If you’re a chess piece, you’re either black or white. There is no in-between; your color defines what you are. If defines your loyalties and your entire purpose in life. There is no gray in chess. There’s no such thing as a traitor among chess pieces.
This is how liberals view human beings, and this is why they repeatedly claim that since most influential people in the US are white, white people don’t need representation. For example:
I read with amazement the Thursday letter asking why we can’t have a White caucus in Congress. The answer is obvious.
Through the magic of legislative gerrymandering, the representation of the 38 percent of Americans who are a minority are represented by 17 percent of Congress. By forming these caucuses, these minorities amass enough voting clout to get a seat at the legislative table.
The Whites of Congress don’t need a caucus. They own the table!
It would be helpful if somebody would document, in some way, that white members of Congress feel any loyalty to other whites – but this can never happen, because they don’t. Their loyalties are to the wealthy interests that pay for their campaigns, to their lobbyists, to their own political party or, in the best case scenario, to their constituents (of all races). If any white member of Congress were to even hint at any racial loyalty to other whites, his political career would be over. In the chess-board of real life, white pawns have no representation. Black pawns, at least ostensibly, do.
Do liberals really believe that all whites, who find themselves in positions of power, are benefactors of working-class whites? Of course not. They only believe this when the subject is race. But as soon as the conversation turns to economic matters, their tone changes. Ask any liberal if the billionaire one-percenters represent the interests of the 99 percent, and his answer will certainly be “NO!”
Only through convolutions of mental gymnastics (to borrow a term from Jared Taylor) can one hold both views simultaneously.
In theory, once you get a liberal to acknowledge that wealthy whites do not represent the interests of poor whites, said liberal should be on his way to recovery… In theory. But if he does conjure up enough courage to admit this, then it follows that whites, as an ethnic group, lack representation in government, on campuses and in the media. The next question might be: Doesn’t EVERYONE deserve representation?