Worst Case of Historical Revisionism?

Alt right self-pity is pathetic. The "white genocide" meme is pure self-pity.

I oppose race hatred, including race hatred against whites, which is somehow excused by the mainstream media and the cool kids these days, with all kinds of circular and false takes about how white people can be talked about in barbaric generalities because they have been so uniquely bad in history, or are all "in power."

But being bullied or shamed for being white, while bad, is not "genocide." Calling it "genocide" functions as an excuse not to do anything productive in response to it, i.e. rallying fellow citizens of all colors to oppose this stuff.

By the way the white population is not "shrinking" in the US. It merely appears to be shrinking because Levantine Americans, mixed Hispanics, some Jews, and other people the alt right would not consider to be white are no longer identifying as white because it is not advantageous anymore.
 
Another thing that really annoys me that I see Right-wingers as well as Left-wingers throw around, for "pity us White folks" points, is anything to do with the Irish-Americans and indentured servants.
1) INDENTURED SERVANTS ARE NOT FUCKING SLAVES. It's an exploitative situation (indentured servants tended to be fatherless adolescents, and could get trapped by debt, it was kind of like the situation of being a company town worker), but even if we sometimes call things slavery as a metaphor, there is a world of difference between being legal property with no civil rights versus just being poor/stuck in a contract. They had a contract. They signed the contract. It paid for their very expensive passage, pretty much at the exact cost (shipping was competitive) of moving them, and if they didn't get the treatment they were due they could and frequently would successfully sue their masters. No other "Irish slavery" existed in America.

This is pretty dumb take on a thread about historical revisionism and to lead off with one of the largest MSM promoted / 1619 project revisionisms made to date.

Its true that initially in the early 1600s many expeditions had a handful of eager conscripts under allusions of gaining property after their time served, but this quickly disintegrated after stories of the new world started returning home. Virtually 100% mortality rate for indentured servants by the 7 year period. Most died from starvation, exhaustion, or disease within the first year or two. Often kept in conditions worse than slaves. Land was already appropriated out, so after the first few decades when servants actually reached their date of maturity, freed servants would very rarely gain any property. Instead they were illegal vagrants on every square inch of parceled land. Outside the colony lands were treatied with the natives, who would likely gruesomely torture you if they caught you living off the land. The Colonial administrators would also throw you in jail for violating their treaty with the natives. The result is most freed servants found themselves either in debt again or charged with petty crimes, which would result in either another 7 year contractual obligation, or a punishment of “servitude for life”, ie: slavery.

When these stories reached home it quickly became know that indentured servitude was a nightmarish hellscape leading to a guaranteed death sentence. As a result voluntary conscripts disintegrated and traders began kidnapping young boys, raiding prisons, charging the poor with petty crimes, and forcing them into debt traps that would force their conscription into the new world. But most were simply kidnapped, none of this was ever a mutually voluntary affair.

By the mid 1600s the whole of Ireland was in uproar and pressing to end this practice to little avail, and even many Protestants were protesting the English crown to take action, legislation was passed that was barely enforced, and kidnappers were rarely ever charged. But what really finally ended the practice were wealthy merchants who by the late 1600s were making so much money off the Africa slave trade they finally pushed out the petty kidnappers from their competition and finally the English government began taking severe actions against them.

So there was a period of about 80 years where a very real Irish slave trade existed. We can see this today in many Caribbean Santeria religions worshipping a st. Bridget. This is a uniquely Irish cultural phenomenon that could not possibly come from British or French slave masters. It comes from Irish slaves mixing with African slaves and syncretizing their cultures. As well as the number of Irish surnames among African slaves. There was also the Irish Redleg community in Barbados, but most of the youth have long emigrated in the 20th century leaving a tiny elderly community behind.

Even with the rosiest, ahistorical, revisionist claims about Irish slavery: indentured servitude is still slavery. It is clearly outlined as a form of slavery in the UN convention on slavery. Not all slavery is chattel slavery. That’s why we call it “chattel slavery”, otherwise we would just call it “slavery”.

So by definition: Irish people were slaves.

Interestingly, when the British first began taking slaves from Africa they didn’t have a legal codified slavery doctrine yet, so they simply began selling them as indentured servants. It was a freed African servant who took one of his African servants to court to have him codified as a “servant for life”, the first time this was used for a nonjudicial punishment. A Google search reveals that there is a large amount of reeeing and historical revisionism over this case now.

