Professional race man says racism rendered Obama incompetent in debate

One of the most worthless of the professional self-niggerized individuals in America, Michael Eric Dyson, has done it again. He says that the poor debate performance by the most powerful, admired, and idolized man in the world was caused by … well, it was caused by … a sudden onrush of cultural stereotype anxiety. It was caused by the Most Powerful and Idolized One’s fear of white racism. I kid you not. Only a professional self-niggerized type, whose limited but manipulative intelligence is capable of only one thought, black victimization, could have come up with such a theory.

Mediaite reports:

Appearing on MSNBC’s NOW on Tuesday, Georgetown University Professor Michael Eric Dyson claimed that, in his opinion, President Barack Obama was overly deferential to Mitt Romney during the debate because he was concerned he may come off as an “angry black man.” Dyson said that a tape released by The Daily Caller and broadcast on Fox News Channel on Tuesday night may have been on Obama’s mind during Wednesday night’s debate….

Dyson then pivoted to what he believed could be in Obama’s head during last night’s debate, which was The Daily Caller tape of him from 2007 attacking the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina and suggesting there were unresolved racial issues behind that insufficient response.

“Obama has just been subject to the Fox News treatment of ‘angry black man’ again,” said Dyson. “Let’s not forget this. Lest we pretend that that doesn’t make a difference to the specter hanging over his neck that ‘I can’t come off as too vigorous, because then it looks like I’m being an angry black man.’”

Meanwhile, also reported at Mediate, the great black innovator who conceived the concept of niggerization (he said that Romney by describing Obama as “angry” had “niggerized” him), has declared that race is not biologically real, it’s just in our heads. But if race is just in our heads and not real, why are, uh, “black” people en masse receiving university admissions, jobs, home mortgages, and careers as TV commentators for which they are manifestly unqualified?

Touré: his entire career, everything he has, is based on
his race. Yet he says that race is not biologically real.

The concept of niggerization as used by Dyson and Touré is so stupid it deserves no analysis. At the same time, I can’t help but point out that the standard way the liberal media have described conservatives in this country, going back decades, is “angry.” Every time some liberal outrage is committed, conservatives are described as reacting “angrily.” They are never described as simply opposing something they oppose. The implication of “angry conservatives” is, of course, that conservatives have no rational position but just bigotry and fear of what is new or different. Conservatives have never once criticized this constant characterization of themselves as “angry.” Liberals are also described as “angry,” but only a tiny fraction as often as conservatives are called it. In any case, “anger” is a commonly used description in American politics. But when Romney simply called Obama “angry,” Touré said Romney had “niggerized” Obama as an “angry black man”; and when Obama, more recently, was actually seen in a 2007 video speaking angrily about race, Dyson said that Obama, as a life-long victim of racist cultural stereotypes, became so paralyzed by the fear that he would now be seen as an “angry black man” that he lost the ability to debate Romney on the economy. But of course, in order to debate Romney effectively, Obama did not need to put on a fake black dialect and indulge in anti-white racial demagoguery, as he did in his disgraceful 2007 speech that had surfaced. He just needed to be able to hit back at Romney effectively on the economy, Obamacare, etc.

I’ve gone into this, as two examples of the complete lack of rationality, and thus the complete lack of character, of various prominent black spokemen in this country. Which brings us back to Touré’s coinage “niggerization.” By using the word on television, he also brought the prohibited word “nigger” into focus and made it a topic of discussion. “Nigger,” as traditionally used both by whites and, far more, by blacks, does not mean all blacks; it means a shiftless, no-account black man; it refers mainly to character, not race. And my point is that Dyson and Touré, by saying the idiotic, race-hustling things they say, niggerize themselves.

Robert P. writes:

If, as Touré says, “Race has no biological basis” is true, then Touréhad better box up the contents of his office and head to the nearest unemployment office. Touré is employed in the role he is in specifically because he is black. Based on the limited number of articles of his I have read and television appearances I have seen, if he were white he would be lucky to be writing for a paper with a circulation of 20,000 or be doing the 11PM/10PM news in a similar market.

LA replies:

When whites begin, not just to oppose the system of black preferences on abstract or constitutional grounds, but to be indignant and outraged at the brutal fact that blacks as a group are receiving vast benefits they have not earned and do not deserve, and that they are receiving them at the expense of whites, and when a political movement comes into being to express that outrage, then maybe there will be hope that this rotten system will end some day.

Beyond the duty of decent behavior on an individual level, what do whites in this country owe blacks? NOTHING. Blacks collectively currently occupy a wholly illegitimate place in our society, not only as the recipients of this leviathan-sized system of unearned material and cultural benefits, but as the wreakers of social disorder, crime, and anti-white racial violence. You may say, well, not all blacks are committing violence. Of course, true. But how many blacks speak up against the anti-white hatred that simmers in the black community and the anti-white violence that expresses that hatred? Here’s one example that comes to mind. We’ve heard that some years ago, perhaps 20 years, Oprah Winfrey attended Rev. Wright’s church, but then she found the anti-whiteness too much and she stopped attending. Fine. Good for her. But did she ever publicly criticize Wright? I don’t think so. And let’s be clear, as I pointed out several times in 2008 at the time of the Wright affair, that the anti-white thing being expressed from the pulpit and in the pews of Wright’s church was the “higher” level of the same anti-whiteness that, on a lower level, is being expressed continually; in this country in the form of anti-white violence.

We know that white liberals cover up and deny black-on-white crime, as I write about continually at this site, and they deserve to be damned for it. But let’s be clear that blacks are also silent about the black-on-white crime, doing nothing to oppose it or end it.

So, as long as the current system of black unearned benefits and black anti-white rage and black anti-white violence continues, what do whites owe blacks (beyond the duty of decent behavior on an individual level)? NOTHING.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 06, 2012 09:23 AM | Send