The Problem with Color-Blindness:

Republicans and Libertarians, whenever challenged on the issue of race by liberals, say they are 'color-blind.' They don't care about race. Their policies aren't affected by any racial considerations. The problem with this is that people are certain races. Therefore, not caring about races is the same as not caring about people.

Republicans and Libertarians can't get this through their head. If you have a 'tough on crime' policy, you can say you don't care about race, but the end result is that half of all black men are in jail. This is practically genocidal. Or suppose you're a Republican or Libertarian who is 'color-blind,' but just wants to get rid of medicaid, food stamps, HUD housing, and all other benefits to the poor. Yet again, who exactly is receiving these benefits? Largely, blacks and hispanics. So you say your policy is race-neutral, but it is in fact targeted like a bullet at minorities. The catastrophic damage you would do to black and hispanic well-being by taking away their food, housing, education and health care beggars belief. And then, when liberals point this out, Republicans and Libertarians whistle a tune while blithely saying they are 'color-blind' and 'these policy platforms aren't about race.' Of course they are about race! If any policy has a disproportionate impact between racial groups, that policy is about race. It is about picking winners and losers between racial groups. If a policy favors one race's survival or reproductive prospects over another's, you can bet that it's about race more than ANYTHING else.

Republicans and Libertarians think that just being explicitly color-blind is good enough. That, somehow, if you never mention skin color, you can't be a racist. But if your policies just so happen to favor people with white skin over people with darker skin, 100% of the time, then you are not color-blind. You are creating an ideal society for people of your color -- and a dystopia for people with darker skin. This is implicitly not color-blind. After all, if you were truly color-blind, if race had Nothing to do with your thinking, then at least 50% of your policies should favor minorities over whites, just by random chance. When your policies just so happen to only appeal to a white electorate, and get a whopping 5% of the black vote, that CANNOT be a 'color-blind' platform. Maybe Republicans and Libertarians are blind as to how their policies affect people of color, but the people of color aren't! Even jellyfish, even amoebas, can understand their own self-interest, and act in accordance with it. When Republicans and Libertarians say they are color-blind, but it turns out 95% of blacks, 80% of jews, and 2/3 of Hispanics and Asians are voting for democrats, it can be understood that something in the Republican/Libertarian 'color-blind' platform is inimical to people of color. Something is against their self-interest. Wishing this away, or pretending this problem doesn't exist, is a cowardly and ultimately unworkable strategy.

Some bold Republicans and Libertarians admit that their policy platform doesn't seem to appeal to minorities. But, hilariously, they don't think the problem is with their platform. Nor do they think that the problem is the minorities. No, apparently, the problem is blacks, hispanics, jews and asians simply don't understand what is in their own best interest. If only blacks, hispanics, jews and asians weren't a bunch of childish idiots, they would realize that the Republican/Libertarian platform raises the survival/reproductive fitness of minorities even MORE than the liberal platform. I kid you not! So every time it is pointed out to these spokesmen that they managed to, yet again, not appeal to anyone but whites, they say, "The problem is blacks don't understand our policies. Our policies are more favorable to blacks than any other! Blacks would thrive under a Republican or Libertarian government like never before!" Except, of course, half of their men would be in jail, and their babies would be starving in the streets because you just revoked their housing subsidy, their food subsidy, their education subsidy, and everything else that keeps black single-parent homes afloat.

The absolute condescension, the incredible amount of racism it takes to say that black, hispanic, jewish and asian voters are simply too stupid to figure out that their interests would be best served by voting the complete opposite of how they actually vote, just makes these 'color-blind' fools even more irritating. What's worse, a party that runs a policy platform that only appeals to whites, white values, and white interests, or being told that you're just too stupid to understand why a policy written expressly for the benefit of whites and using the values and interests of white people as a guide is best for your non-white community? For the record, I don't think jews and asians are 'too stupid' to figure out what is best for themselves. I don't even think cats are 'too stupid' to figure out what is in their best interests. The voting records of minorities isn't a gigantic 'mistake' that has been going on for the last hundred years, and if only we 'communicated' a little better and 'sold' our platform with better slogans all the minorities would happily jump on board the hay wagon, it is a real reflection of the fact that their real interests and values are not being reflected by Republicans and Libertarians.

What is the point of being 'color-blind' if your philosophy is, basically, a white philosophy? If you, a white, find great white thinkers of the past to be inspiring, and model your policies after these other whites, do you really think you're 'color-blind?' A truly color-blind individual would find non-white philosophers just as appealing as white philosophers. Your values and interests would be as in line with black values and interests as with white values and interests. Are Republicans and Libertarians aware that the top ten rated TV programs by black viewers, and the top ten rated TV programs by white viewers, barely overlap? There is a deep divide between these two races. If you take all your policy recommendations from the viewpoint of, "I, a white man, want x, y, and z in my utopia, so that's what I'll campaign for," is it possible that you will leave out some of the desired values and interests of non-whites? A color-blind person is apparently too stupid to notice the real differences between racial groups. Not just their capabilities, but their aspirations and their morality are COMPLETELY different. Asians don't care much about 'individualism.' Blacks don't care much about 'crime.' Hispanics don't worry too much about 'animal rights' or 'zoning laws.' Jews don't especially enjoy 'prayer in school.' Saying you are color-blind, but legislating a society on the basis of 'what would be perfect for me, a white, and whites like me?' isn't just color-blindness, it's simply blindness.

