I’ve said for the longest time that the theory of evolution must be racist, as it basically says that black people are the missing link between man and ape.

I mean, seriously – just look at them.

Everyone knows they look like apes.

Remember when they flipped out over the H&M ad that had a black child in the hoodie that read, “coolest monkey in the jungle”?

Or when they flipped out over that Australian Serena Williams cartoon?

Here’s the question: if liberals don’t know they look like apes, why are these things immediately offensive?

Clearly, everyone knows they look like apes, and the issue that liberals have is that you shouldn’t point that out, because it’s mean.

Now, the chickens are coming home to roost for Charles Darwin himself.

Daily Mail:

The Natural History museum is conducting a review into potentially ‘offensive’ collections including its Charles Darwin exhibitions.

In the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement, museum bosses have ordered an audit into certain collections that some staff believe are ‘legacies of colonies, slavery and empire’.

Rooms, statues and collected items in the museum that could be ‘problematic’ may be renamed, relabelled, or removed.

The review into the museum’s links to slavery and colonialism could result in a potential overhaul of the museum’s collections and public spaces.

In documents seen by The Sunday Telegraph, museum staff were told that as a result of the Black Lives Matter protests, the museum would undertake a review of room names, statues and collections that ‘could potentially cause offence’.

The executive board of the Natural History museum is said to be ‘very engaged’ with the issue and circulated an academic paper to staff which claimed ‘science, racism, and colonial power were inherently entwined‘.

The paper proposes publicly acknowledging the past to create ‘less racist’ museums.

Collections under review include specimens of exotic birds gathered by naturalist Charles Darwin on his expedition to the Galapagos Island with Captain Robert FitzRoy on HMS Beagle in 1835.

I’m not personally the biggest believer in the theory of Darwinian evolution myself. Even with my skepticism, however, my biggest issue with it has always been that there isn’t any open debate. You’re not allowed to discuss it critically in universities, and the federal government effectively says that not teaching children that Darwinian evolution is a fact in public school is a violation of the Constitutional separation of church and state.

What I would want to see with the theory of evolution is what I want to see everywhere: free and open inquiry, and public debate. That is the opposite of tearing down museum exhibits because they offend people. I don’t think this should happen to any idea or theory, ever. Everything should be open. Allowing the free flow of ideas is the single and only path to enlightenment.

It should be extremely disturbing to see open attacks on science. Because you can tear down Darwin exhibits, sure. But if you’ve decided that “science is racist,” then it’s not going to be long before you have a situation where things stop working. Our society requires science to function.

Communism is defined by regressiveness: the society moves backward.

That is what we are seeing everywhere now.

The society is moving backwards, literally devolving, and that is being cheered on by the entire establishment, primarily the media and the government.

Monday 12 is “Darwin Day” so let’s celebrate the great English scientist with a look at some of his most interesting, politically incorrect quotes.

Here is a fascinating passage from the Descent of Man in which Darwin declares his belief that the “civilised races of man” will “exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races”. Unfortunately, at the distance of 150 years, the opposite now looks much more likely.

The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, convinced by general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks incessantly occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies — between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridæ — between the elephant and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and other mammals. But all these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked,[270]* will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

Source: “The Descent of Man” by Charles Darwin

Note the implication of the last sentence that Darwin saw the negro as intermediate between white people and gorillas.

Today, rap music has made us familiar with the negro’s appreciation for various aspects of the feminine form and, in particular, his preference for what he likes to call “big ass hoes”. According to Charles Darwin, these aesthetic principles have been long practised in Africa, where they have deep cultural roots.

It is well known that with many Hottentot women the posterior part of the body projects in a wonderful manner; they are steatopygous; and Sir Andrew Smith is certain that this peculiarity is greatly admired by the men. He once saw a woman who was considered a beauty, and she was so immensely developed behind, that when seated on level ground she could not rise, and had to push herself along until she came to a slope. Some of the women in various negro tribes are similarly characterised; and, according to Burton, theSomal men “are said to choose their wives by ranging them in a line, and by picking her out who projects farthest a tergo. Nothing can be more hateful to a negro than the opposite form.”

