Предыдущая публикация
Share Share Share
CRIMINALS CONTROL THE POLICE VIA SCAMS AND BY CANCELING FREE SPEECH
There have been stories, in the media, of segregation, and confrontation by police, but no plausible explanations for either.
Should the privilege of media blackout be granted to criminals of certain minority groups? Should there be a media blackout of crimes, especially violent crimes, committed by certain ethnic minorities and religious groups?
At one time, a design flaw was found in the Ford Pinto, causing it to be labeled 'the car with the exploding gas tank'. Should the public have been informed of this? Such reporting could cause a negative stereotype of Ford's staff. What if Ford's
staff had a demonstration calling any reportage of this "hate speech"? Wouldn't it be better to simply allow people to burn to death, instead of solving the problem?
Why not simply silence those who complain? Ford is a big powerful company. Those who criticize people in power might be bullied. Surely it is appropriate to respect bullies, yes? That is the woke thing to do. The groups who are given the greatest woke privilege are those who have bullies supporting their interests.
At the end of the day, we could all pat ourselves on the head and say that we were virtuous in stopping the incitement of prejudice towards Ford's staff.
At one time, in the UK, fighting aged guys, of a certain ethnicity, were getting stopped and searched by police more often than others. So, as you can guess, the police were called "racists". However some journalists were reporting the fact that the police had their reasons. That their actions made Britain safer for everyone. So, as you can guess, the journalists were called "racists". Criminals hate to have their crimes reported. In 1985, there was a march down Fleet Street, London's street of journalists, protesting the reportage of the crime. Hence protesting freedom of the press. Instead of getting to the root of the problem, the government responded by shooting down the messenger, effectively sweeping the cause of the problem under the carpet. Yes, the British government responded with 'The Public Order Act of 1986'. The effect of this law is that one cannot criticize people of certain ethnic groups if there are a enough complaints about the criticism - even if it is simply practical, constructive criticism and an attempt to reduce crime. So it ended both freedom of the press and freedom of speech. It is a wonderful benefit to be able to commit crime without being reported. So the public will hear your side of the story when you say the police are oppressive but they'll never hear the other side of the story. That's fantastic! However, it's only the squeaky wheel that gets the oil. As complaining is common amongst some ethnic groups but not amongst others, it effectively discriminates racially. So it is now effectively illegal to report the crimes, and embarrassments, of one ethnic group but not another. Supporters of the racial bias will claim that honest reportage can cause a stereotype of a "vulnerable group". However hip-hop music does this - but has not been banned. If you blame the shortcomings and embarrassments of one ethnic group on another ethnic group, you can justify victimization of people in that group. This can be done far more effectively if you repress free speech privileges of people of that group, or otherwise are able to cancel dissenting views. This is a fantastic strategy for controlling police, journalists and politicians. These were strategies used by Adolf Hitler.
In the wake of the passing of the state imposed media blackout, Britain has had a major problem with 'woke policing' aka 'politically correct cowardice' i.e. police who are more concerned with their own woke image than in the plight of victims of crime. Many a victim of an unprovoked attack from persons of a different color have found that the police were negligent in dealing with their cases, tried to accuse them of provoking the crimes against themselves, or both. Woke policing is selfish, cowardly and racist. It is likely that racially biased media has a lot to do with woke policing.
