Monday, February 4, 2008


Last night, while listening to the radio on the drive home, I heard someone talking about the use of stereotypes and how abhorrent it was. However, during the same talk, the same guy disagreed with a caller regarding one group. He said that the stereotype in that case was "all in fun". The group was White people in the rural South, the so-called American "rednecks".

Why, I wondered, is it OK for the media to blatantly abuse that particular group?

Southern Whites are descended from mostly Scots-Irish immigrants who were not welcome on the English-noble-controlled Irish plantations except as indentured servants or laborers. They came to the colonies and found that things here were in many ways a reflection of their homeland, so they retreated to the wilds of the Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky. They managed to build homes, plant crops, raise families and live their lives with a Bible in one hand and a long gun in the other. They faced hostile native tribes and wild animals with equal resolve. And they did all this without any help from the outsiders in the more urban areas, simply asking to be "let alone". Over time, of course, their isolation was broken.

These people were, to outside standards, "uneducated". Yet, they had a deep understanding of, and appreciation for, the land they lived on. They made an art form out of "making do". They were not "book smart", but were intelligent enough to operate a very viable and vibrant society in a marginal part of the frontier. They generally lived under a strict moral system with very well-defined limits of acceptable behavior.

So, why the hostility which extends to this very day? In large part, it's two-fold. First, the Southern people (or "Southrons") are vehemently independent. They don't meld easily into the prevailing mentality emanating from the North or the West. They maintain their own counsel, and don't need outsiders. So this creates a negative reaction in those who would impose themselves. That negativity has already expressed itself in the form of an unConstitutional "civil" war started by the imperialist Lincoln and his Northern mercantilist cohorts.

But more importantly, they are not city-dwellers, steeped in liberal academia, but rather are rural ultra-realists about everyday life. And this infuriates the cosmopolitan, internationalist Leftists, especially those of jewish extraction, who thrive on opening borders, flooding the locals with foreign influences and destroying local sovereignty. The Southrons, with their history of resistance, represent a nail for those urbanites to hammer down.

But that's not all. This morning, on the Opie & Anthony program on XM, there was a debate about the stereotyping of Italians as mobsters in the New Jersey Lottery's new promotion, called "Bada-Bling!". In this commercial, Sopranos-types tout the new ticket with affected "goon" accents and mannerisms. The members of the show were quick to point out that while "of course" not ALL Italian-Americans are that kind of person, SOME were (or are), and therefore no offense should be taken.

Again, why is it OK for the State of New Jersey to single out one of its largest White ethnic groups for such portrayal?

The first error made by the show's hosts was, the Mafia was never an all-Italian enterprise. Jews made up a huge chunk of the management of the operations. Consider "Murder, Inc.", run by Meyer Lansky, Louis "Lepke" Buchalter and George "Bugsy" Siegel, all jewish. They handled much of the money (of course), and committed many of the bloodiest killings. And today's "Russian" Mafiya is not Russian at all, but comprised almost entirely of Russian jews.

But the Italian element is the one that the jewish-dominated media chooses to put out front, so they carry the load of the stereotypical mobster.

Even allowing for this, how would the media or public react to a lottery promotion involving swindling money-lenders, a la Shakespeare's "Shylock", complete with irritating yiddish accent? Or one portraying Blacks as violent, fast-talking, lazy drug abusers? Or how about one showing Mexicans as low-rider-driving, woman-slapping, hairnet-wearing gangsters?

The point is, the only acceptable prejudicial treatment allowed to the general public involves the denigration of White people, whether in specific socioeconomic or regional groups (like the Southerners), or by ethnicity (Italian-Americans), or by gender (the eternally-stupid White male father portrayed in commercials who is always outsmarted by his wife and kids), or by position (currently, all authority figures in TV shows or commercials are non-White and/or female). The media never airs anything without an underlying agenda. In these cases, that agenda is plain and simple: the denigration and destruction of the White majority as a power base in the Western world.

I'm sick of it, and I want it stopped. Maybe you do, too.

1 comment:

BigHeathen said...

You're right. I'm sick of it, too. I am descended from the Scots-Irish settlers who came out this way to Kentucky. I've even made a study of how the Scots-Gaelic brogue became the southern twang.

Excellent post, Brother. I think it's high time a change was enacted.