Source: “The Descent of Man” by Charles Darwin

President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho. This is what the leader of the dysgenic future of America will most likely look like.

One of the rare examples of a Hollywood movie that is genuinely good and actually has a powerful, positive message that touches on an important social issue is the 2006 movie Idiocracy, written and directed by the brilliant satirist Mike Judge of Beavis and Butthead, Office Space, and King of the Hill fame.

The plot is that two people volunteer to be cryogenically frozen in a military hibernation experiment, and the experiment goes wrong, causing them to not be released until well into the future, in 2505. The future is populated by a coffee-colored mass of, well, idiots, due to hundreds of years of dysgenic down-breeding.

Below is the first two minutes of the movie, which shows a hilarious contrast between an intelligent couple that keeps putting off having children until it’s too late, and a White trash moron who impregnates women left and right and pops out dozens of them. It begins with the following voice-over narration:

As the twenty-first century began, human evolution was at a turning point. Natural selection, the process by which the strongest, the smartest, the fastest reproduced in greater numbers than the rest, a process which had once favored the noblest traits of man, now began to favor different traits.

Most science fiction of the day predicted a future that was more civilized and more intelligent. But as time went on, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction — a dumbing down. How did this happen? Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most and left the intelligent to become an endangered species.

That is, basically, the traditional argument for eugenics, originally derived from Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection by Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton. Whether Judge was versed in the theory of eugenics when he wrote the movie, or whether he had just happened to independently come to the same conclusion as the eugenicists through observing current trends in society, is hard to tell.

If he was aware of eugenics, and the content of the movie suggests that as a good possibility, he must’ve either not been aware of the stigma associated with eugenics, which has become a dirty word in our current world due to the association it has with the so-called Jewish Holocaust, or unaware of the extent of that stigma, or else he just didn’t care.

Eugenics is a dirty word because the Third Reich practiced eugenics, and it led to the mass extermination of millions of Jews and other “undesirables,” so the story goes. This association was cemented into the mind of the public following the highly organized Jewish campaign for promoting the Holocaust in 1967, primarily as a deterrent to anti-Jewish sentiment following the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. John Glad, in his book Jewish Eugenics, explains how

Subsequent to the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, the Holocaust Memorial Movement is launched, with eugenics targeted as the ideology of genocide. So effective is the campaign that polls show that many more Americans can identify the Holocaust than Pearl Harbor or the atomic bombing of Japan. Those who are familiar with the term “eugenics” begin to associate it with “Holocaust” and “racism.”

Glad could hardly be called an anti-Semite, as he is a Jew himself. Ideologically he is pro-eugenics and a universalist, rather than ethnocentric, and, in that eye-opening, thoroughly researched book of his he puts the blame for the suppression of eugenics – in great detail – squarely on his fellow Jews, who have themselves, he writes, “practiced eugenics for millennia.” This is a fact. Eugenics are actually embedded in Talmudic, Jewish religious law. (For more on this see A People That Shall Dwell Alone by Dr. Kevin MacDonald. Also see here and here)

So I guess it should come as no surprise to find out that the Jews in Hollywood did all they could to suppress Idiocracy, to the point where it almost didn’t even get released theatrically, and, when it did, there was virtually no promotion – no trailers, ads, etc. – and it was to a very limited amount of theaters.

Mike Judge spoke to VICE about this controversy in a video interview in 2013. Beginning at around 8:40 he says:

But Idiocracy though, that was, like, really ditching a movie, I mean they, I think it was like maybe 11 theaters they put it in. We locked, finished the movie, put it in the can and it was over a year after that that it came out, so I, by the time they got around to marketing, I was completely out of touch with them.

The Myth of Equality

Idiocracy also inherently challenges another sacred cow of Hollywood propaganda: the myth of equality. The movie puts a strong emphasis on the importance of IQ differences and their relation to biological inheritance. A taboo topic, to be sure. Because, as we know, everyone – Blacks and Whites, men and women, rich and poor – must always be considered exactly equal to everybody else, without exception. Any suggestion to the contrary, no matter how scientifically or logically sound, is simply unfit for polite society. Yet Judge courageously smashes through this silly myth by the deployment of unflinching satire – the most powerful weapon of all in combating the lies of the left – with devastating effectiveness.

