@Za Doca

Amerrički crnici jesu procentualno više krimosi nego belci , ali to ne znači da su svi takvi i da policija koja je sastavljena od belačkih rasista na pravdi boga može ubijati i trpati u zatvor nevine ljude.

Prostesti po Americi nisu za podršku crnačkim krimosima nego za nevine crnce koje mnogi beli policajci i sudije po rasističkoj percepciji ubili ili lažno optuživali i maltretirali samo zato što su crni.

Šta ti ovde nije jasno Doče ljubitelju crnih kobaja??

Niti jedan od ovih za koje se prosvjeduje nije nevin. Michael Brown je netom prije nego što je stradao od policijskog metka orobio malu radnju koju je držao američki Indijac te ga uz to još i fizički zlostavljao, dok je ovaj koji se ugušio bio već višestruko evidentiran i uz to i na uvjetnom dopustu. Doduše, niti jedan od tih zločina ne bi opravdao likvidaciju odstrane policije, no činjenice su pokazale da je Michael Brown nasrnuo na policajca, dok ovaj drugi slučaj vjerojatno ne bi završio smrću da je sumnjivac bio normalnog zdravlja, budući da je obdukcija pokazala da nema oštećenja dušnika. No, bio je klinički pretio i nažalost je završilo tragično.

Samo da ponovimo.

U zemlji u kojoj ima 25% liberala i 13% crnaca i u kojoj Barack Obama dobije 53% glasova i u kojoj su svi veći mediji liberalni i tupe o rasizmu, i u kojoj ima tisuće NVO koje tupe istu priču o rasizmu, diskriminaciji manjina i policijskoj brutalnosti 23% Amerikanaca smatra da bi bijeli policajac trebao biti proglašen krivim za ubojstvo crnog mladića.

Case closed.

Ako uzmemo da nisu svi crnci liberali, kao što nisu, ni svi liberali ne vjeruju u tu priču o rasizmu.

A kamoli ostali normalni Amerikanci.

Ni liberalna propaganda višestruko moćnija, rafiniranija i uvjerljivija od Goebbelsove tu ne može vječno proguravati neistinu.

SJWs Shame One Of The World’s Smartest Men For Wearing His Lucky Bowling Shirt


Scientists are not famous for their social tact. Granted, I do not know how often the “nerd who is a genius but can’t figure out people” stereotype is true, but I imagine it applies to several people in the field. These people are more concerned with knowledge and discovery than they are with hitting the club, and I commend them for that. Whether looking for a cheap hook-up or serious wife material, getting laid involves a lot of time and effort, and this minority chooses to prioritize other things, even if they do get around with the chicas when they get the chance.

Humanity has recently landed a rocket on a comet 300 million miles away. Considering that we’ve done precious little space exploration since the Cold War, this is exciting. Comets obviously move very fast, and this must have been very difficult to pull off. A driving force of this feat known as the Rosetta Mission is an English scientist named Matt Taylor. On Thursday, his day of triumph, perhaps the greatest day of his life, he wore a goofy shirt that a female friend had made for him. It had women in very sexual clothing and poses, including bondage.

Social justice warrior-ing women let all hell loose. This man with his y chromosomes and male anatomy performed a miracle of human ingenuity, and women complained. Yes, I’ll agree that his shirt was in poor taste. Taylor should not have worn it on a public interview. But women, consistently being outdone in the STEM fields, chose to focus on the incidental.

Like the attention whores that are modern women, they immediately rushed to Twitter with a #ShirtStorm and #ShirtGate. They compared wearing a tasteless shirt to Richard Nixon committing a felony. They even made Taylor cry when he apologized the next day. Have they no compassion or mercy for such a deserving man?

Nick Denton once said that “Hypocrisy is the only modern sin,” but I would argue that being seemingly prejudiced is more accurate. These people preach the importance of a woman’s self-esteem, but they have no concern for a man’s.

And what did the women complain about? “This discourages women from entering science fields!” It appears that equality and comfort is more important than achievement and innovation. One of the world’s smartest men is made to feel stupid and evil for an oversight.

This man is not your ROK breed of male. He seems like the type who is genuinely concerned about fairness and cordiality. Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society Nick Howes said, “Matt is a decent guy, and from time spent with him, no misogynist.” I kind of admire Dr. Taylor, considering my friends’ constant complaints that I’m intolerant and elitist are answered with a resounding “meh.”

Taylor has no reason to apologize with the sorrow he had, weeping and calling it a “big mistake.” Myself, I would be flipping the world a bird and daring them to put a rocket on a comet, but there’s a reason they don’t allow me on tv. I cannot fathom why he would feel such shame at the instigation of others. He has accomplished greater things than most people ever will.

Also of note is that women often claim that they should be able to wear whatever they want wherever they want. Woman wearing a low cut top and booty shorts in a dark alley in the Bronx? No problem. Feminist with a shirt denigrating men? Fine. Man with a t-shirt depicting sexual fantasies women indulge in? Hang him!

50 Shades of Grey is a #1 New York Times bestseller, much to the accolades of women everywhere, but as soon as they see it in real life on a shirt, suddenly they are all chaste and pure. Far more people read 50 Shades of Grey or whatever feces is on the magazine stands than follow groundbreaking scientists. Ironically, the world would have largely ignored Taylor’s achievement had he not worn the shirt.

One woman actually said that she did not think Taylor was a misogynist.

This is why feminism is important…I’d like to think that if Taylor were a bit more knowledgeable he would have known the demoralizing message he was sending to young female scientists with that shirt.

Are young women really that sensitive? The other day, a young girl bragged to me that women were smarter because they have more college degrees. I could have felt demoralized and went home, deciding to give up on career success due to the hostile nature of the world. Instead I laughed her down and tried to explain to her why she is wrong before she turned away to start a conversation with someone else.

You see, if young female scientists had any real drive and ambition, they would not let a shirt hold them back. Even if the science community was as hostile towards ambitious women as they claim, they would still fight and claw their way up, because that is where their dreams are. If you really want something, you do everything in your power to achieve it and then prove your value by being awesome.

If women want respect in the science community, accomplishing amazing feats of human ingenuity would be more effective than trying to ban shirts and make men cry. Marie Curie did not have a large lab in a university. She was working in a tiny shed with a leaky roof because science was her passion, and she would not allow any glass ceiling to keep her back.

But there is a good sign in all this. In addition to the numerous retweets of Taylor’s friend who made the shirt, there are many writers on the internet drawing attention to this misfocus of women. Props to USA Today.

It seems to me that if you care about women in STEM, maybe you shouldn’t want to communicate the notion that they’re so delicate that they can’t handle pictures of comic-book women…Thus, what should have been the greatest day in a man’s life — accomplishing something never before done in the history of humanity — was instead derailed by people with their own axes to grind.

USA Today also wrote that this is why fewer and fewer Americans are claiming to be feminists.

When you act like what pioneer feminist Betty Friedan once called ‘female chauvinist boors,’ you shouldn’t be surprised to lose popularity.

Feminists and other social justice warriors, drunk on hubris, continue to fly towards the sun. But as we are seeing with GamerGate, the closer they get, the faster their wings melt. In due time, their ideology will sink into the sea.

http://www.returnofkings.com/48226/sjws ... -a-t-shirt

Da ne ukazuje na jedan dublji trend bilo bi smješno.

Znanstvenik i jedan od pametnijih ljudi na planetu koji je spustio sondu na nekoliko stotina milijuna kilometara udaljen komet u pothvatu koji je nazvan:


http://www.zabranjeni.url/povijesni-trenut ... a/1235710/

...je izroštiljan od rulje modernih puritanskih ideoloških zelota.

Jer je kao pravi smušeni znanstvenik nosio blesavu sretnu košulju koju mu je napravila frendica, a na kojoj su žene u svakakvim pozama, uključujući golišave.

Čovjek je odmah proglašen ženomrscem, mizoginistom, krivcem što nema više mladih žena u znanosti jer pazi ti, ta košulja koju je on obukao je uzrok svega toga.

