I was out and about for most of yesterday, and came back to the site fairly late in the afternoon. I had mentioned a commenter in a previous piece on hate crime charges, and upon sitting down at my computer I was greeted with yet another spergout from them.
The screencap above is not even half of the comment, and he left six more under the article. I deleted most of them, but not before saving their contents, which are relevant for far more than e-drama, or cheap content. It is only the first that I will be transcribing here.
LOL — like anyone cares about your opinion — for the record, I would much rather listen to many of WLP’s old broadcasts than try to slog thru your unfunny, junior high style drivel here — how old are you, anyway?
It is very odd to attack the very content that you are consuming as low quality when no one has forced you to consume it in the first place, and clearly Mr. Eah does care about my opinion. That is evidenced by the sheer amount of comments that he has left on this very site. But I will ignore this for now and focus on the content of the response.
Actually, ‘cuckservatives’ aren’t taught anything vis-a-vis ‘hate’ crime laws — it’s a simple common sense, anecdotal observation that the existence of ‘hate’ laws is not an advantage for Whites, and I believe any empirical study of their application would confirm that — they were not created to punish ‘hate’ directed at Whites — don’t take my word for it, look up the video of Obama AG Eric Holder, during hearings about proposed new federal ‘hate’ statutes, explicitly telling Congress that since Whites were historically the majority population, and never marginalized, the proposed new ‘hate’ laws were not intended to punish ‘hate’ directed against Whites, and pursuing such cases would not be a priority of federal prosecutors — there was no significant change during the Trump administration, and of course with the DOJ now being led by Garfinkel, you are not going to see federal prosecutions for ‘hate’ against Whites.
This one run on sentence would have sufficed for all seven comments, as he gets the majority of his ideas across. He starts off by pointing out that hate crime laws are not an advantage for Whites, and any empirical study would confirm that.
I know this might shock everyone, so take a seat. I already knew that.
I know, stunning, but it’s true. I was already aware that White People are being victimized through selectively anti-White hate crime enforcement. That’s like, kind of the whole point of protesting for hate crime charges.
In my original piece I said the following.
The point of hate speech and hate crime laws is to turn White People, and occasionally Christians, heterosexuals, and other groups into fourth class citizens. Forcing our enemies to explicitly deny these to White People is a win for us, since it makes stark the anti-White double standard. There is a reason why these laws aren’t written with “and oh by the way these don’t apply to White People.” They don’t want to have to say that, so make them say that.
I didn’t include Christians as some sort of Big Tent aside. I included Christians, because Canada was turned into the church burning capital of the world because of a slander about residential schools being secret genocide factories, and there was not one single solitary hate crime doled out for dozens of churches being torched to the ground or otherwise vandalized.
The above church was not even a fifteen minute drive from where I used to live. In response to the lack of hate crime charges I called in to the local Surrey RCMP, and they ended up ragequitting on me. Ultimately, I’m just one guy. I can’t do everything. But the most obviously politically productive course of action to fight against the state is to highlight the lack of hate crime charges for church burnings, when these are absolutely cut and dry, open and shut examples of hate crimes.
Nobody needs some internet commenters genius insight that hate crime legislation is selectively enforced against White People, heterosexuals, etcetera. We already know, but there are a lot of things that people know are true, but which must be made explicit.
The abstract concept of hate crime charges are totally irrelevant. These are simply the most obvious enforcement mechanism through which Globo Homo turns you into a fourth class citizen. You don’t have access to these laws, therefore you are a fourth class citizen. They try doing similar things with all other crimes as well. Are we opposed to making murder illegal now?
Antifas can burn down and desecrate all the churches in this country. Meanwhile, you scribble some swastika on a synagogue, and see how well you’re “yeah but I don’t agree with the abstract concept of hate crimes tho,” routine gets you in front of a judge. Hell, you scribble a swastika on a random sidewalk and see if you can avoid the hate crime charges. Silly you, should have just burned down a church instead. Oh and if you get attacked by an Abo screaming “I hate White People,” judges will rule that’s not a hate crime.