If anyone hasn’t seen the movie, I recommend doing so. I can almost guarantee you will like it, as it is very witty and funny (though it may be a bit too silly and over-the-top for some, depending on your taste). The entire movie is on YouTube here.

Eugenics and Conspiracy Theories

Ironically, Judge was also interviewed by the pro-Jew, anti-eugenics conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and they also touched on this topic.

Beginning at 27:40:

Conspiracy types use the word “eugenics” to refer to their theory of a secret plan by Satan-worshipping Nazis that want to depopulate 90% of the earth, using poisonous airplane exhaust and other super secret evil methods. This issue has been dealt with already, so I will not rehash the arguments against it, but needless to say it is utter nonsense.

Their conspiratorial version of eugenics is basically the same as the fantasy, mainstream Jewish version, where it’s claimed that the Nazis herded defectives into buses and gassed them with diesel fumes (an impossibility) and then conducted all kinds of evil and weird medical experiments, eventually killing 6 million Jews in gas chambers and turning their remains into lampshades, soap and fertilizer. The conspiracy movement is kosher to the core, and does nothing but serve Jewish interests by pushing stupid gibberish such as this. They claim to be against the system, yet at the same time push the exact same narrative as the mainstream, except taking it even farther by claiming that Nazis are somehow still running the show.

Why the Nazis would promote anti-Nazi propaganda 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, while they are running things behind the scenes, is never explained. Also, if there’s a Nazi conspiracy, why the New World Order powers coalesced during World War II to absolutely destroy Nazi Germany is also never explained.

Fortunately, not many who follow alternative media are still dumb enough to believe that our enemies are actually Nazis, rather than Jews.

Eugenics….Are They Really Bad?

Like many other topics in today’s world, one is left scratching their head while studying eugenics and seeing the disconnect between what we are told and what actually is.

Eugenics was designed as a system for the betterment of society, the minimizing of suffering, the lowering of crime, and the strengthening of living standards for future generations, and is based upon objective science. Yet what we are led to believe in our post-WWII society is that it is nothing but a slippery slope to evil and genocide, and those who advance and promote it are seen as hate-crazed racists at worst and misguided at best. Reality has been inverted.

This seeming anomaly makes much more sense once you add in the Jew factor though, as what strengthens the White race – and eugenics surely would – is bad for Jews, and what weakens the White race – as dysgenics surely does – is good for Jews. This is a fact that simply can’t be denied by anyone with any intelligence who takes an objective look at Jewish behavior and how the world really works.

As far as Hitler and the National Socialists, the Jews had already absolutely destroyed their country and taken over many of its top institutions before Hitler had come to power, so conflict between the two was inevitable, and it was initially instigated by the Jews.

In the years leading up to 1933 the Jews had been using their media influence to divide and poison the minds of the Germans with anti-German and Marxist propaganda; they had been leading the Communist party which was trying to incite a violent revolution paralleling the Jewish Bolsheviks who took over Russia in 1917 and then brutally tortured, murdered and starved millions of the elites in the name of “equalizing” the Russian people; it was Jews who had disseminated the demoralizing propaganda and led the workers’ strikes on munition factories that caused Germany to lose World War I – a war that Hitler fought valiantly in from start to finish – and it was Jewish bankers who had plundered the German economy, causing hyper-inflation that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths of German civilians from starvation and suicide.

Hitler, like any honorable man, was wholeheartedly opposed to all of this, so he fought tooth and nail to defend his people and return his beloved nation to its former glory, free of the Jewish parasite that had proven itself to be hostile and disloyal to Germany and the German people.

Because of his open anti-Semitism, the Jews declared war on Germany as soon as Hitler took power, before any anti-Jewish policies had even been enacted. Hitler then began systematically passing laws to force the Jews out of positions of power and influence and he dismantled usurious Jewish banking houses such as the Rothschild dynasty and others. This obviously made the Jews feel very unwelcome – as it was meant to – and so they were leaving Germany in droves. Many went to America, and many went to Palestine and elsewhere.

