Pages

Thursday, March 1, 2012

The Retrospective for Abagond's


It has been many months since I last commented at Abagond's place. After the hullabaloo that resulted in my departure from that forum, I've occasionally gone back to lurk, checking up on the latest posts, recent comments, and general trend of the conversation.

Suffice to say, I think I left in the nick of time.

It appears Abagond's blog has become a battlefield where the majority of the commenters are either ignorant cheerleaders, or virulent and unapologetic racists. As for Abagond himself, the man has seemingly lost the ability to control his own site, letting easily contradicted idiocy run rampant without putting up nary a logical retort.

But, even though I am a committed anti-racist, I didn't actually care until after receiving this email from a longtime commenter at Abagond's:

Please note, all identifying information from this email has been redacted in order to protect the anonymity and reputation of the sender.
"Hey man, it's been a while. I know it seems a little selfish to ask, but I'm at my wits end. Is that old offer of requesting your services to stomp racists still active? To be blunt, I knew that this was only a matter of time, because your proficiency in "Troll Slaying" (which I severely miss still) was pretty much the final vertebra left in the spine of Abagond. I've been doing my part by kicking Randy and his faulty arguments around as well as that of the other small fry's, but even I'm at my limit. Recently that fool Doug1 has returned and he's basically "running" Abagond's blog like Obsidian did on Unamused, GL Piggy, and Alte. Abagond who is clearly outmatched, is too proud to ban him because of the stupid policy he has that prevents himself from having to admit that he banned someone for being outmatched. This, despite Doug1 injecting as much venom as he can in his Anti-Black,"Whites-Who-Don't-
Support-My-Points-Are-Leftie-Marxists", HBDer, Tin-Foil Hat drivel. He's like the T-1000 of Bigotry. You shoot him in the head with a Pistol Loaded with Facts and he just comes back like nothing happened. Personally, I'm not too proud to ask for assistance because racists are the lowest of the low, and tagging someone in for assistance is never a bad thing.
With that out of the way, do you really blog on other sites anymore? Or did you jut kinda step away from it?"
I replied with,
"Hey [redacted],
I'm fine with stomping racists and the like -- but not at Abagond's. He's made it quite clear that he prefers his own brand of hubris (backed by cheer-leaders such as Matari) and I'm just not interested in dealing with people like that.
I *do* still lurk everyone now and then, checking up on the topics etc., but I hadn't been following any of the foolishness you mentioned in your email. I'm sorry to hear it's gotten so bad. That's why on my blog I consistently moderate comments in order to avoid any kind of bullshit.
So to answer your last question: yes, I do still blog at my place, as well as occasionally comment at other sites.
What kind of help were you thinking of asking me for? Let me know and I'll see what I can do."
 As of this moment, what I am doing is blogging. As a writer, my best weapons are my words, my ideas, and the barrage of facts I bring to back them up, such as this monstrously long post as well as outside sources such as this.

But my favorite bit of recent evidential support is this.

That said though, let me show off a few recent quotes from Abagond's latest posts drama.

1. In response to a post on the 1911 encyclopedia Britannica.
thordaddy: "The irony of course is that the believers in evolutionary theory are largely radical white liberals and “black” liberationists... I for one thing do not believe any man “evolved” from the ape/gorilla/monkey/whatever."
And this is why you fail, sir.
truthbetold: "First I want to say to the white commenters here that agree and argue FOR this: You should be ashamed of yourselves. This isn’t 1912 when we ‘didn’t know any better’. It’s the 21 century. What excuses do you have for obvious racism and a refusal to change your mindset?"
 What the hell are you talking about? Literally only ONE PERSON has indicated any semblance of agreement with the racist pseudoscience from the 1911 Britannica. I'm confused as to where this person saw one, presumably White, commenter and multiplied him into many...

