Emily Goldstein: ‘Yes, Diversity is About Getting Rid of White People & That’s a Good Thing’

Source:Beyond Highbrow- from Emily Goldstein.

Source:The New Democrat 

"In “Yes, Diversity Is About Getting Rid Of White People (And That’s A Good Thing)” the author Emily Goldstein (who is either a master troll or incredibly ignorant — but probably a troll) makes an enthusiastic case for the end of white people.

Despite the massive online outrage over the article, Thought Catalog has left the article up, simply putting a warning before access. The site does have editors, so clearly someone thought it was acceptable to publish.

But it’s actually a hilarious article if you take it either as a joke or simply written by an idiot.

“Whiteness is the source of all oppression in the world,” Goldstein writes. “Whiteness is racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and heteropatriarchal capitalism.”

Someone tell Tibetans, Muslims in Myanmar, and Muslims in South Sudan that all their ethnic oppression would end if there weren’t any damn white people.

The author is also not aware of world demographics, as made clear by the statement “the world belongs to the minorities now” — as if white people are the majority race of the world.

“But other races are not as evil as whites are, and it’s important to remember that,” she writes. “The world belongs to minorities now, and they will make a much better, more peaceful world with what they’re given. Only when white people have ceased to exist will a peaceful and progressive society — free of racism and hatred — be possible.”

She also believes that white people are the only ones who are homophobic.

“When white people die out, so will racism, sexism, queerphobia, and all other forms of oppression.”

Yep, Ugandan gays will have nothing to fear after the imminent white genocide.

Goldtsein perhaps jumps the shark and reveals her true troll identity when she starts arguing for long prison sentences for “complaining whites.”

“Not to mention, why should whites receive any kind of benefits when the ultimate goal is to get rid of whites altogether? Finally, laws against hate speech will serve to prevent whites from complaining about this, as any white person who complains will be arrested, given a long prison sentence, and made an example of for the rest of the remaining white population.”

This is so obviously a troll…which I respect. Game recognize game. The piece has more than 1,700 comments, and Thought Catalog is reaping the reward of all the juicy rage clicks." 

From Matthew Ozburn 

“Diversity Is About Getting Rid Of White People”

Source:Vir M- I believe the woman here is Emily Goldstein. You would think a Jewish person would know better than to advocate for the elimination of an entire racial or ethnic group.

From Vir M

Not to even sound like I’m standing up for racists on the Far-Right, or Nationalists and people in the Tea Party and even Center-Right Conservatives, who aren’t racist in any way, because I disagree with the Far-Right as much if not more than I disagree with the Far-Left, but when people on the Right talk about leftist fascism and leftist racism, this is why.

This piece by, Emily Goldstein and Robert Lindsay is ( not even sure that person exists ) is all the fuel that the Right, Center and Far, need to say: “How about leftist racism, violence and bigotry?” Well, here it is when you argue that eliminating Caucasians from the world.

And not only that, if calling for mass-murder and genocide of an entire race of people is not bad enough, but not to offer any real evidence of why that would be a good thing. Which puts you in the same camp as an Adolph Hitler, Joe Stalin, or Saddam Hussein. And if you don’t like being in the same league with evil men like, then don’t join that league by publishing such hateful garbage. (And I’m being nice with that)

As someone who is not a hateful person, but Peter Schiff when he commented on Michael Moore’s statement a couple of years ago saying that: “Caucasian-Americans buy guns, because they’re afraid of African-Americans”, asked the question, “can you be racist against your own race?” Which might sound strange and it’s rare, but it does happen. It’s just that most people are smart enough not fall for that.

If someone believes their race is inferior to every other race and if you’re on the New-Left and Far-Left, depending on how hateful and warped you are, you might believe the Caucasian is inferior to every race in the world and you believe your race is essentially made up of bad, evil, inferior, hateful people, that would make you a racist against your own race. You would be guilty of committing a self-inflicted wound against yourself and your people. (So to speak) Who needs enemies with friends like that?

Thats the level of stupidity that America has to deal with. Racists on the Far-Right like Dylann Roof, who murders people in church simply because he doesn’t like their complexion. To racists on the Far-Left, calling for the death of Caucasians. And saying that would be a good thing.

As far as Robert Lindsay saying that Caucasians, representing the sole source, or major source of evil in the world: I guess he’s not familiar with the People’s Republic of China. That still locks up people for simply disagreeing with the Communist Government. Ugandan dictator Idi Amin, who murdered people in his own country because they were from a different ethnicity. And I could add several African dictators to that. Slavery, is still legal in parts of Africa.

