The New Left is as Racist As … And Anti-White

The New Left is as Racist As … And Anti-White. By Mark Latham.

When applied to the question of race, identity politics only has one rule: white people are to blame for everything, while non-white people are free to do whatever they like. Newly-arrived migrants can cluster in a single suburb if they wish, not learn English if its suits them and as for a strong work ethic, that’s optional too. To criticise this pattern of urban settlement is to invite a social media scream of ‘racism’.

This is a world away from [the Australia that] Whitlam and Fraser intended. They believed in multiculturalism as a nationally unifying policy. The idea was for people to come from different parts of the world but then be integrated into the Australian mainstream. The new arrivals would bring with them their cultural practices but also embrace the Australian values of free speech, democracy, the fair go (aka meritocracy) and our uniquely laconic, larrikin lifestyle. In return, homegrown Aussies would pick and choose the bits of other cultures that we liked.

Whitlam and Fraser, in effect, had a vision for a blended society in which people from different ethnic backgrounds would mix together and get to know each other, speaking the national language of English. They wouldn’t live apart in ethnic enclaves, separated by geographic and language barriers. No street or suburb would have a dominant ethnic group or religion. …

Yet today, if anyone raises the problem of ethnic enclaves, of racial and religious separatism in our suburbs, they are denounced as racists. This is the new language of the Identity Left. …

When places like Lakemba in Sydney’s West have become 65 per cent Islamic, isn’t this a valid concern? If the original model for multiculturalism is being diminished, why shouldn’t people speak out, highlighting obvious problems? Twice last year I visited Fairfield, also in Western Sydney, and found that 90 per cent of people in the town centre could not speak English. As Bolt writes, ‘We are clustering into tribes that live apart from each other and often do not even speak the same language in the street.’

How can multiculturalism succeed, building trust and harmony between people if they can’t communicate with each other?

We live in strange times. It’s a measure of the Left’s extremism that when it comes to national cohesion, Bolt more accurately reflects the Whitlam/Fraser legacy than the feral mob abusing him. …

Bait and switch:

In the 1980s I listened to Margaret Whitlam, Gough’s wife, express her concern about the way in which their old suburb of Cabramatta had become an ethnic enclave. She wasn’t a white supremacist. …

The Left spends a lot of time lecturing people about the benefits of diversity. But apparently this doesn’t apply to places like Lakemba and Cabramatta, which have become near-monocultural.

Mark Latham was the last Australian leader of the older, more honorable left, that still cared about the working class instead of scorning them as deplorables. Notice how he now stands firmly opposed to the new left. Andrew Bolt was also of the old left.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Justin Trudeau feels heat over open-door policy for asylum-seekers

Justin Trudeau feels heat over open-door policy for asylum-seekers, by Cameron Stewart.

It was a single tweet, but it is one that has come to haunt Justin Trudeau. On January 28 last year, only days after Donald Trump was sworn in as US President, the Canadian Prime Minister took a deliberate shot at Trump’s hardline immigration policies by trumpeting how Canada had an open door for refugees.

“To those fleeing persecution, terror and war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength. #welcometocanada,” he tweeted.

Eighteen months on, Trudeau’s tweet has rebounded on him. Canada is facing a reckoning about what sort of country it wants to be as a surge in the number of asylum-seekers tests its tolerance and its self-proclaimed pride as a traditional haven for refugees.

“There is a problem at the border, the border must be enforced,” says Lisa MacLeod, Ontario’s minister responsible for immigration, who says the Trudeau government’s lax policies account for an unsustainable influx of asylum-seekers.

Last year Canada received a record 50,420 applications for asylum, more than double the 23,930 it received in 2016 and the highest level since the country’s Immigration and Refugee Board was created in 1989. …

Now Trudeau, who initially was feted for his generosity to asylum-seekers, is facing a political and public backlash for failing to control Canada’s borders. …

To the horror of some Canadians, the country now is experiencing its own version of the divisive refugee debates that have convulsed Germany, Italy and other European nations in recent years, and that have caused deep divisions in Australia. …

A survey this month by the Angus Reid Institute found that two-thirds of Canadians (67 per cent) believe the issue of asylum-seekers crossing the border into Canada has become a crisis. The survey also found that 58 per cent of voters think Canada is being “too generous” to asylum-seekers crossing the border illegally — more than eight times as many as those who say Canada is not being “generous enough”.