Meanwhile, every other commenter, every single other commenter has expressed disagreement or not addressed the topic. So... yeah... what thread are you following?
Abagond: "Zek J Evets, you might remember, freaked out when I suggested that whites were genocidal because of a defect in their CULTURE. Not their genes, their culture. He was all down for calmly talking about the Defects of Black People but not about the Defect of White People. That was magically off the table for some reason. He seems to be one of those Jews who thinks he gets what it is like to be black because of the anti-Semitism he experienced growing up – and probably because he has a black girlfriend. NO HE DOES NOT. For one thing he has NEVER had his humanity seriously questioned."
Of course, Jews (including this one) did and do have their humanity questioned, albeit differently in comparison to Black people. But it was nice of Abagond to play Oppression Olympics!

That said, he actually did state that White people are genocidal because they are suffering from a mental disease/psychosis. This is in direct contradiction to Abagond's stated policy of not diagnosing people with mental disorders as it is fucked-up.

But I guess it's not fucked-up when you do it, right?

Yet he seems to think my taking him to task for blatant hypocrisy is somehow "freaking out". That's funny -- because Abagond freaks out ALL THE TIME! -- usually because he cannot control his blog. And it is this tendency for freaking out that led him to compare White-people to wife-beaters, rapists, and finally, in an incredibly insensitive violation of Godwin's Law, to Hitler!

But I guess it's not fucked-up when you do it, right?

Yeah, see, I don't tolerate that kind of discussion about any race of people, nor do I feel at all calm about discussing pseudo-scientific defects in regards to ANYONE. Because I have some self-respect and journalistic integrity.

However, the most telling part of his response is the sad, jealously-laden drippings of him basing these gross assumptions -- which he cannot back-up -- on the fact that I have a Black girlfriend. OH NOES, MY GIRLFRIEND DOESN'T MAKE ME AN EXPERT ON RACE? Please... Frankly, Abagond needs to get over his failed marriage and stop projecting that shit onto other people. Seriously.

2. In response to a post on a video left by ostensibly racist White teenaged girls.
Doug1: "It wasn’t free labor. It was cut rate labor. Slaves had to be provided with food, shelter, clothes, usually shoes and so on. Whether the lack of incentives slaves had to work hard and inventively was overcome by their low effective wages is a point of historical debate actually."
I'm sorry but did you just try and change slavery into low-paid labor? Because I'm PRETTY SURE that slaves do not get paid. More importantly, slaves NEVER had "low effective wages" because they were SLAVES.

Oy vey. Let me just define the word for you.
Doug1: "Those who claim that there’s no racial difference in intelligence are usually lying for ideological and social class reasons."
 OR, they merely subscribe to scientific fact. I mean, whatever -- lying, believing in facts, it's all the same right?
Doug1: "I will say that the Portuguese in Portugal probably have the highest percentage of black blood in them of any European country, due to the very early importation of black slaves/servants from Africa, largely to wealth families. Second being Spaniards in Spain, mostly due to the N.African Moorish era of Islamic rule. But still both under 5% I think ... What I cited above is very elite level knowledge. About no Americans know what I said in the paragraph above."
 "I'm so smart guys! See how smart I am? I'm totally smart, right? I'm incredibly intelligent, right?

Aren't I?"

Yeesh, I rarely hear someone so obviously insecure attempting to assert a fallacious sense of expertise in a subject they clearly do not know.
P.S. For those who care, the Portguese and Spanish are actually more "White" than most of Europe, and also most of the genetic similarity between Iberian populations and African populations is actually on account of prehistoric migrations. Not the importation of slaves. (See Gonzales et al 2003) Furthermore, Cruciani et al 2004 demonstrated that Southern Portugal, where African and/or Moorish rule would be more consistent actually report a mere 2% of the population with such lineages. (However, Northern Portugal reports 4% with such lineages, if that makes Dougie feel better.)
I guess wrong again! So much for having "very elite level knowledge"...

