A former U.S. Senate candidate and white supremacist was reportedly part of a small group of protestors who disrupted a Wednesday press conference in Cincinnati on racial injustice.
Robert Ransdell, who made news in Sept. 2014 for U.S. Senate campaign signs that read “With Jews We Lose,” was at the press conference and, according to Cincinnati.com, was the most vocal of the protestors.
“How many decades are we going to accommodate the behavior of black criminals?” Ransdell shouted at one point.
Some of Ransdell’s fellow protestors carried signs with the message: “Diversity means chasing down the last white person, #whitegenocide.”
The press conference was held in advance of the MLB All-Star Game, set to take place at the city’s Great American Ball Park, according to the site. Local ministers had reportedly gathered to urge the MLB to speak out on behalf of the “Black Lives Matter” movement.
h/t The Root
“Diversity means chasing down the last white person, #whitegenocide.”
Victimhood is what the right wing’s really, really good at.
It’s the fragile White Male Ego at work again…and yes, I know that it isn’t limited to just men, but I’m thinking in terms of White Patriarchal Ego…
Accomplished baseball players gather to decide who to send to a big game, Mid-Summer Classic crazy SOB puts in appearance because cameras, and he gets the undeserved attention he wants. Whoever disseminates this news is a fool. TPM, I’m talking to you.
In 1967, Pierre van den Berghe wrote a profound book, comparing and contrasting countries with “race” issues, called, RACE AND RACISM, in which he analyzed four countries on the order of racism (bad to worst). In order of “bad-to-worst”, here was the order that he used:
Mexico…bad
Brasil…worse
United States…worse
South Africa…worst
In his last words describing the United States, van den Berghe said,
“Let us hope that the integrationists are not going to be defined as the next generation of Uncle Toms.”
The pathways of feeding the cankering sore of United States “racial” definition and group-identity-conflict (as opposed to a common sense of nationality for ALL citizens) are so old, so good, so useful (to the 0.001%) and so appealing to people below I.Q. 100, that van den Berghe knew that only a concerted effort in accurately and concisely describing the nature of race relations, on an ongoing basis, would have a chance to at least mute this “American Dilemma”.
And one of the things that van den Berghe was most concerned about, as an impediment to this chance. was the idea of “Competitive Race Relations” (as compared to the Paternalistic brand of Race Relations typified by an all-powerful “majority group” Herrenvolk showing “assistance” to downtrodden but, significanltly, NON-THREATENING “others”).
We have been in the era of Competitive Race Relations for some time now.
To some, it means “white versus black”
To some, it means “white versus non-white”
As we see here, there are even those zealots wishing to circumscribe White Privilege Status away from Jewish individuals.
And in ALL CASES, it means VERSUS “someone else”
My theory is that this sort of person fears that he’ll be treated as the blacks, women, First Nations, Ring of Fire peoples, Central and South Americans were treated by the white majority.