Same in every white country. The globalist left establishment is pushing open borders, anti-white sentiment, and “diversity”. We can all see where this is going, demographically. Is it too cynical to mention that white countries are being encouraged into transgenderism and gay marriage, while smarter women are encouraged to have careers rather than kids, and the welfare system helps less smart women to have more kids?

Things can change fast. A decade ago every mainstream leftist politician agreed that gay marriage was not happening, and they were firmly against it. In 1929 Germany only a few fringe parties intended to do anything to Jews.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

US Colleges offer courses on ‘queering’ children, the Bible

US Colleges offer courses on ‘queering’ children, the Bible. By Celine Ryan.

This school year, students across the country will attend courses on “Queering the Bible,” “Queering Childhood,” “Queering Theology,” and similar topics.

Students at Pomona College in Claremont, California, for instance, will have the opportunity to enroll in a brand new course titled “Queering Childhood,” which will examine “the figure of the Child and how this figuration is used by politics, law, and medicine to justify continued cultural investment in reproductive heteronormativity and productive ablebodiedness.”

The course description explains that students will examine the childhoods of “queer and crip children,” as well as “childhoods against which the figure of the Child is articulated,” with reference to work related to “gender studies, childhood studies, disability studies, and queer theory.”

Colleges are not only attempting to “queer” childhood, they are teaching students to “queer” Christianity and religion in general, as well.

Marvelous. Now “queer” Islam 🙂  I dare you.

Democrats Frighten Manafort Jurors

Manafort trial Day 14: Jury ‘scared’ as it heads home without a verdict. By Daren Samuelson.

Paul Manafort’s trial will stretch into a fourth week, as jurors headed home Friday without reaching a verdict for the second straight day and the judge overseeing the case alluded to “threats” the jury may be receiving.

Seven news organizations sught access to sealed materials related to the trial that would have publicly identified the jurors. The judge, telling the courtroom that jurors were “scared” and “afraid”, did not release their names.

Democrats Frighten Manafort Jurors, by John Hinderaker.

The case that Bob Mueller has brought against Paul Manafort has nothing to do with Donald Trump or the 2016 election. It is irrelevant to any significant political issue. But Democrats worry that Mueller’s prosecution of Manafort for years-ago tax evasion may fail, thereby making a laughingstock of the special counsel investigation in which they have invested so much. What happens when Democrats are afraid they may lose a political battle? Things get nasty. …

Why do you suppose seven news organizations — all liberal, presumably — wanted to know who the jurors are and where they live? They are worried that the jury, having heard the evidence, may not render the “right” verdict, i.e., the one that helps the Democratic Party.

So they want to know who the jurors are so they can apply pressure on them through mob action, newspaper denunciations, online harassment and so on. This is how today’s Democratic Party operates. If the jury fails to render the Democrats’ preferred verdict, what do you suppose Maxine Waters will suggest Democrats should do to the jurors if they venture out in public?

Manafort’s Purge Trial, by Roger Simon.

[Manafort’s] trial — no matter how it turns out — in its underpinnings resembles nothing so much as a Stalinist purge trial. It is political, self-serving and sadistic. Manafort is being purged — for life, if the prosecution gets its way.

Lest you think I am overstating, it’s worth considering that countries have unique traditions. … Here that oppression appears to be coming from a pervasive — almost enforced in the sense that it is a “given” — conformity among large portions of our government, the Democratic Party, many corporations, the mainstream media with hundreds of newspapers writing anti-Trump editorials in unison, the academy, the entertainment industry, and, now, most ominously, social media, all of which are dominated by nearly identical worldviews. …

The Trump/Russia investigation then becomes the natural outgrowth of this new conformity, a warning to cooperate, to actually conform. Thus the trial of Paul Manafort then becomes the first show trial of our own incipient version of covert Stalinism or Stalinisme sans Gulag. …

Although it’s clearly a lever to destroy Trump, in the larger sense the Manafort trial is meant to teach that lesson, to warn the public at large not to stray from the traditional and dominant view, even if that changes. They must accept it anyway.

