Blacks sue temp agencies in Chicago

According to the Chicago Tribune:

A group of African-American men filed a lawsuit Tuesday in Chicago federal court alleging systematic discrimination by a temporary staffing agency and several of its clients they say passed over black applicants in favor of Hispanic workers…

The alleged discrimination took place at MVP Staffing’s Cicero branch office, which the lawsuit claims was directed by clients not to send African-American workers to their companies for assignments.

Those wishes allegedly were communicated using code words, according to testimony from former dispatchers and on-site representatives given in prior cases and attached to the filing as evidence. For example, according to the lawsuit, “guapos,” which translates to pretty boys, would be used to refer to African-Americans to suggest they don’t want to do dirty work. The terms “feos” (translated to mean “dirty ones”),” “bilingues” (bilinguals) and “los que escuchan La Ley” (referring to people who listen to Spanish-language radio station La Ley) were used to refer to Hispanic laborers, the lawsuit alleges…

An immigrant-dominated workforce, with language barriers and legal status concerns, is less likely to complain about failure to pay overtime, workplace injuries, wage theft or overwork, according to Williams. He described dozens of white vans that pick people up in the Little Village neighborhood, populated mostly by Mexican immigrants, and drive them to the suburbs for jobs, while black applicants will show up early at the agency office and wait all day before being told there’s no work.

“They get up early, they make their way there, they get there on the promise that there might be work for them,” Williams said. “And they watch as it changes from a very mixed room in the morning to mostly African-Americans left in the afternoon.”

Let’s look at one plaintiff, who’s highlighted in the article:

Norman Green, one of the five plaintiffs, said he has felt the discrimination at MVP and other staffing agencies in Chicago.

He described arriving at the agency early, around 4 or 5 a.m., with his steel-toe boots on and ready to work, signing his name at the top of a check-in paper. He said he would sit for hours and wait while Hispanics would arrive and be sent out to work sites right away. But the agencies would tell him to come back, he said, so he would borrow from money from friends and family to make the trip and get there early only to sit and wait again.

“A lot of black people just sitting there mad that they can’t work,” said Green, 33, who lives in the East Garfield Park neighborhood. When he has gotten jobs he feels everyone is talking about him in Spanish, and “it’s just uncomfortable.”

Green said the pattern, based on the perception that blacks don’t want to work, is “clear-as-day racist” and unfairly applied to him even though “every time I walk into a temp agency I work my butt off.”

Green, who has eight kids, seven of whom live with him, said he lost faith in the temp industry and instead supports his family doing construction and other manual work for family members.

Compared to Hispanics, blacks don’t have a reputation for being good workers. Affirmative Action policies, and so-called “civil rights groups” have made matters even worse by making businesses afraid to fire lazy black workers. Obviously, there are hard-working blacks, and they sometimes suffer because of this stigma.

The article explains that a major reason for high black unemployment in Chicago is the high crime rate. In other words, many blacks have criminal records that make it difficult for them to find jobs. We’re not told whether Green is an ex-convict, but the fact that he has 8 kids shows a certain lack of responsibility. Who’s paying for those kids? It’s unlikely that Green makes enough through his odd jobs to support them.

It would be interesting to know how many of these black plaintiffs voted for Hillary. We’re told:

The lawsuit comes during a heightened debate over immigrant labor as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office with promises of restoring American jobs.

Green goes on to opine that there are enough jobs for everybody. I contacted the reporter asking her about the voting question, and this was her reply:

Thanks for your note. I didn’t ask them who they voted for though you’re right that a lot of people might ask that question. But I don’t think that a vote for Mrs. Clinton would have been shooting themselves in the foot or that a vote from Trump will lead to a positive outcome. This isn’t about illegal immigrants taking jobs from black people. It’s about companies (allegedly) discriminating against black applicants because they prefer to employ immigrants they can keep under their thumbs to depress wages and working conditions. There are more temp jobs available than there are Hispanics to do them, but still the companies refuse to hire blacks. What I hope the article doesn’t do is divide people or drive resentment, because I think advocates are working to bring the two groups together so that they can be unified in demanding better working conditions. Because when one group is exploited it hurts native-born workers, too.

Thanks again for reading,

Alexia

Perhaps there are enough jobs to go around, and these companies still refuse to fill them with black applicants. It would be interesting to study this question more fully. But one thing is certain: If there were no illegal immigrants, then those companies would not have the option of favoring them to the detriment of blacks.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Africa and blacks, immigration/ Hispanics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What is the Alt-Right?

I used to think I knew the answer to this question, but now I’m not so sure. Here are the elements I used to believe were essential to be part of this movement – back when it was sometimes called the “Dark Enlightenment or the “Neoreactionary” movement.

