MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Sarah Jeong Probably Doesn't Hate White People, But Mocking Them Is an Easy Way to Prove You're Woke

The left doesn't believe racism against white people is possible.

JeongScreenshot via YoutubeHaving delved a little deeper into the controversial tweets of recent New York Times hire Sarah Jeong, I no longer entirely buy the rationale that Jeong provided to The Times: that she was merely "imitating" the rhetoric of people harassing her. If she was trolling her harassers, I would have expected her to quote-tweet or reply to them, but many of the tweets seem to be generated by nothing other than Jeong's own thoughts, or by items in the news.

I understand that she was experiencing a deluge of harassment at the time. That's the internet: an ugly place for everybody, but especially for women of color (Jeong was born in South Korea). It's awful, and people ought to think long and hard about how they might have handled such a situation. Have you ever lashed out in anger after someone was being mean to you? Do you think this should make you unemployable?

I still don't think she should be fired, and further efforts to mine her old tweets for content that runs afoul of right-wing political correctness—oh no, she said bad things about the police, how dare she—play directly into the hands of a bad-faith smear campaign. Over the last 24 hours, it's been incredible to watch an army of right-of-center Twitter users gleefully demand Jeong's head out of some misguided sense of fair play—of forcing the left to "live by its own rules." A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.

Speaking of which, the reaction to Jeong's tweet among some left-of-center folks is a powerful reminder of a harmful lefty belief: that racism against white people is impossible. National Review's David French and New York's Andrew Sullivan (both, alas, white people—and men!) have both written articles about this reaction, which was evident for anyone paying attention to the Jeong news cycle on social media.

Most people probably define racism as harboring negative views about people based on their skin color or national origin, or treating them differently, or prejudging them, or making broad, stereotypical assumptions about them. But for the left, racism has to involve a structural power imbalance to count. White people as a group have never been oppressed, the argument goes, so they cannot suffer racism. White people can still experience oppression if they are female, gay, trans, disabled, etc., but they can't experience racism. That's how intersectionality works.

One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people. While these remarks seem ugly and offensive to most people, folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own.

Ultimately, I suspect that's what Jeong was really doing. She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause. Of course, it says something about this strain of leftism that one of the easiest ways to prove you're a devotee is to make mean-spirited, troll-ish generalizations about other people.

Photo Credit: Screenshot

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • esteve7||

    I'm pretty sure she does. I've talked to a number of progressives and this isn't them joking, or the mask slipping, this is them finally showing who they really are. They've told me they can't wait until 'white America' becomes a minority in US.

    So yeah, I don't buy that for one second.

  • DJF||

    """"'white America' becomes a minority in US.""""

    When that happens do I get free stuff?

  • esteve7||

    talk to enough of the left and you realize they want revenge for sins committed generations ago. They don't want to get rid of oppression, they want to be the oppressors. Just look at any Marxist state in history.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Why would white people be leftists?

  • esteve7||

    most leftists are

  • Pudgeboy||

    ...because of hatred.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Because we aren't straw men.

  • Pudgeboy||

    No, I'm sure it's hatred.

  • MarioLanza||

    Why does she get the benefit of the doubt?

    I write a bunch of anti-black screed. Do I get a free pass?

    And sorry, she is part of the most privileged ethnicity. She ranks lowest in the intersectional politics hierarchy of victimhood.

  • Ariki||

    First they came for the straws,
    Then they came for the men.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    For most white leftists, I believe their leftism fills a powerful inner need for self-elevation: to make themselves feel superior to all others. It may also in some cases partially stem from a sense of guilt and thus serve as a kind of form of absolution without the other baggage of religious dogma.

    This feeling of course is a pure delusion, but it's a delusion they absolutely believe with all their heart.

  • ||

    I have yet to hear a Mongolian apologize for Ghengis Khan, a Russian apologize for Stalin, Arabs apologize for the Arab slave trade or the mostly violent jihads, Indians for pollution, Chinese for slave labour...But holy shit have I heard enough asshats from the West apologize for the Crusades, the Atlantic slave trade, capitalism, Hitler, colonialism, corporations, "the far right wing", and they haven't the slightest clue about what they were. The self-hate propaganda has run its course.
    I just call them faux-flagellants and walk away.

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    That's because ... ooops! I'd better not say.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    ... have I heard enough asshats from the West apologize for the Crusades, the Atlantic slave trade, capitalism, Hitler, colonialism, corporations,

    Some of those things are not like those others such as economic freedom via capitalism and freedom of association resulting in corporations.

    Aside from that, outside of a very small percentage, so me reputable organizations apologizing for the slave crusades, slave trade, Hitler, or colonialism?

    And if you've never heard a Russian show appreciations for Satalins stengths, or leftist professors in the US apologize for him by explaining how Stalin moved Russia into the industrial age, then you know no Russians and haven't been paying attention.

    But maybe I'm wrong - I await multiple citations.

  • Chili Dogg||

    Michael, I think he meant apologizing in the sense of saying "I'm sorry", not meaning to defend something.

  • MarioLanza||

    Crusades!!! If Europe hadn't pushed back on the Islamic invaders, there would be open slavery in Europe. No university. No hospitals. No Bach or Beethoven. No Rodin. No Botticelli. No Kepler. No Newton.

  • Lloyd Clucas||

    You got it right.

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    Someone wrote an article about that...
    http://takimag.com/article/dia.....z5N8vgXhy0

  • Trollificus||

    Nice. That's a perceptive article. The behavior of the elitist white people who are "down with The Cause" is the closest thing I've seen to actual evidence that somehow, caucasian/European peoples have some innate feeling of superiority: the willingness to throw all OTHER whites under the bus to prove their own superiority. This speaks of some desperate need, and, of course, the lack of self-awareness that so marks proggies and SJWs.

    Those of us whose ancestors included tenant farmers, indentured servants and people who shared work and living space with "the Other" (like farmers, military and other blue collar occupations) realize that every group has pride and some feeling of superiority to other groups. This is neither unnatural nor necessarily problematic. This explains the obvious racism of the anti-racists.

  • Reshufflex||

    Your (?) analysis is too kind. The white-apology campaign is a smokescreen of today's academic regulators and high priests. White-guilt is a bumper-sticker, a redline highlight from yet one more conference and committee of self-congratulatory stooges.

    Btw, what they evince is what Steinbeck defined by his Phalanx Theory ( short version: groupthink), but that's another topic. Still, I wouldn't take them lightly. They've thoroughly permeated the ranks of the intelligentsia, media and graduate schools, and steadily indoctrinated their fellow travelers with a twisted mission statement-the gravamen of which is reconfiguring and redefining stuff; in this case, of the concept of equality, especially as implied in white-guy COTUS terms. (What they're doing to language, art and history in general, etc., is worse by an order of magnitude.)

    Look behind the curtain. They really care about 1) unleashing and redressing a collective animus-which unfairly descended upon they imply, and 2) securing power, if not money.

    Equality to them isn't limited to equal opportunity; rather, equality to them is about equality of being and destiny.

    Soothing social or elitist consciences is in their rear-view mirrow. Also, the fact that some suspect-class or historically disadvantaged group might find utility from their warped mega-plan is little more than serendipity or collateral consequence. Don't be fooled.

  • buybuydandavis||

    A thousand years and more of coevolution with Christianity.

    No longer believing in Christianity, they've naturally gravitated to a crypto Christianity, a less domesticated version of Christianity, full of original sin and righteous zeal to enforce and spread the faith by the sword.

    Moldbug was right.

  • Brandybuck||

    racial guilt

  • FlameCCT||

    "Why would white people be leftists?"

    In the words of that great philosopher, Forrest Gump:
    Progressive is as Progressive does!

  • Jimothy||

    If you disparage white people, and recognize—and repeatedly point out—that they are guilty of the sins of their fathers, then you are absolved of your own inherited guilt. In fact, vocally demonstrating your wokeness is the only way to become un-wretched.

  • MarioLanza||

    Hey, it's not like Chinese people enslaved people throughout their history. (Or Africans or Muslims or...).

    The difference is that Caucasians fought the bloodiest war in American, with the resulting loss of life of 1 out of every 25 males in the country dying.

  • fdog50||

    "The slave dreams not of being free, but of being the master."

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Interesting no mention of what is going on in South Africa. Burning white farmers, and now a constitutional amendment that will strip white farmers of the land they've worked for 400 years...

  • dave b.||

    By "worked for 400 years" you mean stolen by the Natives Land Act of 1913, right?

  • Kivlor||

    you mean the law that white people passed establishing separation between the races to the point it was illegal for whites to buy land from negroes? The law that actually increases the black share of land?

    Are you illiterate. Stop with your anti white lies

  • Kevin Tyssen||

    This is a tricky thing to reconcile. If your great-grandfather stole something from my great-grandfather, do you owe me compensation for it? Despite the fact that you didn't steal it and I never owned it?

    It gets trickier if we are talking about land too, sure it may be my "ancestral" home, but it may be the only home you've ever known

  • MarioLanza||

    The Boers moved into dry, barren western South Africa. They found it was great for raising sheep. and they flourished. There was a nomadic tribe in eastern South African. I forget their name.

    The Zulus moved in much later attracted by the wealth of the Boers. They represent the ANC. They treat the members of the original tribe worse than they treat whites.

  • Kevin Tyssen||

    This is a tricky thing to reconcile. If your great-grandfather stole something from my great-grandfather, do you owe me compensation for it? Despite the fact that you didn't steal it and I never owned it?

    It gets trickier if we are talking about land too, sure it may be my "ancestral" home, but it may be the only home you've ever known

  • Ecoli||

    How long before the thieves are starving?

    How long did it take Rhodesia to collapse?

  • fdog50||

    I think Jeong really does hate all of the people she says she hates, and probably more. If you read her other tweets and see what she says about her own immigrant parents and her Christian fundamentalist upbringing, she appears to be a very bitter and unhappy person who has a miserable life.

  • Trollificus||

    " a very bitter and unhappy person who has a miserable life."

    G-g-good.

  • Ron||

    If you think about it for more than five minutes it is literally a rape fantasy by stupid white women I'm sorry but it's the truth they want to be wicked call me a racist call me whatever but that's what it is look at it in depth

  • Brett Bellmore||

    Yeah, I've talked with a fair number of leftists online, and while it's not all of them, a fair number of them sure give every impression of genuinely hating white people.

    That they're usually white makes this kind of strange, I admit. But self-hate IS a real thing.

  • MarioLanza||

    Oikophobia - it's been inculcated into them.

  • Chili Dogg||

    Huh? Phobia means fear, not hate.

  • JWS||

    So, using this Intersectionality Axiom, if a manager in an organization is a POC and they tell a woman that reports to them that they need to decloak and dance about or the woman will lose her job, then that manager can't be disciplined because POC cannot have power or white people?

    Good times.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    "they tell a woman that reports to them that they need to decloak."

    If it happened to me, I would tell the manager, "Decloak? What do you think I am, a Romulan battle cruiser?"

    But seriously, chances are the manager, being a POC, would get a pass. Maybe one of the higher ups would take him aside and tell him to be more careful, but his status on the grievance scale would outrank hers, I think.

  • ThomasD||

    I self identify as a Romulan battle cruiser.

    Sometimes.

    And I really mean it.

    But there is no way I'll believe that Rico Suave has looked into the heart of this scrunt and seen anything but hatred.

  • JWatts||

    "I self identify as a Romulan battle cruiser."

    Phhftt, Kzinti one cruiser for the Win!

  • Eddy||

    That depends, are you a British cop in Rotherham?

  • Happy Chandler||

    Not the way it works, but nice try.

  • Kristian H.||

    Per Iowahawk:

    Q: how can you tell if a tweet is racist?
    A: it depends, true racism can only come from a position of power.
    Q: how can you tell if it's from a position of power?
    A: when the tweeter doesn't get fired for it

  • Just Say'n||

    "Racism requires a power dynamic, like sitting on the editorial board at the New York Times"

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    That's a great point.

    If she continues to express these views once she is on the editorial board of the New York Times, she should (and will) lose her job.

  • MarioLanza||

    Continues to tweet? Why does she get a second chance? Kevin Williamson made a joke about the death penalty for woman who abort their babies in an old tweet. (He had written against capital punishment many times, so no it could not be seriously unlike these tweets.)

  • Chili Dogg||

    Oprah is powerless. A poor white Appalachian-American is powerful. Don't you get it?

  • esteve7||

    ask them to define power and you will get a word salad from them...

    see everyone else has power except them. What a victim complex.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Yet another point on which Moldbug was right.