The Islamic Republic of Iran, calling for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel. Talk about genocide and they fund anti-semitic groups who still attack Jews in Israel, simply because they’re Jewish. How about North Korea and the Communist Government starving their own people. Sending them to work camps and making slaves out of them. I already mentioned Saddam Hussein in Iraq and his murders of Kurdish-Iraqis.

Racism, is racism whether it comes from the Right, or Left. And just because someone might let it slide, doesn’t mean it’s not there. Just means someone didn’t bother to mention it, or ignored it, perhaps for partisan political reasons. And because of our liberal First Amendment, extremists, Far-Left and Far-Right have a very liberal amount of freedom of speech. And that even covers racism, just as long as they aren’t calling for violence even because of their racist beliefs. And because of that, people who aren’t warped, who have at east one foot on the ground and a level of intelligence and sanity, I at least believe have a responsibility to call out the racists for what they are exactly.

President Barack Obama: Eulogy at Charleston Shooting Funeral of Clementa Pinckney

Source:You Hot News- President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) speaking in Charlottesville, South Carolina.

Source:The New Democrat

I can’t imagine anything worst than being murdered in a house of worship. A place, that is supposed to be a house of peace. I mean, if you’re not safe in a church in America, where would you be safe? And yet this is where these members of the Charleston AME Church were murdered. And why, because of the so-called accused murderer Dylann Roof, hated African-American people? His hatred was so strong, his faith in people was so weak, that he murdered people in church simply because they were members of a different race and had a different complexion. These murders, were simply pure evil. Perhaps something that only an Adolph Hitler and his followers would approve of.

I believe that is what President Obama was hitting on here. Yes, remembering Reverend Clementa Pinckney and the fact that he was murdered just perhaps because he was an African-American Reverend. But also acknowledging why everyone was there in the first place. Why they were eulogizing a man of 41 years. When I think of how young Reverend Pinckney was when he was murdered and then add the fact that he was murdered in his church and for no other reasons than the color of his skin, it makes me really angry and wanting to see his murderer get similar treatment. But just not in a peaceful place like a church. But in some hell hole underground, where only Devils are welcomed and expected to attend.

South Carolina, I’m sure has its wonderful qualities and has aspects that make it a great place to live. And I believe Charleston is an example of that, but it has a level of hatred and bigotry that needs to be overcome. So it becomes that state where all Americans who are good productive people are welcome. And it doesn’t become a state where people aren’t even safe in church simply because of their race and complexion. President Obama, didn’t speak to that and to South Carolina as a whole and I’m just adding this myself. But no American should have to even contemplate being murdered in a house of worship. Especially just because of their race and complexion. And gunned down in the prime of their life.

Jared Bernstein: The Supreme Court & ObamaCare: Somehow Commonsense Prevailed

Source:On The Economy-

Source:The New Democrat

Jared Bernstein, progressive economist from Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, has a very good pice about the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act today. He talks about Chief Justice John Roberts and why he ruled in favor of Burwell, in King V Burwell. U.S. Secretary Sylvia Burwell, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Burwell, being the Obama Administration in King V Burwell. Bernstein, argues that Chief Justice John Roberts and the other Justices who ruled in favor, 6-3 decision by the way, ruled in favor of the ACA and the subsidies, based on Congressional intent.

Chief Justice Roberts, ruled that when Congress passed the ACA in 2010, it was based on three parts.

Better rules and regulations for how private health insurance is given in America. Including protections for patients, so they don’t lose their health insurance simply, because they actually need to use it. Or have a pre-existing condition. Just a couple of examples.

The individual mandate. So everyone is in the system and is covered and paying for their costs of their health care. And not passing their costs onto others. And making health insurance more expensive for everyone involved.

And the last one and perhaps the most important, because it goes to expanding health insurance and health care in America. The tax credits for lower middle-income working class Americans. People who aren’t technically poor and who are working, but can’t afford private health insurance and make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.

The Chief Justice, arguing that Congress didn’t intend to leave the tax credits up to the states that have a health care exchange, or have the Feds handle it. He said that under the ACA, the Feds can give out tax credits to people who don’t live in state with a health insurance exchange. Chief Justice Roberts, wasn’t saying he supports the law, but was simply ruling on the intent of the law and how it was written. And the ACA, clearly tries to expand health insurance in America. Which is what the tax credits are about and why the Feds fund them.