  1. A recognition of biological racial differences (HBD), and a willingness to openly discuss them.
  2. Outspokenness for white-advocacy, and a willingness to work toward self-determination for whites as a group (or Native Europeans, as the case may be).
  3. An eagerness to defend the hallmarks of Western Civilization, including outspokenness against such threats as open borders, Islam and Third-Wave Feminism.

On the flip side, it was also necessary to disavow Nazis, skinheads and organizations such as the Aryan Brotherhood or the KKK – even though members of those organizations share our concern with the wellbeing of white people as a group. There’s nothing “Alternative” or novel about them; they’ve been around for a long time. However, it was my understanding that some such people, though they call themselves “KKK” or “National Socialists” are actually not hateful at all; that their opinions are very much in line with my own; a label can’t tell you everything about a person.

On the peripherals of the Alt-Right movement is the Men’s Rights movement. There’s a lot of overlap, but one can exist in exclusion of the other.

Those who advocate for white rights, but deny the biological reality of race, are fighting a losing battle – because racial disparities are getting more and more difficult to pin on either racism or other environmental factors. These people are often now referred to as “cuckservatives” or “cucks” for short, because their denial of racial differences lead them to act against their own race.

Since the Alt-Right is ideologically based, people of any race or background can be part of it. Admittedly, it would be awkward for a practicing Muslim.

But it now seems that some people, Red Ice (at about 20:15) among them, count The Daily Stormer as part of the Alt-Right.

A quick glance at The Daily Stormer’s front page makes it obvious (to those who didn’t already know) that its main focus is to be anti-Jewish (“anti-Semitic” if you will). Here’s an excerpt of how the Daily Stormer defines the Alt-Right:

The core concept of the movement, upon which all else is based, is that Whites are undergoing an extermination, via mass immigration into White countries which was enabled by a corrosive liberal ideology of White self-hatred, and that the Jews are at the center of this agenda.

I’ve been to a few Amren conferences, and the central role of Jews, in this conspiracy, was never brought up by any speaker. I’ve already pointed out that Jared Taylor welcomes Jewish participation. Apparently, according to The Daily Stormer, American Renaissance is not part of the Alt-Right.

I would ask them, and Red-Ice, if The Daily Stormer is part of the Alt-Right, then wouldn’t Stormfront also be included? In what way do they differ from Neo-Nazis?

This is not a rhetorical question; I really want to know.

And if we are to include The Daily Stormer, Stormfront, and Neo-Nazis as part of the larger “Alt-Right” movement, perhaps it’s time we find a different label to describe people who fit the description I laid out at the beginning of this post.

Posted in politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | Tagged , | 11 Comments

What is the National Policy Institute’s policy toward Jews?

I’ve never attended an NPI conference. My impression has been that there’s a lot of overlap between NPI and Amren conferences; they feature some of the same speakers, and the president/director of NPI, Richard Spencer, has spoken at Amren conferences several times.

While Jared Taylor’s position is clearly one of tolerance toward Jews, and no serious accusations of anti-Semitism have been leveled against him (on the contrary, he’s sometimes accused of being too pro-Jewish by his detractors), I’m not aware of any such statement by Richard Spencer.

It’s true that CNN lied about what Spencer said. CNN claimed that Spencer questioned the humanity of Jews. In fact, he was questioning the humanity of certain journalists. CNN’s lies add validity to Spencer’s question.

That being said, take a look at this video:

It doesn’t look like Spencer himself did the “Nazi salute” (a Google search for that term yields the above video at the very top. So typically Google), but some members of the audience obviously did.

Spencer’s choice of words “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory” leaves something to be desired. On top of that, why use the German word “Lügenpresse” to describe the lying media?

I wasn’t there, and I have no idea if there was some sort of context that would justify the use of such terms; the media is notorious for leaving out details that would be inconsistent with their narrative. But it’s hard to justify tolerating the use of the Nazi salute. This is not how you go about gaining a wider appeal. Such shows will not help us spread the word about our legitimate concerns.

The National Policy Institute has some articles relating to the “Jewish Question,” and we should have no problem with this. Nobody, and no ethnic group, should be above criticism. But neo-Nazis, or those who appear to be neo-Nazis, have no political future in America.

It would be great if Mr. Spencer would provide an explanation. Perhaps I’ll ask him at next year’s Amren conference, assuming he’s there.

Update: I finally got around to watching Spencer’s interview with Red Ice explaining what actually happened. Here it is:

So it’s not as bad as it was made out to be (by the Luegenpresse). Still, I don’t think it was a good idea.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, politics, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 40 Comments

Hillary’s “popular vote”

A recent headline reads:

Hillary Clinton Won Popular Vote By Almost 2 Million — Can Trump Still Be President?