Who would want to work for the Republican Party, if this is what is going to befall you? If he hadn’t briefly worked for Trump, Manafort would have just been given an adverse tax ruling and a fine.

Denmark to give children in migrant neighbourhoods compulsory lessons on democracy and equality

Denmark to give children in migrant neighbourhoods compulsory lessons on democracy and equality. By Tom Barnes.

Denmark will force children living in “ghetto” neighbourhoods containing large numbers of migrants to learn about democracy and equality, as well as traditions such as Christmas.

The Scandinavian country’s government announced the new policy, which will see children from certain districts completing 25 hours of compulsory state education each week from the age of one.

Denmark uses the term “ghetto” as an official designation for neighbourhoods populated by primarily by non-Western immigrants. …

Denmark has struggled for decades with how to integrate migrants from areas such as the Middle East into its largely ethnically and religiously homogenous society.

hat-tip byrmol

Khan’s New London: Six Arrests After Teen ‘Disembowelled’ in Quadruple Stabbing

Khan’s New London: Six Arrests After Teen ‘Disembowelled’ in Quadruple Stabbing, by Jack Montgomery.

A teenager is fighting for his life after allegedly being disembowelled during a quadruple stabbing in London’s so-called ‘murder mile’.

Describing the incident on the Elmington Estate in Camberwell, a witness said they saw “four or five black boys running, [then] all of a sudden I could hear, ‘Help, help’.”

Another resident said they saw one of the four stab victims grievously wounded with his “intestines falling on the ground”, according to MailOnline.

Six male suspects, said to be aged between 15 and 16, were arrested following the incident, which took place a stone’s throw from the street where ‘drill’ rapper Sidique Kamara, also known as ‘Incognito’, was stabbed to death earlier this month. …

Acid attacks, stabbings, and shootings have been getting progressively out of control in the British capital under Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, who has attempted to pin the blame for the crime wave on central government cutbacks.

How vibrant! So diverse and third world!

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Facebook Bans Jewish-Australian Military Veteran Avi Yemini for ‘Hate Speech’

Facebook Bans Jewish-Australian Military Veteran Avi Yemini for ‘Hate Speech’. By Lucas Nolan.

Avi Yemini, a Jewish-Australian IDF veteran, conservative political blogger and political candidate, has been banned from Facebook allegedly for publishing “hate speech.”

A popular Jewish-Australian IDF veteran, political blogger, and Australian state government candidate recently found his Facebook page banned…

Yemini’s Facebook page boasted a follower count of approximately 175,000 … Yemeni has been on the receiving end of death threats on Facebook himself based on his reporting. …

Breitbart News spoke with Yemini who provided the following comment on the blacklisting of his page:

“Banning my page is another example of Facebook’s political bias and is an attack on free speech. They are purging conservative pages. In this case, they are meddling in the Australian political system and therefore breaching a number of local laws.

“I believe I was banned because I am exposing the Islamization of Australia and how it is negatively impacting the country.”

Immigration and the great replacement of whites in the West — talk about it and you are silenced. Verboten. It is becoming increasingly clear that anti-white racism is the new antisemitism.

hat-tip Stephen Neil, Charles

Human Biodiversity Truth is the Only Way to Fight SJWs

Human Biodiversity Truth is the Only Way to Fight SJWs, by Lion of the Blogosphere.

Let’s imagine if blacks, on average, were as equally intelligent as whites, on average. This is what SJWs believe, and what they severely punish anyone for being the least bit skeptical about.

But if it were true, then there is something massively wrong with our society. That blacks have such low educational and economic achievement despite being equally as intelligent as whites would demonstrate that there’s something evil afoot that’s preventing them from succeeding.

