Non-Whites Waging War on Whites in Colleges

Jared Taylor shows how radical leftist non-white students are waging a protracted race war against white people in colleges and universities across the West, a phenomenon particularly pronounced in the United States where anti-whites control all the major schools.

The anti-white lunatics are not satisfied even with leftist self-hating whites who parrot anti-white talking points. Even those whites are condemned simply for being white. This means that leftist whites will slowly be pushed out of the social justice sphere and condemned as crypto racists.

The anti-white brigade are literally promoting the racial genocide of whites, like Rudy Martinez did in a university newspaper. They first try to delegitimize and deny the very concept of whiteness and race, but at the same time say white genes are defective and need to be bred out.

This war on whites is clear as day. Only a blind man could miss it. The leftist establishment is trying its best to eliminate whiteness but will only succeed in pushing more whites into the alt-right.

About Brandon Martinez

A prolific writer, historian and social commentator, Brandon Martinez is a 21st century counter-cultural heretic and rebel intellectual for the new European Reconquista.

View all posts by Brandon Martinez →

7 Comments on “Non-Whites Waging War on Whites in Colleges”

  1. The war on whites is and has been clear as day, just like the war on men, but libtards like the Ugly “Truthers” or the Ken O’Keefes out there will continue to deny these wars because they’re too goddamned lazy and/or dumb to actually research the topics. If you’re Ken O’Keefe, reading Malcolm X was all you needed to know about race… he read Malcolm X and now he’s an “expert” on race, lmfao. I apply all the same double standards to these ignoramuses that they do to whites and men.

  2. https://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness
    QUOTE
    If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious…

    Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be true – such as the whole of the history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women. Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and say, “Wait a minute. This isn’t true. I can see it isn’t true,” the power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state…

    Marxist theory said that when the general European war came (as it did come in Europe in 1914), the working class throughout Europe would rise up and overthrow their governments – the bourgeois governments – because the workers had more in common with each other across the national boundaries than they had in common with the bourgeoisie and the ruling class in their own country. Well, 1914 came and it didn’t happen. Throughout Europe, workers rallied to their flag and happily marched off to fight each other. The Kaiser shook hands with the leaders of the Marxist Social Democratic Party in Germany and said there are no parties now, there are only Germans. And this happened in every country in Europe. So something was wrong.

    Marxists knew by definition it couldn’t be the theory. In 1917, they finally got a Marxist coup in Russia and it looked like the theory was working, but it stalled again. It didn’t spread and when attempts were made to spread immediately after the war, with the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, with the Bela Kun government in Hungary, with the Munich Soviet, the workers didn’t support them.

    So the Marxists’ had a problem. And two Marxist theorists went to work on it: Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary. Gramsci said the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said in 1919, “Who will save us from Western Civilization?” He also theorized that the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise was the culture: Western civilization itself…

    In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank is established that takes on the role of translating Marxism from economic into cultural terms, that creates Political Correctness as we know it today, and essentially it has created the basis for it by the end of the 1930s. This comes about because the very wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by the name of Felix Weil has become a Marxist and has lots of money to spend. He is disturbed by the divisions among the Marxists, so he sponsors something called the First Marxist Work Week, where he brings Lukacs and many of the key German thinkers together for a week, working on the differences of Marxism.

    And he says, “What we need is a think-tank.” Washington is full of think tanks and we think of them as very modern. In fact they go back quite a ways. He endows an institute, associated with Frankfurt University, established in 1923, that was originally supposed to be known as the Institute for Marxism. But the people behind it decided at the beginning that it was not to their advantage to be openly identified as Marxist. The last thing Political Correctness wants is for people to figure out it’s a form of Marxism. So instead they decide to name it the Institute for Social Research…

    The stuff we’ve been hearing about this morning – the radical feminism, the women’s studies departments, the gay studies departments, the black studies departments – all these things are branches of Critical Theory. What the Frankfurt School essentially does is draw on both Marx and Freud in the 1930s to create this theory called Critical Theory. The term is ingenious because you’re tempted to ask, “What is the theory?” The theory is to criticize. The theory is that the way to bring down Western culture and the capitalist order is not to lay down an alternative. They explicitly refuse to do that. They say it can’t be done, that we can’t imagine what a free society would look like (their definition of a free society). As long as we’re living under repression – the repression of a capitalistic economic order which creates (in their theory) the Freudian condition, the conditions that Freud describes in individuals of repression – we can’t even imagine it. What Critical Theory is about is simply criticizing. It calls for the most destructive criticism possible, in every possible way, designed to bring the current order down. And, of course, when we hear from the feminists that the whole of society is just out to get women and so on, that kind of criticism is a derivative of Critical Theory. It is all coming from the 1930s, not the 1960s.

    END QUOTE

    1. In the above quote, the author argues that all ideologies are authoritarian because the start from the assumption that a given philosophy is true, and then attempt to engineer reality to fit. That is where caution is advised with notions of the “Alt-right”. It seems pretty clear that in America, Trump’s ‘Evangelical’ (Christian Zionist) base and such outlets as Fox News are ideologically driven and not conservative in the classical sense. And this is where disambiguation is so important between that which calls itself conservative and that which actually is such.

      Also, the above essay points to the absence of an alternative suggested by PC Critical Theory, which begs the question of what the Marxists actually have in mind to replace Western Culture and most importantly Christianity with? I would suggest that we have our answer in the term “Alternative Right”. Although this is not the sense in which I think that Martinez presents the right, it is very much a descriptor for the Putin style of authoritarianism and it’s spinoff the Trumpian right. The “Alt-right Cringe compilation” shown a week or so back highlights the nature of Alt-right as an ideology rather than as a conservative critique of PC.

      If we take a look at the issue from the perspective of Thesis – Antithesis – Synthesis, then we have a model that runs something like:
      Christendom – Critical Theory – Alt-right (as Dughin’s Fourth Way).

    2. Very interesting backgrounder.
      Criticising is contagious and it is usually people’s initial reaction, they have been brainwashed to criticize and won’t spend more than 2 minutes, researching. Saying they are too busy is no excuse, they have the time but they are just not interested.
      Useful condensed information is very useful to grab their attention and agreement.
      Erin’s Quote from academia.org on the origins of political correctness is one such useful snippet.

  3. Non whites, who usually have low IQ, must not study in western colleges and universities. They must not even study at all. Maybe that is why there are many white dropouts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *