Dolezal: #Wrongskin

This issue of Dolezal is a prime example of leftist hypocrisy and schizophrenia.  When I was working on my first degree, I had to take a sociology class called “Race Relations.”  Back then, when I was young and naive, I thought there might be some actual science to the class, but nothing was further from the truth.

The first thing the professor did was say that “race is a social construction,” and “There is no such thing as race.”  If that were so, then why would we have a class on “race relations”?  From day one it made no sense, but then, the left isn’t about making sense it’s about programming people into useful drones.  After that he held up a piece of paper next to his face and said, “Am I white?”  Which of course got some chuckles from the drone community.  Then he went on to talk about how only white people can be racist (in order to do that he had to throw out the dictionary definition and create a fluid definition of his own which required continual circumstantial reinterpretation and goal post pushing), and talked about “deconstructing whiteness.”  It was one of the longest, stupidest, fluff sessions I ever had in my life, and it was clear that the purpose was not to understand social issues in any meaningful way, or to address facts, but rather to instill people with certain feelings.  Of course, I had no feelings, other than indignation over something stupid being taught as fact.

So if there is no such thing as race then why are we having a class called “race relations,” and how can anyone be racist?  The premise of the class defeated it’s purpose, and the time spent there would have been better used pondering the old Medieval question of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

So that was my first comprehensive and immersive experience with left wing foolishness on race.  Now we come to Dolezal, who was pretending to be black, and now claims that she is black on the inside.

First we have to ask what “inside” we are talking about.  On the inside people are mostly red, but DNA is what determines who you are, and if your DNA has 0% black sequences then there is no basis for arguing that someone is black on the inside.  You may feel a stronger affinity towards another group, and if that group befriends you, then you may even forget that you’re not one of them, but at the end of the day you are whatever you are, and nothing can be done to change that.  When it comes to behavioral differences between races, at least half of that is culture.  You can change your behavior but you can’t change your race, and it’s absurd that we are even having this sort of discussion.  The closest anyone can get to changing their race is to marry into a different race and produce kids that are different than they are.  So you can’t change yourself, but you can change the next generation, for whatever that is worth.

“While challenging the construct of race is at the core of evolving human consciousness, we can NOT afford to lose sight of the [broader social issues] that affect millions, often with a life or death outcome,” wrote Dolezal, 37. “This is not about me. It’s about justice.”

Whatever her intentions, Dolezal touched off a contentious national debate about race, what exactly it is and whether it even exists. In interviews, Dolezal said she considers herself to be black, and she described choosing the black community over white culture during her college years in Mississippi.


Among rational people, there is no debate over whether or not race exists.  Even many on the left know it does, which is why they don’t count Dolazel as black.  If they were ideologically consistent, they would say, “Oh yes, she’s black, and always has been, just like Bruce Jenner was always a woman.  So she can keep her job, because she never actually lied in the first place.  She’s presenting as black, so you have to recognize.”

The fact that they don’t do that goes to show that they do believe race is immutable, and that there are essential characteristics to different races. In fact, the whole idea that white people are somehow the incarnation of evil, and that only we can be racist is predicated on the assumption of innate and endemic group characteristics.  If they really believed that race was a social construction, they would just construct Dolezal into the group and call it a day.

Of course, as soon as they do that then they lose the ability to continually browbeat white people, because they would have to accept the idea that you can’t identify a person’s race by their looks.  They would have to allow whites into black universities, just like Planet Fitness allows men into the women’s bathroom because of the “transgender” thing.  Also, the quota system on universities would be completely undermined, as whites, Asians, and Indians would put down that they were black and Mexican in order to get in, and if the universities argued there would be some lawsuit about transphobic discrimination.

It should be obvious that the left has no ideological consistency.  Their main goal is to destroy our society, and they will take the quickest road to doing that.  On the surface it may look like the “race is a social construction” thing is self defeating and irrational, and it is in the logical sense, but what it is really about is controlling the dialectic, and redefining reality based on political authority rather than accepting reality as it is.  It’s a 1984 kind of thing, where if they reduce your chocolate rations and call it an increase you have to make yourself THINK it’s an increase, and if they say you will float up from the table you have to believe it.

Suppose Bob goes into a pet shop looking for a Great Dane.  He goes inside and asks the manager if he has a Great Dane.  The manager says he doesn’t know what Bob is talking about.  Bob then proceeds to describe what a Great Dane is, and all the while the manager shakes his head.

Finally the manager says, “You’re wrong sir.  There is only one kind of breed, the dog breed.  There are no differences between dogs.”

Bob loses it, and insists that the man show him the Great Dane’s right away, or he’s going to leave.  The manager goes into the back room and comes out with a bijanmaltese, or some other small yappy dog.

Bob says, “You’re a complete idiot!” and walks out.

The manager says, “Breedist!  Bigot!”

So Bob concludes that either the manager is a completely delusional moron, or he is pretending to act like a fool in order to accomplish some ulterior motive.  The current situation is no different.