These republicans and Libertarians are completely blind as to the consequences of their policy prescriptions. They are blind to the fact that it weighs on different racial groups unequally. They are blind to the fact that their policies only appeal to whites, because whites are fundamentally different from the other races. And under this rubric of reality-blindness, they talk about 'color-blindness.' In the height of arrogance, these blind men claim that other racial groups just don't understand that letting whites have their way on everything is for the best of all races, including minorities. Minorities should just get to the back of the bus and let us drive. Whenever minorities disagree with whites, it's because they're too stupid to understand what's in their best interest. If a minority doesn't vote Republican or Libertarian, it's their fault, because they were too dumb to realize the Republican or Libertarian platform is in fact ideal for their racial group, and for them as individuals. If I were a minority and I heard a condescending argument like that, I'd want to punch the speaker in the face. How dare they pretend to know our self-interest better than we know it ourselves?

Every time a Republican or Libertarian opens their mouths, they discredit themselves. They're either prattling on about things that don't matter, like 'freedom' and 'opportunity' and 'God' and 'justice,' or they're pretending to care about minority interests while actually attempting to genocide them with exterminationist levels of anti-crime and anti-spending programs. Blacks don't have much use for 'opportunity' when, if they compete fairly, they will always lose against whites. They don't care much about 'justice' when that would mean there were no boys left to provide for a next black generation. They don't care about 'freedom' when that means the freedom to starve in the streets, homeless, because they can't get a job due to being out-competed by foreigners or machines. They don't care about any of the shit whites care about. We live on completely different planets. A white person prattling on about the Constitution and George Washington is trying to tell a black person, who is surrounded by friends and family members getting shot, fired or pregnant on a regular basis, what's in his best interest? If it weren't so infuriating it would be laughable. A black person doesn't know whether to laugh or cry when listening to a white, 'color-blind' republican/libertarian.

It is impossible to be color-blind so long as our law code gives better survival/reproductive fitness to one race over another. It is impossible to be color blind if a law code gives one race a higher quality of life over another. Only a law-code that perfectly balanced all racial interests could be called 'color-blind.' You would know such a political platform was being offered if it garnered 50% of the white vote, 50% of the black vote, 50% of the asian vote, 50% of the jewish vote, and 50% of the hispanic vote. Any result before then is clearly tilted in favor of one group or another, and you should go back to the drawing board. If non-discrimination, if color-blindness, is truly necessary to be a moral person, Republicans and Libertarians need to keep redrafting their policy platforms until they receive these electoral results. I want a crowd assembled before their spokesmen that is exactly proportionate to the demographics of our nation. Anything short of that is clearly favoring one race (whites) over others -- or why is the crowd of people who approves of the speaker so predominately white?

If Republicans and Libertarians don't want to change their policy platform to appeal to non-whites, they should admit that they are a white party that is mainly for the benefit of whites. Minorities can join in if they feel like it, but their participation, or non-participation, is irrelevant to us. We want what's best for ourselves, and screw everyone else. This, of course, cannot be called 'color-blindness.' It can be called, 'being perfectly willing to include race traitors and eccentric individuals from other groups, while being exclusively and only pro-white.' But a policy favor that only helps whites and only pleases whites CANNOT be described as 'color-blind.'

The problem is, once you've gone so far as to become a pro-white party only interested in improving the condition of whites, Republican/Libertarian policies cease making sense for whites too! There are plenty of better ways to be pro-white than the Republican/Libertarian party platform. For one thing, whites could cut off non-white immigration. That would make our lives better. For another, we could ban Islam. That would give whites a rosier future. We could also choose who has children and who doesn't, such that only good families with good genes craft the next generation. That would be an enormous improvement from our current policy of overpopulating the Earth with the lowest riffraff imaginable, whose only virtue is their ability to have sex without birth control. So you see, there is NO PLACE for Republicans or Libertarians, except a world of hypocrisy and lies. To be a Republican, or a Libertarian, is to play pretend. Let's pretend our policies are actually good ideas. Let's pretend they benefit everyone. Let's pretend they give equal outcomes to disparate groups. Let's pretend they at least benefit whites. Let's lie and lie and lie until the cows come home.

The Republican/Libertarian party is a morass of cowardice, hypocrisy, self-deception, and unlimited arrogance. Color-blindness is a code word for ignoring the needs of people of color. Acting on 'principle' is code for acting in a way whites find most appealing when they sit down and contemplate things next to a stream. 'Non-discrimination' is code for accepting anyone stupid enough to betray their own interests, as well as everyone who is happy to support a policy that favors their own interests. The policy platforms of Republicans/Libertarians THEMSELVES discriminate, largely along racial lines. Color-blindness is a joke when race is the best predictor of which party you will vote for. Better than ideology, religion, class, or any other measure, just knowing the race of an American voter is sufficient to know what party they're going to vote for. That can't be by coincidence. Any Republican or Libertarian who says it is a coincidence, knows he's lying out his teeth.