    You don't have a witch problem when you're burning witches left and right. You have a witch problem when witch hunters are found impaled at the top of flaming pine trees with their heads shrunk to the size of grapefruits.

    Is it white supremacists getting burned, or hunters of white supremacists?

  • Finrod||

    You especially have a witch problem when the preceding is true and people are afraid to speak out about the witches.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    "You don't have a witch problem when you're burning witches left and right. You have a witch problem when witch hunters are found impaled at the top of flaming pine trees with their heads shrunk to the size of grapefruits."

    If only Donald Trump could grasp that simple concept.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    What a clear and concise way of demonstrating how consistently racist the President's tweets are.

  • MiloMinderbinder||

    Robby is willfully delusional. He'll maintain this view as he's lead to the guillotine.

  • esteve7||

    I could only image what is reporting would be like as the leftists he defends send him to the Gulag....

  • Idle Hands||

    To be sure....

  • Eddy||

    "One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people. While these remarks seem ugly and offensive to most people, folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own."

    You'd have to go back to some of the darkest corners of American history to find a scenario where someone could signal their wokeness by making Jeong-style racist comments against black people. What would we think of a political community so awful that you signal your membership by saying stuff like that against nonwhites?

    Maybe you can say white people are better able to take it, because historically "they" were on top, and still have plenty of power today.

    But that's the problem - insulting groups of people based on what "they" are supposedly like.

    And any group you care to name - yes, including white people - has experienced episodes of racial oppression - either in the U.S. and abroad (think of Mugabe scapegoating white people in his attempt to cling to power).

  • Cathy L||

    What would we think of a political community so awful that you signal your membership by saying stuff like that against nonwhites?

    "We" as in Reason commenters? Most would probably defend it and bitch anytime the editors called it "deplorable."

  • Just Say'n||

    That's a delusional take. They are like three commentators who would maybe defend it

  • Cathy L||

    Do you really need me to do a search for how many people complained when Robby said Milo was not actually super cool?

  • Just Say'n||

    Cathy, you accused Ben Shapiro of instigating the mob against Gunn, when the opposite was true. If you read something outside of left-wing echo chambers you might get a better picture of people you revile. People take issues with slander against other people simply because a Voxsplainer tells them what to believe.

  • Just Say'n||

    People aren't going to accept the labels that progressives, such as yourself, put on people automatically, because the Left lives by the exaggerated smear. Shapiro is probably the best example of this and commentators recognize that.

  • Just Say'n||

    And so, I stand by my point. If someone had actually hurled racial insults, I highly doubt that any commentators here beyond maybe three would actually defend that person.

  • ||

    If someone had actually hurled racial insults, I highly doubt that any commentators here beyond maybe three would actually defend that person.

    No, but if Robby wrote an article about it where he said "to be sure, what these people are hurling is vile, but they have a right to hurl it," there would be an explosion of bitching about how Robby is anti-free speech.

    As we discovered yesterday, while it is unacceptable to condemn the content of a white racist's speech, it is equally unacceptable not to call for immediate firing when racist speech is coming from a non-white person.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    I have to admire the complete lack of self awareness it takes for a person to write....

    "People aren't going to accept the labels that progressives, such as yourself, put on people automatically....."

    It's absolutely breathtaking.
  • Just Say'n||

    This is what, I am referencing from yesterday:

    Cathy L|8.2.18 @ 2:41PM|#

    I thought the whole reason Shapiro & Co went after Gunn was because he was part of the "woke progressive left."

  • Just Say'n||

    That's a delusional take. They are like three commentators who would maybe defend it

  • esteve7||

    and the squirrels

  • esteve7||

    " folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible"

    Folks on the left constantly have to redefine terms to suit their narrative. Racism does not require 'power'. Also get them to define 'power'; that's a fun word salad they come up with after that.

    My coworker was attacked on the bus because he was listening to music on his headphones, didn't hear someone, and he was swung at and accused of being a racist. Yet the left would say he had 'power' and the other guy did not...

  • Microaggressor||

    Soviet style justice, where your guilt is determined by class identity, not individual wrongdoing.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    My coworker was attacked on the bus because he was listening to music on his headphones, didn't hear someone, and he was swung at and accused of being a racist.

    What kind of headphones? If they were Beats by Dre, then I'm pretty sure he's also guilty of cultural appropriation. He should just be thankful that all he got was a beating. /sarc

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    Yep, there's nothing racist about the suggestion that a person using of headphones sold by a black man is somehow proof that he can't possibly be racist.
    Nothing racist about that at all.

  • Trollificus||

    Wow. You're just making shit up like some fucking proglodyte now. Off in your own little world of projection and delusion, and what comes out is only a "point" in your own mind. Your response to CA's comment qualifies as a non sequitur at best.

  • MarkLastname||

    This why the "power dynamics" qualifier is so moronic.

    It doesn't matter if you're CEO of a Fortune 500 company and the other guy is homeless when he's cracking you over the head with a tire iron: he has absolute power over you in that moment. And that power - the ability to maim or kill someone - is the most important kind; arguably the kind from which all other power derived (politicians after all are only powerful because all the men with guns are behind them).

  • Marshal||

    Who is this Sarah Jeong anyway? Who has ever heard of the NYT editorial page?

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Wood not.

  • Trollificus||

    Wood chip her. But then, Yellow Fever is a hell of a fetish.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    "Who has ever heard of the NYT editorial page?"

    Only literate, well-informed Americans who believe educating themselves has value.

    It's understandable why you, nor anyone you associate with, would have cause to have ever heard of the NYT editorial page.

  • JoeBlow123||

    Interesting proposition. To be considered literate you must signal your literate-ness by reading the NYT.

    Seems like you are also signaling something else too, Mr. Lemming.

  • Trollificus||

    Also, IF that were ever true, it is now considerably less true due to the input of fucking racists on the board.

    But I'd have made the opposite assumption: anyone who reads the NYT editorials as political or social gospel is a mindless golem. And 4C's posts reflect this-no sign of independent thought, just repitition and virtue-signalling (to him/her/xirself).

  • Chili Dogg||

    Your comment is sarcasm, right?

    You could help us out by putting /sarc at the end of your comment.

  • Chili Dogg||

    Seriously, are you saying that someone who does not read The New York Times editorial page is not literate and well informed, and does not want to learn things?

    That would be the stupidest comment of the day.

  • Enemy of the State||

    In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, exactly "how white" you were mattered (still does to a lesser extant today).

    East coast pasty Protestant white? Good. Immigrant Irish Catholic, southern Italian, SE European white? Bad!

    Same with blacks; light skinned blacks look down on dark skin blacks.

    Hispanics? There is no such race; just a mix of whites, blacks, Asians and all manner of mixes of those 3 from south of the US border....

  • The Heresiarch||

    Are Asian people considered People of Color? I've met some very pale Asians. It seems weird to use this "Person of Color" euphemism for someone who is paler than, say, a swarthy German (anyone who has been to European beaches knows that lots of Germans can get pretty damn tan).

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Only when compared to white people. Otherwise, they're lower than others on the Progressive Totem Pole of Oppression.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Are Asian people considered People of Color?

    Only when doing so is convenient for The Narrative.

  • esteve7||

    my cousin is 14yo and looks completely white, but he's a quarter Samoan, quarter Russian, quarter English, and quarter Portuguese. His dad immigrated to here as a child and his mom is 2nd or 3rd generation.

    So is he considered Asian? I mean he has 1/4th Samoan. How much % Asian do you need to have before you are not Asian anymore?

    I know that's completely ridiculous, but that's the point. Leftism operates on feelings, not facts.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    What if you're 100% Asian but imported as a baby and life a colorless life in the valley? Asking for a friend.

  • Kivlor||

    According to the Nazis being 3/4 white would make him white. According to the US tradition, 1 drop makes him not white

  • Trollificus||

    That's the old slave trade standard. That's what makes 1/8th blacks, black and half-blacks not half-white.

    Never have gotten an explanation as to why the "wokies" like a slave trade standard, though.

  • fdog50||

    A Samoan would not be an Asian-American, but would be classified by the appropriate intersectional authorities as an "AAPI", or "Asian-American Pacific Islander". At least I think that's the correct terminology.

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    According to Liz Warren you can pretend to be 1/64th and it makes you a minority so I'd say 1/4th is fine

  • Marshal||

    Are Asian people considered People of Color?

    When it's useful they are, when not then no. If you think the Constitution is alive what chance does a dictionary have?

  • Demosthenes3000||

    I'm starting to see the acronym "NAM" being used - Non-Asian Minority. It was used in reference to proposed laws and regulations in California to limit college admissions of Asians in exchange for more African-Americans and Hispanics.

  • Enemy of the State||

    The "Keep Out the Qualified to Admit the Unprepared Act"...

  • Chili Dogg||

    Germans can overdo it on the beach because they don't get that much hot weather.

  • Just Say'n||

    Why not criticize Jeong for being a hypocrite on praising online mobs against others?

    www.dailywire.com/news/33976/i.....en-shapiro

  • Rhywun||

    There's always just criticizing her for being a nasty person.

  • esteve7||

    It's like leftists have never seen or believe in the speech from the movie Gettysburg --- In America, we judge you for who you are, not who your father was.

    Well now fuck that according to them, let's judge people on who their ancestors were, or who people who look like them were.

    So my cousin is 14yo and looks completely white, but he's a quarter Samoan, quarter Russian, quarter English, and quarter Portuguese. His dad immigrated to here as a child and his mom is 2nd or 3rd generation. So who's sins are you going to have him responsible for, you fucking wacko leftists.

  • perlchpr||

    So who's sins are you going to have him responsible for, you fucking wacko leftists.

    Stalin, the British Empire, Portuguese explorers, and, um, I'm sure some Samoan somewhere has done something unpleasant.

  • Trollificus||

    Have you seen the fucking weapons they used to make? Awesomely nasty contraptions of hardwood and sharks' teeth! And then they'd row 200 miles just to find somebody to smash with 'em. That's unpleasant. Also very badass.

  • Cathy L||

    If you don't think it's possible to be racist against white people, and also express a bunch of racial hatred toward white people...you're probably actually racist.

    If you don't think it's possible to be racist against white people, but also don't express a bunch of racial hatred toward white people...you might be confused and into intersectionality, but you're probably not actually racist.

  • Just Say'n||

    To be fair, though, we know that progressives don't actually hate "white people" since most of them are white. The whites that they do hate are primarily rural and lower-income white people, which is what makes their position vile.

    Conservatives have their own hatred of white people (although they never frame it that way) which is primarily directed toward white urban liberals.

    I think when we assume either hates "all white people" we're missing the point, which is really one about class and income.

    Oh shit....I just became a Marxist

  • esteve7||

    "To be fair, though, we know that progressives don't actually hate "white people" since most of them are white."

    Wrong, they hate themselves. That's why progs are the most miserable, unhappy people you would ever meet.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Wrong, they hate themselves

    Example--all of Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland's posts. Everytime he makes a comment about backwards, ill-educated hicks, he reveals his own upbringing.

  • ||

    I think you're right, and I think this get at what racial politics really are for a lot of the progressive left.

    The Good Reverend clearly comes from a pretty bourgeois background and hasn't the foggiest idea what's involved in life for most people. He just knows he's one of the ones that doesn't have shit all over him.

    Wokeness is a way of reversing that power dynamic - of pretending that when he's stamping his shiny boot on the face of a peasant that he feels like he's standing up for oppressed underdogs.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Artie's a hick.

    He's from the holler--he's said as much.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    To be fair, though, we know that progressives don't actually hate "white people" since most of them are white. The whites that they do hate are primarily rural and lower-income white people, which is what makes their position vile.

    Rural and lower income whites are the last class of people that it's considered OK to openly hate. What makes this particularly dumb is that many of them have never actually spent any amount of time around rural and/ or lower income whites, so they're hating them based on some ridiculous straw man that they've invented.

    And, they're not even doing Marxism "right" (if there is such a thing) in that they're supposed to at least put up a pretense about caring about the poor, downtrodden proletariat class, but instead they openly despise them (unless they fit into one of the victim classes - POC, womyn, LGBTQI+, etc.).

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Yeah, the victim classes have effectively replaced poor over time. It just makes it funny when the "victims" aren't within spitting distance of poor.

  • Finrod||

    See: college students that Daddy is paying $60K/year to send them there.

  • BYODB||


    What makes this particularly dumb is that many of them have never actually spent any amount of time around rural and/ or lower income whites, so they're hating them based on some ridiculous straw man that they've invented.

    Hint: This is much of the cause of all racism, with most of the rest being the exact opposite and having too much contact with a group that's values are opposite of your own.

