(You can see these graphics full size by scrolling back through my posts to June 9 (the post titled "This Is Racist ... How?")
How he attempted to portray the message of the graphics -- as reassuring affirmations to white people -- is risible and dishonest, as I'm sure he knows that's not what they are. Or, maybe he doesn't know and I've been giving him too much credit all this time.
In any case, the memes in my graphics aren't intended to comfort white people -- most white people already know these things and have always known them, even the multiculturalists among them who pretend to be angered or horrified by them.
My sentiments are replies to the beliefs, or at least the claims, of multiculturalism. Simpson's misunderstanding (sincere or not) took the form of attempted humor, presumably to bring a touch of levity to his otherwise stuffy, suffocating blog. His "humor" involved classifying these "affirmations" with those of Al Franken's affirmation-spouting character, Stuart Smalley, from Saturday Night Live. (I note, however, that for humor to work, it has to be funny.)
As interesting as Simpson's failed attempt at ridicule is, some of the comments by his followers are far better illustrations of kneejerk multicultural indoctrination.
The following illustrates the kind of mentality my "affirmations" were intended to defy. This is classic multiculturalist bullcrap:
June 20, 2013The idiotic message here is, if you prefer one type of association, it is the only type you will engage in; you will reject all other associations. Specifically, if you prefer to associate with white people, you will never, ever associate with anyone but white people. What makes otherwise (seemingly) sane and intelligent people spout this sort of nonsense? Well, what's done it in the USA was several decades of indoctrination in schools and colleges, television, movies, books, magazines and virtually every aspect of the popular culture.
“Professor Young, we would like you to speak to the Latino Law Students Association.”
“Sorry Oswaldo, but I prefer to associate with white people.”
Who could possibly be justifiably offended by that, I ask you.
If you want to see the difference between multicultural "preference" and real preference, we can learn about it from ... ice cream.
Yes. Ice cream.
I prefer butter pecan ice cream. Prefer? I love it. Does that mean I reject all other kinds of ice cream and never eat them? No, but if the multiculturalist mindset were applied to ice cream, people who expressed a preference for one type would be characterized not only as HATING all other flavors, but as attempting to get other people to stop eating all but their own favorite; and to convince ice cream makers to make only the kind they prefer. Ludicrous.
But here's a realistic, elementary and logical illustration of preference so simple even the academic multiculturalists can understand. Here's a far more accurate illustration of preference:
Let's say that over the course of a time period, say a year, you have occasion to eat ice cream twelve times -- roughly once a month. On all but one occasion, you have a choice of what kind of ice cream you eat. (The one occasion where you don't, you are dining with friends at their home, and they serve only one flavor of ice cream with desert; you have no choice but to eat that flavor, or to have no ice cream at all.)
So over the course of time you choose eleven times which flavor you will eat -- and five times you choose butter pecan. Three times you choose Dutch chocolate. On two occasions you choose peach and on one you choose pistachio. You obviously have a preference for butter pecan; but you don't totally reject chocolate, peach or pistachio.
If white people prefer to associate with white people, that doesn't mean, as Pat Young implies, that they refuse to associate with others.
This is one of the Big Lies of multiculturalism and anti-white-ism.
Here's another comment from one of the blog followers:
June 20, 2013Oh, but people do tolerate far, far worse expressions -- from non-whites. Apparently, that doesn't bother multiculturalists.
Pretty certain that there is a psychological term to describe this degree of tribalism. One thing for sure is that it shows fear of the future and today’s world. I can only assume that she is a first class racist. Perhaps if she spent a few years living in New York City things might change. Or working and living in place where people won’t tolerate these type of expressions.
It would be interesting to see what Michael Confoy would come up with if asked to copy and paste any fear in my memes, since there isn't any there, and fear did not inspire them. Replying to schizoid multicultural ideas, like the claptrap he just posted, is what inspired them.
If there IS a psychological term for degrees of tribalism, it is far more applicable to other ethnic groups than to whites. Of course, the dishonesty of multiculturalism won't let the Mike Confoys of the world even SEE it, let alone understand and comment on it.
