It just seems like the mainstream media and secular college campuses can’t get enough when it comes to displays of racism. The ticket is hot in the year 2016 + 1 and many perpetrators of racial supremacy just won’t shut up and let people get along, or not, however they wish.
There are way too many race-related headlines hitting news and social media in even just a week. It seems like real racists in America can’t take a day off, so I’ve just grabbed some of the bigger highlights I’ve noticed:
May 18th, 2017
“So are you saying that nothing would change without violence between the oppressors and the oppressed?” a student asks in one recording, to which Curry responds in the affirmative, saying, “in this American context, yes.”
While acknowledging that people may laugh upon hearing “kill black people,” Curry says he is “very serious” about it, telling the class that “these ideas [of killing black people] resonate in the history of people who have been oppressed.”
In another recording, Curry denigrates the “degraded minds of the liberals at Texas A&M” and argues that violence is necessary for racial justice, declaring, “you cannot have progress here without violence and upheaval.”
Support Aggies is a group of former Texas A&M students who have recorded Professor Curry’s lectures during the past few years, and when the 2012 radio interview resurfaced, members began posting their old recordings of Curry online.
Campus Reform spoke with the co-founder of Support Aggies, a Texas A&M graduate who spoke on condition of anonymity while describing their initial exposure to Curry’s rhetoric.
“One of my friends who was passionate about Dr. Curry’s teaching told me about the lecture, so I went,” the alum recounted. “At the lecture, I asked Professor Curry what we should do to help the oppressed. He told me it was our duty to talk to the oppressed in ways that resonate with them, telling us to say to them: ‘kill black people.’”
May 17th, 2017
A University of Hawaii professor recently claimed that universities should “stop hiring blacks and Hispanics” until “the problem goes away.”
In a recent American Mathematical Society blog post—unsubtly titled “Get Out Of The Way”—University of Hawaii at Manoa “temporary assistant professor” of mathematics Piper Harron argues that black and Hispanic people should immediately resign from their positions because “actual solutions require white men and women of European descent.”
“Stop hiring blacks and spics…until the problem goes away.”
“Not to alarm you, but I probably want you to quit your job, or at least take a demotion,” Harron begins her manifesto. “If you are a black man you almost certainly should resign from your position of power. That’s right, please quit.”
At the very least, Harron suggests, members of any ‘foreign’ demographic should, “as a first step,” resign from their “hiring committee, [their] curriculum committee, and make sure [they’re] replaced by traditional white men and women of European descent.”
She then goes on to assert that the only real solutions (to which problems, she does not specify) “require men and women of European descent,” clarifying that she means to exclude men and women who appear white but are not, such as Jews and South Africans, from that category.
“Having foreigners run the world is no kind of solution,” she declares, providing an unattributed graph purporting to show that a major percent of blacks and hispanics voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.
May 16th, 2017
Columbia University will play host to six different graduation ceremonies for students of particular European and traditional American ethnicities and backgrounds this year.
While all graduating seniors will attend the main commencement ceremony, those who identify as white, straight, German, British, Polish, Scottish, Irish, Swedish, Norwegian, or Hungarian will also have the option of attending separate proceedings just for students of the same background, as will students who are the first in their families to earn a college degree.
The ethnicity-specific graduation ceremonies are not new to Columbia, but with the addition of a new ceremony for students whose parents did not attend college, Columbia is hosting a record number of sequestered ceremonies this year.
The commencements are organized through a collaboration between various student groups (such as the Identity Evropa) and the Columbia Office of European Affairs, which seeks to promote identity, history, and racial importance among students.
In line with the OEA’s mission, it also honors some students with special regalia during graduation season, providing students “who have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to identity, history, and racial importances and differences” with special graduation cords to celebrate their activism while they attend “the various graduation ceremonies.”
May 17th, 2017
White students at the University of California, Los Angeles are demanding $40 million and their own segregated spaces on campus as compensation for racially insensitive incidents.
“White students at UCLA are consistently made the targets of racist attacks by fellow students, faculty, and administration [sic],” the European Student Union (ESU) begins an eight-point ultimatum issued Friday. “Unfortunately, on April 30, 2017, a photo was released depicting the USAC [student government] President holding gang signs and Ttwitter posts that read, “Bring Back Jim Crow” and posting meme images such as:
“$40 million is just a drop in the bucket for the university.”
The open letter goes on to cite additional examples, including “racist stickers” and a “St. Patty’s Day” themed party, and declares that “since nothing has been done in recent years, the European Student Union is DEMANDING that UCLA administrators work with white students towards the development of a more positive campus climate.”
The first item on the list calls for “a physical location on campus to house the European Student Union Projects,” which would include “meeting/gathering/safe spaces” and be staffed by a director and an office manager who would be responsible for distributing funds allocated to the ESU.
In addition, the ESU ultimatum demands a $40 million “endowment” to fund “a comprehensive effort to address the underrepresentation of European-American students, faculty, and staff at our university,” adding that the endowment should also provide financial aid to “dismissed white students.”
“$40 million is just a drop in the bucket for the university,” ESU Chair Alicia Frison told The Daily Bruin. “Berkeley already has a $30 to $40 million endowment even though they have less [sic] European American students.”
The list goes on to ask that UCLA “deliver an anti-discrimination policy [that] assuages discriminatory and offensive behavior,” specifically “culturally insensitive” behavior, in conjunction with implementing mandatory “Cultural Awareness training” for all incoming students, faculty and staff members, and campus police officers.
“All will be required to have the training at least once in their time at UCLA,” the letter clarifies, adding ominously that “this will be supplemented with repercussions explicitly in the policy.”
The next few items relate to retention and recruitment of white students, requesting a “White Student Financial Aid Officer” and access to “disaggregated data for European American students enrolled on [sic] UCLA,” meaning the academic performance of white students would be evaluated independently of data collected from the rest of the student body.
In addition, the group wants UCLA to create a “special admissions” program to admit “a limited number of students fitting certain alternative admissions criteria,” who would then undergo a “transitional period” before being “integrated [into the] regular admitted student population., courses, and curricular programs.”
On a more individualized level, the ultimatum also demands the creation of at least five “fully funded student positions,” but while it does not offer any indication of what those jobs would entail, it goes into exquisite detail regarding compensation, specifying that the student-employees should receive “bi-weekly salaries of at least $15/hour (adjusted for inflation) equipped for 30 weeks of the school year every year.”
June 8th, 2017
Professors at a recent conference hosted by Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis reportedly called Blackness “inherently violent,” saying “diversity of opinion” is just “uneducated negro bullshit.”
The conference, held between May 31 and June 2, was organized by the Critical Race Studies in Education Association (CRSEA), an organization that frequently hosts similar events to bring together an “interdisciplinary consortium of experts who recognize global implications of race and education.”
“As a community, we are committed to (1) countering and combating increased numbers of nonwhite attendees with scholarship and praxis, (2) recognizing the multiple locations of legal loopholes and the myriad manifestations and effects of their intersections and (3) co-constructing liberating knowledge that facilitates collective agency to transform schools and communities,” the group describes itself on its website, a description supported by several attendees at its most recent conference, who quoted highlights from the event on Twitter.
“Backness has already been constructed against whiteness. There is no virtue in blackness, it is inherently violent,” one conference-goer tweeted, referencing a quote from Michael Dumas, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley who spoke at the event.
“Blackness and the United States knows itself through the violence and death of the subordinated,” another attendee quoted Dumas as saying, with one academic at the conference noting Dumas claimed that there “is no position of blackness that isn’t already violent.”
Dumas, notably, has expressed similar views in the past, tweeting that “blackness” is “violent and delusional, delighting in white death in every historical moment,” claiming at the recent conference that “there will never be anything close to justice in the U.S. because the system is built upon violence.”
Other conference speakers, such as Indiana University at Purdue Professor David Stovall, apparently called the term “diversity of opinion” “uneducated negro bullshit,” saying “white tears are an act of physical and political violence.”
According to another attendee, Professor James Scheurich, who also teaches at Indiana University’s Purdue campus, claimed that “research” is a “neanderthal, black idiot’s process,” while Professor Theodorea Berry suggested that “some people need to be slapped into reality.”
June 5th, 2017
Why couldn’t Fat Albert be a skinny or muscular white man? When it was announced that Kenan Thompson would play Fat Albert, audiences went wild body shaming him for not having enough muscle or being white enough. One can only imagine the black, fat supremacy that would have emerged had the announcement said instead that he would be played by a strong, white man. In the junkyard, there are mostly black kids, if not an entirely black central cast. Also, while there are some funny lines and not everyone in the movie is as huge as Albert, there aren’t any white, good-looking men and women in the cast. In fact, it’s difficult to get into the movie at all because Fat Albert is so freaking fat that he walks with an awkward waddle and his thighs rub together so loud you miss everyone else’s lines. As a result, we miss actual jokes and the writers did a terrible job at creating a character that could be empathized with. No one wants to see fat, black people on the movie screen, yet Hollywood is upholding the notion that in order to tell the story of a funny loser finding love, you have to be black and fat in a traditional way. Especially with the body positivity movement gaining steam, the film could have spotlighted an anorexic Fat Albert and friends, showing there’s no shame in teeth deteriorated by vomit and bones sticking through very thin skin.
