Hist. based on reality shows diff. races are necessarily enemies, always have been....

Below-copied by ap first submitted at comments, http://www.unz.com/article/the-diver...omment-2754110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Real History, Based On Actual Reality
(Apollonian, 16 Jan 19)

<blockquote>"I think you need a review of US history regarding relations between whites and black citizens."</blockquote>

US history regarding white citizens is they migrated fm Europe as settlers, the N. American colonies being European in culture. The blacks were basically slaves, esp. in the southern parts of N. America, blacks hated and held in contempt by the whites for obvious, usual, natural reasons, humans being sinners, the whites not wanting to compete w. free black labor, etc.

Note diff. races HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ENEMIES--and always will be--for life on earth sucks, and life is war, as Homer, Plato, St. Augustine, Machiavelli, Herbert Spencer, Charles Darwin and all the best minds and philosophers of Western Civ. have understood. Strife and war btwn diff. races is NOTHING new. Whites and blacks don't like one another, never have, and never will--same goes for all races--life sucks, doesn't it?

So now we have "elite...," once again, working to patronize and condescend to the blacks as soooooooooooooooooooooo many of his "liberal" sort have always done, "elite..." pretending he's morally virtuous in doing so w. this putrid, typical sort of patronization which has been going on now for at least a hundred yrs, eh?

Thus the historic situation is blacks SHOULD have been sent back to Africa where they belong--even Lincoln certainly knew he had to get rid of them. The southern states of 1860 wanted to run their slave economies independent of the northern industrialists, but northerners weren't having it, the north subsequently invading and genociding the southern people, both black and white, mass-murdering probably a million of both races by later 1860s.

Additionally, we southerners slaughtered several hundred thousand yank invaders, so after the war, the "radical" northern politicians took the vote and political power away fm whites and imposed upon whites these former black slaves--purely out of revenge and malice for the southerners having defended themselves against invading northern psychopaths and murderers.

Further, as yrs went by, blacks migrated NORTH and imposed their dictatorship, such as it is, upon the poor stupid whites up there too, hoh o ho ho ho ho--a little poetic justice, eh? So it's same old, same old--war and strife btwn the races, as always, and as always will be.

What has to happen now is whites exercising NULLIFICATION and perhaps some more secession to starting up our own countries and states once again--this sort of action is necessary wave of the future. People like "elite..." will typically and predictably object, but this time we the people need to treat these creatures like the TRAITORS and enemies they really are--with summary justice--there's the real solution to things. See TenthAmendmentCenter.com


--------------------above by ap in response to below-copied--------------------

# 228, EliteCommInc. says:
January 16, 2019 at 5:35 pm GMT • 300 Words
@anarchyst

It all depends by what is meant by negatively impacted. If you mean having to fairly compete or are in some manner impacted by redress, you’ll have to be more specific.

I think you need a review of US history regarding relations between whites and black citizens. The history is overwhelming that the black citizen was the target of discrimination, overt and covert in nearly every area of their lives. Even a look at the history of riots makes clear — whites are the primary aggressors. From the extremes of murder, to assault to the destruction of property and various adverse discriminatory practices. Sadly, even today, blacks according to FBI data sets are the victims of hostile acts from whites overwhelmingly. It’s a frustrating reality.

I don’t think there is any way for whites to know how the AA policy has adversely affected them. There are two hurdles:

1. women, white women are the primary benefactors of AA policies and practices.
2. the actual number of african americans who might benefit from affirmative is unknown, but even if it were an across the board application – 100% it would not even reach a threshold of the 12% represented by the black population.

It’s not slavery — it’s the long term consequences to the immediate and long term issues indicated by policies and practices.

I assume you mean by white social norms — the norms of civil society in ethos and practice as to our constitution. Well, it is generally accepted that everyone do so, including whites. Which in my view has nothing to do with color itself.

I would add you cannot practice segregating people form the norms and then make an argument that they don’t follow the norm from which you have denied — the logical order just doesn’t follow.

But what is astounding in my view is that despite national practices to bar their exclusion for the society, the proportion of African Americans who operate withing the norms of US society is generously high — despite the animosity they face.