    Obviously human's are much more complicated than this, but it's a fairly good rule of thumb.

  • MasterThief||

    That's actually a really fair point. I can admit to racial biases, but they're rooted in a lifetime of experiences being low income and surrounded by minorities. Every individual is treated as a unique individual, but it's hard to miss behavioural patterns from different groups. When some of those behaviours noticed are highly negative (or rubs against one's own morality) then a general animosity towards the group is likely. I suppose racism and other group biases really arise from what characteristics a person applies to certain groups and whether those characteristics are viewed poorly or favorably.

  • ||

    they're not even doing Marxism "right" (if there is such a thing) in that they're supposed to at least put up a pretense about caring about the poor, downtrodden proletariat class

    This is actually the opposite of Marxism, although an inhabitant of the contemporary world could be forgiven this error considering the mounds of bullshit Marx has been buried under for 150 years.

    People who "care about the poor" are the enemy to Marx. If you "care about the Poor," then you are obviously not poor, and rather than working toward Revolution (which is what you should be doing if you're a Marxist-in-good-standing), you're preserving the existing power structure that has you at the top while fetishizing your pity for the Poor as an adequate substitute (for you) for the Revolution.

    Marx called this "Bourgeois Socialism" and describes it in The Communist Manifesto as a greater evil than Capitalism by far.

  • Fk_Censorship||

    Marxists supposedly support the poor rootless working class in cities (especially those toiling in factories). Marxists openly hate the clingers to tradition and religion, the rooted rural classes. Especially if they own a tiny plot of land (or a backyard) - then they are evil plantation owners. Marxists never made a secret of the fact they wanted to kill those people off.

  • Trollificus||

    Wait, wait, wait...*I* have a back yard! Does that make me racist? I mean, I did plan to use it to bury a bunch of dead black people and immigrants in, but still...

  • ||

    Oh shit....I just became a Marxist

    Marx wasn't wrong about everything. In fact, he was right about a lot of things. One of those things is that racial categories are much less significant social sorters than economic classes are, and that racism and racial-identity politics serve mainly to keep the proletariat divided and, thus, easily held down.

    Bernie made exactly this point about Democrat identity politics during the primary, but it doesn't seem like it stuck.

  • Fk_Censorship||

    I call bullshit. Family (even extended family) is a lot more of a tribal motivator than temporary economic status. If you think those in the same social class have common goals, you should spend some time in the lower class neighborhoods of Houston, and see how much the black and Latino gangs collaborate tonight the oppressive bourgeoisie. Hitler, in his demented way, made a lot more sense than Marx (that people are more loyal to ethnicity than class).

  • Azathoth!!||

    Marx was wrong about EVERYTHING

    FTFY

    The man couldn't have been any more wrong if he walked backward on his hands and shat out his mouth--hey! that would explain A LOT.

  • damikesc||

    Why assume she does not? No evidence exists to bolster that

  • esteve7||

    If you are woke you get the benefit of the doubt, the benefit of blind eyes, the benefit of....

  • Tony||

    If you're too dumb to understand the concepts here (specifically, that the reason racism is a problem is because it keeps classes of people oppressed--something white people don't experience no matter what names you call them), then you probably need to be in a protected class.

  • damikesc||

    Tell me more about the oppression of a NYT editorial board member.

    Then tell me this...if i am racist regardless, why should i oppose white nationalists? They are simply this bitch with far less power and privilege.

  • Tony||

    I thought I indicated that I shouldn't have to explain this to people with functioning brainstems. Sigh.

    It's not about individuals. A NTY editor is a privileged person, but compare a white NTY editor to a black NYT editor, and the black one is relatively worse off in our society. She'll get pulled over by cops more. Will have had less opportunities to advance.

    To the poor white coal miner example below, compare him to a poor black coal miner. We're talking about racism specifically, not any other form of lack of privilege. Why is this difficult?

  • Just Say'n||

    The belief that poor whites are not mistreated by the state more than an upscale black person does not conform with statistical analysis on the topic and contradicts President Obama's own statements in the past where he conceded that a poor white person would have a more difficult life than his own daughters.

    If we are talking about a black person and a white person in the same income bracket then possibly you may have an argument, but it would be impossible to prove beyond anecdotal examples.

    Identity politics is a rather dumb ideology that is based upon "faith alone". The Left made a hell of a lot more sense when they fixated on income rather than skin color

  • Tony||

    "The belief that poor whites are not mistreated by the state more than an upscale black person..."

    Is explicitly not what I argued. Pay attention or we'll have to keep going over this.

    The entire point is made by comparing people who are similarly situated. Obviously Oprah is better off than Mike the tire guy from Bumfuck, West Virginia. What kind of moron would argue otherwise? The strawman in your head perhaps?

    But no matter how rich or poor you are, if you're white, you get the privileges that come with whiteness. Oprah is successful despite being black. Martha Stewart went to prison despite being white.

  • Just Say'n||

    When she says she hates "white people", she never specified "white people of a certain income bracket". That's what you don't seem to grasp here.

  • Tony||

    And what you don't seem to grasp is irony. I'm sure white people will be OK. If you like I can get you a life jacket and a lollipop if you can't handle the endemic racism of it all, snowflake.

  • Just Say'n||

    You just proved my point.

  • Nardz||

    Tony, it is YOU that is perpetuating racism.

  • Tony||

    It is you who are, comrade.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    But no matter how rich or poor you are, if you're white, you get the privileges that come with whiteness.

    Magnificent circular reasoning there.

  • Tony||

    Lectures on reasoning from people who think white Americans are like Jews under Hitler.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Proclamations from people who think #RUSSIA totally changed the vote.

  • Tony||

    Anyone who voted against Hillary because she was corrupt, ran a child sex ring from a pizza shop, or something similar--which includes members of my own family--is living proof that they did just that.

    I don't know why you have a dog in the fight. There's a serious investigation going on. All a hoax, I suppose? Or perhaps Trump's actually behind it all in an elaborate plot to save the universe.

  • Microaggressor||

    So Wikileaks really is just a Russian disinfo front? We have so much to learn from Tony.

  • Tony||

    I suppose the reason Wikileaks doesn't expose anything about Russia is because Russia isn't corrupt.

  • ||

    I suppose the reason Wikileaks doesn't expose anything about Russia is because Russia isn't corrupt.

    Hmm . . .

    this stuff wasn't hard to find at all.

    But please, don't let me fuck up your narrative - carry on.

  • esteve7||

    LOL yeah if you believed Hillary was corrupt it was because of the Russians. Not her 30+ years in public life.

    Talk about delusional. You leftists are the biggest bunch of sore losers

  • Tony||

    So why isn't she in prison? Do tell.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Are you really this dumb?

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""So why isn't she in prison? Do tell.""

    Just because a person isn't in prison doesn't mean they are corruption free.

    If I was to use the same metric being applied to Trump, his cronies are being indicted therefore he's guilty too, then the McDougals (Clinton cronies) going to prison for bank fraud over the Whitewater investigation would also mean the Clinton's are guilty.

    The Clinton's are good at letting other people do the dirty work and taking the fall. Perhaps Trump is too.

  • Tony||

    I believe in innocent until proven guilty, Trumps included. Don't know about you.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You believe in innocent until proven guilty? HAHAHAHAHAHA

    Roy
    Moore.

    You lost your mind convicting him without a trial.

  • Mock-star||

    Because she's white. Duh.

  • GeoffB1972||

    White privilege, duh!

  • Nardz||

    It's funny how you run cover for credible allegations of systemic pedophilia by characterizing it has "Hillary Clinton running a child sex ring from a pizza shop". At the same time, you prop up the Russian conspiracy theory and make claims of systemic racism based on skin color in, by the way, the least racist country in the world.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Super serious investigation. The conspiracy is so deep it began before Obama was elected! And we know hillary wasn't corrupt because the Clinton foundation cloned unicorns and the #RUSSIANS made her set up an illegal private mail server, delete government documents (some classified), and lie about it under oath to the FBI.

    There's nothing #RUSSIANS can't do.

  • Tony||

    You're fucking beyond hope you know that?

    But her emailz!! For real? I'm really reading this right now? Do you not watch the news?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Do you own a mirror?

  • Tony||

    Hannity isn't news.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Neither is Cuomo.

  • ||

    But her emailz!! For real? I'm really reading this right now? Do you not watch the news?

    "set up an illegal private mail server, delete government documents (some classified), and lie about it under oath to the FBI"

    Remind me which part is untrue again?

  • Tony||

    That investigation is concluded, famously.

  • fdog50||

    So one could only have come to the belief that HRC was corrupt through being brainwashed by Russian propaganda? Not by Whitewater, the whole Rose Law Firm records incident, continual lying about the "vast right-wing conspiracy" in order to cover up for her husband, the money hustling for the Clinton Foundation or the entire dishonesty with the e-mail server? None of that, which was in lots of papers, magazines, websites and books might have caused people to think she was corrupt?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Lectures on reasoning from people who think white Americans are like Jews under Hitler.

    Lectures on wokeness from people who fuck their cousins.

  • Marshal||

    Is explicitly not what I argued. Pay attention or we'll have to keep going over this.

    Right. You allow yourself to focus on only a tiny fraction of the issue by defining the rest out of existence. When people point out this is wrong you continue to go back as if intelligent people are required to use your conclusion driven definitions.

    Pay attention or we'll have to keep explaining this to you.

  • Trollificus||

    So, what you're saying is, outcomes are not dependent on race, thereby countering your "argument"*.

    *-yes, we allow you proggies to pass of assertions as arguments, otherwise you'd have nothing.

  • Microaggressor||

    The faith is that racism is the one and only cause for disparate outcomes. That's why entertaining the possibility that other factors might be at play is the modern taboo. That's why there is an IDW.

  • Tony||

    If you want to argue that black people are genetically inferior with respect to coping with modern society (oooh so taboo), then you should be prepared to deal with the consequences of that. Do we simply let them remain an underclass forever? Social darwinism all the way? Or do we treat them with a modicum of compassion, as we do special ed kids in schools, as leaving them alone in the wild would be cruel? How much welfare do you want to give to blacks for being black?

  • esteve7||

    'black people are genetically inferior with respect to coping with modern society'

    Tony those are questions that should be answered by you, since that's what you believe.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    If you want to argue that black people are genetically inferior with respect to coping with modern society (oooh so taboo), then you should be prepared to deal with the consequences of that. Do we simply let them remain an underclass forever? Social darwinism all the way? Or do we treat them with a modicum of compassion, as we do special ed kids in schools, as leaving them alone in the wild would be cruel? How much welfare do you want to give to blacks for being black?

    So you're saying that it's the white man's burden to lift up the "inferior" black race.

    Interesting...

  • Tony||

    I'm saying given the premise there are two models that I can think of to deal with it: the permanent underclass model or the special ed model.

    I happen to not be a big fat fucking racist moron, so I don't believe that black people are inherently unable to cope with modern society, whatever that could possibly mean, but that their relative poor metrics result from centuries of mistreatment and oppression.

  • ||

    their relative poor metrics result from centuries of mistreatment and oppression.

    So . . . maybe we give taking government's boot off their neck a try and see if things start equaling out?

  • LamarPye||

    Boot off the neck and lefty pandering : your a victim, I'm your friend ,he's your enemy, vote this way

  • Trollificus||

    Tony:
    "I happen to be a big fat fucking racist moron". FTFY

    Blacks are a minority in this country and becoming more of one all the time. We cannot UNmake that status. Even as other minorities come here and improve their lot and become successful, somehow the very special treatment you hypothesize for blacks holds them down.

    Other hypotheses explain their lot far better. Also, fuck you.

  • Tony||

    Maybe it has something to do with the fact that blacks didn't "come here," exactly.

  • Rhywun||

    do we treat them with a modicum of compassion, as we do special ed kids in schools

    Wow.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    It's not hard to see why Tony thinks Jong isn't racist.

  • Happy Chandler||

    The fact that people can deny that people who lived under state sanctioned racial terrorism are still alive are affected by racism.

    The fact that people can deny that both state-sponsored and private actions still affect people.

    Even if there are other factors, these factors are proven and quantifiable.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    So about those asians...

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Or Jews.

  • Trollificus||

    Is that the famousd "black fragility" we hear so much/little about?

  • esteve7||

    "the black one is relatively worse off in our society. She'll get pulled over by cops more. Will have had less opportunities to advance."

    Assumes facts not in evidence Tony. That's your ideological possession speaking, Tony. There's no data to back that up

  • Tony||

    I'm pretty sure there is.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Assumptions just show gullibility.