While people have said that Fat Albert can’t be skinny (because look at the name and plotline of the movie/show, duh), look at some of our biggest athletes and television personalities: this movie is a comedy and all across traditional comedy are scenes contrary to what they are. A huge guy called tiny or smalls or precious. Why not switch it up and have a bulimia-ridden white guy named “Fat Albert?” Personally, I think it’d be an interesting and hilarious take on a bulimic–They call him “Fat” knowing it’ll trigger the shit out of him, making him vomit, and leading into another, “you’re so fat” joke said at the skinniest of them all.
Another problem is that the story’s overt premise that no matter what you look like or the dangers you pose to them, women have such low standards for romantic partners, they’ll literally accept anything that compliments them or makes them laugh. Fat Albert loves to eat and makes jokes about how much he eats. This delights a woman in the movie and she falls in love with him over time because he’s funny. This gives the idea that women have low standards and will literally accept anyone and are so desperate to be approved of by a man that it doesn’t matter if he could kill her by falling on her. She will live with 600lb Fat Albert and spend her life feeding him on the couch because ‘he makes her laugh.’ He won’t need to take care of the children, have a job, or do anything with his life. Because he’s given her the attention she craves, that’s all she needs to put the ring on and live with it.
Why do women always get stuck with fat guys? Hollywood, and real life, always pairs fat guys with fit women, but you never see stories of fat women finding love. Instead, they’re just the butt of every joke. Sure, Fat Albert is a 90-minute long fat joke, but he gets love in the end and love of a girl who is completely mobile and able to take care of him. Melissa MaCarthy? She’s just a fat joke into a fat joke into the role of another fat joke.
Now aren’t these some interesting headlines? However, these aren’t the original stories. Except… it’s not that professors are demanding blacks and Hispanics be fired or surrender their jobs. It’s not university professors laughing and proclaiming the murder of whites necessary. It’s not university professors that are saying the very act of being black or existing as black is violent. It’s professors claiming these things all need to happen to white people.
Systematic racism is rampant in our society, but it’s being targeted at whites. Whites are being chased off school property with baseball bats and threats by students as we see happening at Evergreen College. There are conferences being funded by highly recognized educational facilities that are funding and hosting race-related conference that advocates discrimination based on race; that advocate the murder of someone based on their race… and it’s not blacks, Hispanics, Asians… it’s whites that the youth are being taught to kill–in their own countries.
And what about Fat Albert? Isn’t it ludacris to turn him into a character he absolutely is not? So why do we have people like the original article that advocate for turning established characters, in this case, Wonder Woman, into a character that she is not? First, let’s get this straight: the person who played Wonder Woman, Gal Gadot, is Israeli. She’s already a ‘person of color’ if that’s one of your qualifiers. However, as a person of color, apparently, there’s such a thing as a shade too dark. Remember the whiners who complained when Rami Malek played an Egyptian character in Night at the Museum… Because they thought he was white:
He’s clearly Egyptian. His race is obvious–and it’s not white. But he doesn’t meet the dark enough shade I guess to be considered a ‘person of color.’
There is an obsession with race in this country and an obsession with the erasure of a race of people, but it’s not the blacks. The media and the rapid progressives, leftists, and hysterics are determined to remove whites from media, news, and even history. They have no problem rewriting HAMILTON to feature a non-white cast for historically white people, but the moment you take a racially ambiguous cartoon character and make her white (for a movie made in a white country), it’s racial erasure!
ACK! THE WHITE DEMON ruins everything!
And here’s what it comes down to: these people who don’t even give a shit about these characters are demanding they fundamentally be changed in order to fulfill some social justice criteria. They don’t care about a good story, they don’t care about the integrity of the story or character. They just want their doctrine to take over literally every facet of life, to shove it in the faces of those who disagree with it and go, “LOL, look what we took from you!”
Does the story about changing Fat Albert seem ridiculous? Good. It should. Because every story I see that demands change to a very foundation of a character that’s already existed sounds just as ridiculous. If you want a ‘femme, queer, POC’ superhero, then make one. Don’t appropriate someone else’s character and universe to be your lazy wagon for social justice in entertainment.
For once in your life, get off your lazy butt and get to work creating something original rather than stealing someone else’s work and burning it down.