Needless to say, this treatment was a great embarrassment for the Jews and caused them to develop a deep, burning hatred toward Germany and as a result they were – and still are – willing to make up any lie necessary to have the Third Reich, and its memory – and anyone else who would resist their tyranny – demonized and destroyed. The lies told about eugenics have little to nothing to do with the German-Jewish conflict of the 30s and 40s and, as we have seen, weren’t even invented until 20+ years after the end of the war. They are an outgrowth of the ongoing Jewish hatred of White gentiles, who they view as all potential Nazis that must be destroyed.

Historian and Eugenicist Lothrop Stoddard visited Hitler’s Germany in 1939 and reported on what he saw in the book Into the Darkness: Nazi Germany Today. In that book, he gives the reasons for Germany’s eugenics policies, and their aims, through firsthand knowledge:

When the Nazis came to power, Germany was biologically in a bad way. Much of her best stock had perished on the battlefields of the Great War. But those war losses were surpassed by others during the post-war period, due to the falling birth-rate. Economic depression, mass-unemployment, hopelessness for the future, had combined to produce a state of mind in which Germans were refusing to have children. The birth-rate dropped so fast that the nation was no longer reproducing itself. Furthermore, the lowest birth-rates were among those elements of highest social value. The learned and professional classes were having so few children that, at this rate, they would rapidly die out. At the other end of the scale, the opposite was true. Morons, criminals, and other anti-social elements were reproducing themselves at a rate nine times as great as that of the general population. And those lowest elements were favored in their breeding by the welfare measures of the Weimar regime. Statistics indicate that it cost far more to support Germany‟s defectives than it did to run the whole administrative side of Government—national, provincial, and local. As the Nazis saw it, they had a two-fold task: to increase both the size and the quality of the population. Indiscriminate incentives to big families would result largely in more criminals and morons. So they coupled their encouragements to sound citizens with a drastic curb on the defective elements.

To stand in opposition to the implementation of eugenics policies, such as those described above, is obviously insane, and literally suicidal for a nation. The only reason our society frowns upon eugenics is because our society is controlled by Jews, and as such the basis of our negative perception of the science is not driven by rationality – as most have no idea what it actually even is – it is driven by Jewish lies. Like everything that the Jews don’t like because it is good for Whites, they just claim it inevitably leads to lampshades and Holocausts, and is therefore off limits to even contemplate.

The main reason people don’t know what eugenics really is and are therefore unable to come to a rational opinion in regard to it, is because the other side of the debate over them is ruthlessly suppressed by the liberal Jew media, just as innumerable other big lies. Whatever is good for Whites and bad for Jews – from eugenics, all the way to the belief that White people should not be wiped off of the face of the planet – is simply shouted down as being “Nazi.”

Yes, if you simply care about the future of White children, you will be labeled a “Nazi.” You have to roll over and let your race perish to avoid that label. You have to let your race be degraded into a disgusting cesspool of fat Walmart shoppers that ride around in little carts so they don’t break their ankles trying to get at a tub of Ice Cream, and you must not object to having our borders wide open to hordes of violent subhumans who hate our guts and will slaughter every single one of us wholesale as soon as they’re given half a chance, if you want to avoid that label.

Therefore, unless you are on board with the White genocide program led by the Jews, being called a Nazi is clearly a compliment, and fighting to have every policy associated with Nazism implemented ASAP, virtually a sacred duty.

The logic in favor of eugenics requires only very basic, common sense. Not practicing it is insane and apocalyptic for any people, anywhere.

Are the Jews Right in Suppressing Eugenics?

Suppressing eugenics is clearly evil, but is this a logical strategy from the Jewish point of view?

It can be argued that it is. Eugenics is about rejuvenating the health of your nation, which can only be bad for Jews, since they function as parasites on the body of their host peoples.

Eugenics is rooted in science, and, excluding the leftist versions of it which ignore racial sub-groups and focus only on its IQ and hereditary disease aspects, it emphasizes the need to separate the races geographically due to their differing levels of achievement. The study of civilizations through a racial lens – a key factor in the foundation of racial eugenics – leads to the overwhelming historical evidence which shows that all great ones were built by White people, with the Nordic element at the forefront.

