“Hypersensitivity” and the Fighting Spirit
By • 6/10/08 |
The Architect, old white prick. |
Two commenters on last week’s entry What Do You Say When Whites are Denigrated? accused me of excessive sensitivity in taking offense at a line from the film The Matrix Reloaded: “You can’t make me do anything, you old white prick!” A commenter calling himself Realist said that the insult to whites that I perceived was all in my imagination. Another commenter, B.B, said, “Reacting to racial hyper-sensitivity with more racial hyper-sensitivity doesn’t seem like a particularly productive tactic to me.” I think these two commenters are trapped in an obsolete and suicidal mindset. If whites are to survive, we’re going to have to develop a fighting spirit, and that means we have to become more sensitive to insults and learn to answer them.
Realist argued that “white” was not being used as a term of insult in the phrase I cited because it’s conventional for people to put random adjectives that have no real meaning in front of insult words.
What Realist says may be valid in some cases, but it is clear that the Matrix movies have a point to make about whiteness that Neo is hammering home in his insult. In case any of you don’t know, the Matrix movies imagine a future in which machines have taken over and project a simulacrum of reality, the Matrix, for human beings so that the machines can exploit them for their own purposes. The movies pit the forces of the machines against those of “Zion,” the name for the humans who have realized what the machines are up to and wish to liberate the rest of mankind.
I don’t think anyone would deny that these movies have an aggressive “anti-racist” agenda. In fact, they are one of the best fictional expressions of the myth of the fascist establishment that I know of. The machines take a human form as a sinister police force and as the Architect, who explains the workings of the Matrix to Neo and against whom Neo directs the insult in question. All of the human manifestations of the machines are white. The racial diversity of the Zion resistance, however, is heavily emphasized. Essentially, the film pits a conformist, repressive, violent, secretive, and entirely white establishment against the racially diverse, individualist, and extremely sexually liberated forces of resistance. Neo’s insult stems from the underlying agenda of the movie, which is to connect whiteness with fascism. In fact, in the same scene, television screens show the images of George Bush Sr. and Jr. along with Hitler, thus implying that contemporary America is a fascist or proto-fascist state.
I also reject the assertion that my attitude towards the denigration of whites is equivalent to that of blacks and other minorities who see racial denigration where none exists. Obnoxious stereotypes about whites are ubiquitous in American culture. Among the most common stereotypes are that whites are rich spoiled brats; that we are excessively rational, controlling, unemotional, and sexually repressed; and that we take a sadistic pleasure in treating non-whites unfairly. In case you doubt me, look at the portrayal of whites in the film Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle, a consummate expression of leukophobia.
Even worse, whereas well-funded and powerful minority organizations exist to respond to complain about racial stereotypes of blacks, Hispanics, and Jews, there is no organized resistance to the denigration of whites. Consequently, except in the most extreme and salient cases, such as that of Jeremiah Wright, the denigration of whites goes completely unchallenged.
The days when whites could afford to take a dismissive attitude toward racial denigration against them are gone. That attitude was appropriate when whites held an unassailed dominance over American society that could not be threatened by insults. But in a time when half of American children under 5 are non-white and when our school system and popular media are eradicating our cultural identity, whites have to learn to fight for their survival. And that means that we have to be sensitive to denigration and learn to respond to it. Moreover, it means we have to develop a spirit of racial solidarity that gives other whites the benefit of the doubt when they take offense, rather than reflexively dismissing their concerns.
What Realist and B.B label hypersensitivity, I see as the will to racial survival and the fighting spirit. That’s why we all need to become a bit more “hypersensitive.”
If you want this article to be exposed to a wide audience, take the time to recommend it at digg. Millions of readers traffic the site, and the more recommendations an article gets, the better its chance of being read. If you don't have digg account yet, registration is easy. Just click submit to get started. |
Click here to join the Inverted World mailing list. You'll get an e-mail notice whenever IW publishes new entries.
