Street-Fighting, Forum-Fighting, And Reporter-Fighting Discourse

<o:p />

Some European Americans have fallen into the trap of
believing that their anger and their new understandings are an
appropriate basis for their message. That is, they believe that their
anger at African Americans is an appropriate emotional context to use to
convey statements about African Americans. But it is rare that
revealing your personal insights or emotional responses is the
best line to use in society or among the diverse white American peoples to
accomplish change.<o:p />

<o:p />

Examples From Other Demographics<o:p />

<o:p />

Consider some examples. If you ask Jews how they
justify violent ethnic cleansing in southwest Asia, they will usually quietly
claim that they are merely reclaiming the territory God gave their
ancestors. It’s so breathtakingly dishonest that it
stuns reality-based hearers and leaves little room for counter-response.
They win.<o:p />

<o:p />

If you ask African Americans how they justify the claim that
a mixed-race Obama is an African American, they will usually quietly claim that
his physical appearance is how white Americans judge or classify him and that is
justification enough. Nice passive-aggressive twist — it’s our
fault. We at Resisting Defamation actually love the tightly wrapped lapse
of judgment found when that claim is deconstructed — it’s a masterpiece.
They win.<o:p />

If you ask American Latinos how they justify claims to
pre-eminence in the southwest USA, they will usually quietly claim that the
border moved beneath them. That is wonderfully dishonest, untrue,
and sloppy history, but it can stop a discussion cold. It would take a
two-week seminar to sort out the truth of Mexican, USA, and border history —
by that time, it’s too late to impact the claim. They win.<o:p />

<o:p />

If you ask aware Euro-Americans how they justify a claim to
pre-eminence in the USA, there will be no answer except for outrage and
anger. We could have a cutting answer ready along the lines of "We
have the right of conquest to keep what we conquered 300 years ago."
Or something a bit more extreme, "The only real question is why we haven’t
conquered the northern Mexican states yet and added them to the
USA." I’m not advocating these positions, only the possibility that
they are show-stoppers in public discourse.<o:p />

<o:p />

If you are confronting American Latinos berating our
immigration system in the hope you will say something about distinctions
between demographics or culture so you can be accused of racism or bigotry,
just say that you support the Mexican immigration laws that govern its
southern border, the beatings, and the forcible deportations. And tell
them the USA simply needs to adopt the Mexican plan.<o:p />

<o:p />

There are so many examples of the need for
show-stopper claims or defenses. On the charge of racism, a remark
could be made that any racism is the fault of the tribal chiefs’ cheap
sale of enslaved Africans. That is, any racism in America is the fault of
the Uncle Tom African tribal enslavers & sellers in Africa. That
would stop the show.<o:p />

<o:p />

Our own specialty is to develop an understanding about
naming and labeling, and how to denounce any label used for us in a variety of
ways, which serves to change the subject and to take the offensive.
Here’s an example. One of our members was at a Human Relations Forum
recently, and was accosted by a Jew who demanded to know who was
white. (Their trick question to run us off the road with fine
distinctions. Our member simply replied that "Anyone who has been
called white boy, white trash, non-Hispanic white, lily-white, white bread,
mayonnaise, gringo, white privilege, WASP, white flight, round eyes, redneck,
hillbilly, cracker, typical white person (thanks Obama), goober, Yankee dog,
acting white (thanks Obama), and Wonder Bread is a white person." It
shut him up, all he could say was, "I see." We didn’t even have
to get into gentile, shiksa, or goyim although we can escalate to that level
easily if necessary. <o:p />

<o:p />

Then he turned to a young Muslim and berated him for
Arab-Americans’ failure to speak up against Arab counter-attacks. That
poor guy had never thought it through, and could have simply said, "But we
don’t control the media and we are not allowed any op-ed pieces to express our
feelings." He got all defensive and the Jew promptly attacked him
over and over. Of course, the Arab American could have simply said,
"How many babies in Lebanon and Gaza did you kill today?" Now,
that would have changed the subject.<o:p />

<o:p />

Academic Truthfulness In The Claim Or the Defense<o:p />

<o:p />

If you’ve been reading closely, you’ll have noticed that
none of these responses by the other demographics, or even some of our own
suggestions, are academic truth, but they are practical responses on the
street, forum, and media levels that will change the subject and
disrupt the planned discourse. <o:p />

<o:p />

Getting Over The Juvenile Assumption<o:p />

<o:p />

Somehow we need a mechanism for developing the cutting statement
and/or response for this level of combat, and disseminating it to other
Euro-Americans. Someday we’ll get over the juvenile assumption
that academic truth wins the fight — not so. By the time the
research is done, documented, and communicated, it will be two
weeks after the incident arose. Nothing wrong with the truth, and
history should be the truth, but for instantaneous discourse we need a library
of phrases, and experimental conferences to teach us how to talk in public discourse.<o:p />

<o:p />

Remember — the goal of our adversaries is to constantly
torment us by cherry-picking unpleasant incidents from the past to generate
"white embarrassment" (not "white guilt") because
"white embarrassment" silences us. That secret (silencing us)
is what allows them to advance their murderous agenda at school &
college campuses, on newspaper pages, and in entertainment
productions. If you think ethnic cleansing is painful, look around you
and see the destruction of our neighborhoods, our hospital system, and our
municipal budgets in California by free loaders. And that’s just the
beginning.<o:p />

<o:p />

How do we know the goal is "white embarrassment"
and not "white guilt"? Because the accusatory demographics have
no guilt themselves. Just consider the continuation of black slavery in
black Africa. No black guilt. They don’t know the meaning of the word.<o:p />

<o:p />

Just consider the continuation of the violent ethnic
cleansing of non-Jewish Semites in southwest Asia. No Jewish
guilt. They don’t know the meaning of the word. They pretend
to for the entertainment industry and the human relations industry, but they
don’t really get it.<o:p />

<o:p />

Just consider the lack of remorse by Latinos over their own
country’s histories of civil rights violations, serfdom customs, political
oppression, and revolution. No Latino guilt. They don’t know the
meaning of the word, thus it cannot be guilt that is intended and it is, in
fact, silence by embarrassment that is planned. It works as long
as we let it work.<o:p />

<o:p />

Stanley Womack<o:p />

for<o:p />

Resisting Defamation<o:p />

<o:p />

<a href=”http://www.resistingdefamation.org/”>www.resistingdefamation.org</a><o:p />

2009-02-17