget, major film that is putting faith into the idea of coming back to the state of New Mexico to make movies.

"I think a major production like this coming here shows signs that we are looking pretty healthy for film and TV production in the state."

He said the production will probably utilize Albuquerque Studios. He did not think it would be shooting at the newly built Santa Fe Studios.

The producers reportedly cut the original budget of some $250 million down to the $215 million range to get the go-ahead to film this new version of the fabled story of a mysterious masked man who rode the West, righting wrongs with his faithful Native American pal, Tonto.

Online blogs and entertainment venue reports have indicated that the venerable Western hero and his partner would face off against American Indian shamans and werewolves in this new version.

One such blog, citing Hollywood-Elsewhere as a source, noted that the script is laden with special effects and described it as a kind of an "Indian-spirituality werewolf movie — a.k.a., The Lone Ranger Meets the Wolfman."

Which makes sense, given The Lone Ranger only uses silver bullets in his guns, rides a horse called Silver and makes Silver wear silver horseshoes. (Werewolves shy away from silver stuff.)

In a very early episode of the old Lone Ranger television series, the Lone Ranger asks a miner pal of his to melt down silver ore into bullets. "Silver bullets will serve as sort of a symbol," the Lone Ranger explains. "Tonto suggested the idea ... a symbol that means justice by law."

Created by George W. Trendle and written by Fran Striker, The Lone Ranger originated as a radio show in 1933. In 1949, ABC turned it into a long-running television series starring Clayton Moore as the title character and Canadian Mohawk actor Jay Silverheels as Tonto.

The 1981 film The Legend of the Lone Ranger — a notable critical and commercial failure — also utilized New Mexico locales.

The new version was canceled and restarted over the past year while the issues of budget and locale were reworked.

Last autumn, Bruckheimer told The Hollywood Reporter that in trimming his budget he had to consider the film incentives that various states offered.

"We found that Louisiana gave us a better tax incentive than New Mexico — that was another $8 million," he said. "We're still shooting in New Mexico, and we might go to Louisiana."

Last year Gov. Susana Martinez urged state lawmakers to revamp the state's film-incentive program, putting a $50 million cap on what the state will pay out in one year to qualifying productions.

Though the $200 million production The Avengers shot in New Mexico last year, the state attracted few other big-budget films in 2011.

Two longtime television series anchored in Albuquerque, Breaking Bad and In Plain Sight, are slated to stop shooting this spring after completing their final seasons.

The state played host to several television pilot shoots in 2011, including A&E's Longmire, starring Australian actor Robert Taylor, Lou Diamond Phillips and Katee Sackhoff. A&E has announced that it has picked up Longmire as a series, though it has not yet announced where it will film.

Maniatis said he couldn't yet confirm any possible upcoming film or television projects, but noted, "I hope to announce a TV show shortly, a project that's been here already, and we are excited it is coming back."

He said he's a fan of the old Lone Ranger television show. "Now I have a couple of boys and they will get to see the film shot in our state. The fact that it will be shot in and around New Mexico will be great for us. The production will hire over 300 New Mexico crew members, about 30 actors and 1,200 extras. It will have a big impact on the state."

Asked whether he knew anything about the werewolf angle, Maniatis laughed and said no.

Because it's important to remember that the Lone Ranger never shot to kill, preferring to wound his adversaries and bring them to court instead. How this humanitarian approach would work with werewolves, should they remain in the new script, remains unclear.