Talking about anti-white comments in films, there is a scene in the 1986 film “Soul Man” where the Harvard law lecturer played by James Earl Jones describes his students in a derogatory manner as “white xxxxxxx” I forget what the noun was, because I binned the DVD after that - but it was said in a vicious manner which was not meant to reflect badly on Jones’ character. It is a pity because “Soul Man” was otherwise not too bad.
By on 6/11/08 at 2:12 pm
Becoming sensitive to insults and demeaning remarks had better be an acceptable attitude by us, the nation builders, or we will be considered soft-headed and only encourage the bullies to push harder.
When we are called derogatory names, we need to let it be known that, while there is still freedom of speech, we can resort to the same thing. Those slandering/slurring us need to be treated in the same way they treat us.
I have had filthy phone calls from minority groups because I stand up for our European-American heritage. It is disgusting to note that only the ‘white on black’ slandering (if done at all) is ever made note of, but, let me tell you, the words thrown at little white kids and white women by the minorities is disgusting, and while this is supposed to be overlooked, just let a white guy return the slur to a minority, and lo and behold, the white guy is a racist. We either stick up for ourselves and STICK TOGETHER on this or we will be plowed under. The admittance of millions of illegals and other minorities is not by chance, and formenting hostility between the races is a boon for the race-traitors in this country. Wait and see.
By on 6/11/08 at 2:25 pm
You said it, Helen! Our people should be proud and stand up to those who are coercing/guilting us into compromising our culture and children. I have a white aquaintance (I use this term loosely) who bemoans that there are “just too many old white guys running this counry.” Even white people have been brainwashed into believing that they are inherently evil or bad, etc.
By on 6/12/08 at 11:19 am
Mr Jobling:
You are being discussed at amnation:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/010816.html
By on 6/12/08 at 3:15 pm
JRC is writing about a View from the Right discussion about a comment on Little Green Footballs that names me, as well as Lawrence Auster, Jared Taylor, Peter Brimelow, etc., as neo-Nazis.
I’m pleased to be on such a distinguished list, although I wish Stormfront operative Jamie Kelso weren’t right next to me. Yuck!
I just can’t bring myself to be “hypersensitive” about this! I guess no publicity is bad publicity. They can say what they like about me, as long as they don’t throw me in prison.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
By on 6/12/08 at 3:48 pm
Realist argued that “white” was not being used as a term of insult in the phrase I cited because it’s conventional for people to put random adjectives that have no real meaning in front of insult words.
I’m afraid that summary bears little relation to what I actually said:
When you are verbally aggressive to someone, you typically address them using some feature of their appearance that most differentiates them from yourself. It is not necessarily a sign of a more general prejudice. Compare:
You old bald/fat/red-haired/Coca-cola-drinking prick!
The direct insult is in “prick”, not in what qualifies “prick”. An individual is being denigrated, not a larger group.
IOW, the adjective is neither random nor without real meaning: it describes “some feature of appearance” differentiating the target from the abuser: the target is white or fat or red-haired or drinking Coca-cola. I am quite happy to accept that the movie — which I’ve no intention of seeing — was anti-white, but you picked a bad example of its tendency. Calling someone a white prick is not of itself anti-white, any more than calling someone a black bastard is of itself anti-black.
What Realist and B.B label hypersensitivity, I see as the will to racial survival and the fighting spirit. That’s why we all need to become a bit more “hypersensitive.”
I am highly “racist” myself, but I value truth and accurate analysis as well as will to racial survival and fighting spirit. Leucophobia is pervasive in the modern West, and often deadly in its effects, and we don’t need to invent examples of it.
By on 6/28/08 at 4:27 pm
You are perfectly correct. For another current example of name-calling, go to:
http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/israelsbigdick/
See the author slap us with Shiksa, Redneck, and WASP. See the reasonable criticism of this in the third comment, and the author’s snotty response in the fourth comment. He thinks we should laugh at his slurs as if they are punchlines.
This is a common pattern of response to being told that slurs and slander are inappropriate. First comes ridicule, then second comes anger. Third comes acceptance by the slanderer. Resisting defamation is not work for delicate people.
Nevertheless, onward!
By on 6/10/08 at 11:14 pm