Doug1: "The former is utter rubbish. Slavery and subsequent black-white relations have been an important issue in American politics and society, but hardly made America what it is. American laissez faire freedom, representative democracy, white self reliant and highly inventive and intelligent culture, and strong sense of national (largely white) purpose are what made America what it is today. Blacks have probably been a net negative."
 You, sir, have clearly never read a history book.

Also, Black people a "net negative"? Really? Because heart surgery, Jazz music, professional sports and a multitudinous contribution to science and culture are a "net negative"?

I think you may have today, and every day, confused with backwards day.

4. In discussing White History Month.
Doug1: "It’s typical female herd instinct behavior to want to exclude anyone who disagrees much with a group consensus."
Or they just don't agree with your unique brand of nonsense... But, by all means, blame it on them being women! I mean, it's easier than making a legitimate argument.
Doug1: "Neither majorities of white elites nor the majority of white Americans ever committed genocide against Amerindians ... The area [America] appeared almost deserted when French and then English explorers came upon it more than a hundred years later."
Um... seriously??? The Trail of Tears doesn't ring a bell? The forced eviction of hundreds of tribe from their homes to make way for White colonists? What about when Whites purposefully gave American Indians blankets infected with smallpox? What about the Pequot war?

And as for America appearing almost deserted, you do realize that roughly 10 million people lived here, right? Possible even more! Just because you got off the boat right by the sandy beach and don't immediately see a bunch of Tonto and Pocahontas-looking motherfuckers sun-bathing n the Potomac DOES NOT preclude the fact that people lived on the continent.

Seriously, you need to read your history

But I digress... Abagond's blog appears to have devolved from a place of genuine discussion to a place where racism is actively allowed to run rampant, and where Whites are not racist -- but mentally deranged! (According to some.)

Either way though, I'm as much bemused as I am pitying.

Good luck with that noise, Julian Abagond.



Cheers

17 footnotes:

lifeexplorerdiscovery said...

LOL you see this is why I stopped going to Abagond's like a year or two ago. I realize it was bad for my health and was wasting my precious free time.

I don't know why you bothered to even address Doug1 or Abagond's blog in general, you can't make people like him see common sense assuming he'd even read any of what you said. And well, Abagond's blog is a cesspool at this point anyways. It'll die out eventually from all the trolls.

I'm surprised you still lurk about there, that website gives me a headache, its like reading the Yahoo or Youtube comment section which is just as vile and racist.

Zek J Evets said...

Lifeexplorediscovery,

Indeed. Shaking my head =/

Temple said...

I haven't yet read your entire post, Zek. The reason is that the first thing that jumped out at me is that your email corresponder seems to believe that the only problem over at abagond's is Doug1 & his ilk; I don't agree. Doug1's points are beyond weak. His only strength is repetition.

You said this:
"It appears Abagond's blog has become a battlefield where the majority of the commenters are either ignorant cheerleaders, or virulent and unapologetic racists. As for Abagond himself, the man has seemingly lost the ability to control his own site, letting easily contradicted idiocy run rampant without putting up nary a logical retort."

I believe that all of abagond's recent commenters are ignorant, virulent, unapologetic racists/bigots,race aside. And abagond has ALWAYS allowed racist idiocy as long as the idiocy (in the comments) is directed at black women &, to a lesser extent, white men.

The ugly & disappointing problem (for someone of color--like me) is that abagond & his commenters of color are unwilling to address ALL the ways in which POC groups perpetuate & propagate white originated racism within their own communities. My belief is that that is where a white anti-racist such as you can be beneficial--by affirming (confirming?) the racist experiences of POCs, but not attempting to make it ALL GO AWAY (resolving) the effects of white racism. I don't know & so may not be clear in what I write here. What I do know is that, while it's important to me that I educate my nephews (who I'm raising) to be aware of racism/appropriation of racism within nonwhite groups; I'm disgusted with the idea that they should/may/can be crippled by racist/colorist ideology.

Zek J Evets said...