Madison Grant, the most famous early American anthropologist/eugenicist, in his highly influential 1916 book The Passing of the Great Race, characterized the Jew as one whose “dwarf stature, peculiar mentality, and ruthless concentration on self-interest are being engrafted upon the stock of the nation,” and warned against the dangers of race-mixing:

It must be borne in mind that the specializations which characterize the higher races are of relatively recent development, are highly unstable and when mixed with generalized or primitive characters, tend to disappear. Whether we like to admit it or not, the result of the mixture of two races, in the long run, gives us a race reverting to the more ancient, generalized and lower type. The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a white man and a negro is a negro; the cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; and the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew.

Thus we see that physical anthropology and race science, of which eugenics grew out of, also leads to the recognition of the Jews as a distinctive and separate race (actually a mixed race), which leaves no room for their trick of blending in by pretending they are White when it suits them and pretending they are just a religion when that suits them. That trick has served them very well, and indeed serves them very well to this day, with most White people having no clue what a Jew actually is, to the detriment of us all.

So yes, eugenics for Whites is bad for Jews, necessarily. Therefore, keeping in mind that they are our deadly racial enemy with separate interests and an entirely different value system, and indeed live off of us as parasites, then it becomes obvious that discouraging us from practicing eugenics is the logical way for them to behave.

Equally obvious, with the simple facts above in mind, is that the logical way for us to behave is to be unashamedly and unapologetically anti-Semitic and pro-eugenics, without fear of the Jews genocidal smear terms, because it is the right thing to do from our perspective.

Why is eugenics evil again? Oh yeah, lampshades and soap. We must feel guilty and give all our wealth and power to Jews and just roll over, rot, and die as a race, right?

Deliberate Genocide

What the Jews are doing to us by suppressing eugenics is conscious, deliberate, premeditated genocide, provably. First off, they are highly conscious of the fact that race-mixing is genocide, and always have been. Secondly, they are also conscious that low birth-rates lead to genocide. Eugenics takes both of these problematic issues into account, and seeks to rectify them.

All leading Jewish groups actively work toward preventing Jews from marrying outside of their race. Alan Dershowitz, one of the top Jewish leaders in America, even wrote an entire book about this, The Vanishing of the American Jew. For Israel, they regard a low Jewish birth-rate vs. a high Palestinian birth-rate as tantamount to Jewish genocide – and rightly so – and thus they are alarmed by and fight against that trend. Israel is, for all intents and purposes, a national socialist, eugenics state.

Meanwhile, they promote the opposite for Whites in White countries: race-mixing, multiculturalism, open borders, and dysgenics; and they brainwash our people into believing that national socialism, White race consciousness and eugenics are the ultimate in evil.

They cannot fallback on the excuse that they are just true-believing “liberals,” because there is ample evidence – stretching back thousands of years – that they are aware that what they are promoting inevitably leads to race destruction.

Therefore, they are guilty of White genocide, with malice aforethought, and it could be proven in court.

Let that sink in for a moment.

Ad encouraging Jews not to intermarry or miscegenate.

Running Out of White People

The President of the future United States in Idiocracy is a hilarious, Black professional wrestler/porn star named Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho. A few years ago Mike Judge brought him back from the future for a series of webcasts, wherein he issued a dire warning in the form of the most politically incorrect statements I’ve ever seen coming from anyone who is anywhere near the mainstream.

Apparently, the future doesn’t run so smooth once White people have, for the most part, disappeared from the face of the earth, and this is a great concern for President Camacho.

Take heed, White man:

“Seeing as I’m from the future and I’ve seen it all, and I see how the shit came out. Listen. Y’all don’t need to worry about climate change. What you need to worry about is we running out of White people. We running out.

“Let me tell you something. In about 500 years. Y’all done went to bonkers. Y’all done got on planes, you flew to different places. The White Flight. There ain’t nowhere else to go! You done head out in the mountaintops, you done went underground. We, let me tell you something: there’s a White people shortage. That’s gonna happen.