  • MoreFreedom||

    I reject any assertion that whites are privileged in society. Show me a law or rules giving whites privileges, say like the laws regarding affirmative action. Until then, it's just a liberal meme they want us to believe. And one which you've fallen for.

  • esteve7||

    that's not why racism is wrong Tony. JFC. Read a book, *A* book.

  • Just Say'n||

    "something white people don't experience no matter what names you call them"

    OK, Trust Fund Tony, why don't you tell your ideas to an unemployed coal miner in West Virginia

  • Tony||

    Why don't you tell yours. Start with "stop looking for a bailout and learn some modern skills for god's sake."

  • Just Say'n||

    Their skills are marketable if it weren't for the government intervening to kill their industry. And if we're all about ending bailouts then we really should examine the extra funding that goes to inner cities, or is that different because nonsense?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Start with "stop looking for a bailout and learn some modern skills for god's sake."

    Tell that to all these non-skilled journalists losing their jobs. "MOVE TO THE CITY AND LEARN TO CODE, LOSER."

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Now do someone from detroit.

  • Tony||

    Capitalism fucked Detroit just like it fucked West Virginia. Yay capitalism!

  • esteve7||

    Tony, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Running pig dog kulaks! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

  • Finrod||

    Because the Democrats that ran Detroit into the ground always spoke so highly of capitalism, you dumb fuck.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Why do we assume coal miners are white?

    Because the mines were segregated and the unions discriminated against blacks.

  • Just Say'n||

    That's not actually true, because mines in the Midwest, which no longer exist, employed all races. You do realize that West Virginia broke away from Virginia, because it did not share wealthy Virginia's support for secession, right?

    The coal miner unions were actually the least likely of early unions to segregate based upon race. Race segregation was primarily the purview of skilled labor unions. Unskilled labor unions could not really afford to discriminate based upon race, as that allowed minorities to be used as scabs.

    Do you only know the world through a Vox explainer?

  • Just Say'n||

    The mines in West Virginia are overwhelmingly white, because the Scots-Irish that first settled there were and remain the primary inhabitants there.

    This is just really really bad history on your part.

  • Fk_Censorship||

    And it's a mountainous area, where cotton and other cash crops don't grow.

  • Trollificus||

    But it's CONVENIENT history, and that's what counts.

    And by CONVENIENT, I mean "Can be jammed into "The Narrative" sideways and held there with duct tape."

  • Trollificus||

    The concept of "a Vox explainer" is one with which I am unfamiliar. It does sound very oxymoronic. Or even just moronic.

  • Trollificus||

    Hey, a neologism that might be sometimes useful: "voxymoronic", adj., Of or pertaining to progressive stupidity emanating from website "Vox", as "The New York Times just shut down a major bullying tactic of the alt-right", usually characterized by straining rationalization and desperate mental gymnastics.

  • Trollificus||

    Hey, a neologism that might be sometimes useful: "voxymoronic", adj., Of or pertaining to progressive stupidity emanating from website "Vox", as "The New York Times just shut down a major bullying tactic of the alt-right", usually characterized by straining rationalization and desperate mental gymnastics.

  • Mickey Rat||

    People here understand the concept, they just think it is a stupid and vile way of looking at things that does not end up anywhere good.

  • Tony||

    But it really doesn't have to be any of your concern. Especially if you're white.

  • Microaggressor||

    You know, if these people ever seized power and put white people into gulags, then it might be our concern. Sort of like how Jews were right to be concerned by Hitler's scapegoating tactics. Oh wait, this is the same scapegoating tactic. Weird.

  • esteve7||

    A fun experience is to take a hitler speech and replace Jew with 'White Person' or 'The 1%', and 'German' with 'POC' or 'Citizen', and see how the left reacts.

    Maybe it was because Hitler was on the left. One of the great lies is Fascism is somehow on the right. They are only 'on the right' when compared to communists.

  • Tony||

    You literally just said white Americans are analogous to Jews under Hitler.

    You probably also think black people whine too much about how society treats them.

    What do the kids say? I can't even with this monkey shit.

  • Microaggressor||

    The analogy only fits in tactical ways, like dehumanization and creation of in-group solidarity by finding an Enemy to rally against. However, since white people are still the majority, the risk isn't the same.

    Either way, I see all it takes are a few hatefacts to send Tony sputtering and unable to formulate an argument.

  • esteve7||

    The risk isn't the same in America because of our 2nd amendment. The first thing Hitler, Stalin, and every other mass murder did was outlaw guns.

    Speaking of which:
    bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-18288430

    Venezuela bans private gun ownership, June 2012

  • Tony||

    If I wanted to commit genocide I'd probably ban the members of the relevant race from having guns too. That's just smart genociding.

  • Nardz||

    This is the first intelligent thing you've said this thread, Tony.

    Now define 'race'

  • Tony||

    It's usually defined by whomever is in power as a way to separate themselves from the people they want to scapegoat.

  • Happy Chandler||

    I'm not sure if this is stupider than the Hitler was liberal argument. It's close!

    There were lots of guns in the Warsaw Ghetto.

    The Nazis took over Poland, who had an army, even if not well equipped. I'm not sure a few pistols would have saved the Jews.

    Claiming guns could have saved the Jews is ahistorical and offensive to the memory.

  • esteve7||

    No one is saying Hitler was a Liberal, they are saying he was a leftist. Which he was. Go read the National Socialist German Workers Party Platform. It's what is claims to be... Nationalist Socialism.

    Claiming the situation would have been exactly the same with an armed populace is offensive, There is a reason why mass murderers prefer gun control.

    People with guns fight back. How do you think America became a country? It was Britain's attempts to seize our powderhouses that started the revolutionary war.

  • Tony||

    How do you think America became a country?

    The French.

  • soldiermedic76||

    The French didn't join the war until several years into it and only after Saratoga, when it became evident that the colonist actually could be the British. Even then it was a year after Saratoga that the French became formal allies and nearly two tears before French Troops arrived. In fact French Troops only were critical in one major battle.

  • Tony||

    The French provided 90% of the rebels' gunpowder. They were supplying arms a year into the revolution and pummeling the British in European waters. Set aside your patriotic and romantic notions and you'll realize that the American Revolution was a proxy war that France won.

  • Trollificus||

    Now you're just trolling. I know you're not that stupid.

    RIght?

  • soldiermedic76||

    The french nay didn't bsgart "pummeling" the British Navy until after 1778. It is a matter of historical fact that France refused to join the war until the colonist demonstrated the ability to beat the British. BTW the French didn't supply powder until after Washington had forced the British out of Boston. Once again they refused to aid the colonist until the colonist could demonstrate the ability to defeat the British.

  • Azathoth!!||

    The French provided 90% of the rebels' gunpowder. They were supplying arms a year into the revolution and pummeling the British in European waters. Set aside your patriotic and romantic notions and you'll realize that the American Revolution was a proxy war that France won.

    Awww--you just watched Simon on Youtube and his 'Top Ten Uncomfortable Truths Americans Don't Know"

    hahahahahahaha

  • jph12||

    "Claiming guns could have saved the Jews is ahistorical and offensive to the memory."

    Except that having guns did save some Jews during World War II. Nothing was going to save all of the Jews, except possibly if the Allies hadn't agreed to cede Western Czechoslovakia.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Also, prior to Saratoga most of the powder the Colonist used was either captured British powder or purchased by Americans from Europe (France was just one country they purchased it from). It wasn't given it was purchased. Saratoga (and Germantown) changed the war. The French crown refused to give official French support until the Colonies we're victorious. Because they didn't want a war with England over a losing cause. The seige of Boston, Battle of Trenton and Princeton, Saratoga and Germantown, and Monmouth (French were officially in the war but had no influence yet in the war) were all major battles that changed the direction of the war with no French participation. An argument could even be made that the Battle of Bunker Hill, despite technically an American loss, inflected such heavy casualties that the British became reluctant to attack fortifified American positions that it forced them to abandon Boston when Washington moved guns onto Dorchester heights.

  • Nardz||

    And the Polish resistance put up one hell of a fight, only finally succumbing because they couldn't be adequately resupplied.

  • Mickey Rat||

    At the very least, this is a noxious regressive concept that is poisoning debate in Western Civilization and leading to polarization along racial and ethnic lines. It is an awful development and that concerns everyone.

  • Mickey Rat||

    At the very least, this is a noxious regressive concept that is poisoning debate in Western Civilization and leading to polarization along racial and ethnic lines. It is an awful development and that concerns everyone.

  • NashTiger||

    You can say that again!

  • Mickey Rat||

    At the very least, this is a noxious regressive concept that is poisoning debate in Western Civilization and leading to polarization along racial and ethnic lines. It is an awful development and that concerns everyone.

  • Trollificus||

    Ah, NOW I understand!

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Throughout all of history, the worst examples of racial oppression have all been forced upon humanity by government. Individuals are powerless to be truly oppressive without the power of government.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    As my longtime Usenet ally of twenty years, Chris Morton, wrote, it takes a pair of hands to build a bomb.

    It takes a government to build a concentration camp.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Government by the people can also lead to racial terrorism. The Ku Klux Klan was not dragged by the Southern governments to terrorize blacks for generations. They used the government to further their agenda.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Democrats sure did that.

  • ||

    Speaking of classes Tony, maybe you should have taken a couple more that didn't end in "studies".

  • John C. Randolph||

    You're white, aren't you Tony? This bitch hates you. Now, while you may fully deserve that as an individual, hating someone for their race is WRONG.

    -jcr

  • Azathoth!!||

    If you're too dumb to understand the concepts here (specifically, that the reason racism is a problem is because it keeps classes of people oppressed--something white people don't experience no matter what names you call them), then you probably need to be in a protected class.

    The world we live in today exists BECAUSE white people were oppressed. Europe was repeatedly invaded and conquered in antiquity.

    Until they made it stop. And WHEN they made it stop, they headed out to do some conquering themselves.

    And they took over the world.

    And they completely reshaped it again and again. First to a Eurocentric shape, then to a more rational, scientific shape, then, to a shape seen from space--and finally, today, to a globalist shape.

    But it's all white people doing it.

    White people stopped slavery--and they did it at a time when they didn't have to. White people ended colonialism--even though they could have maintained and expanded it.

    White people are behind the acceptance and spread of anti-white bigotry.

    The rest of the world can't even racism right.

    Since white people stormed out of Europe in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries they've been the mover and shaker behind pretty much everything.

    And if they stop.....

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    This is how this ends. I've said before that the outrage wars has become a war of attrition. Each side is going to sacrifice more and more of its own in a futile attempt to come out on top of the body pile, to prove moral superiority. The left started it and the right is more than happy to make them pay with their own. At some point, however, either everyone will have been completely outraged out turning on each other or everyone will have deleted their histories and there will be nothing left of interest.

    I'm not sure this woman is collateral damage or hoisted on her own petard, but at least she still has her job. That's luckier than most.

  • damikesc||

    The problem is the Left demands that ONLY the Right live by rules. They do not need to.

  • buybuydandavis||

    The only rule the Left believes in is their own rule over others.

  • AustinRoth||

    The Right was not "happy to join", they were forced to in the name of self interest.

    Ignoring didn't stop it or help, denying didn't stop it or help, so at some point when you realize a weapon is being continually and increasingly used against you, you either retaliate in kind or get destroyed.

    I agree with pursuing option A until bi-lateral disarmament talks occur.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    This is what's known as an external locus of control.

  • Just Say'n||

    Agreed. When the NYT defended her statements by stating that she was forced to respond that way to trolls it was a rather asinine excuse

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    That's an apt comparison.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Not what they said. But, try again.

  • Just Say'n||

    That is exactly what they said. You can't invent reality, because Vox told you otherwise.

    "For a period of time she responded to that harassment by imitating the rhetoric of her harassers," the statement said. "She sees now that this approach only served to feed the vitriol that we too often see on social media. She regrets it, and The Times does not condone it."

  • Trollificus||

    Does she also regret the Twitter lynchings she cheered on because it wasn't her?

  • esteve7||

    yes how long will the left used scorched earth tactics until the other side catches on. This is literally how you got Trump.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Nice post Fist.

    The political left and right truly deserve each other. This whole Outrage War thing reminds me of the Spy Vs Spy comics.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    And I suppose you think the left is the black spy don't you?

  • DajjaI||

    Not all white people are balding, beer-bellied racist goblins.

  • Tony||

    Just the most powerful man on earth and all his supporters.

  • Just Say'n||

    "and all his supporters."

    The classism of rich white liberals is really the most offensive thing in our society.

  • Tony||

    Okay, the ones who show up to his rallies then. I see it on TV.

