A message for 'progressive' compassionate globalist-imperialist Cleuci De Oliveira who associates the violent history of rape and plunder in Brazil with 'proud race-mixing'.
A link to her article in Foreign Policy, the magazine of Zionist globalist imperialists:
http://www.unz.com/isteve/why-susan-rices-kids-wouldnt-get-affirmative-action-in-brazil/
Now, does the following quote make any sense?
"As the proudly mixed-race country grapples with its legacy of slavery, affirmative-action race tribunals are measuring skull shape and nose width to determine who counts as disadvantaged"
How can Oliverira say 'proudly mixed' and 'legacy of slavery' in the same breath? The reason why Brazilians are mixed is BECAUSE of slavery. So, Brazil is 'shamefully mixed', NOT proudly mixed. All the racial mixing resulted from conquest, genocide, mass rape, and slavery.
https://www.amren.com/features/2015/11/race-in-brazil-part-i/
https://www.amren.com/features/2015/11/race-in-brazil-part-ii/
https://www.amren.com/features/2012/09/is-brazil-a-racial-democracy/
We know what an imperialist European-Brazilian like Oliveria is trying to pull off. By invoking diversity and race-mixing as matters of PRIDE, she is trying to sweeten the European-Portuguese history of conquest, rape, plunder, slavery, and genocide in the New World. "Hey lookie, Latin America is so 'proudly mixed', therefore all the conquest, plunder, rape, and slavery were really worth it for birthing Diversity!"
The fact is those blacks didn't ask to be brought to the New World in slave ships. They were brought over by force. Brazil took in 10x more slaves than the US. Brazil took in more slaves than rest of Americas combined. Also, because Brazil mostly brought male slaves, some of these slaves took women from native peoples. So, conquered native men had to witness their own women taken and raped by both whites and blacks. So, this is why Oliveria uses the term 'proudly mixed'? What a disgusting harridan.
Imagine if some man raped a woman of another race, got her pregnant, and then celebrated the proud-mixture of the offspring.
The natives of so-called Latin America didn't ask to be conquered by European invaders and imperialists. What is Oliveira so proud of? If she, as a so-called 'progressive' is opposed to imperialism, why does she take pride in the fact that Brazil was created by conquest, mass rape of natives, and mass slavery of black men who then also raped the native women?
Also, is it right to call South America 'Latin America'? The native peoples were Indigenous folks of various cultures. They were not Latin. Latin-ness was imposed by imperialists, conquerors, and rapists.
India was once ruled by Anglo. So, should it be called Anglo-India. Philippines was once conquered and raped by the dirty Spanish. So, should it be called Latin-Asia?
Oliveira's ilk should forever feel ashamed for the shameful race-mixing of Brazil. Latin whites conquered and raped the natives and FORCED race-mixing on the natives. It was a history of rape and plunder, a violent mash-up of identities and cultures. And not just in Brazil but in Mexico, Bolivia, Venezuela, Chile, and etc. The natives didn't ask to be conquered by her imperialist ancestors, no more than Russians asked to be conquered by Nazi Germans in WWII(and much earlier by Mongol rapist hordes). Her avaricious ancestors conquered and raped the New World, and that is how races got mixed. It was shameful, not something to be proud of.
She should be ashamed of the history of race-mixing, the legacy of imperialism and rape. But the horror didn't end with the European conquest of native peoples. Her dirty ancestors brought 3 to 4 million black men to the New World. And since they were mostly men, they grabbed women from native folks. So, the Indians got raped by both whites and blacks. And yet she calls this 'proudly mixed'. She is a sick disgusting vile woman. According to her historical logic, the native folks of Brazil should feel proud that so many of their women got raped by whites and blacks.
She is essentially an apologist of massive historical rape culture.
Imagine if a bunch of bandits attacked her family and raped her and her family, and then suppose she and her family gave births to mixed-raced kids from bandit seed. Should she be proud of this? Only a sicko would say so.
For the conquered and humiliated natives of the Americas, there was no PRIDE in race-mixing. It was rape and plunder. Portuguese & Hispanics came, spread diseases that wiped out 90% of the natives, and then they raped tons of women to produce mestizos. And the, whites brought over millions of black slaves who also raped the natives. It is a sad brutal tragic history, and Oliveira, as a white woman of imperialist-genocidal lineage, has NO RIGHT to talking with pride about 'race mixing'. Latin whites and blacks did to native women in 'Latin America' what the French, Americans, and blacks did in Vietnam in the colonial and anti-colonial wars. Conquering peoples always sexually dominate the women of the conquered peoples. 'Race-mixing' followed Nazi invasion of France and US invasion of Japan.
When Japanese invaded China, they acted just like Oliveira's rapist-ancestors did with natives in the New World. Japanese soldiers raped tons of women in Nanking. Should Chinese who were impregnated by Japanese soldiers be 'proud' of their mixed-national babies? Following Oliveira's disgusting imperialist-genocidal-rapist logic, the answer would be yes. The history of Latin America has been the history of Rape Culture on a massive scale.
She has no right to be talk of pride and race-mixing. Her ancestors are imperialists, rapists, and slavers. Shame on Cleuci De Oliveira.
Her ancestors did what Zionists did to Palestinian women. Rape!