The article continues:

Nearly a week since the presidential election, all the ballots have yet to be counted, and yet it’s already been determined that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a massive margin. At this point, Hillary has almost two million more votes than President-Elect Donald Trump. Can he keep his position despite this?…

For anyone hoping that the massive popular vote lead means Hillary has another chance at regaining the presidency, don’t get your hopes up. Trump is still president-elect after obtaining the necessary electoral votes, which he did on election night. It does not matter the outcome of the popular vote count at this point, though Hillary can take solace in knowing that voters turned out in the millions to support her as their commander-in-chief.

When a government has a long-standing policy of being lax on border control, to the point of changing the demographics (and, by extension, the politics) of its electorate, then proponents of such policies cannot point to the resulting demographic change as a moral mandate to continue such policies. This would be akin to European colonizers wiping out Native American villages – and then holding an election, where the new majority is European. When the results of such an election come in, and support the continued onslaught against the natives, we would be neither surprised nor impressed.

Leftists are pointing to Hillary’s supposed “popular win,” but ignoring the fact that much, if not all, of this “popular” vote differential can be attributed to the open borders policies of previous administrations.

Here’s the annual breakdown of births to illegal immigrants in the U.S. (anchor babies), according to Pew Research, since 1980:

anchor-babies

Since you must be at least 18 years old to vote in the US, let’s tally up the number of such births prior to 1998. In other words, how many anchor babies were eligible to vote in this year’s election? The answer is 1,860,000. Were any anchor babies born before 1980? Obviously so.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is Hillary’s “popular vote.” It’s entirely the result of the very same crimes that Trump has vowed to end. To cite the fruits of such crime as a reason to question the legitimacy of Trump’s victory is a sick joke.

I wanted to mention one more thing. There’s an effort to pressure the electors to rebel and to vote against Trump – despite their states having voted for him. If this does come to pass, it will make the United States a laughing stock of the world. America will no longer have any moral high ground to demand that other countries honor their elections. As bad as some people imagine a Trump presidency would be, this turn of events would, in the long run, be much worse.

 

Posted in examples of propaganda, politics | 9 Comments

A loose end that needs to be tied

I saw this video a few days ago. A homeless black woman tried to protect Trump’s star in Hollywood. Though she might, indeed, have some mental issues, she tried to stand up to leftist bullies. In return, she was practically lynched. Warning: It’s not the easiest video to watch:

I think it would be a great gesture, on Trump’s part, if he would send some people to Hollywood to find this woman – and then let her meet Trump. Not only would it be the right thing to do, it would also be a great P.R. move on several levels.

Please, if anybody close to Trump is reading this, speak to him about it.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

I’ve never been so happy to be wrong!

I just saw the news that Trump has won. Honestly, I never believed it was possible. I’d like to thank everyone who worked toward this victory, including Jared Taylor and all the other “Deplorables.”

But this is only the beginning. We’ve got some serious work ahead of us, if we’re to hold Mr. Trump’s feet to the fire, and get him to do the things he said he would do.

Aside from that, we’ve got a Republican congress. Hopefully, this time they’ll be more in tune with the will of The People, taking their cue from President Trump. It’s nice that legalized marijuana made some advances as well; government has more important things to do than prosecute people for smoking marijuana.

Posted in activism, Uncategorized | 20 Comments

Final thoughts on the election

I’m writing this at a quarter to eight Tuesday evening, and I still believe it’s a foregone conclusion that Hillary’s going to win. If it turns out I’m wrong, I’d be tickled.

Let’s assume the Establishment gets its way and Hillary is victorious. The country, as a whole, should then ask itself some glaring questions:

  1. How is it that almost half of American citizens voted for a candidate who was almost universally vilified by the press, the standing government, the educational system, the vast majority of celebrities and even his own party (at one time)? Does this not indicate that something’s terribly wrong with the status quo?
  2. Consider how lose-lipped Trump is, and how much ammunition he gave his enemies throughout the campaign. Consider how much 99% of the media hate him. Consider the fact that he had no political experience – and that he regularly angered ALL of the powers that be. How is it that Hillary Clinton almost lost to him? Again, does this not imply that something’s terribly wrong with our system?
  3. How long will we hear the phrase “a nation divided” until it finally dawns on people that the United States is not a nation at all, but merely an arbitrary geographical area within which a political elite exercises a monopoly on force. There are, in fact, several nations within these “boundaries.”
  4. Given that we’re not a nation, but a collection of nations, how long will this political elite continue to deny each nation its right to self-determination?

We need more than just the “right man” occupying the White House, or the right men sitting in Congress. What we need is OUR OWN White House and OUR OWN Congress. Our needs are simply incompatible with the whims of the mediagov that now rules over us.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 4 Comments