There are many who exploit Wokeism to selfish or nefarious ends. Jussie Smollett being a well known example. Many a cop, who has caught a perp red-handed, has been called a racist. Cops are often called racists just for doing their jobs. It's a fantastic means of manipulation. It's not surprising that it is often implied that Islam is a race. One evening, when I was a teenager, a 40yo man got me drunk and then asked me for sex. When I refused, he implied I was racist and homophobic. Then there is the claim of 'systemic racism' which blames the racial majority for under achievements, under productivity and crime rates of certain minority groups. However, the rates of such things are consistent with the rates of such things in countries where those minorities are the majority. It is not just common criminals who exploit wokeism. There are 'blame claims' which are simply absurd. Mainstream media will lead you to believe that the only threat to the environment is greenhouse gasses. Not overhunting, overfishing deforestation, other habitat destruction and population growth. Can it be that this is because the latter five occur mainly in the third world, while the first can be blamed mainly on a certain race? Is the environmental debate being racialized? It appears that it is. In the 1990s, tree hugging and other attempts to save forests, were becoming popular. Some big businesses were not happy with this. Those who wish to vilify environmentalists accuse them of keeping the poor poor. Of stopping the development of the third world. However, the overwhelming majority (if not all) of the third world countries where deforestation, habitat destruction and development were allowed to proceed, are still third world countries. So the poor are still poor. So that Wokeist argument is a scam. And the Woke clearly play a role in damaging the biosphere which sustains us. It is interesting to note that while it is trendy to publicize any hypocrisy among environmentalists, hypocrisy among Wokeists, of which there is a lot, gets very little publicity.
I rarely watch documentaries but I have noticed that some, there are probably many similar ones, like one I saw by VICE, which basically implied that environmentalists are 'nazis' (a woke term for right-wing extremists) because some 'nazis', like the Christchurch shooter, express support for environmental issues. Furthermore, such implications are made of people who don't like pedophiles. I saw a BBC documentary about a group of women who were protesting the underage grooming gangs in Britain. In many cases, the victims are neglected by woke police. The BBC basically labeled the woman's group 'justice for women and children', who were also helping victims of rape, as 'nazis' - basically because some of the attendees of their demos were Islamo-phobic. Twenty years ago, in Britain, it was trendy to openly condemn pedophilia. It's not trendy now. So, yes you guessed it, if you're an environmentalist, or if you don't like pedophiles, you're a nazi!
The propagandists claimed that the aforementioned 'nazis' were not concerned about the children, nor the environment, but were merely pushing an anti Islamist agenda, although they provided no evidence to back this claim. One time, when I almost drowned, I was rescued by a man, with a woman, in a boat. Maybe he didn't care about me but just wanted to impress the woman - but I didn't complain. Would you?
It is interesting to note that Hitler blamed the shortcomings and embarrassments, of one race of people, on another race of people, he repressed free speech, he used propaganda to deceive the masses and bullied those who spoke out against him. All of these are also done by wokeists.
Wokeism is the current mainstream 'morality' of the Western World. While some early forms of Wokeism were anti-Hitlerian, it has since been corrupted and has become quite Hitlerian in many ways.
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF WOKEISM
(Funny but true!)
1. THOU SHALL HATE, FOR THE CULT OF WOKEISM IS NOT ONE OF LOVE NOR PRAISE, BUT ONE OF CONDEMNATION AND VENGEANCE; AND RECOGNIZES NO SAINTS, ONLY SINNERS.
2. THOU SHALL HONOR THE BULLY, AND GRANT THE GREATEST WOKE PRIVILEGE TO GROUPS WHO HAVE BULLIES SUPPORTING THEIR INTERESTS.
3. THOU SHALL CANCEL ANY FREE SPEECH PRIVILEGES OF THOSE WHO EXPRESS DISSENT OR OTHERWISE SAY THINGS WHICH WOKEISTS DON'T LIKE.
4. THOU SHALL NOT MAKE JUDGEMENTS BASED ON RACE, PREJUDICE OR ANY KIND OF STEREOTYPE - HOWEVER, JUDGMENTS ABOUT A CERTAIN RACE ARE FINE.
5. THOU SHALL BLAME A CERTAIN RACE OF PEOPLE FOR THE UNDERACHIEVEMENTS AND SHORTCOMINGS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT OF THAT RACE.
6. THOU SHALT DEFUND THE POLICE; FOR IF ANY RACE IS POLICED MORE THAN OTHERS, IT CAN ONLY BE DUE TO RACISM AND NOT THE CRIME RATE OF THAT RACE, AND ANARCHY IS BETTER THAN RACISM.