In the early days of the civil rights movement, there was the assumption that if blacks were given equal education, if we abolished racism, and if we enacted affirmative action to give blacks an extra push until they could equalize with whites, then all of the inequalities would come to an end. However, that was clearly proved to be wrong. We did everything we were supposed to do to end inequality, but inequality just didn’t end. …

But the left call you “evil racist” if you say the truth:

The only way for Republicans and conservatives to stop being evil is to embrace the truth of HBD [Human Bio Diversity]. Scientific truth is not evil, it’s just the way it is.

Advances in genetic science means the blank slate hypothesis has a very limited life. This should get interesting.

How Can I Cure My White Guilt?

How Can I Cure My White Guilt? By Cheryl Strayed and Steve Almond. Yep, this letter and reply really are in the New York Times, the global HQ of political correctness.

Dear Sugars,

I’m riddled with shame. White shame. This isn’t helpful to me or to anyone, especially people of color. I feel like there is no “me” outside of my white/upper middle class/cisgender identity. I feel like my literal existence hurts people, like I’m always taking up space that should belong to someone else.

I consider myself an ally. I research proper etiquette, read writers of color, vote in a way that will not harm P.O.C. (and other vulnerable people). I engage in conversations about privilege with other white people. I take courses that will further educate me. I donated to Black Lives Matter. Yet I fear that nothing is enough. Part of my fear comes from the fact that privilege is invisible to itself. What if I’m doing or saying insensitive things without realizing it? …

I don’t talk about my feelings because it’s hard to justify doing so while people of color are dying due to systemic racism and making this conversation about me would be again centering whiteness. Yet bottling it up makes me feel an existential anger that I have a hard time channeling since I don’t know my place. Instead of harnessing my privilege for greater good, I’m curled up in a ball of shame. How can I be more than my heritage?


Steve Almond: Shame and anger are powerful emotions, Whitey. And yet your central struggle is around identity. You write that you don’t know your place. In fact, your letter describes your place as a kind of prison cell of privilege. What you really feel is trapped within an identity that marks you, inescapably, as an oppressor. …

We do live in a culture steeped in white supremacy and class bigotry, as well as patriarchal values. But the solution to this injustice isn’t to wallow in self-hatred. …

Cheryl Strayed: I think Steve’s onto something when he notes that your anxiety is acute now because the racial mix at your college is reflecting your privilege back to you, but I’ll go even further: My hunch is that you’re truly seeing it for the first time. You grew up in a neighborhood and attended schools where you were one of the relatively few whites. It’s possible your status as a situational racial minority gave you the illusion that you didn’t have much in the way of racial privilege. Now that you’re living in a community that, at 75 percent white, roughly mirrors that of the American population, you’re feeling the full force of what it means to be white in a white supremacist culture and it makes you feel uncomfortable because up until now, in some unconscious way, you’d exonerated yourself from it. You were the “good white person” because you grew up among people of color. Now you’re another white face in the crowd at your elite college, and ashamed of it.

Is this the future the PC mob are pushing us towards?

Retreat on Paris emissions target may not save Malcolm Turnbull

Retreat on Paris emissions target may not save Malcolm Turnbull, by Simon Benson.

Malcolm Turnbull has dumped the government’s plans to legislate the 26 per cent Paris emissions-­reduction target, in a dramatic ­capitulation to rebel MPs and ministers threatening to cross the floor and vote it down. …

Under the backdown, the 2015 climate change commitment would be retained but mandated through a ministerial order and only after advice from the competition regulator that it would not ­increase power prices. …

The changes to the energy shake-up were swiftly condemned by Tony Abbott, who told The Weekend Australian he was concerned about whether the new plan would allow a future Shorten government to ramp up emissions-reduction targets more easily.

The Weekend Australian has also confirmed the Prime Minister will pursue an aggressive campaign to force down energy bills that will include arming the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission with divestiture powers to strip the big three energy ­companies of generation assets if their early closure leads to higher prices.

Turnbull effectively pulls Australian out of Paris Climate Agreement, but still wants to meet carbon reduction commitments “for free”

Turnbull effectively pulls Australian out of Paris Climate Agreement, but still wants to meet carbon reduction commitments “for free”. By Joanne Nova.

