Are Whites Racially Oppressed? The Question Media Matters Doesn`t Want Asked

Looking at the hysterical reaction
of the far-left Media Matters to CNN`s March 4 article


Are whites racially oppressed?

by John Blake, one would think that it had
celebrated VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow as a Civil
Rights advocate. [CNN Article Legitimizes
"Pro-White" Commentators
, by Todd Gregory, March 4, 2011.]

Blake`s article was certainly a
step above what normally passes for

analysis about race i
n the Main Stream Media. But it
nonetheless does reflect the standard left-wing view on
race in America.

The fact that some right wingers
are happy about the piece (even Brimelow`s

reaction
was uncharacteristically benign), and that
the Left is infuriated, simply shows how the current
paradigm on race is so badly slanted against the Right
(and, of course, reality).

What got

Media Matters
so upset?

Usually, MSM pieces on
“racism”
completely ignore intelligent voices that defend white
Americans. At most, they will give a few out-of-context
or fabricated sentences to make them look unreasonable.
To his great credit, Blake sought out Peter Brimelow and
Political Cesspool
host

James Edwards
.

Blake quoted Brimelow as saying
“diversity is not
strength”
and continued

“Some may see him as extreme, but Brimelow argues in his columns that
more white Americans are moving toward his stance on
immigration and other issues.

“He cites as proof the
rise of the Tea Party movement a
nd the

racial makeup of Beck`s march on Washington.
He says
more whites recognize, even if it`s only on a

subliminal
level, that they have common interests to
defend.

“`Of course,
they would deny this, quite sincerely,
if you put it
to them because the idea of whites defending their
interests as whites is quite new,` he says. `Americans
are trained to think that any explicit defense of white
interests is `racist.` "

Blake quoted Edwards as saying,
"There is nothing wrong for Jewish organizations to promote the
self-interest of Jews or
black
organizations
to promote the interest of
blacks…There is no organization to stand up to advance
the interests of the dispossessed majority."
And
that “Anything a
white conservative does that a

liberal doesn`t like
is called racism.”

In the past, Media Matters did not
argue that people like Peter Brimelow should never be
interviewed, but rather that articles must emphasize
just how much of a racist he is. Thus past hit pieces on
VDARE have been headlined
Associated Press
identified VDARE.com as an `immigration-focused Web
magazine` — not noting that it publishes `white
nationalists
,`”
and

Post`s
Knight omitted VDARE`s `white nationalist` connections”
.

But Blake was careful to say that
the

Southern Poverty Law Center
($PLC
t
o VDARE.com) has

named
VDARE a
“hate site”
and Edwards a
“white
nationalist”.
(They don`t call Edwards`s website a
"hate site"
but they call his radio show
"hate radio."
)

So what`s wrong? Media Matters`s
Gregory
writes:

“The most glaring problem with CNN`s treatment of Brimelow and Edwards
is that it presents the nature of their views as a he
said/she said matter—i.e., the Southern Poverty Law
Center says they run hate groups, but they deny that.
Any fair-minded look at their public statements would
show that they espouse the view that minorities are
inferior to white people.”

Oh yeah? What evil
“public
statements”
has Brimelow made? The worst Gregory
could come up with is

Anglos, to coin a phrase,

have not yet begun to fight
. They could. But will
they in time?

I increasingly feel it hardly matters. This is all going to
end in
tears
anyway.

To adapt
another phrase
, the historic American nation (=
Anglos) will
fight on the beaches
, or it will fight in the hills.
Even outnumbered, Anglos in Texas and America would be a
formidable force—one which

probably could not be contained
within the current
political framework.

 [
"It`s Basically Over
For Anglos" In Texas. Or Have They Not Yet Begun To
Fight?,
By Peter Brimelow, VDARE.com, February
27, 2011]

Even if you considered this to be
“Hate speech,” it is no more
“extreme”
than what Blake reported as Brimelow`s
beliefs.

Gregory`s second complaint,

“Another important point about this treatment of

white racial anxiety:
It is completely unfair to
white people who

don`t hold hateful views of minorities.
If you are
seeking perspective on `what white people think about
race,` you have committed journalistic malpractice by
quoting people like Brimelow and Edwards. They can`t be
said to be in any way representative of what white
people think.”

Bunk! Blake did no such thing. He
quoted Brimelow and Edwards along side three white
liberal academics as well as neoconservative

Mona Charen
(who apparently thinks that a majority
of whites voted for Obama) and a white Tea Party
activist, who both gave the

colorblind conservative
line.