  • albo||

    They claim to be fighting for the working class, but would never shop at a Wal-Mart or go to a firehall chicken BBQ.

  • Microaggressor||

    That's the internet: an ugly place for everybody, but especially for women of color

    Don't worry everyone, Robby's still woke as Tony. Religious beliefs die hard.

  • esteve7||

    "but especially for women of color"

    https://xkcd.com/285/

  • GabrielSyme||

    Breaking News: World About to End, Women will be most Affected

  • ||

    The hierarchy of oppression dies hard.

  • damikesc||

    And outside of the word of a bigot, where is evidence of this harassment?

  • Happy Chandler||

    Are you seriously pretending that 4chan and 8chan don't exist?

    She wrote a whole book about it. If you read it, maybe you'll learn something. Guessing you don't want to read anything that doesn't support your biases.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    So when did you finish Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg?

  • damikesc||

    I need evidence. The word of a racist is not enough.

    Malkin posts her hate mail and tweets. Doesnt use racist language, repeatedly, for years.

  • Real American||

    That's the internet: an ugly place for everybody, but especially for women of color

    I seriously doubt that's true. That she's a flaming racist cuntbag is probably a bigger factor in her internet treatment.

  • esteve7||

    It's actually the opposite, but Robby's gotta parrot that prog narrative. Men experience more harassment online as a percentage, but facts be damned, full steam ahead!

  • ||

    But women feel worse about it, so they're more victimy.

  • Happy Chandler||

    Cuntbag. That's respectful.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    He's just auditioning for TBS.

  • damikesc||

    I should mourn if a racist cunt gets flamed for being a racist cunt?

    I dont mourn when Spencer is called bad names, either.

  • Finrod||

    I'm sure you were the first to complain about those shirts that came out in mid-2008 that had in the largest font possible in neon green saying "Sarah Palin Is A Cunt", then.

  • General_Tso||

    'Sarah Jeong Probably Doesn't Hate White People...'

    What, exactly, leads you to believe that?

  • esteve7||

    Or, what would she specifically have to do for you to believe she *does* hate white people.

    Hypothetical Conversation:

    "I literally hate white people"

    Robby: "They don't really mean it"

    "I mean it, I completely hate white people and favor discrimination against them"

    Robby: < insert some excuse here >

  • ||

    I kind of miss Cathy Young.

  • esteve7||

    Leftists was exemplified perfectly when Peterson said how he literally has helped women improve their pay 2, 3 times though assertiveness training and other coaching, and she was aghast 'and that's a good thing?'

  • DajjaI||

    I would have expected her to quote-tweet or reply to them

    Did you even read your own article?

    she said bad things about the police

    Have you ever spent any time on this web site?

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Oh Robby, much of the commentariat really hates you. Agreeing with them is just going to make them really hate you even harder.

  • Social Justice is neither||

    Hate him, no. I think he's lazy (procrastination then rushing for his deadlines or to be part of the cycle) and will generally go out of his way to excuse leftist behavior no matter how bad.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Nice attempt at signaling how above it all you are.

  • Microaggressor||

    I don't hate him for it either. It's how you do outreach. You can't deprogram cultists by insulting them. You provide them with the tools and knowledge to come to a conclusion on their own.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    White people as a group have never been oppressed...

    I'm sure the Scottish and the Irish will be surprised to hear this.

    That's one of the many problems with the left's "intersectionality" bullshit. Pretty much every ethnic or national group has at one time or another been oppressed at some point in history. Some far worse than any group in American history. It shouldn't mean anything in the hear and now, but it seems the only way the far left can win new converts is by convincing certain groups that they're helpless victims.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Certain Slavic peoples will be confused by this too, since the Ottomans favored them as slaves, especially the females for sex slaves.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    ...the Ottomans favored them as slaves, especially the females for sex slaves.

    Sounds like the Ottomans had good taste.

  • ||

    The Italians would disagree to.

    Oh, if the "left", and politicians in general, didn't have a group to peddle victimhood to, they'd be out of a job.

  • dave b.||

    This is a stupid comment. The Irish and Scots were indentured servants, not slaves. Blacks in America were stripped of their native language, religion, and customs and their descendants were born into slavery, even children born via slavemaster rape. It was illegal to speak your native language, learn how to read and write or congregate in groups. Your wife and children were subject to rape and could be sold off anytime. Slave breeding farms existed to make more slaves which is why the transatlantic slave trade ended. After 300 or so years of this, there was another 50 years of the Black Codes and then 50 years of Jim Crow. No other group of slaves on the planet were subjected to this level of oppression and ethnic cleansing.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    The Irish and Scots were indentured servants, not slaves.

    I didn't say they were slaves. I was responding to the idiotic and a-historical belief that "White people as a group have never been oppressed" when anyone with even a passing understanding of history should know that that's simply not true.

    No other group of slaves on the planet were subjected to this level of oppression and ethnic cleansing.

    As for which ethnic group wins gold in the Historically Oppressed Victim Olympics, I really don't give a shit because it doesn't matter in the here and now. Although I suspect that the Native Americans and Jews might have something to say about that. Although I guess technically Native Americans weren't slaves. Just driven off their land, forced onto reservations, and murdered by the thousands if they resisted.

  • Fats of Fury||

    "Champ, what did you think of Africa?" Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!" _ Muhammad Ali

  • Trollificus||

    Also, pretty much every race, ethnic or national group has also COMMITTED oppression against other groups. Except maybe the Utes out west here. They just got shit on by everybody. I heard "ute" translates to "Charlie Brown", but then, I was using the "Injun-to-Paleface Translator".

  • DajjaI||

    I just can't even with you white people right now.

  • albo||

    I'm having a Velveeta sandwich with mayo on Wonder Bread. Want a bite/

  • Rhywun||

    That better be "Just Mayo" to go along with the fake cheese and the fake bread.

  • Kivlor||

    He says "Mayo" but the label reads "Miracle Whip"

  • georgeliberte||

    Good news!, there is a recently published 'Idiot's Guide to Evening'.

  • albo||

    A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.

    I've read a ton of right of center pundits say exactly this.

  • Eddy||

    I wouldn't call it hypocrisy if the NYT is promoting people to their editorial board who share their worldview.

    And the editorial board is part of the NYT's collective voice, so this is not a dispute over the hiring of servers in the cafeteria ("try our tofu sandwiches!"), it's a dispute over what the NYT actually is.

    The best way to deal with this is to point out the kind of views the NYT holds, and encouraging people to be skeptical of this particular news source. Maybe marginalize it so self-proclaimed centrists are no longer willing to pay close attention to it except for laughs and to search for the occasional gem in the pile of muck.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Shapiro
    Treacher
    Beck
    Williamson

    To name just a few.

  • Just Say'n||

    "After 5 years of this shit, all it took was for two figures with liberal politics to get in trouble over old tweets to suddenly turn this into a pressing emergency."

  • Eddy||

    What trouble?

    If you're on the Times' editorial board you've pretty much Made It - and at an early age, too. We should all have such "trouble."

  • Eddy||

    (At least until the Times loses so much market share it has to reconsider its business model or go broke - but that could take years and Jeong can during this period arrange a soft landing for herself if things go badly).

  • Longtobefree||

    As soon as the socialists get enough power, they will require a subscription to the racist NYT in order to buy health insurance. And make health insurance mandatory again.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    TIRED: All those societal norms are bullshit.

    WIRED: ZOMG, I can't believe how uncivil you are!

  • Marshal||

    Have you ever lashed out in anger after someone was being mean to you? Do you think this should make you unemployable?

    Sarah Jeoung does.

  • RabbitHead||

    No. There ought to be plenty of fields where a person who expresses themselves in this way can be gainfully employed. IT, acting, engineering, auto repair, project management, proofreading, librarian, chef...

    If you hire someone who has written what she has written, and put them in the role of formulating and expressing your corporate opinions, then I will regard you as garbage.

  • Trollificus||

    She certainly has for the many previous victims of twittermobs, but they were all guilty of wrongthink, so...it's not really hypocrisy and/or a double standard? Even though it looks exactly like hypocrisy and/or a double standard?

  • Marshal||

    A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.

    What a stupid evaluation of "productive". Criticisms of hypocrisy by the right are completely unproductive. The right chose to call for her job because that is productive. As proof note the left's sudden reversal of their own positions in order to save her. Their tactic succeeded, your preference is useless. Worse you make this point as if you aren't proven wrong by the very events you're commenting on.

  • Iheartskeet||

    Yup. The left will never understand until they feel implications of their own rules. It has a way of clarifying things that being oh-so-reasonable Quakers does not.

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.

    That's exactly what they did for decades, and got rolled over every time.

    And that's exactly why "cuckservative" is a thing. Anyone silly enough to still try that approach deserves it.

    Enough is enough! Off with her head!

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Enough is enough! Off with her head!

    YEAH! Kill the dumb bitch!

  • TGGeko||

    "she subscribes to The Cause"

    Oh does she now? Well, what is The Cause's view of white people?

  • buybuydandavis||

    " Do you think this should make you unemployable?"

    If she said the same thing about Blacks, how employable would she be at a media outlet? Or anywhere?

    But hate Whitey, and all of a sudden it is crocodile tears for overt racists. Boo hoo hoo! It's so unfair! It's all about *her* unhappiness.

    "and further efforts to mine her old tweets for content that runs afoul of right-wing political correctness—oh no, she said bad things about the police, how dare she—play directly into the hands of a bad-faith smear campaign."

    When Whites protest against anti white hatred, it's "bad faith".

    " A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted."

    Postmodernism doesn't believe in truth. They only believe in power. They espouse principles for the purpose of manipulating the listener. They are hypocritical by design and on purpose. Their hypocrisy has been pointed out for decades. What good has it ever done to change behaviour? Why would anyone think it would start working now?

    Only the Cuckservatives like the mentioned National Review's David French still think pointing out the hypocrisy is enough, because all they care about is their precious moral preening.

    The rest of the Right wants to *win*. So we believe in fighting back. When the pomo Marxists no longer control our major institutions, maybe we'll feel more tolerant of the random crank. Until then, *fight back*.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause. "

    The Cause *is* hatred of whites. The fundamental organizing principle of the Outer Party of the modern Left is hatred of white men. That's the tool by which the Inner Party attacks freedom, because white men are the primary protectors of freedom in the world and America.

    Most libertarian political culture historically? Anglo American culture.
    Most libertarian political culture currently? American culture.
    Most libertarian demographic in America? White men.

    Liberty in the world was created and protected by white men, and is currently sustained by them. That's why the Left's cause is to destroy them.

  • Tony||

    I suppose this drivel is going to just lay here unnoticed while everyone snipes at every slightly progressive opinion.

    This guy is kind of speaking for libertarians here...

  • buybuydandavis||

    And speaking perfectly accurately.

    Don't have the stones or the brain to attempt a refutation yourself? Thought so.

    But continue to defend your anti white hatred. It's nice to have you openly display all your malignancy.

  • Tony||

    Almost all my friends, and all of my family, are white. There's the requisite token minority here and there, but it's mostly all white people in my life.

    And you're right, I hate them all. And I hate myself. Specifically because of the whiteness. Milk and sheep offend me, and don't get me started on sheep milk.

  • buybuydandavis||

    See?

    Doesn't it feel better to tell the truth for a change?

    Next, share your resentment of the productive. Do it. It will feel just as good.

  • Tony||

    I request paper paychecks so that I can burn them.

  • Trollificus||

    If you're honest about your "hatreds" you'd admit that you're perfectly happy throwing all the "inferior, non-woke whites, including family members" under the progressive, spike-wheeled bus. And this makes you a very particular kind of "supremacist", doesn't it? You're a "Tony supremacist", reveling in the moral superiority attained by white knighting the poor, poor blackamoors and shitting on the lesser whites.

    Must feel good, you don't seem to exhibit the mortifying shame I would at being such a clueless asshole.

  • Tony||

    Wow, you described me as something and then accused me of being it.

    I'll give you this, morons certainly don't make the world better faster. I wonder if it's particularly American for morons to think they should run everything.

  • Nardz||

    That's progressivism, Tony

  • barfman2018||

    *barf*

  • dave b.||

    Nothing says libertarian like mass genocide of Natives, Blacks, Africans, Asians, Indians, Aborigines, and whoever else stood in the way of the Europeans and Americans. Sometimes entire populations of millions just have to be genocided for the cause.