Dr. Boyce Watkins: MSNBC Suspends Pat Buchanan, but Needs to Fire Him Too

link

*MSNBC has suspended conservative commentator Pat Buchanan, according to Phil Griffin, the network’s president.  The suspension comes from words in Buchanan’s book, “Suicide of a Superpower.”   Buchanan has stated that President Obama arrived to the White House as a result of Affirmative Action and that the country “has been built, basically, by white folks.”
Griffin seems concerned about two of the chapters in Buchanan’s book, one of them titled “The End of White America,” and the other called “The Death of Christian America.”
The MSNBC president is quoted in the AP as saying “Because of the content of the book, I didn’t think it should be part of the national dialogue, much less part of the dialogue on MSNBC.”
I’ve only met MSNBC President Phil Griffin one time.  He and I were on a panel together at the National Action Network Conference, hosted by Rev. Al Sharpton.  Griffin seems like a nice enough guy, and we haven’t spoken since.  But if we were to have another conversation, I’d ask him one simple question:  How in the holy hayell is a man like Pat Buchanan still on your payroll?
I remember Columbia University Professor Marc Lamont Hill being fired from Fox News after one very quick, dirty and misleading smear campaign.  I recall Rev. Jesse Jackson being fired from CNN because he had a child out of wedlock.  Yet, Pat Buchanan has spent the last 40 years speaking and acting in ways that would put David Duke to shame, and the network continues to treat him like he’s just a regular guy.
In spite of how hard Buchanan has worked to prove to MSNBC that he is a bigot in analyst’s clothing, they have continued to reward him with a high salary, limousine rides and a national platform for his racially inflammatory remarks.  This is another example of the same white privilege that allows Don Imus to continue making good money after referring to a group of black women as “nappy headed hoes.”
Not only does MSNBC need to fire Pat Buchanan, they need to ask themselves why they didn’t get rid of him long ago.  Is it because so many millions of Americans think the way he does?  Is it because they simply don’t care what he says?  Or perhaps it’s the obvious – that disrespecting black people is at the bottom of the political priority list for most major organizations.
The saddest truth in the world for black people is that even our friends have a hard time respecting us.  We end up stuck between Republicans who want to kill us and starve our kids, and Democrats who care about almost none of the issues that matter to our community. Over the last two months, when MSNBC celebrated reduced unemployment as a victory for the Obama Administration, they failed to make note of the fact that black unemployment has gone up over the same period of time.  Our agenda only matters when it happens to be their agenda; but I argue that it’s time to speak clearly about the black agenda.
While I am not entitled to tell anyone how to react to Pat Buchanan, MSNBC or anyone else, I encourage people of color to honestly ask themselves whether our friends or our enemies have very much respect for our community.  If this were the court of law and we were reviewing the evidence, I argue that the verdict would be abundantly clear.   Firing Pat Buchanan is the least this network can do and the firing should be followed by an apology to us all.  Buchanan brings few redeeming qualities to MSNBC, and President Griffin knows this.
Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Professor at Syracuse University and founder of the Your Black World Coalition. 

Casual to Deadly: Anti-Asian American Racism

link

From casual to pandering to deadly, there have been several disturbing reports about anti-Asian American racism in the news. In the more casual forms of racism, it seems that the whole using someone’s name as a way to retrieve an order at fast food places has gone horribly awry. About a month ago a Chick-Fil-A cashier at a store in Irvine, California assigned racist names to two customers and even typed them into the printed receipts (images here). And, just in the past few days, a woman went into a Papa John’s pizza chain in New York City and got called a racist name on her receipt (see that receipt here). Here’s an idea – maybe we could just go back to the “we’ll call your number when your order is ready?” system.
AngryAsianGrrlMN sums this up well when she writes:

This is the kind of casual racism that isn’t talked about, but that Asian people deal with on a regular basis.  We are the invisible minority, and we rarely get the kind of attention that other minorities do.

I’ll just state the obvious here and point out that these incidents didn’t happen in the distant past or some rural backwater, but in supposedly tolerant, cosmopolitan urban areas in the present, putatively post-racial era.
The pandering form of anti-Asian American racism is coming through, not surprisingly, the presidential campaign. John Huntsman, Republican candidate and former Ambassador to China, is fluent in Mandarin and, rather remarkably, spoke Chinese during the Republican presidential debate recently.  Huntsman and his wife have also adopted children from China and India.  All this “foreign-ness” has proven too tempting for some of his political opponents who are using these facts to pander to peoples’ racism and xenophobia.  As AngryAsianMan notes:

“It’s an election year, so you know what time it is. Racist campaign ads! This latest gem is from someone claiming to be a Ron Paul supporter, attacking Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman for his “un-American” values. … Here we go with another round of equating China with all things evil. Complete with an extra Oriental soundtrack — never has Mandarin made to sound so sinister. [This video] is one of the most unabashedly racist attack ads we’ve seen in a while.