Temple,

abagond has ALWAYS allowed racist idiocy as long as the idiocy (in the comments) is directed at black women &, to a lesser extent, white men.

I wholeheartedly agree, and would further include LGBTQ individuals in that statement. But lately it seems that such hypocritical lameness has become far more prolific than before. Even despite bannings -- or perhaps, more accurately, because of bannings of legitimate commenters in favor of trolls who are less likely to make Abagond look bad in an argument.

Either way though, for a White anti-racist like myself, I ca only shake my head at such foolishness and support legitimately anti-racist POC elsewhere.

RR said...

Zek,

Your anonymous letter-writer wrote:

Abagond who is clearly outmatched, is too proud to ban him because of the stupid policy he has that prevents himself from having to admit that he banned someone for being outmatched.

But this is to Abagond’s credit. He should allow for unfettered debate. That’s part of the reason for the blog’s existence. Most women and blacks just don’t get this. The letter writer can’t fathom honest debate, thus his/her consternation. He prefers the shoutdown or the banning. Silence the critics! Off with their heads! This intolerance of dissent paves the way to tyranny.

As you know, I have had my disagreements with Abagond, but he does seem to tolerate dissent better than many on the left. This is a feature of open debate, not a bug.

Zek J Evets said...

RR,

Honest debate does not include portraying your opponent as being stupid, violent, or uncivilized. Race-realists consistently describe Black people this way, yet cry foul when valid criticisms about Whites are returned. Frankly, they are spineless cowards behind a keyboard when they behave like that. Honest debate my kosher ass.

And it's something you're guilty of too: "Most women and blacks just don’t get this." Are they really? Have you met most women and/or Black people? Upon what vast experience and expertise do you base this assumption? Upon what science and study do you make your claim? Better yet, don't answer, because you know (though stubbornly will refuse to admit) that such logic I employ is meant to reveal your own prejudice regarding people YOU ASSUME are not as capable as you are.

And what tyranny? It's a BLOG -- not a government assembly. Hyperbole is also dishonest.

People want to have a decent conversation, but refuse to do that when the other person is constantly berating them as less-than. In that capacity, I think bloggers have a responsibility for moderating their personal forum to reflect the kind of message they want to send.

But Abagond does not do this. He prefers to give bigotry a free reign, completely ignoring the kind of message that it sends to commenters he says he values.

RR said...

Zek wrote:

And it's something you're guilty of too: "Most women and blacks just don’t get this."

This is a valid criticism. I hereby officially amend my previous remark to read:

"In my opinion, most women and blacks just don't get this."

Frankly, they are spineless cowards behind a keyboard when they behave like that.

Really? Have you met most race-realists? Upon what vast experience and expertise do you base this assumption? Upon what science and study do you make your claim? I fully expect your remark to be redacted.

And what tyranny? It's a BLOG -- not a government assembly. Hyperbole is also dishonest.

You completely misunderstood my remark. I said that such intolerance paves the way for tyranny. This is your blog and you are obviously free to be as intolerant as you wish. My point was that such private intolerance paves the way for public intolerance. Intolerance becomes a state of mind for many because they so often practice intolerance in private. They not only become offended by dissent, but characterize dissenters as evil. It is a way of thinking that is pervasive in American society. Conservatives are as guilty of this as Liberals are. We are prepping ourselves for dictatorship. This was the point.

People want to have a decent conversation, but refuse to do that when the other person is constantly berating them as less-than.

Do you remember the disagreement you had with Faith not too long ago? She no doubt wanted to have a decent conversation, but she viewed you as a crazed misogynist. Your argument seemed reasonable to me, but your words didn't jibe with her view of a "decent conversation". By the same token, my interaction with She Who Will Not Be Named (SWWNBN) was, from my perspective, decent. But SWWNBN had a radically different opinion, which would have been cool if HER INTOLERANCE OF DISSENT HADN'T GOTTEN ME BANNED by the very fellow you accuse of allowing bigotry free reign. To Abagond's credit, he did not ban you. To your great credit, you have not banned me. I'm glad America has not yet become a dictatorship, but we are well on our way.