  • buybuydandavis||

    See Marxism for details

  • dave b.||

    I missed the part where Marxists claimed to be libertarian

  • Fats of Fury||

    You seem to be missing a lot of parts. People succumbing to disease doesn't rise to genocide. Do you blame the Mongols for genociding much of Eurasia by spreading Bubonic plague? They didn't make your list.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    True, you fucks are totalitarian and never claimed otherwise.

  • Modus Pwnens||

    They would have done the same to whites if they had the ability and opportunity. Arabs and Turks, for example, were notoriously savage toward Europeans when the caliphate was the preeminent power in the Mediterranean.

    Tribalism is written into our DNA. Every race and culture in history has been racist, except modern white people.

  • Happy Chandler||

    "They only believe in power."

    "The rest of the Right wants to *win*. So we believe in fighting back."

    Said without irony.

  • buybuydandavis||

    The fundamental moral mistake of the Right, for a century, is mistaking complicity in one way rules as supporting the rules, instead of betraying them

    One way ceasefire is surrender
    One way rule of law is subjection
    One way civility is subservience
    Reciprocity is a fundamental principle of Western Civilization underlying all others

    Unlike the Cucks, we don't treat principles as out of context absolutes. We're all for the rules with people who will reciprocally follow them. When people shoot at you, you shoot back. Duh. The moral idiocy of people who don't get this is a wonder to behold.

  • Seamus||

    "Over the last 24 hours, it's been incredible to watch an army of right-of-center Twitter users gleefully demand Jeong's head out of some misguided sense of fair play—of forcing the left to 'live by its own rules.'"

    It's not a case of forcing the left to live by its own rules; it's one of forcing Sarah Jeong to live by *her* rules.

  • Tony||

    Stop forcing people to do things, how about.

  • barfman2018||

    Irony?

    *barf*

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Literally the first sentence of the article you linked:

    I've already argued today that Sarah Jeong, the new New York Times editorial board member, shouldn't be fired for her old racist tweets,

  • Just Say'n||

    Shapiro doesn't get enough credit for not engaging in this type of behavior that is used against him

  • esteve7||

    along with Jordan Peterson. How he remains to calm as vicious people slander and lie about him constantly is beyond me

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    is beyond me

    No kidding.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    I've been trying to come up with a new term that combines all the stupid shit people use to argue these days:

    "Fuck you, I got mine"
    "They started it and I'm gonna finish it"
    "Give them a taste of their own medicine"
    "You just hate people"

    And other things like this. The best thing I've been able to come up with is Collective Dickery but that doesn't seem good enough. There's got to be something better.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    "You just hate people"

    This is what I get for using angle brackets. Should be:

    "You just hate (insert random class) people"

  • Finrod||

    How About Gratuitous Asshattery?

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people.

    I would never argue that racism doesn't exist. I would argue that this is a piss-poor solution. It doesn't accomplish anything tangible that would actually help people who are being mistreated because of their race.

    But by all means, tweet away and pat yourselves on the back for being such a hero. Everybody needs a hobby.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    But this is the time of "awareness". Nobody is really trying to solve anything. If they can bring awareness to a cause then that's good enough.

  • Brandybuck||

    ""...racism has to involve a structural power imbalance to coun""

    That's what happens when lefty deliberately change the definition of words. But we have another word we can use that they have not damaged: "Bigotry".

    It is absolutely possible to be bigoted against another on the basis of their race, regardless of any power structure. Fuck the power structure. We all know what racism means, it's bigotry based on race. The left WANTS to be bigoted against whites, against mean, against the middle class,because it gives them a sense of power and so they redefine words.

    So throw it back in their faces and call them bigots. Because that's what they are.

    Bigotry.

  • Longtobefree||

    "Sarah Jeong Probably Doesn't Hate White People"

    Actually, it is clear she does. And she is a racist. And the racist NYT knew it when they hired her.
    It is just a bonus for her that hating white people also get her big bucks from other racists.

  • Ecoli||

    Forget it Jake, it's the New York Times.

  • Number 2||

    As little as possible.

  • NashTiger||

    Forget it, Jake, it's Asian-Americantown

  • Trollificus||

    *snort*

    Pre-quoting the re-make, excellent.

  • Happy Chandler||

    It's incredible how many of the commenters here basically prove the point that this is a bad faith smear campaign.

  • John||

    It is amazing how you continue to put up this same lame, talking point no matter how badly the facts refute it. Again, if she was joking, why didn't any of her Twitter followers or colleges see it that way? And why didn't she ever say it was a joke before this week? Who tells jokes that no one gets and then never bothers to explain them after no one gets them?

  • Finrod||

    Waaah, people are using my own words against me, how unfair of them, waaah.

    Want a block of cheese and some crackers to go with that fine whine?

  • buybuydandavis||

    "Objecting to anti-white racism is bad faith. Whitey has it coming."

  • John||

    If she was joking with these tweets, how come no one ever got the joke? None of those tweets ever elicited a single reply from her many Prog followers indicating that they were a joke? Moreover, there is no evidence she ever tried to explain the joke after apparently, no one got it. There are dozens of these tweets sent over a two year period. If they were all "jokes", how come none of her friends and colleagues have stepped up and said, "oh yeah, everyone knew Sarah's 'racist Asian girl' routine."? How come no one, including her followers, Joeng herself and her coworkers ever once referenced these tweets as a joke before this weekend?

    Robby is just lying here. These tweets were not jokes. You tell a joke once in a while, not continuously for two freaking years. The Tweets are what they are. She wasn't joking. She might not have meant them literally. But clearly, she loathes white people and found it amusing to Tweet out really disgusting slurs against them.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    Jesus Christ, John. RTFA

    I no longer entirely buy the rationale that Jeong provided to The Times: that she was merely "imitating" the rhetoric of people harassing her. If she was trolling her harassers, I would have expected her to quote-tweet or reply to them, but many of the tweets seem to be generated by nothing other than Jeong's own thoughts, or by items in the news.

  • John||

    Jesus Christ Sparky, read the fucking quote and read the article yourself. It finishes with

    One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people. While these remarks seem ugly and offensive to most people, folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own.

    Ultimately, I suspect that's what Jeong was really doing. She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause. Of course, it says something about this strain of leftism that one of the easiest ways to prove you're a devotee is to make mean-spirited, troll-ish generalizations about other people.

    That is Robby saying he thinks she was kidding and that it was a joke, which is complete bullshit. And saying "it is not racist to hate white people" is just another way of saying it is okay to hate white people. That is all Robby is saying here; leftists don't hate hate white people.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    That is Robby saying he thinks she was kidding and that it was a joke, which is complete bullshit.

    Wrong. That you read that part and came to that conclusion means you misunderstood.

    It wasn't a joke, it was a signal. It was a signal that she belongs to the "right" group.

  • John||

    Which is an even more idiotic explanation. People who call black people slurs are not really racist, they are just signaling that they are part of the group.

    How can you believe this bullshit? There are no lengths to which Soave will not go to avoid finding bad faith in a leftist. You must really be in love with the guy to want to keep dying on these hills. Wow.

  • Azathoth!!||

    There's a pretty obvious 'tell' in there, Sparky--

    folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own.

    Not 'folks who believe' or even 'folks who think'.

    No.

    It's folks who understand.

    Saying 'they understand' is saying that this is the correct stance--and implying that one shares that stance

    That's a signal too

  • NashTiger||

    hat logic makes sense when it is WHITE progs disparaging whiteness. Jeong had no such need to advertise

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Ultimately, I suspect that's what Jeong was really doing. She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause. Of course, it says something about this strain of leftism that one of the easiest ways to prove you're a devotee is to make mean-spirited, troll-ish generalizations about other people.

    So it wasn't those nasty trolls who made her do it, it was wokeness. Fuck agency. It's not her fault.

    Yeah, I can see how that changes everything.

  • John||

    I just participated in that lynching to fit in Skippy. I wasn't racist. I was just signaling how down I was with the scene man.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    I'm not a racist. I just said racist things so I could fit in with racists. The logic is irrefutable.

  • JeremyR||

    Pretty sure she does hate white people and men. But if the NYT wants a racist on its editorial board, that's their right.

  • John||

    And white women too. I wonder if she has tweeted any opinions about Japanese and Chinese. Bet that would be interesting.

  • buybuydandavis||

    I'm betting on the Jews

  • Trollificus||

    If there's any group to whom the pejorative suffix "-supremacist" should be affixed, it's the fucking Chi-fucking-nese. And being a good Korean, I think she has to pretend to hate hate the Chinese.

    But I was once told by a Korean girl that "I can't tell us apart either." She had a pretty dry sense of humor, though.

  • JeremyR||

    Andrew Sullivan, who seems to have regained his sanity of late, actually has a really good take on it.

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/

    sarah-jeong-new-york-times-anti-white-racism.html

  • John||

    Sullivan apparently got the help he needed. It is just amazing that the Times and the blue check Twitter mafia are dying on this hill. No one outside the hard left buys this "its not racist if a brown person does it" bullshit. Everyone can see their unbelievable hypocrisy and how okay the left is with anti white racism. They really don't seem to understand that they are doing nothing but alienating the people they should be trying to persuade.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Translation: "hard left" refers to looters who can still get it up. The antonym, "impotent mystics," was coined by Ayn Rand. Both looter collectivist schools have heard that libertarians are into consistency, so they stream in here to call each other hypocrites in hopes of selling the LP antichoice and Maginot Line planks.

  • John||

    Jesus Christ Phillips lay off the sauce.

  • John||

    Regarding this bullshit about "racism requires power" and therefore minorities cannot be racist. So what? That is just a fancy way of saying it is okay to hate white people as a race. What is the point of trying to claim that doing so "isn't racism" other than to remove the pajoritive implications of something being racist? Saying hating white people isn't "racism" is just saying hating white people is okay. And no, it is not okay. But that is what the left and Robby apparently believes.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    And no, it is not okay. But that is what the left and Robby apparently believes.

    You really really really really ought to read the whole article.

  • John||

    One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people. While these remarks seem ugly and offensive to most people, folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own.

    Ultimately, I suspect that's what Jeong was really doing. She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause. Of course, it says something about this strain of leftism that one of the easiest ways to prove you're a devotee is to make mean-spirited, troll-ish generalizations about other people.

    That is the last two paragraphs. He is saying that they really don't hate white people because they are leftists and saying vicious things about whtie people is what they do. Think about how stupid that is and get back to me with your fucking bromance with Soave.

  • $park¥ The Misanthrope||

    He is saying that they really don't hate white people because they are leftists and saying vicious things about whtie people is what they do.

    What's sad is that you almost got it.

  • John||

    What is sad is that you think that is not idiotic. Why do you love Soave so much? You don't act this stupid trying to defend other writers. What is so special about Robby? It is just bizarre at this point. His writing is so bad and his efforts to avoid finding fault with the left so weak and transparent, why do you feel the need to defend him?

  • ||

    The equation they use assumes any "darky" has zero power, and are victim-ridden children, the modern "noble savages". It's hilarious to me that their explanation for why "minorities" can't be racist, is in fact extremely racist at its core and they're incapable of seeing that forest for the trees.

  • Marshal||

    Regarding this bullshit about "racism requires power" and therefore minorities cannot be racist. So what? That is just a fancy way of saying it is okay to hate white people as a race.

    Even if it were true that racism requires power it's obviously both false and racist to claim that non-whites have no power. So even based on the left's own definitions and framework both she and her defenders are racist.

  • Iheartskeet||

    Kind of amazing to let this chick off the hook, while similar generalizations by Trump routinely get Reason staffers to classify him as racist and "hates Mexicans", (an exact quote from NG)

    Actually, not "amazing" at all.

  • John||

    The only thing Trump ever said about Mexicans is that the best people in Mexico don't immigrate and a lot of rapists and murderers come in with the hard working ones. That is by any objective measure true. Yet, Reason routinely trots this single now almost three-year-old statement as definitive proof of Trump's racism. Meanwhile, this chick calls white people subhuman goblins, openly celebrates the possibility of their extinction as a race, talks about how stupid and vile "white women" are and many other things too numerous to mention here over a two year period and Reason tells us "she was just joshing and it is all whitey's fault for goading her into it anyway."

    That is some free minds free markets indeed.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Readers wearily familiar with the girl-bullying racial collectivist trumpista sockpuppet Jawn will understand that the girl outed him with deftness. Libertarians, by contrast, aren't collectivist and are therefore not impelled into the ordure-throwing exchanges that have characterized nationalsocialist v. socialist confrontations since the 1920s. Listen closely to what collectivists say about each other and remember that just before voting.

  • John||

    Take your meds before posting Hank. It works out better for all of us. You dumb enough to begin with, being delusional on top of that is not anything anyone wants.