The ad asks whether Huntsman’s values are “American” values or Chinese?  And, then rather sinisterly photoshops Huntsman into a portrait of Chinese leader Mao Zedong while thoroughly mixing the fear-mongering metaphors and comparing him to the “Manchurian Candidate.” This kind of strategy is what some people refer to as “dog whistle racism,” in other words, political campaigning  that uses coded words and themes that appeal to conscious or unconscious racist concepts and frames. For example, the terms ‘welfare queen,’ ’states’ rights,’ ‘Islamic terrorist,’ ‘uppity,’ and ‘illegal alien’ all activate racist concepts that already exist within a broader white racial frame.
Among the most disturbing news are the details that are emerging surrounding the death of Private Danny Chen in October, 2011. Chen, 19, grew up in New York City’s Chinatown, and is thought to have committed suicide in Afghanistan after enduring racial taunts and bullying (although some now question whether it was suicide at all). A group of his superiors allegedly tormented Chen on an almost daily basis over the course of about six weeks in Afghanistan last fall. They singled him out, their only Chinese-American soldier, and spit racial slurs at him: “gook,” “chink,” “dragon lady.” They forced him to do sprints while carrying a sandbag. They ordered him to crawl along gravel-covered ground while they flung rocks at him. And one day, when his unit was assembling a tent, he was forced to wear a green hard-hat and shout out instructions to his fellow soldiers in Chinese.ethnic slurs. At other times, they forced him to do push-ups or hang upside down with his mouth full of water.

Chinese Britons have put up with racism for too long

link

Chinese Britons are often referred to as a "silent" or "hidden" minority. For although we are the fourth-largest minority ethnic group in the UK, we are virtually invisible in public life, principally the arts, media and politics.
On the surface, the Chinese seem relatively content and well-to-do, with British Chinese pupils regularly outperforming their classmates and Chinese men more likely than any other ethnic group to be in a professional job. Consequently, we are often overlooked in talks on racism and social exclusion.
But academic and economic successes do not negate feelings of marginalisation. A 2009 study by The Monitoring Group and Hull University suggested that British Chinese are particularly prone to racial violence and harassment, but that the true extent to their victimisation was often overlooked because victims were unwilling to report it.
Growing up in the north of England in the 80s, I had few role models. Popular culture was dominated by white faces and occasionally black and south Asian, but never east Asian. I'm not sure that much has changed since.
Shouts of "Jackie Chan!" and kung-fu noises from random strangers continue to greet me in the street, perhaps followed by a "konichiwa!" Just a few days ago, a friend was having a post-hangover drink in a trendy east London pub, only to be accused by the manager of being a DVD pedlar hassling his clients.
Going to drama school in London was a revelation; I was told I couldn't perform in a scene from a play because it had been written for white people. The scene was two girls sitting on a park bench talking about boys, and the year was 2006. Worse was when it came from my contemporaries; one (white, liberal, highly educated) helpfully suggested I did a monologue from The Good Soul of Szechuan instead, and another rushed up after one performance to tell me how delighted her parents had been that I'd spoken perfect English (I'm from Bradford).
In hindsight it was good preparation for a profession where, on my first job, the Bafta-winning director chuckled to everyone on set that I'd trained in kung fu, and where any character who speaks in some kind of dodgy east Asian accent is considered hilarious.
I have friends who are shocked that such things actually happen. They are usually most surprised at the fact that it's happened to me. Why? I suspect mainly because, like them, I am part of the educated middle class, and things like that don't happen to people like us.
Well, they do, and quite often. And frankly, it isn't surprising that prejudices are rife in a country whose media perpetuates the very images that evoke stereotypes and cultural misunderstandings: Chinese characters rarely appear on our television screens, but when they do, you can bet they'll be DVD sellers, illegal immigrants, spies or, in the case of last year's Sherlock, weird acrobatic ninja types. Many Chinese viewers were outraged at the portrayal of east Asians in this show, but typically, few complained.
Sadly, the British Chinese are reticent about speaking up for themselves, and simply do not have the numbers to make the same noise the black and south Asian communities do, whose vociferous and galvanising voices have been making waves against racism for decades. Racism is one of those horrendous, soul- and confidence-crushing things that, when faced with, you'd much rather forget or pretend didn't exist. So we tend to brush it off, pretend it never happened, or laugh along with the rest rather than come across as bad sports. We Chinese have become dab hands at this, living up to the stereotype of the smiling but silent Chinaman.
If we are to make progress in understanding the true extent of racism in this country, we all need to be a lot braver in confronting truths about how we live. It's about swallowing our pride and being less afraid of telling the world how racism affects us and really thinking about the people across Britain who have come to accept racism as a part of life. It's about standing up in classrooms, television studios, offices, pubs and public transport, not just for ourselves, but for friends and strangers, too.
Denial gets us nowhere. But awareness, thoughtfulness and courage could make millions of lives so much better.