The Huffington Post: David Woolner: 'Seeking The Four Freedoms is as Important Today as it Was 74 Years Ago'

Source:The Huffington Post- in Chicago, Illinois, to cover Hillary Clinton's presidential announcement.

Source:The New Democrat

"Hillary Clinton's decision to hold the first major public rally of her campaign at Four Freedoms Park in New York City reminds us not only of the many challenges the United States has faced in the past, but also the many challenges we face today as we seek to build a better future for ourselves and for our children. 

Hillary Clinton's decision to hold the first major public rally of her campaign at Four Freedoms Park in New York City reminds us not only of the many challenges the United States has faced in the past, but also the many challenges we face today as we seek to build a better future for ourselves and for our children.

It was on January 6, 1941, in one of the darkest moments of the Second World War, after Hitler had announced his decision to establish a "new order" in occupied Europe, that Franklin Roosevelt took to the world's airways to propose a different idea -- a "moral order," based not on "the tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb," but on four fundamental human freedoms: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear." 

From The Huffington Post 

"Hillary's official campaign launch at Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island, New York City. She lays out her vision for the country, inspired by the stories she’s heard from everyday Americans." 

Source:Hillary Clinton- announcing his 2016 presidential campaign.

From Hillary Clinton

If today’s so-called Progressives, (Democratic Socialists, in actuality) believe that Hillary Clinton is going to run for President as the female Bernie Sanders and the other self-described Democratic Socialist, or even as an, to quote the heavy metal band Judas Priest: (which I’m not a fan of and especially heavy metal) they have another thing coming. 

Hillary, will speak to Democratic economic concerns and the broader economic concerns of the country and even offer policies to address those concerns. But don’t expect some expansion of the New Deal or a Swedish welfare state. Other than new infrastructure investment, job training for displaced, unemployed and low-skilled, low-income workers.

Center-Left Democrats, which is Hillary Clinton is one, should be all about freedom and pushing for it and that includes economic freedom. But they need to be more clever and go even further and put more thought into how we accomplish it. Instead of being about individual rights and trying to out socialist Socialists and what government can do for people and how government can take care of people, they should be about individual rights. And what government can do for people who are struggling to move ahead, or even keep current pace, to be able to move forward on their own and achieve economic freedom for themselves by empowering them to improve their own skills. And encouraging more economic, especially small business development. Even for people who are current unemployed or underemployed.

Democrats, could expand economic freedom, by first getting elected and getting reelected. But to do that, by talking to Americans who are struggling regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender, that they have a plan to help them get ahead: 

Improve their skills through further education and job training, including college. 

Infrastructure investment for underserved communities. 

Small business expansion and even cooperatives for workers who are struggling to move ahead and give them the opportunity to become successful small business owners. 

But if Democrats talk about how big government can take care of you, if we just give them more money and not have to do things for ourselves, it will be 1972 George McGovern again. Because Americans, are still a people that like to move ahead, live in freedom and be able to take care of themselves.

The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Captive Audience (1962)

Source:Alfred Hitchcock TV Series- left to right: Arnold Moss & Ed Nelson.

Source:The New Democrat

The Captive Audience, is about a man Warren Barrow, played by James Mason, who is a mystery writer, who at the very least wants his publisher to believe that he’s going to kill his girlfriend’s husband and then later his girlfriend, Janet West, played by Angie Dickinson. And sends his publisher, Victor Hartman, played by Arnold Moss, what today would be called a cassette book. Barrow, has written a book on tape about the murders that he wants his publisher to believe that he’s committed. Barrow, at the very least, is unstable, after losing his wife in a car accident and suffering brain injuries that he’s never recovered from.

Victor Hartman, brings in one of his other writers, Tom Keller, played by Ed Nelson, to listen to Barrow’s self-confession tapes, to see what Keller thinks of the tapes. Hartman and Keller, are trying to figure out whether Barrow has just completed his latest murder mystery, or is he serious about murdering these two people. His girlfriend and her husband. They decide that Barrow is serious about these murders and even talk to him about his book. And give him some constructive criticism about his book. Barrow, being unstable, doesn’t take the criticism well and freaks out about it. And takes it as if Hartman and Keller simply don’t understand the book.