Gregory`s complaint was all more
spurious because Brimelow was quoted saying that most of
the Tea Party “quite sincerely” deny that they are focused on race. Brimelow
explicitly said that he did not speak for most
conservative whites, much less all whites.

Even for Media Matters low
standards, this attack is a stretch. The message is
clear: they do not want any Americans exposed to
VDARE.com`s ideas in any circumstances.

Of course, if we applied the Media
Matters standards in the other direction, there is
plenty to gripe about in the CNN piece.

Blake describes Southern Poverty
Law Center as a
“group that tracks extremists.”
We could object that
they should be described as an

ideologically-driven
left-wing
fundraising scam.

Additionally, the piece quotes
Tim Wise, [Email
him
] described as the
“author of White Like Me“,

as well as
Matt
Wray,
[email
him
]
“a sociologist at Temple University in Pennsylvania, who writes books
about white studies
and Charles Gallagher,[Email
him
] “a

sociologist at La Salle University in Pennsylvania

who researches white racial attitudes”
.

Thus Gallagher and Wray are
portrayed as disinterested academics. But they are both
involved in the field of
“Whiteness
studies”
, which is on the far left of the already
slanted academic field (more on this later). A quick
look at their CVs reveals several articles about


“white privilege”.

Tim Wise is one of the most
vitriolic anti-white writers. After the 2010 election,
he

notoriously
yearned for the death of
“white folk”
stating, “We just
have to be patient. And wait for your hearts to stop
beating. And stop they will.”
[
An
Open Letter to the White Right, On the Occasion of Your
Recent, Successful Temper Tantrum
Tim
Wise, Daily Kos, November 3, 2010
]

But Blake`s CNN article absolutely
no mention of the anti-white biases of these men.

The double standards in reporting
aside, what about Blake`s initial question:
“Are whites racially oppressed?”

Of

course
they
are!

But Blake does very little to
actually examine this question. He does not talk about
how the

Attorney General
of the
United States

specifically stated
that Hate Crimes laws were not
designed to protect whites or Christians. He did not
even mention

Affirmative Action
: i.e.

government mandated
discrimination against whites.

Of course, there is an important
qualification to be made here. Unlike

blacks in the time of Jim Crow
, whites are
oppressing themselves. If White Americans suddenly
decided they would no longer accept anti-white
discrimination, the problem would disappear overnight.

In fact, the real question of the
CNN article is: Do whites
believe they
are racially oppressed? Blake gave seven indicators to
suggest they are, and it`s worth going through each one.

  • “U.S. Census
    Bureau projections that whites will become a minority by
    2050 are fueling fears that whiteness no longer
    represents the norm. This fear has been compounded by
    the recent recession, which hit whites hard.”

This is of course completely true,
but how much whites recognize this as a group is hard to
say. I have not seen a single

poll about immigration
that even asks whites about
the racial aspect of immigration. And absent
Pat
Buchanan,
I can`t think of a single major
commentator who is willing to say this is something to
be concerned about.

  • “A recent Public
    Religion Research Institute poll found 44% of Americans
    surveyed identify discrimination against whites as being
    just as big as bigotry aimed at blacks and other
    minorities. The poll found 61% of those identifying with
    the Tea Party held that view, as did 56% of Republicans
    and 57% of white evangelicals.”

I took a look at the

full report
of this poll, and amazingly, it simply
did not break down the results by race. It is safe to
assume that the percentage of whites who believe this
fact is above the 44% overall figure for
“Americans”.

One could interpret these polls in
many ways. It could be that whites see themselves
oppressed, but it could also mean they are sick of
minorities whining about discrimination, or both.

  • “A Texas group
    recently formed the `Former
    Majority Association for Equality`
    to offer college
    scholarships to needy white men. Colby Bohannan,
    [Email
    him
    ] the
    group`s president, says white men don`t have scholarship
    options available to minorities. `White males are
    definitely not a majority` anymore, he says.”

This is the only concrete example
of whites really treating themselves as a conscious
interest group, however. And it`s just a few brave
people who raised money for a few 500 dollar
scholarships. This is crumbs compared to the hundreds of
millions of dollars in minority scholarships given each
year to corporate and government funded groups such as
the
United Negro College Fund.

I once spoke to someone who did
fundraising for an elite Southern university who told me
that so many alumni asked about scholarships just for
whites that the school had to come up with a boilerplate
response: it does not offer white scholarships, but
individuals may set one up on their own. Unfortunately,
there aren`t too many people willing to openly advance
this idea like Bohannan. If more of these White
Scholarship Funds pop up, it will be worth taking
notice.