Asian Industry Forum urges Asian investors and students to avoid racist Britain

link

London, Jan 7 (ANI): The Asian Industry Forum has advised its members, press and governments in the South Asian and ASEAN regions to avoid new investments in the UK due to the increasing number of attacks against people of Asian origin in the UK.
 They have also advised governments to instruct Asian students not to enroll in British universities as the racism, unemployment and alcoholism among the local White population has led to an increasing victimisation of seemingly well to do Asian students and businessmen.

In addition to the recent shocking and tragic murder of highly qualified Indian student, Anuj Bidve from Pune, there have been attacks on Indian businessmen, Chinese and Malaysian students and executives.
 It was pointed out by the forum that very few white members of the local population even bothered to sympathise with the parents of the Indian student when they visited UK.
 A christian student of nursing from Kerala was badly beaten up in East London by some white thugs recently and the police refused to take his complaint saying it was a civil matter.
 The Forum, a leading hub for businesses has suggested that the United States of America is a far more civilised and cultured place for students and businesses from Asia as it has always taken special care of Asian students almost all of whom are not only warmly received at universities but respected for their knowledge and contributions.
 The Forum president Mr. Chandramouli said, that old colonial powers like Britain learnt to change the deep seated arrogance and evil of racism in their countries rather than try to trumpet their false, newly manufactured Duchesses and princesses and royalty all over the world in such an irritating and childish fashion as if these are more interesting to foreigners than safety and courtesy on their streets. (ANI)

"Divide and rule"? Diane Abbott was right

in a society steeped in white supremacy white racists incite racism and stereotypes(an example is the racist BBC show Top Gear) is called free speech and when people of colour (POC) objects to being dehumanzed and stereotyped they are called, sensitive, politically correct, and accused of playing the race card. but when a POC like Dianne Abbot exercise the same freedoms and tell the truth about white supremacy. she is called a racist and is asked to resign and apologize.



The privileged will do anything to distract attention from their own power. 