  • ThanksForTheFish||

    I'm actually enjoying the self immolation in the part of progressives.

    Want a good laugh? Go read Mary Sue to see their twisted logic why Jeong is okay, but James Gunn deserves to stay fired.

  • Paulpemb||

    "One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people. While these remarks seem ugly and offensive to most people, folks on the left who understand that anti-white racism is impossible are able to recognize the disparager as one of their own."

    This may be the stupidest thing I've ever read here.

    I mean, this is like saying 'Most people in the Jim Crow South weren't racists, they just knew that saying ugly and offensive things about black people was a good way to show everybody else that they were just another 'good old boy'.'

  • John||

    Exactly. Just because the clan used racial slurs every other sentence didn't mean they were racist. They were just showing their membership in the cause.

  • Hank Phillips||

    A nicely soave and deboner article that misses the point entirely. "The left" is a convoluted way or deferring to looters, and "racist" is an I'm-rubber-you're-glue pejorative that again bounces off of looters. The correct expression is racial collectivist, which smacks them squarely in the face because if there ain't no such animal, then there ain't no nazis, aryan nation or whatnot. Adopting the Newspeak crafted by the enemies of freedom is as counterproductive now as it was in 1980.

  • CDRSchafer||

    Isn't satire supposed to be funny and/or witty? Because her tweets suck and not because she's Korean. Reads like the average comment on Democrats Underground.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Back in the early 90s I had a friend that lived by the Brooklyn Navy Yard. I walked back with them a couple of times and every time we were yelled at and threatened by black people telling us we were in the wrong neighborhood and they were going to kick our asses.

    Being told you're not welcome because of the color of your skin is racist. If this wasn't a racist incident, then what was it?

    A similar incident happed when I was on the 5 train at 3 AM.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "It's only racist when Whitey does it"

  • ThanksForTheFish||

    Just be glad you have never suffered any real bias or oppression you privileged white person you.

  • Devastator||

    Figuring you are about to get beat and gang raped in a back alley because a bunch of dudes are threatening you and you don't even have your glock to protect you is not suffering?

  • MasterThief||

    Baltimore is one of the more racist places I've spent much time in. Boston was probably the worst. Oddly, Alabama was one of the less racist areas of the country that I've been.

  • Pudgeboy||

    The amount of stupid written here is impressive. Two easy examples: the 'science' writer admits he doesn't understand the 'science of global warming', so he just repeats what other people tell him it means (awards for science-y sounding things are hand-waving). Shikha Dalmia. I assume she knows someone.

  • Widhalm19||

    Leftists seem to want a race war in the United States. Clearly, they do not understand what a race war would mean for themselves.

  • Cloudbuster||

    Soave can read minds and divine that the woman who says she hates White people doesn't hate White people. Wow, Robby, you're amazing.

    I don't buy the "deluge of harassment." Men experience far more online harassment, on average, than women. Of course, once you start comparing White people to goblins, call them awful and say they smell like wet dogs, you just may be on the receiving end of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • John||

    She claims to have a "deluge of harassment" but hasn't produced a single screen shot or DM or pointed to a single Tweet directed at her showing that. Yet, Soave takes this as the Gospel truth because leftists journalists would never lie. I guess.

  • buybuydandavis||

    With Lefties it's always mind reading

    They hear the Right whistling their dog whistles
    While anything they say is now "self defense against trolls"

  • Violent Sociopath||

    She doesn't actually hate white people; she was demonstrating that she subscribes to The Cause.

    "I'm not actually a bigot. I just tweet bigoted things to virtue-signal to bigots."

    In Robby's moral universe this is exculpatory, somehow.

  • RonGood||

    re: " A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted."

    Can you please point to a time when pointing out hypocrisy to leftists actually worked to moderate their stand?

  • John||

    And why should anyone defend Jeong? She said all of these nasty horrible things. On what basis does Soave expect the right to defend her?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    And yet many have. Just like so many on the left defended eich and damore. Oh, wait...

  • hugh59||

    So, according to the writer, Ms. Jeong is writing ideas that she really does not believe in order to curry favor with a particular crowd. In effect, she is putting on a false face of "morality" in order to prove that she is woke. A person who puts on a false face of morality is a hypocrite. So, Ms. Jeong is a hypocrite.

    I use that term very narrowly. I am not one of those people who says that a person is a hypocrite just because their actions are inconsistent with their stated views or believes. People are not binary; we generally have many causes and interests. Thus, I might act contrary to one of my causes or interests (perhaps even my most important cause or interest) because the act supports some of my other causes or interests.

  • John||

    Also, if putting on a false face of morality in order to fit in with the left requires saying horrible things about white people, isn' that pretty conclusive proof that the left is racist against whites?

  • hugh59||

    by most peoples' definition, yes. By their definition, no.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    What is in the latest edition of the NewSpeak dictionary?

  • 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed||

    It seems to me that this article touches on some true arguments, and also points to the future of race relations where rebellion will involve what are currently considered taboo opinions about race.

  • BYODB||


    A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.


    This was tried for, what, twenty or thirty years at least and this resulted in some of progressivisms big wins. Shit, it's been fought for over 100 years. So, maybe read more than Twitter?

  • BYODB||


    A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted.


    This was tried for, what, twenty or thirty years at least and this resulted in some of progressivisms big wins. Shit, it's been fought for over 100 years. So, maybe read more than Twitter?

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    Well yes, but this time it hit people we like!

  • Kivlor||

    For Robby this is working as intended. Keep laying down arms and wait for your demise right wingers

  • Truthteller1||

    According to the author her blindingly racist and hateful comments are no big deal because she was just signaling.

  • Mark22||

    I think we should encourage people signaling their racist beliefs, on their own behalf and on the behalf of the media organizations that employ them.

    Thanks, Jeong, you exposed again what the NYT is all about.

  • Truthteller1||

    According to the author her blindingly racist and hateful comments are no big deal because she was just signaling.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    I still don't care whether or not she gets fired. I'm not particularly offended by the fact some intensely racist woman has a job somewhere. At least she has a job that involves publicly airing her stupid wokeness so that:

    a) more reasonable people can respond and provide arguments against her racism,

    and/or

    b) other different sorta racist people can hurl insults and the whole stupid thing is perpetuated and Robby gets to write more articles about garbage people with garbage opinions that are ultimately not relevant to anyone but themselves. It's Robby Soave articles all the way down.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Jesus Haploid Christ, Robbie. Do you believe that David Duke hates blacks and jews? Do you believe that the Westboro Baptist Church hates gays? This isn't just some chick trying to be cool, this is a snotty little racist spewing hatred for years.

    -jcr

  • Mark22||

    This isn't just some chick trying to be cool, this is a snotty little racist spewing hatred for years.

    She's a racist, but there is a big difference between her and the usual white supremacist racist. Most of the white supremacists are economically disadvantaged and powerless, and their racism compensates for their otherwise miserable, powerless lives.

    Jeong is a privileged, wealthy intellectual; her racism is about protecting her privilege and getting free crap from others.

  • XM||

    Jeong - "let me know when a cop gets killed by a rock or molotov cocktail or a stray shard of glass from a precious precious window."

    "If we're talking big sweeping bans on shit that kills people, why don't we ever ever ever ever talk about banning the police?"

    Replace police with Mulsim on the second line and she's instant Alt-right.

    This isn't some binary "right vs left" thing anymore. A number of progressives are now speaking out against the PC mob and aspects of the #Metoo movement. Eventually and inevitably, some high profile (white) progressive in trouble with an old tweet will complain why he isn't given the benefit of the doubt afforded to Jeong. She's a prog, Asian, immigrant, woman.

    "Some people keeping their jobs despite violating pc orthodoxy is better than everyone losing their jobs over it" is hollow victory, especially for the other victims.

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

  • Mark22||

    Sarah Jeong Probably Doesn't Hate White People

    No, she just wants white men to defer to her and give her free crap that she feels entitled to given her "intersectionality" of being an Asian female. Like all wannabe slavers, she doesn't hate slaves, she just holds them in contempt.

  • JeremyR||

    And of course, now the left wants Andrew Sullivan fired for his reasonable column on Jeong's racism (that didn't want her fired)

  • Greg J||

    "Have you ever lashed out in anger after someone was being mean to you? Do you think this should make you unemployable?"

    I don't know. Let's ask Rosanne Barr about that, shall we?

    "One easy way for a person to indicate that she is on the left—that she's woke, she gets it, etc.—is to make remarks that disparage white people."

    So, in other words, making racist anti-white statements is how you align yourself with the power structure?

    "A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted."

    Well, yes, if you want to be a second class citizen, you can grovel to your "superiors" like that.

    If, OTOH, you're not an idiot, or a loser, you will attack the Left viciously for their racism, and do you best to drive those racists out of power and influence in society

    Which means no NYTimes jobs for them
    Hmm

  • Enemy of the State||

    No, you lose nothing by expanding freedom.

    The losing starts when someone decides "you can't say that", followed by "you can't think that"....

  • Devastator||

    Yeah she's basically a sexist/racists piece of shit like those dudes in Charlottesville; a rose by any color smells just as shitty. Egalitarianism and free speech or get the fuck out you posers (from both sides).

  • Enemy of the State||

    "...women of color (Jeong was born in South Korea)."

    Is every non-white someone "of color"? When did white stop being a color?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Its so awesome because white includes all other colors.

  • Rufus T. Firefly.||

    Looks like Ricky plagarized word-to-word Timcast. Tim posted his video (https://youtu.be/4gHW38QnmnA) on 8/2 and Ricky posted his article on 8/3.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Tim's not as bad as this.

  • vek||

    The truth is that in a way the left is correct... You really can't diss white people. Why? Because white people are too awesome.

    It's like trying to diss the tall, good looking, genius guy/girl in high school. Anything you throw at them to insult them falls flat, because they know they're awesome. That's basically white people. We're the richest, most successful, most educated people in the history of mankind...

    So the only thing you can diss us for is the awesome shit we did, like conquering the world.

    "Ohhhh no, my people kicked the shit out of your people and made them our bitches for hundreds of years! I feel sooo lame now!"

    Personally I give no fucks. You don't hear the Mongolians, or the Turks, or anybody else apologizing for being badasses, and frankly neither should we. Fact is if the Africans, Aztecs, etc had been able to they would have gladly invaded and subjugated Europe... But they couldn't. So why feel bad because whites did? We were in fact far kinder rulers in much of the world than the native ruling classes we displaced, and certainly no worse than any other great empires. At least we brought modern science, infrastructure, etc to all those shit hole countries. They'd had been even worse off if we hadn't. This is a fact actually, countries that were colonized are on average richer than countries that weren't. Fun fact!

  • James Solbakken||

    But what about the Yankees always apologizing for winning the World Series all the time and making the rest of MLB look bad? And what about Babe Ruth apologizing for hitting all them home runs and making all them pitchers look bad?
    Didn't they hang their heads in shame and beg forgiveness from the other teams, especially the Cubs?

    Are you saying that didn't happen?

  • vek||

    Gee whiz, I guess I was wrong! People who are winners must apologize for being better than everybody else all the time! I must have missed all that ;)

  • Marshal||

    You know what we call people who use racist themes to indicate group membership?

    Racists. It's bizarre you think the purpose excuses the racism. It shows you've searching for a reason to exonerate her rather than evaluating reality.

  • cpreston||

    "Racist" has been redefined to not include prejudice against white people. That is just the way it is now. Therefore, people need to start using the word "bigot" when describing people who are prejudiced against another group of people. Using the word racist just leads to an argument about semantics and structural racism with anybody who considers themselves woke and just plays into the bigot's hands.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Fuck that. I'm not going to let racists screw with the language.

    -jcr

  • vek||

    I second that. I fight the re-defining of words in pretty much all cases. I don't even consider somebody racist who accepts that there are in fact biological differences between races, because that itself was a re-definition. Racists IMO are exclusively people who HATE people of other races. That's what it originally meant.

    I am not a racist by the original meaning, but by newer definitions I am. Fuck that. It's the same thing with rape. I'm sorry, telling somebody you think they're hot, and it making them uncomfortable is not rape!

  • Trollificus||

    Whatever. I just can't see how, once again applying the progressives' own standards, the NYT can possibly provide a "safe working environment" for white males with this vicious racist in their midst. I mean, the mere presentation of scientific facts by James Damore was enough to trigger massive sperge-fits of professed insecurity and fear at Google, so I don't see how any white male can possibly...oh, I get it "down with The Cause", "more equal than others", never mind.