I pokazatelj što je važnije poludjelom liberalizmu i modernom feminizmu.

Ne jedan od najvećih znanstvenih postignuća novijeg doba, nego košulja...



http://www.bug.hr/vijesti/spustanje-kom ... 37768.aspx

Šta reći o tom modernom lovu na vještice, spaljivanju čovjeka na lomači zbog trivijalnosti?

Ili o toj trivijalnosti da itko iole priseban može zamisliti da jedna blesavo nakaradna košulja može utjecati na išta, a kamoli na "nedostatak" žena u znanosti.

Moderni puritanci, religijski fanatici i čuvari morala na djelu.

Doduše ne viktorijanskog kome se izruguju u njegovoj rigidnosti.

Mentalitet seoskih baba i njihovih oštrih jezika kojima osuđuju one koji im nisu po volji.

Dopuštanje da se grupa ljudi nađe uvrijeđena zbog bilo kakve sitnice, trivilanosti ili marginalnosti i maltretira druge jer im nešto smeta ili su im "povrijeđeni osjećaji".

I to postaje nešto što društvo mora uzeti za ozbiljno i iskoristiti mehanizme represije da bi spriječilo ovakvo "griješno ponašanje".

Ovakvo maltretiranje, ponižavanje čovjeka, nametanje totalitarnog novo-morala.

Ili liberalizam na djelu.

A možemo se svi nasmijati, i odmahnuti rukom...to što je jedno od najvećih znanstvenih postignuća zadnjih godina zamagljeno zbog nekakve blesave košulje od strane zadrtih i ograničenih ljudi samoprozvanih "naprednjaka s progresivnim idejama" je ionako nevažna.

Uspjeh u sjeni trivijalnosti
'Shirtgate' ili kako je par sisa zasjenilo sondu na kometu

Autor: Vedrana Simičević

Britanski znanstvenik Matt Taylor vjerojatno ni u najluđim snovima nije pomišljao da će ga dan nakon povijesnog uspjeha za čovječanstvo osebujni izbor košulje iz znanstvenog heroja preko noći pretvoriti u promicatelja »diskriminacije žena u znanosti«

Misija »Rosetta« u sklopu koje je veliki međunarodni tim po prvi put u povijesti čovječanstva uspješno spustio sondu na površinu kometa idejno je začeta još u osamdesetima, nakon čega je otprilike petnaest godina trebalo da bi stručnjaci sagradili adekvatnu letjelicu i osmislili robotsku sondu koja će odoliti svim izazovima svemirskog tijela koje putuje brzinom od 120 tisuća km na sat i potom opremljena cijelim nizom sofisticiranih »gadgeta« ostati na njegovoj površini dovoljno dugo da analizira okolinu.

Letjelica Rosetta, pogonjena solarnim panelima, potom je deset godina putovala svemirom i na svojoj se kompliciranoj putanji susrela s dva asteroida, uspješno preživjela dugo razdoblje sjene u blizini Marsa, kao i godinu dana hibernacije, da bi ovog svibnja napokon uhvatila putanju 4 kilometra dugačkog kometa. Rosetta naravno nije sama od sebe cijelo desetljeće putovala svemirom, već je njome s gotovo nepojmljive udaljenosti od više stotina milijuna kilometara upravljao cijeli tim stručnjaka. U kompliciranom nizu iznimno osjetljivih manevara, skupina znanstvenika uspjela je prije dva tjedna u potpunosti uskladiti letjelicu s putanjom i položajem kometa, toliko precizno da se izbačena sonda samo putem slabe gravitacije kometa »spustila« na njegovu površinu i unatoč čak dva odbijanja s površine, ispuniti svoju misiju.

Šanse da ovaj futuristički projekt uspije, od samog početka nisu bile stopostotne. Na svom desetogodišnjem putu sonda se mogla pokvariti nebrojeno puta, a tijekom samog »iskrcavanja« jedna minijaturna pogreška mogla je upropastiti cijelu misiju. Unatoč tome, u projekt su uložene godine truda i znanja generacija znanstvenika i inženjera. Sati i sati istraživačkog rada, pokušaja i pogrešaka, i u konačnici ukupno 1.4 milijarde eura, stoje iza ovog velikog znanstvenog uspjeha koji će jednog dana možda omogućiti čovječanstvu da sazna od kud potječe život u svemiru ili mu pomoći da izbjegne opasnost od udara asteroida.

