David Cole at TakiMag links the #NiggerLivesMoreImportantThanSocietyMotherfucker movement to a recent traffic stop with no white people involved: Saying 'No' to Black People:
The driver was lashing out at something she knows she can never be: a force for order, not anarchy.Because of Melugin’s cowardice—and Tucker’s—in not revealing the race of the driver even though they knew it and even though it was relevant to the story, every other media organ that picked up Melugin’s exclusive likewise left that detail out. In the May 6 L.A. Times, journalistic fraud Hayley Smith wrote that “the race of the woman in the video is unclear.” No it isn’t. The unblurred version of the video had been online for three days at that point. But I don’t blame Smith. Scumbags will scumbag. I blame Melugin and Carlson, who are supposed to be “fearless” and anti-woke. One mention of the driver’s race would’ve forced other outlets to either ignore it or admit it, but not outright lie about it as Smith did (Fox even closed comments on the video on YouTube to prevent viewers from mentioning the unmentionable).More proof that there’s just so far a guy like Carlson can or will go regarding America’s untouchables.See, that traffic-stop video is far more dangerous than you might think. So dangerous that even a guy like Carlson had to back off, at least on the most important detail and its implications.Several years ago, I wrote about my brief exchange with the then (blessedly) unknown “Dr. Ibram X. Kendi” regarding the Planet of the Apes films. I explained how the 1968 original was not intended as a racial allegory, but by the fifth film, 1973’s Battle for the Planet of the Apes, the franchise had dived headfirst into social commentary. Battle depicts a postapartheid society (Earth following the liberation of the enslaved apes) in which apes and humans live side by side, but with one inflexible rule: A human must never say “no” to an ape. In one scene, a “progressive” human teacher who runs the community’s school impulsively yells “no” when one ape kid maliciously destroys another’s crayon drawing. He’s hauled off to prison.To the film’s apes, “no” is associated with their former enslavement. And now, in freedom, they’ve demanded that “no” be taken off the table. Humans have lost the right to say it, even for legitimate reasons. Now, I’m not comparing black people to apes. The movie did that; I’m merely commenting on the commentary. And the fact is, the film nailed the exact way in which postapartheid societies go wrong, via “corrective” racial preference systems fueled by vengeance in the guise of justice.And in America’s current “corrective apartheid,” saying “no” to a black person is the worst sin a white can commit. It can lead to being fired, “canceled,” or even physically attacked. The rules may in theory apply to everyone, but you can’t tell a black “No, you can’t use the bathroom if you’re not a customer,” “No, you can’t eat in this area,” “No, this parking is for handicapped only,” “No, you may not trespass,” “No, you may not grope women in this neighborhood.”Indeed, society’s ultimate “no,” expressed via arrest, prosecution, and imprisonment, is rapidly being suspended for blacks via police defunding, progressive prosecution, and deincarceration.That San Dimas deputy said “no” to a black person on camera for the entire world to see. The driver used every weapon in the black rhetorical arsenal, but the deputy stood firm. Ironically, when she told him “you’re not white,” she was kinda right: A non-Hispanic white would’ve given in. Or, if not, he would’ve been targeted by the press and local politicians and activists for destruction. That’s the danger of the video: It shows a nonblack saying “no” to a black and getting away with it.
It even extends to geo-politics:
This isn’t a viral video; it’s an instructional video.Just last week in Plano, Texas, BLM thugs were allowed to illegally block an intersection, while the white cop on duty concentrated on pushing back an angry white motorist who simply wanted to get to his destination. And guess what? Now BLM is demanding that the cop be fired for not shooting the white motorist! That cop didn’t say “no” to blacks who were breaking the law, and what good did it do him? He still got hammered for not killing a white guy who tried to say “no” on his own. Remember—“corrective apartheid” is not about justice but vengeance; the more you indulge it, the more you encourage the favored group’s bloodlust.Meanwhile, not being able to say “no” to blacks has quite literally become a national security issue. When Biden’s limp-dicked Secretary of State Blinken tried to have a “summit” in Alaska with the Chinese last March, China’s top diplomat stated that “the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength” because “the challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated, such as Black Lives Matter.” These “human rights violations” are “admitted by the U.S. itself.”“Admitted by the U.S. itself.” That’s the key. Humoring blacks, not saying “no” to the unreasonable and objectively false things they say—“we’re being genocided,” “we’re being murdered by cops every day,” “1619 is America’s true founding year,” “all whites are privileged oppressors”—has given our most dangerous international foe exactly the ammo it needs to steamroll the U.S. at the negotiating table. How can we claim any moral authority when our leaders “admit” that all those horrible things blacks say are true? Yes, we’re a KKK slave-state, a racist genocidal hellhole. Having made that admission, how can we then argue that China shouldn’t decimate us economically and in every other way?Genocidal states should fall, right? And because we can’t say “no” to even the most outrageous black claims, we’ve essentially admitted that we deserve to fall.The inability to say “no” to blacks will harm us internationally, as surely as it’s already harming us domestically in our cities and suburbs.