Angie Dickinson, is hardly an angel on this show. Just looks like one, but her character Janet West, is married to a wealthy man whose old enough to be her father and she’s not in love with him. She uses men to get what she wants and uses Barrow as well and doesn’t love him either. And this is all part of why Barrow is at the very least considering murdering her. He’s very unstable and doesn’t handle rejection and being used very well. They do a very good job with this episode of not making it clear whether Barrow actually murders his girlfriend, or is this simply part of his book. He’s writing a murder mystery that actually doesn’t happen in real-life. And it's one of the better murder mysteries that I at least, have ever seen.

The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Murder Case (1962)

Source:Alfred Hitchcock TV Series- Gena Rowlands & John Cassavetes.

Source:The New Democrat

This is one of the better episodes of the Alfred Hitchcock Hour, simply because of the people in it. You have two up incoming actors Diana Justin, played by Hollywood Goddess Gena Rowlands and Lee Griffin, played by John Cassavetes, who were once a couple themselves, who meet again on set in London for a play they’re in. They discover that they’re still hot for each other and want to get back together. The problem is, Diana is married to Charles Justin, played by Murray Matheson. Charles, is a very wealthy jewelry dealer, who is also old enough to be Diana’s father. To put it mildly, Diana is not with Charles because she loves him. But that is fine with Charles, as long as she makes him feel good.

This new couple, sets out to murder Diana’s husband. They fail once with the breaks in Charles’s car and try it again. Another thing I like about this show, is Charles is not rich, because he’s stupid, or dense. He knows that Diana and Lee are back together and might even try something dangerous. Which is why he sends his wife on vacation to get her away from her boyfriend. Diana, figures out that Charles is on to her, but Charles still wants her. And if you’re familiar with Gena Rowlands, you can easily see why. Doesn’t take a genius, or even someone with average intelligence to figure it out. And Charles, is not going to give up his goddess wife without a clean fight.

Murder Case, despite its simplistic and dull as a brand new pencil title, is one of the better episodes in the Alfred Hitchcock Hour series. It has a great cast and a great plot. Normally in shows like this when the older wealthy husband figures out that his young gorgeous sexy wife, is having an affair with a young man, he dumps his wife as soon as he can. He hires detectives, he gets all the evidence that he needs to get a clean divorce. So he doesn’t have to pay his cheating wife anything. But Charlie, fights for his wife and knows exactly what is going on all the way up to the end. And is just one example of why this is such a great show.

Sam Seder: 'The Rise of the New Left With Cliff Schecter'

Source:The Majority Report- talking about the New-Left in America.

Source:The New Democrat 

"Cliff Schecter joined us last Friday to discuss how the Bill De Blasio wins means a resurgence of an economically progressive left, why we are leaving the age of Reagan and Clinton behind, why younger voters are so economically left wing and how Clinton and Obama governed from the right...

From The Majority Report

I actually agree with a lot of what Sam Seder and Cliff Schecter and are saying here. Which might be the first and last times I ever say that. But they’re also being overly optimistic. The Millennial Generation, is the largest generation that we’ve ever had. And they’re still very young and even if they have the largest support of socialism than any generation that we’ve seen since the 1930s, (or whatever) that doesn’t mean this is a socialist generation.

The Millennial’s are made of what I call Paul Conservative Libertarians, (named for Ron and his son Rand Paul) and then you have Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialists. And then you have what I at least call a classical liberal wing of this generation, people who aren’t anti-government, but don’t want big government running their lives for them. Which is why they support things like same-sex marriage, marijuana legalization, big believers in privacy and personal freedom in general. But they also don’t want big government in their wallets and trying to manage their economic affairs either.

Millennial’s, whether they say it or not, like private enterprise and capitalism in general. A lot of them are small business managers and owners. The ones, who’ve actually been able to find jobs. And don’t believe their business should have to pay a lot in taxes. But they believe government needs to do certain things for us like education, infrastructure, environmental protection, regulating predators, a safety net for people who need it. But they don’t want that Bernie Sanders socialist superstate that’s going to tax a lot of our money away from us to take care of us. And they don’t want big government in our personal affairs either.

The presidential candidate next year that can speak to young people especially Millennial’s, who says that government doesn’t have all the answers and shouldn’t try to do everything for everybody but can be a force for good by empowering people to take control over their own lives, will win this generation and probably win Independents in general as well. Who also believe in a limited government that does what we all need it to do in the areas of security, economic investment, to use as examples. 

You win these two huge groups and Millennial’s tend to be independent as well, that candidate will be the next President of the United States. I could be wrong about this, but I’m willing to bet it with anyone.