Racism, as the British National Party and its neo-fascist street imitators have been arguing for years, cuts both ways. On 4 January, a black British woman MP hammered out a comment on Twitter which could, taken entirely out of context, be interpreted as a a generalisation about white people. Diane Abbott MP is now Britain's best-known racist -- in a week when the nation's top story has been the prosecution of the murder of a black teenager by a gang of white youths and the subsequent "institutional racism" that was unearthed in the handling of the case by the Metropolitan police.
But hang on, what was it that Abbott actually said? Let's have a little look at the generalisation over which the Hackney MP got a public dressing-down from her own party. Abbott said that "white people" like to play the game of "divide and rule". That's rude, isn't it? Clearly she thinks that ordinary white people like me spend the waking hours between tooth-brushing and the office dividing and ruling. It couldn't possibly be a comment on the structural imposition of power along lines of race and class, particularly not from a veteran anti-racist campaigner, and especially not in a week where institutional racism is in the news. That would just be silly.
Dorian Lynskey's comments on the matter are worth quoting at length. He points out that Abbott, who has a track record of saying the right thing in just the wrong way -- "she should have said 'white people in power' or 'certain white people'" -- was essentially on the money.

[Abbott] clarified that she was referring to 19th century colonialism when, to take just one example, the Belgians colonising modern-day Rwanda strategically favoured the Tutsis over the Hutus and sowed the seeds of attempted genocide a century later. But you don't need to go back that far. The US government's efforts to disrupt the civil rights and Black Power movements are a textbook example of divide-and-rule. It is what dominant powers do. To read her tweet as an indictment of every single white person in the world requires either paranoia or malice. Most of all it means denying that power matters.

The British right has always been allergic to any structural understanding of racial politics, and all week, the commentariat has been coming out in hives. A day before Abbottgate, a Telegraph leader wrung its hands over the profound impact of the Lawrence trial on racial awareness in British public life, complaining that "people" have "found themselves denounced for harmless, if inappropriate, remarks". Elsewhere, former Prospect editor David Goodhart wrote that:

If the Stephen Lawrence case may help to diminish a black grievance culture, it is likely to increase a white working class one . . . this is part of a broader story of how parts of white working class London, especially in the east and the south, felt that they had to accommodate the changes required by post-war immigration...and then had to endure lectures about racism from middle class liberals whose lives had not been changed at all.

The argument that the "white working class" has had anti-racist politics forced on it by "middle class liberals" is an insult to those white working-class people who have spent years, sometimes lifetimes, fighting racism in their communities. In Barking and Dagenham in 2010, thousands of the borough's residents mobilised to stop the British National Party gaining a foothold in Westminster. Goodhart's lazy generalisations play right into the language of the modern far-right: that anti-racism is itself racist, and that any gains for black people must produce equal and opposite losses for white people, in a world in which privilege and prejudice can never be fought, only redistributed.
There's a term for that tactic. The term is "divide and rule".
It's a tactic, as Abbott herself put it, "as old as colonialism" - and it's also a tactic as modern as Twitter. When those with an ideological or personal stake in defending the interests of privilege feel themselves under threat, their first line of defence is often to persuade the underprivileged that it is they who are under attack.
Rick Perry and Mitt Romney defend tax-breaks for the super-rich by telling blue-collar Americans that Democrats and union workers want to cut their paycheques: divide and rule. David Cameron denounces industrial action by encouraging low-paid private sector workers to complain that the pensions public sector workers are striking to protect are higher than theirs: divide and rule. David Willetts tells unemployed men that it's all these selfish women in the workplace who have taken their jobs: divide and rule. Ed Miliband and Liam Byrne, not to mention Ian Duncan Smith, defend the dismantling of the welfare state by persuading the working class that those in receipt of housing benefit are scroungers scamming the system. Divide, dismiss -- and rule.
Everywhere, the right fights public awareness of structural injustice by re-phrasing it as a personal attack by one vulnerable demographic on another. Structural injustice itself cannot be wedged into the story of neoliberalism, which reduces everything to a cloying moral syrup of personal responsibility lectures -- except where the banking sector is involved, of course.
What's missing from the story -- what's always missing -- is power. Defenders of privilege and hierarchy will do anything at all to distract attention from power, and to re-phrase attacks on power as attacks on the powerless. The chorus of faux-outrage over Abbott's tweet isn't just cynical; in a week when structural racism is in the news, it's a classic game of divide and rule.