7. THOU SHALL NOT ABUSE PEOPLE FOR THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION - HOWEVER, ONE CAN ACCUSE HETEROSEXUAL MALES, WHO SUBTLY EXPRESS ADMIRATION FOR FEMALES, OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
8. THOU SHALL BLAME ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION ENTIRELY ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, NOT ON OVERHUNTING, OVERFISHING, HABITAT DESTRUCTION, DEFORESTATION OR POPULATION GROWTH, BECAUSE GREENHOUSE GASSES CAN BE BLAMED, ALMOST ENTIRELY, UPON A CERTAIN RACE OF PEOPLE.
9. THOU SHALL BITTERLY OPPOSE PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION TOWARDS PEOPLE WHO ARE THOUGHT TO BE POOR, MARGINALIZED, OR OTHERWISE DISADVANTAGED - EXCEPT FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE; IT'S OKAY TO BE IMPARTIAL TO THE FACT THAT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HOMELESS PEOPLE IS LEGAL IN THESE WOKE TIMES; AND ALSO TO THE MEDIA MAKING HATEFUL, PREJUDICED STEREOTYPES OF SUCH PEOPLE.
10. THOU SHALL HATE HITLER - EVEN THOUGH HATRED OF HIS HATE, RACISM, BULLYING, DECEPTION OF THE MASSES, CANCELLATION OF FREE SPEECH, DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HOMELESS PEOPLE AND BLAMING A CERTAIN RACE OF PEOPLE FOR THE UNDER-ACHIEVEMENTS AND SHORTCOMINGS OF ANOTHER RACE, IS OBVIOUSLY HYPOCRITICAL.
Some say Wokeism was merely an awareness of black suffering, in the USA, which created sympathy and hence improvement. And yes, there have been improvements since the early 60s, when Wokeism became popular. There has been affirmative action, sympathetic media coverage, more public spending, less policing in the ghettos and other improvements, in the USA and other places. There are now more black politicians and other elected officials and there are now more popular black actors. One sees a lot of blacks in television advertisements too. But what is the overall effect for the average, common black man in the USA? There have been some negative side effects, especially with regards to the sympathetic media coverage. Like the story of the blind men and the elephant, the sympathetic media coverage often gives a one-sided, misleading picture. Some have referred to it as 'race hate propaganda'. Furthermore if you tell a guy that he will never make it because of an invisible wall of 'systemic racism' you might discourage him from striving for achievement and make crime more attractive for him. Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the average wage gap between blacks and whites has been about the same and unemployment among blacks hasn't changed and is still about double that of whites. So the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve this. Furthermore there has been a significant change in the black incarceration rate, which is about double what it was in 1960. Furthermore, as Wokism encourages crime, many black neighborhoods have become considerably more dangerous than they were in 1960. By the 1990s, the leading cause of death, among young black males, is homicide by other blacks. There was a major rise in violent crime from the mid 1960s, many new laws were passed, and there was heavier law enforcement and this was followed, not surprisingly, by an increase in the incarceration rate. So by the mid 1990s America, the land of the free, had the world's highest incarceration rate. Teaching young men that police who stop them are racist oppressors can cause them to behave in a threatening manner towards the police. This can get them shot, and it has. Furthermore, the de-funding of the police in the '20s, particularly in the hoods, has been followed by a significant increase in the black on black homicide rate.
Portraying police as oppressors has resulted in a 'no stitch' etiquette. This makes it very hard for police to solve crimes in the ghettos.
So is Wokism really benefiting blacks? Why is it that anyone, with a platform, is unable to be open and straightforward about it?
Maybe it is time to replace Wokeism with something practical and realistic.
So what should we replace it with? How about EQUALITY - including equality in media reportage, for starters. If there is a media blackout, for certain groups, of crimes and other embarrassments, there should be such a blackout for everyone. Or there should be transparency for everyone. The latter would be more practical as constructive criticism should be encouraged and welcomed. Media which makes one group look bad while portraying another group as victims incites hate. It was a common 'divide-and-rule' tactic which causes violence, hence fear, hence desire for more state control. This provides power for the ruling classes who are protected from the violence in their gated communities. So it's not surprising that it gets so much support from governments. However, this harms common people.
Следующая публикация
Нет комментариев