Skip to main content

Oberlin retrospective

It seems like such a weird thing. Ten years ago getting accused of racism was the worst possible thing. Anyone I knew did everything they could to avoid it and even the merest suggestion would create incredible stress. It was the *worst* thing that could happen to your reputation.

Now, well, a lot of people stopped caring so much because the accusations became the default, and attached to anything and everything that had nothing at all to do with race. (If everyone is racist, then no one is.) And then even the definition changed so racism wasn't dependent on opinions or actions anymore but simply on who you are... or who you weren't. The woke happily carry on with their public theater of racist confession because it requires nothing of them, no change in their behavior because they aren't (in their mind) actually guilty of anything. It's all show.

So when they go on to accuse someone of a "long history of racism" they aren't any more serious than if they were confessing their own long history of racism, which doesn't bother them at all because they're LYING.

"Well, why does it bother you if it's not true?"

"The fact that you're so mad means that you must be racist."

How exactly does that work? A 90 year old man isn't supposed to be bothered by a FALSE attack on his reputation, he's only hurt and angry if the attack is true?

"You must be racist if you don't accept this injustice toward yourself for the greater good. Compared to what people of color have gone through, this is just an inconvenience and the fact that your inconvenience is more important than All Of History, just proves how racist you are."

I could channel "woke" all day long but I still can't quite get my mind around how a person GETS there.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...