Ron Paul Supporters Release Racist Ad Depicting Jon Huntsman As Maoist Soldier

link

America has only experienced the first of many primary contests this week, and already a candidate for “most offensive campaign ad” has come to the fore, and with gusto. The group “New Hampshire Liberty 4 Paul”– supporting Rep. Ron Paul– has come out swinging against Jon Huntsman for his ties to China, asking whether he is the “Manchurian Candidate” and whether he lacks “American values” for having lived in Beijing

The ad begins asking of Huntsman, “The Manchurian Candidate,” “What’s he hiding?” It features “traditional” Chinese music and clips of Huntsman doing things in China: speaking Mandarin, taking interviews from Chinese press, walking around in China– you get the idea. It then asks a series of questions during the montage like, “American values, or Chinese?” and “Weak on China? Wonder why?” It also takes a detour to slam him for being Mormon (“A man of faith?”) before the coup de grace, a doctored photo of Huntsman in what appears to be Maoist military garb. Essentially, it makes “Willie Horton” look like Will.I.Am’s “Yes We Can” ad.
The ad is part of an account labeled “New Hampshire Liberty 4 Paul” on YouTube and appears to have no connections to any actual Rep. Paul SuperPAC or his official campaign. But it has been floating around the blogosphere and, given that the reaction in many circles to it has been something to the effect of “those crazy Ron Paul fans strike again!” rather than “This is a joke, right?” is just as much of a problem– in fact– possibly the central problem– the Rep. Paul campaign faces in this election. The predominant attitude towards this campaign is that it would, entirely seriously, have supporters who would launch attacks like this. And even in the event that this ad is revealed to be a joke, the fact that most take it at face value is indicative of precisely the challenge Rep. Paul faces and what kind of campaign many– rightfully or otherwise– believe he is capable of.
Then there is the actual content of the ad, which is problematic (though not entirely surprising) in itself. There is a long and storied tradition on American history of discrimination against far east Asians, particularly of Chinese descent. While this ad, ridiculous as it is, may remind many of you of myriad different political attacks in the election sphere, the quote that came most to mind for me was from Justice Harlan’s dissent in the “separate but equal” case Plessy v. Ferguson. In short, this is what “non-racist” people sounded like, not so long ago in America:

There is a race so different from our own that we do not permit those belonging to it to become citizens of the United States. Persons belonging to it are, with few exceptions, absolutely excluded from our country. I allude to the Chinese race. But, by the statute in question, a Chinaman can ride in the same passenger coach with white citizens of the United States, while citizens of the black race in Louisiana, many of whom, perhaps, risked their lives for the preservation of the Union, who are entitled, by law, to participate in the political control of the State and nation, who are not excluded, by law or by reason of their race, from public stations of any kind, and who have all the legal rights that belong to white citizens, are yet declared to be criminals, liable to imprisonment, if they ride in a public coach occupied by citizens of the white race.

And that’s not even mentioned the (still totally legal!) internment of thousands of Japanese-Americans for no reason during WWII. Even when overt discrimination against black Americans became entirely socially unacceptable (some may argue it is still not entirely so), the alternative discrimination against Asian Americans was considered a responsible alternative. As far as history goes, Rep. Paul’s supporters may then be onto something here, igniting racial thoughts in voters that will cause Republicans to distrust Huntsman. But that doesn’t make it any less vile, and toxic for Rep. Paul himself should he not denounce it.
.

1964 Not the Only Time Racists Hated Government

new york magazine article

A few days ago, I dismissed the argument by Ron Paul and his supporters that he can’t be racist because he’s a libertarian along with (the weaker version of this argument) that Paul’s paleolibertarian ideology has nothing to do with racism. Conor Friedersdorf has a lengthy reply at the Atlantic. Much of the article is him complaining that I don’t write about President Obama’s civil liberties policies, which aren’t related to the question at hand. (Answer: I don’t have opinions on everything!) But then the heart of it is Friedersdorf claiming that it was really just a brief historical moment in time when libertarian anti-federal principles aided the cause of racism:

Critics of Ron Paul-style libertarianism are right, or so I'd argue, that his approach to governing would've postponed the advancement of human freedom had he risen to power in 1960. … In the same way that neo-cons cloud their thinking and public discourse writ large by constantly evaluating every foreign-policy argument as though it's Great Britain circa 1939 -- take that, anti-war appeasers! -- critics of American libertarianism clarify nothing by acting as if the early 1960s are the only prism through which libertarian ideas should be evaluated.