Faced with a possible and imminent challenge from Peter Dutton, a limping Malcolm Turnbull has done the barest minimum just to stay in power. He has capitulated, and won’t try to mandate the Paris agreement through law, but he still wants the nation to meet the Paris agreement. If he had pushed it through Parliament he would have faced a leadership challenge for sure, and pundits are saying it’s still likely. How long will liberal lemmings allow him to lead and give up the easiest, well trodden and winning election strategy?

Tony Abbott is leading the nation from the back bench.

Most of the party is too afraid to even talk about how much warming humans may be causing lest they be called a “denier” for doubting that it is not exactly the same as an unaudited, unelected and unaccountable foreign committee says. The nation can’t even have a sensible public discussion on climate change.

As Andrew Bolt says Turnbulls leadership is now terminal. His clumsy gambit to present the NEG as a done deal too early shows how non-consultative he is, how bad his judgement is, and makes those that defended it look like fools.

The new “Ministerial Agreement” arrangement may be worse because it probably suits the Deep State even better. Decisions about whether to proceed will be done by a Minister advised by unelected committees using models based on a bunch of assumptions about “the cost”. Turnbull has led the party for three years while electricity costs have jumped seismically and now he just wants to keep prices at this obscene level? …

ABC viewers blind-sided by reality again:

On Tuesday The ABC news audience heard what a unified success it was for Turnbull to get the NEG through the party meeting. It turns out this was a complete bluff — most of the party didn’t even know what was in the plan (the Labor Party got a copy before them). The ABC didn’t point out the obvious — that speaking up against it, or threatening to cross the floor was a major risk, so Turnbull’s gambit was that he might get the illusion of support and unity by railroading it past the party in a high stakes situation. Instead it took other journalists at The Australian and on radio — Ray Hadley — to ask the right questions and expose how deep the resentment was and how fragile the “unity”. So fragile that three days after his big win Turnbull’s head was almost on a block. We pay a billion dollars for blind propaganda. …

The NEG was not about electricity costs, it was (is) primarily about emissions:

The purpose of the NEG was first and foremost to lock in emissions reductions. Fines for failure to cut emissions are one hundred times higher than fines for failing to provide electricity.

Daniel Wild, IPA: “The NEG is functional equivalent to the Renewable Energy Target, an Emissions Trading Scheme, an Emissions Intensity Scheme, and a carbon tax.”

When it comes to climate, the PC left and Malcolm Turnbull just cannot help themselves. It’s all spin and deception, because they cannot brook any compromise or face the possibility that the carbon dioxide theory of global warming is greatly exaggerated.

Turnbull lost the leadership of his Party in 2009 because he deceived his party and forced through his climate wishes over the majority of the Liberal Party — which promptly elected Tony Abbott instead. And here he goes again, apparently.

Turnbull faces “sizable revolt” over energy prices and Paris agreement

Turnbull faces “sizable revolt” over energy prices and Paris agreement, by Joanne Nova.

Turnbull, apparently is “wedded” to his plan to be the only nation on Earth to legislate and mandate the Paris target. He knows carbon taxes and emissions trading schemes are widely unpopular or he wouldn’t have buried the “success” of his achievement getting a secret emissions trading scheme through Parliament. (One the World Bank is very pleased about).

He’s not glued to Paris for the votes. Nor is he doing it for the environment, surely, since all these international schemes achieve notoriously little except for funding some banker yachts. Turnbull is a smart guy, if he was serious about reducing carbon, he’d be talking about nuclear power, and the cheapest ways to reduce CO2, like supercritical coal, Abbott’s auctions, and anything-other-than-solar. Why the fixation with foreign committee dictats?

Turnbull’s new approach to electricity: smoke and mirrors

Turnbull’s new approach to electricity: smoke and mirrors, by Alan Moran.