Šarena košulja

I dok je znanstveni svijet aplaudirao uspjehu, u nesmiljenom svijetu društvenih mreža spuštanje sonde na komet zasjenio je jedan posve drugačiji detalj – jedna šarena košulja. U tjednu koji je uslijedio nakon uspjeha Rosette tisuće i tisuće »twittova« i blogova ispisane su na račun toga kako je bio odjeven dr. Matt Taylor, jedan od znanstvenika koji je upravljao sondom. Živopisni britanski astrofizičir, otac dvoje djece i uspješni znanstvenik među kolegama je odavno poznat i po svojim tetovažama od kojih zadnja u nizu prikazuje sondu i letjelicu, kao i po svojem smislu za humor. Kako zbog važne pozicije u timu, tako i zbog tetovaža i vesele naravi Taylor je danima prije slijetanja kometa često bio u fokusu medija. Dan prije tog uspješnog 12. studenoga satim je strpljivo odgovarajući na pitanja svih zainteresiranih putem twittera, ne ignorirajući čak ni upite tipa »Što ako vanzemaljci uzmu sondu jer misle da je božićni poklon? «»Bruce Willis će skočiti na nju«, rado je šalom na šalu odvratio raspoloženi Taylor.

Uzbuđen što sudjeluje u jednom od najvećih tehnoloških dostignuća desetljeća, britanski znanstvenik vjerojatno ni u najluđim snovima nije pomišljao da će ga dan kasnije osebujni modni ukus iz znanstvenog heroja preko noći pretvoriti u »ženomrsca« i promicatelja »diskriminacije žena u znanosti«. Matt Taylor je naime, na misijski D dan odlučio odjenuti SF varijantu havajske košulje s motivima polugolih SF heroina koju mu je darovala prijateljica. Već je i samo dvominutno pojavljivanje pred kamerama bilo dovoljno da njegov modni izbor diljem interneta dobije jednaku pažnju kao i sonda na kometu.

Zaplakao pred kamerama

»Činjenica da jedan muškarac, znanstvenik, misli da je dobra ideja nositi košulju s motivima golih žena dok predstavlja veliku svemirsku agenciju i značajan znanstveni projekt je odbojna i očito on nema ideju da sudjeluje baš u onoj vrsti seksizma koji odvraća žene od znanosti, napisala je američka novinarka i aktivistica S.E. Smith čiji su komentar, kao i mnoge druge »twittove« i statuse povrijeđenih čitateljica i čitatelja prenijeli mnogi svjetski mediji, očito spremni da »shirtgate«, kako je cijeli »slučaj« nazvan u javnosti, dignu na važniju razinu. I tako je, u samo nekoliko dana, fokus tzv. »šire javnosti« skrenut s povijesnog svemirskog »koraka« za čovječanstvo na rasprave o dubljem značenju jedne košulje. Iako je na društvenim mrežama imao i puno advokata, Taylor je dva dana nakon velikog uspjeha, ovog puta odjeven u tamnoplavu majicu, zaplakao pred kamerama i ispričao se »što je njegova košulja povrijedila tolike ljude«.

Teško da i jedna priča u posljednje vrijeme bolje od ove ilustrira površnost današnjeg društva ojačanu »društvenim mrežama« i medijskim apetitom za trivijalnostima. Kao da činjenica da stražnjica Kim Kardashian dobija puno više medijske pažnje od bilo kojeg znanstvenog dostignuća već nije naprosto otužna sama po sebi, moralno, logički i uostalom evolucijski je poražavajuće da ogroman broj ljudi, od kojih veliki dio spada u visokoobrazovane skupine u društvu, važnijim od povijesnog tehnološkog uspjeha čovječanstva smatra motiv na nečijoj košulji.