Suppose some Arab women got pregnant with seed of Zionist rapists. Should we say there's PRIDE in this race-mixing?
https://www.guernicamag.com/old-wine-broken-bottle/
One might wonder why The Nation would publish an article about a non-event. In fact, “the story I am telling here really begins,” according to the peacenik, “at night, [when] those of us who couldn’t restrain ourselves would go into the prison compounds to fuck Arab women.” Actually, to rape, but why get hung up on nuances in a story so irresistibly titillating, of an Israeli Jew who, unlike his scrawny American counterparts, gets to copulate with macho abandon? And anyhow, his enviously awestruck American editors and readers could rationalize, as the Israeli did, that “those who couldn’t restrain themselves did what they thought the Arabs would have done to them had they won the war.” Just as, if men were women, and women men; then women would rape men; ergo, it’s okay if men rape women. None of The Nation’s house feminists, who periodically erupted in politically correct indignation at the vaguest hint of sexism in the magazine’s pages, objected to the Israeli fucker’s logic.
Also, Oliveira doesn't get to the real problem of why there are so many problems with blacks in Brazil. The reasons are threefold:
1) Blacks are more muscular and stronger. So, they easily beat up on weaker races.
2) Blacks are more aggressive and wilder. So, they tend to be more destructive of civilization and society.
3) Blacks are generally of lower IQ. Blacks are generally superior to whites in muscle and speed. But they are generally inferior to whites in brain power.
Group differences do exist among racial and ethnic groups. It's like Ashkenazi Jews are generally smarter than other races, and blacks are bigger and stronger than Asians. The following two articles discuss Jewish advantages in intelligence and black advantages in sports.
https://newrepublic.com/article/77727/groups-and-genes
Among US immigrants, why do Nigerians outperform Chinese in sports? West Africans are bigger and stronger and superior in athletics.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/19/sports/more-nigerian-americans-are-reaching-highest-levels-of-sports.html?_r=0
And how come Jews are more likely to own sports teams than play in them? They got brains.
So, don't gimme the BS about all races being the same. Also, if all races are the same, why celebrate diversity? If race is just a social construct, then diversity is an illusion since all peoples are the same.
Blacks are problematic because they are stronger and more aggressive. The same advantage that blacks have in sports is what they have in schools and streets. They can attack and rob weaker races. That is why so much of the violence in the US is black on white, black on Mexican, black on Asian, etc. Yeah, yeah, Liberals and Jews condemn as 'racist' any discussion of racial differences, but they do EVERYTHING to avoid black crime in places in NY.
We need to discuss racial differences. And we also need to discuss the fact that race-mixing and diversity are the result of imperialism, rape, slavery, and genocide. They are nothing to be proud of.
Diversity is created by empire building. If anything, anti-imperialists were nationalists. After the French and the US colonized and raped Vietnam, the Vietnamese nationalists fought to liberate their own nation from imperialism that forced diversity on that nation.
Look how Hawiaii became diverse. At one time, it was all Hawaiian. But then, whites came and took over. So, there was Diversity forced on the natives! And then whites allowed in tons of Asians WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF NATIVE PEOPLES. More diversity. So, Hawaiian natives, like Brazilian natives, lost their homeland to invaders and immigrants. What a shame. Hawaiians lost their homeland not only to whites but to Asians. That's what imperialism and mass immigration does. Look how Palestinians lost Palestine to Jews because of Massive Jewish Immigration.
And race-mixing erodes identity and meaning.
Indeed, race-mixing has been a weapon used by Latin-American imperialists to prevent the uprising and liberation by natives. After all, if the majority of Latin American peoples are of mixed-race, they will be confused as to their identities and loyalties. Are they native? Are they white? They won't be sure, so they don't know which side to take and what to do. (Whites would still be ruling South Africa IF white men had raped tons of black women and created a huge population of mulattoes who, in their confusion, wouldn't necessarily side with native blacks against whites. If there had been no race-mixing in Latin America, the natives might have eventually kicked out the Latino imperialists... like the Vietnamese and Algerians kicked out the French. But the race-mixing by mass rape took place on such a massive scale that the majority in many Latin American nations became mixed and confused. Another interesting fact: People seem to dislike diversity all around the world. After all, people flee from diverse nations to go to less diverse ones. People in Latin America try to move to US and Canada that are still less diverse and more white. People in racially diverse North Africa try to move to white Europe. So, even as 'diversity' is hailed a good, people try to escape it.)
Phony Latin-American progressives pretend to be so virtuous, but they are nothing but apologists for the history of conquest, imperialism, slavery, and rape. Oliveira needs to remind herself that the main reason why Latin America is so racially-mixed is because of imperialism, conquest, rape, plunder, and genocide. The natives were FORCED into slavery and rape. And blacks were FORCED into slavery. And whites and blacks both raped the native women in Brazil. That is how Brazil became mixed.
Even today, when a lot of race-mixing happens by means of 'free choice', much of interracial mixing isn't about colorblind spread of love but of people choosing ot mate with other races in conviction that the other race is SUPERIOR. So, race-mixing, by rape or freedom, is not about racial equality. It is about going with what is deemed to be the superior race.
No comments:
Post a Comment