Friedersdorf headlines his item, “For Critics Of Libertarianism, It’s Always 1964.” That strikes me as an awfully strange reading of history. The cause of white supremacy was deeply enmeshed with opposition to federal power for well over a century. Defenders of slavery, then opponents of reconstruction, as well as opponents of a long line of civil rights measures from anti-lynching laws to voting rights protections, all framed their case as principled opposition to expansive federal power.

It doesn’t take some enormous leap to connect Paul’s ideology with the anti-government arguments employed by white supremacists far earlier than the sixties. Paul and his closest adherents have done so themselves, as James Kirchick explained in his seminal piece about Paul’s ideology:

To understand Paul’s philosophy, the best place to start is probably the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Auburn, Alabama. The institute is named for a libertarian Austrian economist, but it was founded by a man named Lew Rockwell, who also served as Paul’s congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982. Paul has had a long and prominent association with the institute, teaching at its seminars and serving as a “distinguished counselor.” The institute has also published his books.
The politics of the organization are complicated--its philosophy derives largely from the work of the late Murray Rothbard, a Bronx-born son of Jewish immigrants from Poland and a self-described “anarcho-capitalist” who viewed the state as nothing more than “a criminal gang”--but one aspect of the institute’s worldview stands out as particularly disturbing: its attachment to the Confederacy. Thomas E. Woods Jr., a member of the institute’s senior faculty, is a founder of the League of the South, a secessionist group, and the author of ThePolitically Incorrect Guide to American History, a pro-Confederate, revisionist tract published in 2004. Paul enthusiastically blurbed Woods’s book, saying that it “heroically rescues real history from the politically correct memory hole.” Thomas DiLorenzo, another senior faculty member and author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, refers to the Civil War as the “War for Southern Independence” and attacks “Lincoln cultists”; Paul endorsed the book on MSNBC last month in a debate over whether the Civil War was necessary (Paul thinks it was not). In April 1995, the institute hosted a conference on secession at which Paul spoke; previewing the event, Rockwell wrote to supporters, “We’ll explore what causes [secession] and how to promote it.” Paul’s newsletters have themselves repeatedly expressed sympathy for the general concept of secession. In 1992, for instance, theSurvival Report argued that “the right of secession should be ingrained in a free society” and that “there is nothing wrong with loosely banding together small units of government. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it.”

Again, to correct another error by Friedersdorf, I don’t think libertarianism or even plaeolibertarianism is inherently racist. I’m arguing against the notion that it’s inherently anti-racist or non-racist. As Noah Smith argues, local bullies are always going to be attracted to libertarianism:

The freedom of the individual can be curtailed not only by the government, but by a large variety of intermediate powers like work bosses, neighborhood associations, self-organized ethnic movements, organized religions, tough violent men, or social conventions. In a society such as ours, where the government maintains a nominal monopoly on the use of physical violence, there is plenty of room for people to be oppressed by such intermediate powers, whom I call "local bullies."

The modern American libertarian ideology does not deal with the issue of local bullies. In the world envisioned by Nozick, Hayek, Rand, and other foundational thinkers of the movement, there are only two levels to society — the government (the "big bully") and the individual. If your freedom is not being taken away by the biggest bully that exists, your freedom is not being taken away at all.

You can be one without the other, and certainly libertarian principles have features that attract adherents other than permitting local bullies, but paleolibertarianism and white supremacy are obviously quite compatible.