The idiocy of Turnbull’s handling of electricity policy now, once again, looks likely to cost him the leadership of his party. Faced with termination, he is seeking to extricate himself while pretending to reform the policy that has revealed his incompetence. His new proposals at modifying the National Energy Guarantee (NEG) are bromides that leave intact his destructive objectives for the electricity supply industry.

Turnbull’s automatic default position is to override the market and substitute his own perceived wisdom. Ten years ago, on a joint ticket with the ALP to close down fossil fuel electricity production and replace it with wind, he lost the leadership to Tony Abbott.

He has long considered “modern” wind and solar to be superior to the geriatric coal power stations that gave Australia the cheapest electricity in the world. Among his missions is to effect the replacement of those dinosaurs. He will not be swayed by arguments that the alternatives are dearer and less reliable and will remain so. And no amount of evidence will dissuade him that global emission reductions are either unnecessary or unachievable. …

The fact is that Turnbull cannot be trusted to carry out the changes he is hinting at when they undermine his basic philosophy. He will torture words and devise seemingly ameliorative policy platforms. But these will simply be superficial actions to dampen criticism while he continues towards his objectives.

New Mexico Jihad Compound Mysteriously Destroyed By Authorities

New Mexico Jihad Compound Mysteriously Destroyed By Authorities, by Tyler Durden.

New Mexico authorities have executed a court order to destroy an encampment where the son of a famous New York Imam ritualistically murdered his three-year-old son and trained nearly a dozen other children to commit school shootings, according to Taos, NM prosecutors.

The decision to raze the compound is the latest controversial development in the case, after New Mexico judge Sarah Backus on Monday ordered four out of five alleged Muslim extremists free on a $20,000 “signature bond” (meaning they didn’t have to pay), including the suspect in his son’s murder, Siraj Ibn Wahhaj.

On the face of it this seems insane. Is the deep state protecting Muslims? Democrat connections?

See US suspect was ‘training children to commit school shootings’.

A man arrested after 11 malnourished children were found in a remote desert compound was training them to commit school shootings, US media report. …

Political activist Linda Sarsour has a long track record of praising and thanking her beloved mentor, you guessed it, the “amazing” Imam Siraj Wahhaj.

How the Left Is Outsourcing Censorship of the Internet

How the Left Is Outsourcing Censorship of the Internet, by John Hinderaker.

Liberals control every newspaper in America, as far as I know, except the Manchester Union Leader. They control CBS, ABC, NBC and every cable network except Fox News. They control what is left of the news magazines, and pretty much every other magazine, too. Only talk radio and the pesky internet lie outside their grasp, so that is where they seek to impose censorship.

But they have a problem: the First Amendment. The government can’t suppress conservative speech on the ground that it is “hate speech,” i.e., something that liberals don’t like. That was recently reaffirmed by a 9-0 decision of the Supreme Court.

So liberals have outsourced censorship of the internet to the tech titans of Silicon Valley.

Unfortunately, most political conversation these days occurs not on the “free” internet, where independent sites like Power Line reside, but rather on social media–Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and so on. Other players include Google (in its search capacity), Apple, Pinterest, Spotify, etc. Happily — if you are a leftist — all of these tech companies are run by liberals. And because they are private companies, they are not constrained by the First Amendment. They can restrict or ban conservative communications on the ground that they are “hate speech,” or on no grounds whatsoever, with impunity.

And that is exactly what they are doing….

Any claim by the Left that companies aligned with it are merely cleansing themselves of disreputable content would be absurd. First, PragerU is among the most reputable content on the internet. Second, they have taken no action against left-wing extremists like the fascist Antifa, which disseminates its hate speech freely on every social media platform I am aware of.

The Left’s attempt to outsource censorship to its Silicon Valley allies is one of the most important issues of our time. The proper solution may lie in creating competitive platforms, or in legislative, regulatory or judicial action. Perhaps platforms fitting a particular legal definition should be regulated as public utilities. After all, Federal Express doesn’t refuse to deliver packages to the National Review office on the ground that they may contain conservative communications, and telephone companies haven’t tried to cut off connections when two conservatives are talking. Why should Facebook, Twitter and YouTube be permitted to engage in political discrimination?