I have a dream, a dream that somehow the world could go back to a time when it was safe to walk the streets, pornography was just a naked lady in a magazine, good conduct was the norm, and people generally had an optimistic view about life. It was what you made it. People didn’t sit around agonizing about real or imagined wrongs, and didn’t engage in name calling to prove that they were right. My, how things have changed.
Instead of a nation of doers, we have somehow evolved into a nation of parasites, and complainers. The blacks and the old people and the veterans and the Mexicans and farmers all tell us that they deserve more, and more, and more. The homosexuals and lesbians tell us that we are legally obligated to respect them; whether we want to or not.
And if you feel, correctly, that blacks are dangerous, and homosexuality is wrong, that means you’re a bigot. (By the way, a bigot is a bad thing.) The point being, that expressing the view that America was a better place when it was a white Christian country is absolutely forbidden. But why?
The answer is very simple. And it all has to do with who has the right to define that which is legitimate; and that which is not. Everybody uses a sort of intellectual shorthand when deciding what’s good, and what’s bad. It’s called heuristics. For example, if you see dangerous pot-smoking black thugs at the train station every day, you would stereotype them as bad people. Which they are.
And receive very expensive medical care.
The whole idea is that you, as an individual, do not have the right to your own opinion. And since heuristics, or stereotyping, is a way of classifying, you do not have the right to do that either.
The real objective of the left is not only to criminalize free speech, but to change the way that young people think about success, in order that they may be taxed more heavily.
So let’s talk for a minute about how things used to be. In order to get married and have children, a man would first need to find a good job. But black people don’t work very much, so this formula had to go. And of course, old people don’t work at all.
That why they want young people to believe that we're all the same.
After all, it's only logical.
As long as old people are not seen as a separate group, and as long as white men don't interfere.
Quality of Character has nothing to do with it. And for the record, you don’t have any rights as a parent either.
But more than that, morality is how we define who is human. The most human creatures are young Anglo Saxons. As they get older, they become less human until they reach decrepit old age, at which time their humanity is surrendered. After the Aryans, the next most human people are the Slavic race; followed by various Semitic tribes, the Asians, and then finally, the blacks, who are not human at all.
It’s not just bloodlines, however, that define a person’s humanity. It’s also personal conduct. That why the most human Anglo-Saxons are married couples with children. They are creating the future for everyone. The left, however, doesn’t like this definition of humanity. Old people don’t like it either. So they have conspired to redefine what it means to be human. How? Through human motivation.
But how can you stop white people from interfering? By destroying the young white men first.
The overall objective of the left is to re-define that which is moral, by eliminating morality. If it doesn’t exist as a category, you can’t even refer to it.
But what is morality? It’s more than just right or wrong. It’s the complex web of human connections that make up our society. That’s why white girls are supposed to be very careful whom they marry. Bloodlines matter.
What old people really want is to go on expensive taxpayer-funded vacations.
It all boils down to what is moral, or immoral. When stereotyping, we often place ideas into those two categories. For example, having children outside of marriage is immoral; because it denies children a father, and a stable home. But black people don’t want to be seen as engaging in immoral activity, so instead of changing their horrible conduct, they try to change the context within which it takes place.
They have turned a sense of permanent moral indignation into permanent financial obligation.
There's no such thing
as too much dick.
They try to argue that even though blacks aren’t socially valuable, or economically valuable, they are artistically valuable; so naturally they should feel a sense of righteous indignation when they are slighted. Artists live by a different set of rules.
And since you aren’t better than a pack of niggers anyway, you don’t have the right to judge.