Since the term "racist" frequently has no objective meaning anymore, because it has been used to substitute for so many other things, the term "a first class racist" is even more meaningless. Here's a meme sure to cause Mr. Confoy to blow a gasket.
Notice, also, how multiculturalists take upon themselves the authority for deciding for others what's good for them -- such as, where they need to live to bring about "change"? I don't know Mr. Confoy, but I reject the notion that he or any other multiculturalists are qualified to suggest to others that they need to change, particularly people they only know by way of the internet and toward whom they have exhibited deep prejudice.
Where do you suppose such arrogance originates? And do you imagine he doesn't know that nearly any place to work has come under the influence of multiculturalist idiocy of the type Confoy spouts -- an idiocy that labels tribal identity as a wonderful thing for everyone except white folks?
Too bad they don't offer courses in humbleness. Mr. Confoy could use a couple of semesters.
Here are some lesser yappings in response to these memes:
We have this irrelevancy from Charlie: "White people such as myself, seem to be well represented in congress."
Yeah? So? What has that got to do with any of the graphics Simpson pilfered and took to his blog?
Then, from Talmadge Walker, comes this: "Never heard of her. I suspect publicity gets her dander up and makes her forget to take her meds."
LOL! Depends on the type of publicity, Mr. Walker. If it's something that will translate into book sales, I'm fine with it. If it's "publicity" on a stuffy personal blog of an arrogant academic ... eh... so-so.
To bdhamp's observation, "Ya know, if she (or they) would just let up on the ancestor worship to establish the entirety of her identity, she wouldn’t have to expend all this energy in a futile search for justification," I first note that there's not a lot of energy involved in making and posting graphic Facebook memes.
Second, as explained, it's not a search for justification, which is not needed. It's a reply to the mendacious claims of multiculturalism. And as for ancestor worship -- where do they get this hallucination? I made it clear a long time ago, I'm under no illusions about my ancestors being all too human and thus not worthy objects of worship. http://conniechastain.com/sf/index.html
Finally, from Rob Baker, "Every time she posts that nonsense I always think of this scene." What follows is a video of a character, Uncle Ruckus, from The Boondocks animated TV series. I'd never seen or heard of him, so I had to look him up. Wikipedia describes him as, "An angrily self-hating black man, he disassociates himself from other African Americans as much as possible, and is outspoken in his support of what Huey calls the "white supremacist power structure."
Since there's nothing in any of my graphic memes that would logically bring this cartoon to mind, Rob has just given us a marvelous look at the multicultural mind, always on the lookout for white racism -- and if none can be found, it can be construed from nearly anything, by a mind that is constantly in that mode.
As for MikeD's confession, "Gotta love Uncle Ruckus. I always think of HK Edgerton," I have to say it that he genuinely associates these two in his mind, he (1) doesn't know HK and (2) is doing it just because they're both black -- which is ... dare I say it ... racist!
All this comes just a few days after Brooks Simpson has marvelously illustrated his compulsion to "trap" people who do not focus their creative efforts solely on the civil rights era. Or, at least, that's was why he unsuccessfully attempted to entrap me. He suggested that the white teens in one of my books are comparable to the murderers of Emmett Till, and is apparently disapproving that I do not portray them that way.
He hinted that a Southern novel about false rape accusations should be about the Scottsboro boys, who were black, rather than fictional white teens. He has repeatedly exhibited the attitude (in discussing my novels, which he hasn't read) that white Southerners should not be given positive portrayals in novels, or depicted as suffering injustice.
It is this kind of deaf, blind, indoctrination-induced antipathy for white people (and, yes, exhibited by white people) is what inspires the graphic memes I have created. Since there is good reason for opposing this kind of mindless animosity I will no doubt continue to showcase it and oppose it. And I will likely continue to include graphic memes as part of that effort.
(Note, there is not one syllable of animosity for another race in any of my memes. That's why the commenters at Simpson's blog never single out and identify racism in anything I write. They can't; I don't write racism. That's why they're reduced to making nebulous, out-of-the-blue accusations.)
Image of woman from FreeDigitalPhotos.net