Zek J Evets said...

RR,

"In my opinion, most women and blacks just don't get this."

Thanks... except that was already implied. It's still offensive to carte blanche declare people based on their race or gender to be less capable.

Really? Have you met most race-realists? Upon what vast experience and expertise do you base this assumption? Upon what science and study do you make your claim? I fully expect your remark to be redacted.

Really RR? Again, you're failing at nuance... a point of view is not the same or remotely equal to a person's race, or gender, especially considering the historical oppression surrounding those facets of a person's identity. Case in point: nobody is oppressing race-realists. Nobody is refusing them jobs, or wrongfully incarcerating them, or denying them their civil rights.

That said, I was talking about their ACTIONS, not their inherent qualities based on them being race-realists. (Though that argument would be something I could make.)

My point was that such private intolerance paves the way for public intolerance... We are prepping ourselves for dictatorship. This was the point.

Really? Slippery-slope fallacy much? Why not make the case that private intolerance can also pave the way for overturning the Constitution.

I like how you characterize people exercising their personal preference not to engage with people who dehumanize them as "prepping ourselves for dictatorship" as well as state, "I'm glad America has not yet become a dictatorship, but we are well on our way." Again, hyperbole serves you wrong, sir.

Temple said...

"I like how you characterize people exercising their personal preference not to engage with people who dehumanize them as "prepping ourselves for dictatorship" as well as state, "I'm glad America has not yet become a dictatorship, but we are well on our way." Again, hyperbole serves you wrong, sir."

I know, right? Because a man MUST have the right to counter any of my legitimate discussion points by shouting HOE! or COON! or any combo of the two & be crowned the winner by foul-mouth default. If that isn't allowed, then the society must be a dictatorship
:-!

RR said...

Zek,

Regarding your first criticism of the generalization I made with respect to how blacks and women view the 1st amendment, my opinion was not implied (only a liberal would think this). I made the remark as if it were established fact, which it wasn’t. Opinion should never be inferred from an ostensible statement of fact.

It's still offensive to carte blanche declare people based on their race or gender to be less capable.

Really? What if I had said “Women are less physically strong than men on average.”? Would this statement of fact be offensive to you? Note that from the statement, my opinion doesn’t enter into it. What if I stated “Women are shorter than men on average.”? Would that be problematic? For whatever reason, you seem to have a problem accepting facts that don’t comport to your world view. Certainly one should ask for references when another states a supposed fact without substantiation. Opinion should have nothing to do with it.

Again, you're failing at nuance... a point of view is not the same or remotely equal to a person's race,

They are often highly correlated, especially with respect to party affiliation in the US. The Republican party is overwhelmingly comprised of white Christians. To question the intelligence of Republicans is to effectively question the intelligence of white Christians. If one were to question the morality of Jews, would it not be a bigoted inquiry? By your line of reasoning, since Judaism is a particular religious perspective and anyone can become a Jew, one being suspicious of the morality of Jews would not be bigoted. If this is what you are saying, then I respect your opinion, although it wouldn’t make sense.

nobody is oppressing race-realists.

Many white race-realists would strongly disagree. They would cite Affirmative Action, black on white crime and unrelenting third world immigration to support their case. I have to admit, they have a point.

Nobody is refusing them jobs

Tell it to Frank Ricci:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano

That said, I was talking about their ACTIONS, not their inherent qualities based on them being race-realists.

Yes you were. How are their actions, whether you agree with them or not, cowardly. Pat Buchannan is a race-realist (and he was fired from MSNBC because of his race-realist views). Is he cowardly? What about Jared Taylor or Kevin MacDonald? Are they cowards? You claim that race-realists hide behind their keyboards spewing their opinions, but isn’t that what most bloggers, including you, do? Are bloggers cowards?