Baš kao što je dobar dio hrvatskih medija nedavno više prostora dao misteriju od kud na stolu premijera Milanovića papirnati brodić, nego analizama njegovih političkih poteza, po tom konceptu je i »shirtgate« pokazao zašto, između ostalog, znanost danas ima tako zanemarenu i često financijski marginaliziranu poziciju u društvu.

Zavedene trivijalnostima

– Dovoljno je pogledati prosječni internet portal, i vidjeti veliki postotak trivijalnosti u kategorijama poput tračeva ili golotinje, u usporedbi s postotkom sadržajnih i informativnih vijesti. Ja osobno ne vjerujem u to da su ljudi uistinu trivijalni. Samo što mnogi lako potpadaju pod utjecaje. Jedan od tih utjecaja je skretanje pozornosti na trivijalnosti i okupiranje pažnje nizom irelevantnih detalja koje onda mozak obrađuje punom parom, da bi se čovjeka odagnalo od razmišljanja o stvarnim problemima u društvu i proaktivnog pristupa životu, smatra uspješna riječka astrofizičarka dr. sc. Dijana Dominis Prester, jedna od autorica rada nedavno objavljenog u prestižnom Sciencu, cinično komentirajući da bi prilikom budućeg predstavljanja znanstvenih rezultata možda mogla obući haljinu s fotografijama zvijezda iz Big Brothera u kama-sutra pozama kako bi skrenula malo više medijske pažnje na znanstvene rezultate.

Drugi aspekt ove otužne priče svakako je i bizarna manifestacija feminističkog aktivizma na primjeru košulje s nekoliko pari sisa, zbog koje bi se stare sufražetkinje vjerojatno zapitale čemu su svojedobno poduzimale visoko-rizične društvene akcije koje su ih nerijetko stajale i života. Riječku astrofizičarku zapitali smo stoga misli li i ona da Taylorova košulja doprinosi diskriminaciji žena u znanosti.

– Diskriminacija žena u znanosti postoji, to je činjenica. U nekim sredinama je ona manja nego u drugima. Rijeka je u tom smislu pozitivan primjer. No ta diskriminacija nema po mom mišljenju nikakve veze s nečijom smiješnom košuljom. Mene osobno ni kao ženu, ni kao znanstvenicu, takva košulja nimalo ne vrijeđa. Mislim da su žene koje se vrijeđaju takvim stvarima pogrešno fokusirane i na sličan način zavedene trivijalnostima, umjesto da se pozabave problemima u svojoj srži, smatra Dominis Prester zaključivši da »shirtgate« slučaj više doprinosi ismijavanju borbe za ženska prava, a ne samoj borbi.

U astrofizici dopuštena osobnost stila

– Svatko od nas bira svoj način, u skladu s uvjerenjima. Ja osobno ne osuđujem ni golotinju, niti smatram da je dobro forsiranje kvota postotaka žena u pojedinim segmentima. Kad nešto postignem na »terenu« koji se inače smatrao muškim, i kad znam da je to bilo zahvaljujući isključivo mom radu, a ne činjenici što sam žena, smatram da je onda postignut cilj. A što se odjeće tiče, u astrofizici smo vrlo tolerantni, i dopušta se osobnost stila. To je i jedan od aspekata moje struke zbog kojeg se osjećam ugodno. Ne bih voljela raditi posao u kojem bih svaki dan morala biti uniformirana, priznaje riječka astrofizičarkuDijana Dominis Prester naglašavajući da količina pažnje pridana Taylorovoj košulji prvenstveno treba potaknuti na razmišljanje o sustavu vrijednosti u današnjem društvu.

http://www.novilist.hr/Znanost-i-tehnol ... -na-kometu

Shirtgate iliti liberalizam/feminizam na djelu.

The “Seven Sisters” Become Brothers




http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6202

Progresivna misao dana: postoje žene koje imaju vaginu i žene koje nemaju vaginu.

So chic.

Čini se da se ipak pomalo kreće...

U zadnje vrijeme je sve više istupa o raznim temama koje sačinjavaju liberalnu ortodoksiju.

Čak i na HRT-u u salonskim emisijama se pojavljuju disidentski glasovi.