“You White people been worrying so much about what’s in danger to spotted owls…the fucking…the fucking deer and the last bit of rabbit that’s running around, the jack rabbits. Can’t let us shoot the coyotes. And y’all didn’t realize yo ass was in danger. Check it out right now. Look, you used to be blonde, family was blonde, now you running around the family looking like…like…like Chico!

Let me tell you something. It’s all getting mixed together player. We all one family, come on out of hiding. Man, we got to save the White people, that’s why I have a 5% stake in the Washington Whiteskins. That’s right.”

“What I’m trying to say is: preserve yourself White people. You special. I’m getting choked up over this shit.”

“So, I came back, from the future, to let you know that this shit is happening. You’re running out of time.”

So it’s Friday again, time for another fun edition of poll Friday: a fun Friday poll tradition of Nazis.

Here’s the topic: evolution or creation.

I will briefly state that I do not personally have a definite opinion on this.  Clearly, taking the Biblical creation story literally seems a little bit silly, and I’m not sure it was ever taken that way traditionally by religious intellectuals or meant to be.  At the same time, though the logic of evolution seems internally consistent, it is not scientific in the sense that it follows the scientific method, and animals transforming into other animals seems on the face of it a bit ridiculous, especially since we have no evidence this is possible.

The fact that academia will crucify you for questioning evolution also makes it seem less credible/serious as a philosophy, but that is mainly because the Jews have tied the concept to their atheist revolutionary claptrap.  It could also be that it is just the way institutions like this work – they establish a certain dogma and don’t want it questioned.

My own spiritual inclinations are more toward a pantheistic conception of reality, so I would put the existence of the spiritual world as before the physical world, with the physical being a manifestation of the spiritual – a function of it.  In my own thinking, the physical world probably does not actually even exist as an independent concept, but it simply a projection of our thoughts, which are themselves extensions of a divine whole.  Within this paradigm, both evolution or spontaneous creation could possibly make sense, as either would be driven by the spiritual force acting upon the material realm.

For those interested in this, you can look into William Pierce’s Cosmotheism teachings, and from a Christian angle on the same basic idea, George Berkeley.  The concept, in various forms, goes all the way back to the pre-Socratic Greek philosophers and presumably way back into prehistory.

Anyway, I have indulged myself – enough of that, you get the idea.

The Showdown

Here is some evidence for the creationist angle:

And here is a summation of the Darwinist argument:

Bonus: The truth about Dinosaurs:

This is also good:

Also, I will note that atheism is in my view lower than the most primitive African superstitions.  But I don’t think the question of evolution vs. creation implies atheism vs. Christianity for any other reason than because the Jews say it does.  Darwin himself was a Christian.  This comes about by tying evolution to a magical random chance mechanism (deus ex machina) and then automatically implying biogenesis happened for no reason for no reason (eh, they make the implication that it happened for no reason without any reason for making this implication).

Athiesm is just a weird Jewish revolutionary movement which has tried to hijack the racist and basically Christian ideas of Darwin, Huxley, Galton and other fantastic non-Jews.

Another note: the implications of evolution are highly useful from a racialist/eugenicist perspective.

Also note: I don’t really believe that dinosaur video (hope that was obvious, but apparently sometimes these things are not).  I am a firm believer in dinosaurs.

Terms!

For the purposes of this poll, I will have to define the terms, since I confused it above by adding all my spiritualism.

Evolution: Lower lifeforms progressed into higher life forms over a period of time.  Happened by divine guidance or random chance.

Creation: Lifeforms all appeared on earth exactly as they are now, or close to it, having been formed by a creator-god (not necessarily out of clay on the sixth day, but something like that).

The outer space option was added to make the poll interesting and because that is the most likely possibility.

So.  The choice is yours.

[yop_poll id=”17″]

Please feel free to discuss and debate in the comments section.  Keep it civil.

Though the far left is presently obsessively fixated on coddling the Negro race, it were not always this way.  Generally, most everyone looked at these people as completely ridiculous and annoying.

Here you have statements from four of the heroes of the left (who, granted, excluding Che were probably not considered “left” at the time) giving the straight truth about the Negro and his ridiculous and annoying manners and methods.

Spread it around.