Why not make the case that private intolerance can also pave the way for overturning the Constitution.

That is EXACTLY the case I am making! The First Amendment CAN be repealed! As others have pointed out, our government has been in the process of effectively repealing inconvenient portions of the Constitution for decades. Don’t be na├»ve!

Dehumanization is in the eye of the beholder. Faith no doubt thought that your supposedly misogynist views were dehumanizing to women. Many view offensive language in itself as dehumanizing. Is questioning the intelligence of blacks or the morality of Jews dehumanizing to either group? I don’t think so. Human ethnic and racial groups are different. It is not dehumanizing to recognize difference, although one should strive for accuracy in one’s pronouncements.

Zek J Evets said...

RR,

I made the remark as if it were established fact, which it wasn’t. Opinion should never be inferred from an ostensible statement of fact.

When someone makes a statement that is patently unprovable, it is common sense to assume they are making an opinion. Already you're starting this next comment off without a basic understanding of rhetorical cues.

For whatever reason, you seem to have a problem accepting facts that don’t comport to your world view.

Actually, quite the opposite -- on two fronts. 1) I have no problem accepting facts because I don't, as a rule, create a worldview and then cherry-pick, distort, and otherwise ignore facts that support my worldview. I accept the world as it is. 2) This is something you have done CONSTANTLY. Moreover, Conservatives do this constantly too, evidenced by creationists, race-realists, climate-change denialists, and an entire host of armchair pseudoscientists from Newt Gingrich to Unamused. making carte blanche statements based in neither fact nor reality.

To question the intelligence of Republicans is to effectively question the intelligence of white Christians

Really? So all Republicans, despite their assertions to the contrary, are primarily White Christians? And to question their intelligence is comparable to racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism? Really? For real? For really real?

Point of fact though, since I state Republicans, and I mean Republicans, I am not making carte blanche statements about "White Christians", who are not wholly Republicans (or even mostly Republican), and as such your argument is without merit. And laughably absurd -- because I can tell you that questioning whether an uneducated electorate of Republican voters are really all that smart about political issues is NOT the same as anti-Semitism. Until a Republican voter's polling place is vandalized, and their person experiences bodily violence, SOLELY for the fact that they are Republican, you are frankly beyond the pale of semantical misunderstanding. You have literally jumped the shark, and fail to comprehend the basic ideas of this conversation. To that I must ask, are you willfully obtuse?

I have to admit, they have a point.

Umm, even conceding your point that AA and Black-on-White crime somehow exist in the way that Race Realists attest to, that still doesn't explain the logical leap of "Black power" to race-realists are oppressed.

But since that isn't the case, the argument is without merit. Race-realists are allowed free-speech, to rent houses, to hold jobs, and are not systematically attacked by the media, or reactionary conservative politicians, or indeed ANY politicians (as race-realism is frankly not well-known). Yet these things all happen to Black people, male victims of rape, Jews, women, immigrants, and Muslims.

And I did read the link you provided. Your exception which proves the rule notwithstanding, no race-realists have so far been systematically oppressed, or even denied jobs like those firefighters were. Nor has that happened to Conservatives either.

Zek J Evets said...

How are their actions, whether you agree with them or not, cowardly. Pat Buchannan is a race-realist (and he was fired from MSNBC because of his race-realist views). Is he cowardly? What about Jared Taylor or Kevin MacDonald? Are they cowards? You claim that race-realists hide behind their keyboards spewing their opinions, but isn’t that what most bloggers, including you, do? Are bloggers cowards?

How are they cowardly? Well, since they comfortably, and vehemently push to discuss the alleged deficiencies of racial minorities, yet concurrently refuse, point-blank, to discuss the alleged (and often verified) tendencies of White people, I would call that intellectual cowardice. Moreover, it's simple racism.