It is impossible to believe that race isn't affecting people's decision-making. America is one of the only countries with a death penalty. Why is that? Countries without large black or hispanic sub-populations gave up the death penalty long ago. Is it just a coincidence that in the one majority white country that has large minority populations, the death penalty is still legal? Is the same true of gun rights? What about lack of public health care? The whole rest of the white world has voted to provide their poorest members free health care. Only Americans refuse to offer health care to the poor. Is this due to our rugged individualism, our American spirit, or our racist wish to not help poor blacks and hispanics? Think about it. What are the odds? Republican/Libertarian platforms are popular in America, and ONLY America. Whites, everywhere else on Earth, vote for completely different policies. But here in America, we become fiercely unwilling to tax the upper class (whites), and give to the lower class (non-whites.) Just OUT OF THE BLUE we suddenly lose all compassion upon setting foot on American soil. It's unbelievable. To make matters worse, democrats KNOW it is unbelievable.

Every time Republicans whine about taxes and say we should cut spending, the spending cuts are never directed at the military -- which happens to disproportionately employ whites. No, the government 'waste' always just so happens to benefit non-whites. Republicans have never seen a program that predominantly helps non-whites and not labeled it 'waste.' Whites think it's a waste whenever and wherever a non-white is made happy. It's a shame they weren't hung up in a tree somewhere instead.

This is why, whenever Republicans start talking about 'taxes being too high,' (while they are the lowest in 80 years), Democrats reply, "You're a bunch of racists." Not because they are unfairly calling perfectly innocent Republicans a dirty word. It's because the only reason any white person could ever think their taxes are too high is because they live in America, which has minorities. Every other white country on Earth pays far higher taxes than Americans. Every other white country on Earth is comfortable with spending far more on their poor. It's just 2+2=4 from here. Either, miraculously, Americans are the most 'freedom-loving' individuals on Earth, or they're racists who just don't want to jeopardize their quality of life/survival/reproductive fitness for the sake of other races they feel no compassion, or even disgust for. Even Democrats can smell a rat.

There is no conceivable logic as to how Republicans or Libertarians decided on their policy platforms, so radically removed from any other white culture/community on Earth, except racism. It's just impossible. Why would these policies, specifically, appeal to us and no one else? Because we are pioneers, because we are immigrants? So is Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. No, there's only one variable between white Americans and white non-Americans -- the presence of 'diversity' in our midst. All of our thinking is warped around how to best screw our minorities -- there is no other explanation for why we come to such radically different results than the rest of the white world. Until we admit this, America's dialogue on race can not move forward. When Eric Holder said whites were cowards who wouldn't speak honestly about race, he was talking about THIS. This willing refusal to admit we are racists, that our policy prescriptions are racist, and that color-blindness is inherently a joke unless it actually appeals to all colors equally.

The only honest broker who can fairly, evenly debate with liberals are not Republicans or Libertarians. They are 'Nazis.' Basically, the only real dialogue on race that could ever emerge would have to come from a group that is AWARE of white racism, that ADMITS to a policy platform that doesn't serve all races' best interests equally, but then goes on to say they are OKAY with this. That must be the start of the debate -- (otherwise, people who came that far would immediately convert to liberalism.) A fair, open dialogue on race would start like this -- whites and non-whites have irreconcilable differences. It is in white's best interest, therefore, to set up a country that exclusively suits whites best. It is probably in any minority's interest, therefore, to leave. They can go set up their own law code that best suits them, somewhere else. Because we won't budge an inch, we won't accommodate their wants or needs in any way, because we are selfish and intent on pleasing ourselves and ourselves alone. But, if, for some crazy reason, you as a minority find our policy prescription pleasing and want to stay in our country, then go right ahead. This is the only possible counter-argument to liberalism. Honesty matched with firmness. Fairness matched with unapologetic selfishness.

The sick, gloopy syrup of Republican/Libertarian lies won't get us anywhere. And eventually, when whites become a minority, it won't win any elections either. Then, even the argument for the 'practicality' of lying through our teeth about everything will be dissolved. But whites shouldn't need a reason to stop lying. Whites shouldn't lie in the first place. It's part of the meaning of belonging to our race -- we hate, detest, and abhor all lies and all hypocrisy. We can't stand it. We want no part in it. We'd rather die than say it. Whites acting in a dignified, honorable fashion is the start of any decent conversation with liberals. Before then, liberals know we aren't even willing to discuss reality, and just want to live in lala-land. What possible response can they give our specious, ridiculous 'talking points' except 'we hate you and can't wait for when all of you die of old age?' If we're going to treat them with utter contempt, they may as well treat us likewise. But if we honestly, openly speak to them as fellow adults, maybe they could honestly, openly reply to us like adults.

It would be a lot better than today's current 'race relations.'