Neither Glen Beck nor Limbaugh were
saying that whites are oppressed. While the GOP and Tea
Parties are certainly white
“implicit
communities”
,
neither Limbaugh nor Beck have
made that connection—in fact they explicitly deny it.

 No
one at Beck`s rally complained about whites being an
oppressed minority. Everyone

bent over backward t
o invoke the legacy of Martin
Luther King Jr.
ABC News
reported that his niece, Alveda King, told
the adoring tea partiers
“that she hopes
that white privilege will become human privilege and
that America will soon repent of the sin of racism and
return itself to honor.”
[Alveda
King Speaks at Glenn Beck`s DC Rally
,
Kevin
Dolak, August 28, 2010]

Simply looking at video and
testimony by poll observers that the Panthers said


“you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker”

is proof enough. The only person it has not been proven
to is Attorney General Eric Holder—whom whistle blowers
say

refused to address the offense because the victims were
white
. The fact that Republicans and conservatives
are willing to fight this is encouraging.

  • “More colleges
    are offering courses in `Whiteness
    Studies`
    as white Americans cope with becoming what
    one commentator calls a `dispossessed majority group.`”

Here Blake is hopelessly confused.
“Whiteness studies” sis not an example of treating White Americans
as an oppressed group, but an effort


to make whites realize they are the oppressors.

The late, great
Sam
Francis
explained,

  • “The people who
    peddle whiteness studies make no pretense about their
    real purpose: to change how whites think about race so
    as to make whites feel guilt about who they are and what
    they or their ancestors have achieved and thereby to
    destroy whites` capacity to resist being shoved aside by
    non-whites”
    [The
    Real Meaning Of `Whiteness Studies`
    , June 30,
    2003]

And, lest I be accused by Media
Matters as relying on
“racist”
sources like Francis, the
Washington Post
described Whiteness studies as follows:

“The field is based on a left-leaning interpretation of history by
scholars who say the concept of race was created by a
rich white European and American elite, and has been
used to deny property, power and status to nonwhite
groups for two centuries.

“Advocates of whiteness studies—most of whom are white liberals who hope
to dismantle notions of race—believe that white
Americans are so accustomed to being part of a
privileged majority they do not see themselves as part
of a race.”
[Hue
and Cry on `Whiteness Studies` An Academic Field`s Take
on Race Stirs Interest and Anger,
by Darryl
Fears, Washington
Post,
June 20, 2003]

One of the pioneers in Whiteness
Studies is Noel Ignatiev, a

card-carrying communist
former Harvard academic who
publishes a journal called

Race Traitor,

the stated
mission of which is to “abolish
the white race”
and the motto of which is
"treason to
whiteness is loyalty to humanity"

Blake must have just assumed that
the fact that
“Whiteness studies”
was the white equivalent to
“Chicano studies”
and “African
American Studies”
which play up the victim card of
each race. But the analogy is faulty because, as David
Horowitz has

aptly explained
,
“Black studies
celebrates blackness, Chicano studies celebrates
Chicanos, women`s studies celebrates women, and white
studies attacks white people as evil."

If these were the extent of
resistance to anti-White discrimination, we would be in
big trouble.

Fortunately, it is not that simple.
There is clearly a growing segment of whites who are
beginning to realize that their government and elites
stand against their interests. But as Peter Brimelow
stated, it is largely on a subliminal level.

Or anonymous—some whites know the
score, but are afraid of speaking out publicly. One need
only look at the

comment threads
at most news articles or YouTube
videos that deal with race to see far more politically
incorrect thoughts than anything written at VDARE.com.



Are whites racially oppressed
is no exception.
The article is one of the most popular posted at CNN,
with over 8,000 comments and some 40,000 FaceBook
recommendations. While the comments are mixed, the
majority support the concept with such heterodox
thoughts as
“"Anti-racist" is a code word for anti-White”
and
“Every white
country on earth is told to become multicultural and
multiracial. EVERY white country is expected to end its own race and end its own culture. No one asks
that of ANY non-white country”
.

These thoughts could become more
explicit and less anonymous—which is exactly what Media
Matters and its backers fear.

They do not want Americans exposed
to VDARE.com and other unapproved sources
because they are
afraid that Americans will agree
.

Ellison Lodge (email
him) works on Capitol
Hill.