Vanguard News Network

I just had a lovely conversation with someone who was going to fix my racisms. A relative. They’ve never heard of Antifa and so it doesn’t exist. They’ve never heard of ‘The Problem of Whiteness’ and so that doesn’t exist, either.

Wonderful way to maintain belief in crud-throw up your hands and say,’ Well, I’ve never heard of that.’ I should try it at tax time.

But it brings up the court case aspect–this person said to me that anti black racist classes exist just like ‘the prob of whiteness’. I said I’d not heard of such, where was this? They can’t name one, just declared it a fact. I said no, they’d be fired-the anti White class still goes on, it’s at Arizona State.

Same with Antifa-they claim the ‘thing at Berkeley’ happened because ‘they’re trying to make it right wing and nobody wanted to see Ann Coulter so she didn’t go’. I said no–there is a court case about failure to protect those that wanted to go. They gave me that dismissive Frenchman’s wave. I said, ‘Did you see the violence at the preceding event?’ They said no. I explained it-firecrackers in bottles to throw at people, covered faces and so on-criminal assault because they don’t like what you’re saying, basically. I asked if they thought that was ok, they said, ‘I think those people need the hell beat out of them, yes! They’re very violent.’

I said, ‘Oh. Ok. That pretty much says it all, then-their violence is ok, their racism is ok.’ I said I didn’t see the point in a conversation with someone so patently dishonest-it’s fine to find fault with people in any movement, including the one for Whites–but if you can’t do it honestly, the credibility of anything you say after that goes out the window. I also pointed out the high level of emotion on their part when I didn’t agree. Why so hot and bothered? If I’m wrong, just point me to the data that proves it.

They can’t.