    I guess it's the same as with "listen and believe" and white peoples' professed offense at being targeted by racist tweets. Exactly the same, but not the same.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "It's only unsafe when Whitey does it"

  • SteveMG||

    Isn't it odd - or revealing (or both) - that the only crime or sin that the left gives white people a pass on is the crime of creating Marxism/communism? Here's an ideology that emerged solely from Western thinkers - Hegel to Marx and Engels with assorted other white political philosophers making contributions - and one that has ended up slaughtering and oppressing millions of people of all races.
    Yet on this one the left gives white people a pass. White people and the West, two items that the left usually holds accountable for numerous crimes, somehow is not criticized for the creation of this murderous ideology.
    As the Marxists used to say, that is no accident, comrades.

  • Echospinner||

    Attacking LeBron James is just an awesome stupid move by the president of the United States of America.

    The pick and roll is not a Trump strength. You need a team to make it work.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Trump will do just fine.

    You never expected him to be president and he did it.

  • PaulTheBeav||

    If the New York Times would just admit their bias I wouldn't care about this at all. What bothers me is their bias coupled with their sanctimonious condemnation of anyone who is biased in any way other than the way they are. They act like bias is a scourge on society all while spewing bias daily.

  • John C. Randolph||

    Those asswipes still haven't apologized for Walter Duranty. Fuck the NYT.

    -jcr

  • Trollificus||

    Their reputation as a piece of shit, dishonest rag is well-earned and goes back over 80 years.

  • JoeBlow123||

    Jim Acosta and CNN have the same feel. They want to have their opinions and be immune from any of their consequences.

    "We are reporters, saviors of the republic. You must listen to our opinions, we know the path of righteousness! If you don't listen to us it's because you love Hitler and murdering babies."

  • Sam M||

    "A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted."

    What do you mean by productive? And not only productive, but "much more" so. So... Kevin Williamson gets his job back? Or the next time it happens to a right of center person, that person doesn't get fired? That assumes that this claim to hypocrisy sticks, and that people would actually care about being tarred as such. What makes you think they would, rather than simply living with their hypocrisy? Has anyone ever changed their minds or their actions because of hypocrisy claims?

  • buybuydandavis||

    "What do you mean by productive?"

    Keeps the cucked Right from doing anything to fight the Left.

  • ColoradoKook||

    If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....it's probably not really a duck, to be sure.

    Quoted from the book of Robby logic

  • WJack||

    Sara is a good fit for the NYT, or for that matter any of the other self hating progressive propaganda pumps.

  • Hidebehindyourcause||

    Robby did you even read all of here tweets? She clearly despises us.

    Maybe in your mind you're giving her the benefit of the doubt but I think it's being dishonest with us and yourself.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Y'all seen the latest Kamala Harris doublespeak mental triple backflip with a twist? How is anyone actually stupid enough to pretend there is anything rational about that woman?

  • MoreFreedom||

    Soave misses the point here. It's just as bad to disparage whites, men, the police, etc., to show oneself as a woke liberal, as it is to actually hold those views. In fact it may be worse, because it buys into and encourages cultural conflict, rather than dissipates it. After all, isn't racial harmony, or harmony in general, the goal? It seems the liberals goal is instead cultural war, that is if you want to be "woke".

  • kyle_r_hudson||

    I'm disappointed in Mr. Soave's imbalance in critical thinking and intellectual dishonesty. Of course, no one can read minds. All we have is language and behavior. Therefore the standard to which we hold, say, a KKK member for designating that person as racist, is the same standard we hold to all other philosophical persons, including Miss Jeong.

    #racismisracism

  • inoyu||

    Jeong is an ambitious new entrant in the Race Conflict Industry. Good choice because Race Conflict employs so many people.

  • Duelles||

    Don't fire her! Fine she is still a useless protagonist- if that is possible. And I stopped read the NYTimes over 30 years ago anyway. The are not even a distraction.

  • geezer117||

    You have no evidence that Jeong does not hate whites. She routinely disparages them, and has for years. Second, many people have been hounded out of jobs, public office, and candidacies for some long ago private comment that is now politically incorrect. But Jeong gets an exemption.

    It's not a double standard, because the Left has no standards. They simply collect excuses to punish people they despise and protect their own. Jeong is their own, so she gets a pass.

  • Butler T. Reynolds||

    How can Koreans be considered "people of color" but not Italians?

  • Ben of Houston||

    I wouldn't have minded her tweets if her response had been something along the lines of "I lost my temper".
    That's understandable. Being angry at someone or even at the world, happens to everyone.

    The problem is the double standard. What gets to me is that people are actually defending these comments as somehow acceptable. That they are accepting ridiculous excuses. We have comedians getting fired over jokes made a decade ago, and comics are supposed to be immune to political correctness. On the other hand, this open racism is actually being supported. Let's let everyone live. Don't judge them for years based off a stupid, angry quip or attempt at humor.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I think it's worth mentioning the very hard lesson that the Jews learned in the middle of the 20th century: when someone says they hate you and want you dead, you'd better take that at face value.

    -jcr

  • Mr. JD||

    The Left reasons about race in the same way that the Nazis did.

  • texexpatriate||

    For Pete's Sake, Robby Soave, do you absolutely have to use the left's made-up language? I refer to Woke. Use the words that "woke" is supposed to suggest.

  • TGoodchild||

    "A much more productive use of their time would be to defend Jeong while pointing out leftist hypocrisy when warranted."

    Define "productive." Surely, you aren't proposing that identifying a person's hypocrisy - particularly a leftist's - materially disincentivizes that person from doing anything.

  • NewIntellectual||

    Sarah Jeong's racist remarks are contemptible enough, but her outright evil goes much deeper than generic anti-white racism. Read this impassioned piece by a courageous dissident Chinese woman whose life was severely damaged by Jeong's lies, used from a position of power against a lone woman at the behest of Vice magazine. Vice arrogantly ignored their agreement with Naomi Wu and caused her grave problems with the oppressive Chinese government.
    .
    https://bit.ly/2OcVZ8S

  • gphx||

    It doesn't matter whether we're talking about Sarah Jeong, Kathy Griffin, or Roseanne Barr - the eagerness of some to suppress the speech of others should be chilling to anyone anywhere on the political spectrum.

  • Naaman Brown||

    This new "awoke" thing, is it anything like the 1950s beatnik "aware"?

    Maxwell H. Brock: ... my poetry is understood by that minority which is aware.
    Woman: Aware of what?
    Naolia: Well, not of anything, stupid, just aware!
    -- A Bucket of Blood, 1959

  • Olga||

    I am white. I am not discriminated against because of my whiteness. If someone makes fun of interactions with white people, it doesn't hurt me in any real world sense. Other minorities have been hurt in a real world sense. As mostly white people are in the position to hire people and decide your fate, negative racial attitudes about blacks or Asians does cause a problem for them.

    The other question is did what she say actually funny? If she is being a comedian she needs to be funny. Now, I saw a great skit of an Asian woman mimicking how white people speak to her asking her where is is from and not accepting California as the answer.

  • ||

    You've never been discriminated because of your "whiteness?" Then you've never left your basement.
    When applying for college, I was told that I needed to be 15-20% better in scores because of affirmative action.
    Once accepted to college and looking for financial aid, I was told that the bulk of funds was available only to non-casucasians.
    When applying to the SBA for business loans, I was told on several occasions that guarantees for different minority groups.
    That is just three larger examples of discrimination against caucasians. That's not even getting into minor slights that happen along the way.
    Caucasian liberal guilt is a disease. It has been foisted upon us that we must make penance for the ills of our ancestors. It has truly gotten out of hand.
    If our society is ever to truly get past racial divides we must all decide to get over ourselves...and most importantly...silence the race baiters of the left.

  • tlapp||

    The argument that white people have never been oppressed is ridiculous. Has the left heard of the holocaust?

  • ||

    There was a time that it was considered "woke" or proper to say disparaging things about minorities. That wasn't right then. This isn't right now.
    For a generation that is all up and "woke" about "hate," they certainly have a hateful, spiteful manner.
    If she were a caucasian, she would be on the street, out of a job already. If we are truly to have a fair society, what is good for the goose....etc...

  • Peter Schaeffer||

    A number of defenses of Jeong have been offered. All (not quite) of them fail on even a cursory examination. Some folks have claimed "she was just kidding". Of course, even racism in humor isn't funny. However, she is not kidding. Read her tweets. She is deadly serious. There is a video from her Harvard days (https://youtu.be/c2ql6H7NpiM). She is serious hater with no trace of sarcasm, humor, etc. in her tone.

    Another lines of defense is that "she was just responding to trolls". This sounds plausible. However, people have checked into this in considerable detail. Two people (Nick Monroe @nickmon1112 and Jay Irwin @invisibro) have searched her Twitter account and found near-zero evidence. She hasn't provided any evidence of the alleged "torrents of abuse". Nor have her supporters. At least so far, this looks like a made-up story.

    A third line of defense is along the lines of "everyone talks this way". This may well be true in her circles. However, what does this really mean? Essentially that anti-white racism, bigotry, and hate are mainstream ideas, values, and conversation tropes on the left. Imagine white people talking in Selma, Alabama in 1900 and you get the idea. Racism so deeply entrenched that no one even notices it.

  • Peter Schaeffer||

    A number of defenses of Jeong have been offered. All (not quite) of them fail on even a cursory examination. Some folks have claimed "she was just kidding". Of course, even racism in humor isn't funny. However, she is not kidding. Read her tweets. She is deadly serious. There is a video from her Harvard days (https://youtu.be/c2ql6H7NpiM). She is serious hater with no trace of sarcasm, humor, etc. in her tone.

    Another lines of defense is that "she was just responding to trolls". This sounds plausible. However, people have checked into this in considerable detail. Two people (Nick Monroe @nickmon1112 and Jay Irwin @invisibro) have searched her Twitter account and found near-zero evidence. She hasn't provided any evidence of the alleged "torrents of abuse". Nor have her supporters. At least so far, this looks like a made-up story.

    A third line of defense is along the lines of "everyone talks this way". This may well be true in her circles. However, what does this really mean? Essentially that anti-white racism, bigotry, and hate are mainstream ideas, values, and conversation tropes on the left. Imagine white people talking in Selma, Alabama in 1900 and you get the idea. Racism so deeply entrenched that no one even notices it.

  • Peter Schaeffer||

    A number of people on the left have used the "just kidding" defense. Sadly, she has been caught on video expressing her hatred of white people (specifically men). There is no hint of sarcasm, irony, or humor in her tone. Check out https://youtu.be/c2ql6H7NpiM

  • Peter Schaeffer||

    Anyone who wants to see Jeong's bigotry and racism in detail should go to https://bit.ly/2Mscsph Warning it's vile stuff. Substitute 'black' for 'white' and it's real KKK material.

  • Peter Schaeffer||

    A guy by the name of Nick Monroe (@nickmon1112) decided to spend many hours going through Jeong's Twitter feed in detail. Nasty stuff. She tweeted her racial obsessions for 5 years (2013-2017). There are literally hundreds and hundreds (if not thousands) of racial tweets. She is so obsessed with hating white people that her tweets are a parody of cliché racism. She uses 'white' in a manner that is so over the top, it is bizarre.

    Overall, the tone is her tweets is deadly serious. Occasionally one can find some element of attempted humor or sarcasm. However, that is not typical. Typically she is deadly straight and seriously racist. People have claimed she is a witty writer. That may be true, but not in her tweets. Dumb racial obsession is the recurring theme, not sophisticated wit.

    Occasionally, she refers to a subset of white people. However, that is rare. A typical example might be "As a general principle, I completely agree that not all white men are terrible". However, as a I said that's not her style. More typical is "white ppl are fucking dumb" or "giving into the PC lie that white people don't smell bad" or "I WANNA CUT ALL THOSE WHITE PEOPLE".

    In her tweets she never (literally never) appears to be responding to someone attacking her. Of course, such tweets may exist. Nick Monroe didn't find them and she hasn't produced any. In most cases, she appears to be agreeing with some other bigot.

  • last liberal||

    when every person on the right side doesn't lose their job or get attacked because of a sarcastic, facetious, or ironic remark, a quote from someone else, a private phone conversation, a poorly delivered joke, an unorthodox intellectual exercise, a remark taken out of context, criticism of anything or something mumbled in his sleep, then I could probably work up anger if this person had been fired by the times.

  • Árboles de la Barranca||

    Actually, she demonstrates the level of empathy and intellectual depth required of an in-group death-camp commandant.

    NYT editors are happy to flaunt a new, outspoken journalist that reflects their values.

  • Lloyd Clucas||

    Waaaaay too mild Robby. And I usually like your stuff quite a bit.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online