That said, I didn't say bloggers are cowards. Nor did I make the connection between bloggers and race-realists. That is your own straw-man arguments, something you have continuously done. Why is that?

Is questioning the intelligence of blacks or the morality of Jews dehumanizing to either group?

Don't be naive, as you said. It is dehumanizing, and history has shown us how. Furthermore, it rarely stops at questioning. It continues with requests for racial profiling, dismantling welfare (despite that most welfare recipients are White), attacking immigrants, calling Black people beasts and racial slurs, whilst propagating conspiracy theories about Jews that reiterate Nazi arguments.

That you don't understand this, or even realize it is frankly disturbing. You say dehumanization is in the eye of the beholder, but most of the country is capable of understanding that racism is wrong.

You also say that the 1st amendment can be repealed, that people are in the process of effectively repealing "inconvenient" portions of the Constitution. I agree. The 1st amendment can be repealed. Will it? Doubtful. So far, no group has even attempted to repeal the 1st amendment, and since so much in our country is based on free speech it's unlikely to happen anytime soon. But people ARE trying to repeal "inconvenient" portions of the Constitution. I think specifically of the Tea Party trying to deny rights to bodily integrity, free speech, and due process. But that's just one example.

Anyhoo, I think this conversation has illuminated several important problems in our country that luckily are slowly evaporating in the wake of progress. But now it's time to bring it to a close.

Mira said...

Well, there are various ways to run a blog and obviously this is the one that Abagond sees as productive. He recently admitted he loves when trolls post out there, because that only "confirms his points better than he could ever do". Which I guess means that to him, an average American white person is how Doug1 (and the like) is. Since I'm not an American, I can't be sure if this is right or not, but it sure means trolls are welcomed in there.

I missed the whole whites have a mental illness culture going on, so I can't comment on it, but I don't think any insults/arguments based on personal lives were needed. Why does he care if your girlfriend is black? Why do YOU care what's going on with his wife and marriage?

As for Abagond, I posted my reasons (well, somewhat) for not commenting that much out there (and elsewhere) anymore:

http://jefflion.net/archives/811

For me, it just... Happened. I never planed it. It just went downhill for me circa Thad's banning (not because of Thad but it was around that time). I still comment from time to time but it often seems like Abagond - or his resident commenters, trolls and supporters - don't have anything new to say.

Satanforce said...

I have noticed that the majority of the commenters there are filled with equal parts self-pity and reverse racism. By self-pity, I mean the "woe is me, I can't do anything caus a di racism". And by reverse racism, I mean you the use of neuroimaging on statistically small sample sizes of whites, and then applying a blanket statement of that to all white people. Worse still, is the need to address every single racist troll and black nincompoop that posts nonsense in the comment section.

[redacted], calm down.

Just because some goofy white chick comes around talking crap doesn't mean that you have to respond. We don't have to feed every troll we come across. And you know what? Feeding trolls is exhausting. Can't we use our energies for something more useful, you know, like a thinktank or something?

We shouldn't be too quick to judge white people. I guess too much time around here can leave one to assume that all whites are HBD types or crazy Confederate nuts. My personal experience tells me that this is not the case.

Zek J. Evets said...

Satanforce,

Indeed. There's a lot of racism out there, floating in cyberspace, and plenty of outspoken examples in real life too (*ahem*derbyshire*ahem*) but on a day to day basis I rarely come into contact with that kind of racism/anti-Semitism. That's because most people may hold racists thoughts or beliefs, but they also abhor racism. People actively work against it.

And it is exhausting. Which is why I prefer to just keep it moving.

jas0nburns said...

That blog is a joke. I don't know WHAT the f*ck I was thinking wasting my time on there. I must have been super bored.

It's a waste of time even to try and begin to describe how and why that whole cabal is a total fubar. Nothing resembling truth, knowledge, or understanding to be found among those people so why bother.

DubV said...

Abagond is either hypersensitive, a professional victim, or a racist himself.