Jednostavno nam treba vremena da se reagira.

Ali na kraju ljudi vide što je na dijelu.

Moderni liberalizam u tri riječi.

Ili dvije riječi i jednom vezniku.

George Canning, 1798. godine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Canning

William Faulkner: Svjetlost u kolovozu

Način razmišljanja sjevernjačkih abolicionista, prozelitističkih naseljenika na američki Jug poslije 1865., predaka današnjih kreatora i moderatora političke korektnosti koja maltretira cijelu europsku civilizaciju.

Faulkner je fantastičan u opisu psihološkog profila tih liberalnih novoengleskih epileptičara.

Mohammed Emwazi je muslimanski koljač koji je za potrebe Islamske Države klao taoce, a mediji su ga zvali Jihadi John - namjerno rabeći kršćansko ime, čak i nakon što mu je ustanovljeno pravo ime koje nosi od rođenja.

Izvor: http://www.vecernji.hr/svijet/otkriven-identitet-jihadi-johna-991972

Tko bi rekao, kao "prorok" Mohammed.

http://direktno.hr/en/2014/svijet/9330/D%C5%BEihadist-koji-odrubljuje-glave-je-iz-dobrostoje%C4%87e-obitelji-iz-Londona.htm

Bitno da je Mohammad, musliman iz Kuvajta Britanac...

A kompanjon Mehmed, musliman iz Alžira, Francuz...

http://www.vecernji.hr/svijet/psihoprof ... ona-992267

Ovi su luđi od Bošnji...

Pošalješ Balkanku na zapad, jebe se s crncima, pošalješ Arapina, ode u Siriju da siječe glave zapadnjacima... dal je do zapada ili je do materijala?

Prijatelji tog tipa se bacili u jebeno takijanje. Nije islam kriv, islam je "religija mira" već je ovaj u školi udario glavom od stativu. Zato je takav. Svašta sam čuo ali ovo je plafon takijanje.

Ma daj...

Multiculturalism is dead - long live multiculturalism?

Trevor Phillips, former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and head of the Commission for Racial Equality

Another year, another denunciation of multiculturalism, another denunciation of that denunciation, another continuation of multiculturalism. It is a dead idea that doesn’t die, even when once fervent friends turn against it, finally noticing its unworkability, unnerved by its neediness, and sickened by its saccharinity. The once all-conquering cult is so comatose that even Conservative Prime Ministers and German Chancellors can find the courage to condemn it, while former devotees squirm in embarrassment at old idiocy. Those of us for whom the idea was never alive watch these tergiversations with a grim sort of satisfaction.

The denouncer du jour is actually a repeat offender, because Trevor Phillips has apostasized before. Although he was not the first Leftist to realise there were problems with the doctrine - Ann Cryer and Prospect editor David Goodhart, among others, preempted him - he was one of the first to say so publicly, impelled into action by the London bombs of 2005. It should perhaps not have been surprising that there existed a subset of Muslims so impervious to the combined charms of British democracy, Chinese cuisine, Thai lady-boys, Andean pan-pipers and the Bhagavad Gita that they preferred to blow themselves and others up, but as a black Briton searching for an all-including philosophy perhaps he can be forgiven for overlooking such annoying facts.

He had already been having doubts, when as a journalist he had made films about female genital mutilation and ethnic politics in Northern towns, and by 2003, when he became chairman of the powerful Commission for Racial Equality, he says he was “braced for trouble”. After the 2005 bombings he declared that the country was “sleepwalking towards segregation”, for which he was condemned not only by Blairites, but also by self-identifying non-Leftists David Laws and Theresa May.

As Archbishop of Equality, his recantation was a body blow to the religion, and a decade on he has come back to the scene of the thought-crime to kick the fly-blown corpse, incidentally disturbing some grazing pests. His latest reflections will be broadcast on Channel 4 this Thursday, in a documentary clumsily called Things We Can’t Say About Race That Are True, and in the meantime are being heavily trailed in the media, to relief from the unreconstructed Right and execration from the unreconstructed Left. Every year the defenders of multiculturalism are objectively less impressive - where once they would have been government ministers and deeply-ensconced academics, now they are sign-waving street demonstrators noted more for volubility than wit.