The left can’t give up on their ludicrous notion that race is a social construct, because that would go against the greater political agenda of multiculturalism which insists that people are the same and interchangeable and everyone has the right to live in any part of the world no matter how poorly they get along or who was there first.  But on the other hand, they can’t allow the “transracial” concept to take off, because then they lose the tools of collective guilt and discriminatory race-based quotas.

Published by:


I could be described as a libertarian monarchist with religious leanings and sympathies towards anarchy and nationalism. I have realized that a lot of my views are reactionary. Most of the time it's when I see something I don't like that I feel inspired to write. I'm basically like a badger being poked with a stick. I'm fairly ornery when poked, but I don't wish people harm provided that they don't seek to harm me either directly or indirectly. I don't at all care for the left, and I am not at all happy that they are out to destroy my way of life and undermine my freedom. But one of my goals is to spread awareness as much as I can. My Manifesto in Short.: 1. Dejure rights and positive liberty are invalid concepts. Man in his natural state is free. He is free to create what he wants, occupy and defend a territory he exists in, associate with who he wants, wear what he wants, say what he wants, follow whatever religion he wants, and essentially do whatever he pleases. Government is an artificial imposition which requires force both to come into existence and to exist. Therefore, government is not in a position to grant freedom or rights, as those already exist prior to the institution of government. Government can curtail freedoms, but it can never give them. The only fully legitimate function of government is to protect the natural rights of others from being violated by forces which they are incapable of combating, for example, protecting a farmer from the Mongol invasion. Protecting someone from having their feelings hurt is not a legitimate function, as never having hurt feelings is not a natural right. 2. Freedom of association and speech are more important than anyone's feelings. Feelings are subjective, and there is no reason why one person's feelings are any more valid than anyone else's. A law to protect one person's feelings from being hurt is certain to harm another person's, therefore, feelings cannot be a basis for law. My freedoms do not end where another person's feelings begin. 3. Democracy is a failure, and it is predicated on faulty premises. In order for Democracy to work, two criterion must be fulfilled, 1) those who tally the votes must do so honestly, and 2) those who vote must be moral and intelligent enough to make wise and proper decisions. The first premise is impossible to prove, and the second is not true of most people, therefore, Democracy is a questionable endeavor at best, and ultimately doomed to failure. In fact, under the best of circumstances Democracy is mob rule, but aside from that it also opens the door to demagoguery, tribal politics, and lobbying. 4. Communism and Islam are no less evil than Nazism. Communism has killed more people than Nazism, and in fact Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Islam has killed, and continues to kill more people than Communism and Nazism together. The only reason why communism and Islam are given a free pass is because Cultural Marxists are in charge of education, the media, and entertainment. Cultural Marxists have decided to institute communism by attacking the culture, and they have recognized Islam as something which they can use as an ally (for the time being). That is why both of those toxic ideologies get a free pass, but really they should not. Hitler worked with both Communists AND Muslims before the allies entered the war, and during the war he continued to work with Muslims. If some guy were to go around in a Nazi uniform and goose-step and Sieg hiel as he walked down the street he would never be able to get a job. His life would be over, and he might even be met with physical violence. If a white guy did it then things would be even worse. However, Muslims are able to walk down our streets wearing their terrorist clothing, their robes and hijabs, which represent thousands of years of slaughter, antisemitism, and persecution of religious and ethnic minorities (not to mention violence against women), and people just let them go. I want a complete and indefinite hiatus on Muslim immigration, and I want us to start repatriating the Muslims that are already here. 5. I utterly reject the concept of the "social contract." I did not ask to exist, nor did I have any control over what part of the world I was born in, which people group I was born into, or what other groups might happen to exist around me. Since my existence is entirely involuntary, I cannot be held responsible for the fact that I exist, nor is my existence sufficient grounds to argue that I owe something to someone else. I do not owe anyone money, goods, or services simply on the basis that I exist or that they exist. 6. Collective guild is a rubbish concept. No one can help what group they are born into, and no one is born owing anyone else anything. Debt is the result of borrowing resources on some level, and having just entered in the world one does not have the capacity to borrow, or really do anything beyond the most basic biological functions. Therefore, the notion that one baby is born owing something to another baby is absurd at best. 7. I thoroughly support Israel. I fully admit to supporting Israel for religious reasons, but if those were not in place I would still support Israel out of enlightened self-interest. Israel fulfills the real world equivalent of the function Gondor serves in Tolkien's Middle Earth. By that I mean they are close to the evil army, and draw a lot of it's attention and focus, and in doing so they protect the west. The difference is, that in Tolkien's world the west does not actively seek to import orcs and other members of the evil army, behind Gondor's back, whereas our moron leaders in real life do constantly import the evil army. Also, Jews are not a monolithic group, There are both left wing and right wing Jews. Those who are on the left are not motivated by religion to do what they do, but by the perverse Marxist ideology which they have adopted in place of their religion.

Categories UncategorizedLeave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s