Note: Paris rioting footage in that video starts at 5:09
Last updated: 2021-06-09
Black Lives Matter
Of course they do, but conversely all lives matter was seen by many as a denial of racial grievances.
Wearing a T shirt that said It's alright to be white would get one denounced as a white supremacist, yet black activisits can get away with advocating to kill white people indiscriminately.
In America, organizations like BLM orchestrated "protest" riots with looting and burning, while the organizers misappropriated charitable funds to buy themselves millionaire mansions.
The death of George Floyd at the hand of police officer Derek Chauvin sparked world wide protests that included sports personalities taking the knee in solidarity with oppressed black population.
Ironically many were themselves black yet multi-millionaires despite said alleged "systemic racism" against them.
A jury unanimously declared Chauvin guilty of both murder and manslaughter, despite the fact that the alleged victim had a history of violence, had taken an overdose of drugs and had a medical condition that could have been the actual cause of his death. It was appropriate to restrain him and the footage I saw does not suggest Chauvin intended to kill.
Speculation abounds about the jurors being afraid of becoming targets for the race riots that were going on in their city.
Is this justice, or a triumph for mob rule?
For generations already, under the law all people are equal, yet black people are over represented in prison population, they have on average poorer health and lower income.
Should we assume these statistics are due to systemic racist sentiments in society, that somehow skin color would be geneticaly linked to one's potential, or could there be other factors at play, like inculcated victim mentality? Does anyone even dare to research the facts, or would that invariably result in allegations of racism?
A lot of resentment has been cultivated about historical injustices that would have taken place in a not so recent past.
There are calls for reparations of slavery in America.
Criminal behavior may be condoned on grounds of alleged disadvantage status.
Although few are alive today who suffered, victim status can be profitable.
Should guilt, or victimhood even be considered hereditary?
If so, how do we correlate that with any particular individual?
I doubt skin pigmentation would be an accurate indicator.
Down through the ages, slavery was common on every continent.
Ironically it was the British who ultimately outlawed it based on their protestant Christian convictions.
While it is true that mostly white plantation owners bought black slaves to pick cotton, was it not the African tribal chiefs that sold captives and their own people into slavery, while merchants from the Middle East transported and traded them for profit?
It seems unreasonable to demand today that people who had no part in it, pay reparations to others who suffered no injustice merely because of their skin color.
I suspect that like feminism, sexuality, and religious conflicts, racial division is promoted for a sinister cultural Marxist ideologue, because their class war narrative failed. IOW it's driven by an ulterior agenda to destabilize Western society.
UN Declaration of Rights for Indigenous People (UNDRIP)
There is also perception that reparations would be due to the descendants of indigenous peoples,
land ownership has always been a military matter with wars, conquests and population displacements.
This has been little different among those "indigenous" tribes themselves.
If it were appropriate or practical, just how far back should one go in making restitution and to what extent can we establish the legitimacy of any claim?
Nature doesn't work that way. Natural selection and the relentless struggle for survival is a motivator to the individual and impels evolution, which applies just as much to society, culture and ideology as to species.
People deserve the right to choose their life style and cultural identity without others imposing theirs, but it's not reasonable to expect their choices be subsidised by others, nor can they expect an equal outcome.
The United Nations have now created a divisive protocol that confers special rights, based on alleged hereditary ethnic ancestry.
I can't be bothered to fathom the details, but the result will be polarization and systemic racism.
I suspect it's deliberate to destabilize Western civilization so that they can usher in their sinister totalitarian NWO.
Apartheid New Zealand
The official history is that Maori arrived here a few hundred years before Europeans.
Archeological finds however, show that there were people here before the Maori arrived.
The evidence is not widely acknowledged even though DNA shows some of their descendants are still around today.
Incessant tribal conflicts among Maori focused on bounty, canibalism and taking slaves.
With European weaponry these culminated with internecine musket wars under command of leaders like Hongi Hika and te Rauparaha.
Eventually Maori chiefs saw it necessary to sign a treaty with the British crown to put an end to these massacres.
There is no doubt in my mind that the intent of the treaty was for us all to become one people, The Maori and European tribes together sharing both cultures, but under one (symbolic) crown and a democraticaly elected parliament.
We would all have the same rights under the same laws without prejudice.
Alas, the meaning of Maori words in the treaty have been disputed to make claims about additional concessions to those of Maori descent.
The above thumb nail opens a video about the Maori Crown vs. British crown.
At first our government rejected UNDRIP as would conflict with our Waitangi treaty, but then covertly ministers in government went and signed us up for it anyway and now that has resulted in He Puapua that is busily putting in place systemic racism garnered from both documents.
Here are two videos that analyse the implications. I salvaged them from Youtube just before the channel shut down consequent to targeted harassment from radical extremists.
I rarely pay attention to New Zealand politics because there isn't a single politician that favours national sovereignty, over the globalist totalitarian NWO that oozes from every UN mandate and agenda.
Each and every one of the slimy little creeps in the Beehive has ambitions to become their dictatorial administrator.
Thus our democracy would degenerate into choosing the face, but with no effect on the policies.
Politicians are supposed to be OUR representatives - government of the people, for the people and by the people.
What we are getting is not the liberty our ancetors fought and died for!
My interest was piqued by a youtube blogger.
He's just a factory shift worker who made political parody of some of our politicians.
Cancel culture went full retard on him after he dared mock a radical Maori politician.
I Googled it.
I watched some relevant parliamentary sessions, then made this condensed version of one.
The opposition leader discussing He Puapua really isn't making "racist" remarks.
The PM's equality of outcome health care ought to look at eating habits, exercise and substance abuse rather than assuming it's systemic racism in the health profession.
Rawiri was deliberately disorderly, sabotaging the debate in defiance of Mr speaker's caution.
Rawiri Waititi, the politician in question himself, and with genocidal glee, makes racist tweets like this one, without repercussion.
Now how is that for hypocrisy? Below is a discussion of another of Rawiri's theatrical performances.
This emerging race war is not being fought with conventional weapons, but as a cyber war, probably part of the great reset that is being orchestrated by the world financial elites.
Their stated aim is to corrupt Western civilization from within, so that they can "build back better".
Sustainable industry is a euphemism for culling excess population and subjugating the rest of us as were we cattle for their fruition.
I shall be writing a follow-on page (will appear in the H2 menu) about this in due course, but meanwhile I shall collect a few screen shots ajacent of online discussions I've engaged with in this nefarious cyber war and perhaps add comments in the howl section of this page.
When engaing discussion the important thing is to always remain rational and to avoid feeding the trolls, but never stoop to flagging and censorship.