Guess the candidate

[archerships]

Guess which national presidential candidate has accepted tens of thousands of dollars in donations from members of a church whose members subscribe to the following twelve “White Ethics”

….These White Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Whites are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God

2. Commitment to the White Community

3. Commitment to the White Family

4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education

5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence

6. Adherence to the White Work Ethic

7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect

8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”

9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the White Community

10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions

11. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System

12. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.”

Original: craschworks - comments

Comments

[fishsupreme]

All of them?

Politicians usually aren't too careful about who they accept free money from.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Heh. Probably true. But in this case, the candidate is also a member of the church.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

:)

[andysocial]

Considering his personal background (religion or lack of religion of each parent, etc), it always seemed to me that his own beliefs were a put-on. He belongs to a church because candidates must be Christian or they can't possibly be President of this proto-theocracy. But I've seen so many strange things about the church he claims as his that I just have to wonder about his judgment in making major decisions.

[zzzing.livejournal.com]

"African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as being inferior."

OBVZ!

mind if I post this in my journal too?

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Sure, feel free to repost.

guess

[jimp220.livejournal.com]

My guess is Mitt Romney

Been wrestling with this for a couple of hours...

[greendalek.livejournal.com]

I think I know where this is going. Change ONE word in the list to its opposite.

Re: Been wrestling with this for a couple of hours...

[ernunnos.livejournal.com]

Yup. I heard about this a couple of months ago. That kind of substitution brings a whole lot of things into sharp focus. I particularly despise the respect the media affords to the organization known as "The Race".

Re: Been wrestling with this for a couple of hours...

[browascension.livejournal.com]

Actually, the words are not opposites. Collectivism is collectivism - the concept is the same concept.

This is an important distinction. You have to accept the underlying assumption of collectivism to consider those words to be opposites.

[pentomino.livejournal.com]

It can only be Nader.

[docscarabus.livejournal.com]

Is it Obama? Whith "white" changed to "black"?

[crasch.livejournal.com]

I agree that blacks, as a group, are poorer, less educated, and more discriminated against. But we don't excuse white separatists because they're poor and uneducated. And even though they've been hurt more by racial discrimination, I don't see how that gives them license to behave in a racist manner themselves. It's like saying that someone who has been frequently robbed, now has license to rob themselves.

I don't think instilling pride in work or education requires self-imposed racial separatism. Many blacks teach their children the virtues of hard work, discipline, etc. without the racial separatism.

In any case, Obama is neither poor, nor uneducated. He's a graduate of Harvard Law School. He knows better. Yet he chooses to belong to a church which teaches an ideology that would have the liberal intelligentsia screaming for his head if you substituted white for black in their texts.

I actually don't think Obama's particularly racist or particularly religious. He needed the black vote in Chicago, and the pastor of his church is politically influential in that community. So I understand pragmatically why he would be a member. I'm just irritated that so many liberal commentators excoriate Paul for accepting donations from a racist, yet give Obama a pass, even though he not only accepted thousands in donations, but is a member of a frankly racist church.

[crasch.livejournal.com]

Not that it matters, but I've lived in Washington, D.C., the suburbs of L.A., Raleigh, N.C., rural Idaho, and the S.F. Bay Area.

As for pragmatism, you know how many blacks go to prison on drug charges?

Of the 250,900 state prison inmates serving time for drug offenses in 2004, 133,100 (53.05%) were black, 50,100 (19.97%) were Hispanic, and 64,800 (25.83%) were white.

Do you know how hard it is to get a job with a criminal record? Yet the only candidate talking about repealing our drug laws is Ron Paul.

And who supports the rights of law abiding inner city blacks to buy guns to defend themselves? Ron Paul. Most of the Democratic candidates, including Obama, treat them like untrustworthy children.

As for affirmative action programs, may I suggest that you read Forbidden Grounds by Richard Epstein. Affirmative action programs and anti-discrimination laws have impeded black progress, not helped them.

[(Anonymous)]

if you are under the impression that racial gaps in income and education level will be ameliorated by a libertarian who dismantles affirmative action programs, you are sorely mistaken.

Oddly, I agree with this statement, more or less. My primary critique of radical libertarianism is that libertarians too often agree with the statists that the solution to all our problems lies in finding the right setting on one of the knobs of the machine of the state. The statists insist that the knob should be turned to eleven while libertarians allow that "off" is the setting that will make everything right. What they both miss is that, for all its smoke and noise, flashing lights and whirling gears, the machine doesn't actually do anything for good or for ill. Most of the damage it causes is indirect: people stand passively agape -- waiting for the machine to do its wonders -- while their problems, untended-to, get worse from lack of attention.

It is not necessary to claim that affirmative action policies cause racial disparities in order to argue that the programs should ended. One need only point out that the programs are ineffective.