This idea that hate crime charges are feminine is a complete 180 to reality. Only a cuck is angry about the abstract concept of hate crime charges. How else are we supposed to send the pseudo-academics pushing “White privilege theory,” to deradicalization camps? Or all those propagandists who are so anti-White, and so petty, that they refuse to capitalize the W in White People?
And yeah, when Darrell Brooks, the BLM Waukesha terrorist, drives into a Christmas festival and murders six White People, including one child, he should get extra punishment because he did it to White People as part of a racially motivated crime. The idea that, because these laws are selectively enforced against Whitey, they are inherently bad is some dumb and pathetic LOLbertarian garbage that I thought was holocausted out of our movement years ago.
…there was no significant change during the Trump administration, and of course with the DOJ now being led by Garfinkel, you are not going to see federal prosecutions for ‘hate’ against Whites.
That there was no increase in anti-White hate crime charges under Orange NFT Faggot is a fantastic argument against Orange Faggot. It is an utterly non-existent argument against hate crime charges in the abstract, let alone protesting the anti-White selective enforcement of them.
He also did nothing for us on the border, let out black crack dealers, signed the DREAM act, pardoned (((Rubashkin))), and ended his term by getting his supporters lead into a trap that has lead to the feds bragging about throwing over a thousand of them in jail, and working on a thousand more.
I guess what we must conclude is that Donald Trump singlehandedly proved to us all that we must loudly seethe in internet comments sections about not supporting hate crime legislation, because Trump didn’t push the needle for us at all on that issue. That’s just facts and logic, bro.
Dear God, make the cuckoldry stop.
I do not need or want the government (which I do not see as my friend)
Why do people like this still exist in 2023?
to enact and enforce laws against ‘offensive’ speech, whatever that is — I guess like beauty, what’s ‘hateful’ or ‘offensive’ is in the eye of the beholder, which of course is exactly the problem with such laws: what’s prosecuted as ‘hate’, or seen as ‘offensive’ speech, is largely subjective.
Yes, that’s the problem. All those well meaning Soros DAs and ADL controlled FBI agents who just keep accidentally interpreting the laws in ways which hurt White People. That’s what’s going on here.
As is often the case, I write the entire piece, only to find a StoneToss comic that makes my point much better than I could. This is true because he also gets at something more important, the reality of power.
There are only two valid paths to power. First, clean your room, buy a gun, and kill your local billionaire. I’m not advocating for that, but ultimately I don’t have the power to reach across the interwebz and stop anyone from doing that.
The second path to power is forming a political party and contesting elections. Due to the extreme illegitimacy of our political system, that might not be enough in and of itself, but what you definitely need in that case is popularity. Activism and electoral politics go together like peanut butter and chocolate, and demanding hate crime charges for White People being murdered or assaulted by black screaming ‘You White? I don’t even like White muthafuckas, I’m gonna fucking kill your fuckin white ass!’ is popular.
The first path to power does not need to be talked about online. The second path to power, electoral politics, should be talked of entirely in terms of productivity. If protesting hate crime enforcement anti-White double standards helps our guys get into office, then it is good. If it does not, then it is bad. In both cases, the assblasted opinion of seething randos on the internet doesn’t matter. I just want to see the polling data.
That might seem very harsh, and I don’t mean to insult the reader. But the truth is that if no one is forming a political party and advocating for you in explicit, tangible steps, it doesn’t matter how popular any particular idea is. For example, 90% of Canadians support a wealth tax on billionaires. That must mean that Canadians got that, right?
The reality is that we don’t live in a real democracy, so it doesn’t matter what the average person thinks unless there is a political vehicle they can attach themselves to that will deliver for them. It is productive to attempt to build that. It is not productive to waste your time in the comments section writing effort posts explaining how “muh Government baaaad,” and men who protest for hate crime charges for White victims of black violence are feminine. I am tired of the internet, and I am tired of retarded novelty takes on the internet, that don’t do anything except annoy me.
For the record, I already had to delete some of that commenters ranting about White Women, so it’s no big loss.
And regarding ‘the number of ways that White People can be offended by speech’, as a white person I am not offended by speech — I believe in free speech, and anyone who wants to say nasty things about Whites, or about me personally (‘sperg’), can do so — I literally do not care —