Phillips raises all kinds of points that sadly still require raising - even if we disagree with him that multiculturalism was “beautiful in theory”, or that we should “venerate” Luther King and Mandela. Adherence to P.C. Holy Writ has as he says had appalling consequences, as with the serial sexual abuse of white girls by Pakistani men, or the death of Victoria Climbie, where people who see what is happening and have the power to act are nonetheless too psychologically paralyzed. He admits that white (and poor) is the new black, and that many stereotypes have some factual basis. P.C. has had as we all know a prophylactic effect on free speech, with even earnest liberals like Benedict Cumberbatch getting into trouble for being insufficiently up-to-the-lexical-minute.

So far as it goes, his is a perfectly decent and even useful critique. But if it is not taken further it may simply mean a redrawing of P.C. parameters rather than their removal. Multiculturalism could live on long after its official death, like the “tremendous, gruesome shadow” of the dead Buddha in Nietzsche’s famous analogy. And although his insistence may be good-hearted, it is also ideologically and ethnically self-interested. Ideologically, because he cannot quite abandon old friends and principles - ethnically because although no longer a card-carrying cultist he still has personal reasons to justify the presence of so many new people in such an old country, and to make the multiethnic reality more manageable. He is abandoning an indefensible position, but only to take up another a little further back, and at an angle.

Much of his argument is couched in concern for minorities rather than the majority -
“Our desperation to avoid offence is itself beginning to stand in the way of progress. And all too often the losers are minority Britons.”
“The next time a white person wants to speak up for minorities, I would guess they’ll hesitate and ask themselves: ‘Will I make things worse by speaking out?’”
“Would the publication and use of ethnic crime data lead to racial profiling and provide an excuse for fresh discrimination by the police and criminal justice system?”

Yet the majority arguably has more to complain about than even the most put-upon minority, because it is their culture which has been most compromised, and their country which has been altered utterly. And Phillips must know this, because more even than Islamists, he fears the nativist parties now springing up across Europe. These “far Right” parties are “frauds”, he opines unjustly, haters masquerading as heretics, getting away with it because the mainstream is too prissy. Cleverer than many of his white compeers, and not suffering from their racial angst, he sees that the veneer of politesse is very thin, and below is a deep angriness belatedly starting to find practical political expression. A soft answer, he clearly hopes, may turn away long-deferred wrath - and so he apologizes and contextualizes, and publicly feels the host country’s pain. It is the only card he can play, although he plays it well.

The new wonder-food of “British values” he and others offer instead of the old pick‘n’mix sweets is almost equally lacking in nutritive value. The ingredients vary, but common to all recipes are usually tolerance, fair play, rule of law and respect for democracy. Excellent though these things are, they are not specifically British, nor are they any substitute for the visceral sense of long belonging that alone makes people willing to make sacrifices for their country. Besides, when perusing the official list of British values, it is difficult to see how exactly they diverge from multiculturalism, with their stress on “further tolerance and harmony between different cultural traditions by enabling students to acquire an appreciation of and respect for their own and other cultures”. As a clearly relieved head teachers’ representative said when these guidelines were unveiled, most heads “will find they have been actively promoting British values for years” - with the notable success we all can see. The historian David Starkey offered alternative national values, which although jocular contained infinitely more insight - queuing, drunkenness, nostalgia, loving pets, self-loathing, wit and eccentricity. “We are at risk”, he noted sadly, “of dying of niceness” - a niceness which has for too long prevented us from protecting ourselves, or challenging those who challenge our right to exist and evolve in our own way.

http://takimag.com/article/white_and_po ... z3W40eqOZX

Bivši predsjednik britanskog Vijeća za rasnu jednakost, gore na slici, napravio dokumentarac kako multikulturalizam ne funkcionira i da ima strašne posljedice.

Bumo videli...

Ali kako neki kažu, nacionalizam je deplasiran...

Materijal, materijal je uvijek u pitanju.