That said, Irish in America were always white, and by the late 1800s were largely a privileged and envied immigrant group in most US cities. Most “no Irish apply” signs were other immigrant groups bitter how the Irish took over the local government and unions and only hired and promoted their own

But the Irish were not very well treated in the period of 1600-1680 when these events occurred. Qualitatively, The Irish experience in the colonies was far worse than the black African American experience in the US from 1776-1865.
 
"McCarthy used HUAC to persecute poor Hollywood actors who dindu nuffin."
  • how would Senator McCarthy be holding hearings in the House Un-American Activities Committee?
  • HUAC was initially formed in the late 1930s to sniff out Nazi sympathizers.
  • The timeline doesn't fit. The Hollywood Ten controversy happened in the 1940s.
  • McCarthy himself never went after Hollywood; he was searching for commie sympathizers within the military, the State Department, and the intelligence community
  • Hollywood unions did, in fact, sympathize with Communists. The reason Walt Disney is smeared as an "anti-Semite" is because he testified before HUAC against rabble-rouser Herbert Sorrell.
  • Elia Kazan's award-winning film On the Waterfront is a parable of how he stood up to his commie colleagues, who denounced him as a "snitch" and a "stool pidgeon". He later said that by making that movie, he was "telling every one of them to go fuck themselves".
Finally, the declassified Venona Papers proved that the booze-hound Wisconsinite tailgunner was right all along. The Soviets conducted all kinds of now-known fuckery that has burgeoned into the Clown World we live in today.

The only thing McCarthy did wrong is that he stopped.
 
Medieval Europe was a hellish place, everyone was an unwashed peasant with their clothes covered by dirt, and waste. Nobles were degenerate tyrants who murdered their peasants for shits and giggles every week. The outside was colored by a dark blue filter.

The so called ''''''Islamic Golden Age''''''. The Mongols did nothing wrong burning Baghdad to the ground.
 
By the way the white population is not "shrinking" in the US. It merely appears to be shrinking because Levantine Americans, mixed Hispanics, some Jews, and other people the alt right would not consider to be white are no longer identifying as white because it is not advantageous anymore.

The white American birth rate is slightly sub-replacement, and as a shrinking proportion of American demographics, our political voice is increasingly getting drowned out. So our government increasingly becomes Third World kleptocracy.

White genocide is dumb and gay, but the demographic engineering is real and specifically intended to make our government unaccountable.

  • Hollywood unions did, in fact, sympathize with Communists. The reason Walt Disney is smeared as an "anti-Semite" is because he testified before HUAC against rabble-rouser Herbert Sorrell.

The reason Disney was smeared as an anti-Semite is he was very aware that Hollywood Jews were largely Commie sympathizers and wanted to continually to push social, political, and sexual boundaries in movies, and wouldn't give them positions of influence in his company. His vision for Disney entertainment was to make childhood a more magical time, not to poz things out in the name of the dollar. If Hollywood Jews hadn't been a bunch of America-hating perverts, he wouldn't have been against them.
 
Last edited:
The white American birth rate is slightly sub-replacement, and as a shrinking proportion of American demographics, our political voice is increasingly getting drowned out. So our government increasingly becomes Third World kleptocracy.

White genocide is dumb and gay, but the demographic engineering is real and specifically intended to make our government unaccountable.



The reason Disney was smeared as an anti-Semite is he was very aware that Hollywood Jews were largely Commie sympathizers and wanted to continually to push social, political, and sexual boundaries in movies, and wouldn't give them positions of influence in his company. His vision for Disney entertainment was to make childhood a more magical time, not to poz things out in the name of the dollar. If Hollywood Jews hadn't been a bunch of America-hating perverts, he wouldn't have been against them.
Walt really should have become the anti-semite they said he was. Look at what the chosen did his company.
 
By the way the white population is not "shrinking" in the US. It merely appears to be shrinking because Levantine Americans, mixed Hispanics, some Jews, and other people are no longer identifying as white because it is not advantageous anymore.
>The white population is not shrinking
>All you have to do is include all these non-whites, see
:story:
 
Super recent but the "Hatsune Miku created Minecraft" shit from 2019. Imo it was one of the first major examples of the sheer autism and childishness of twitter trannies at work and there's something about it that's just so unbelievably cringe and irritating beyond anything I've ever seen before. "Oh you don't like seeing faggots marching down the streets sucking each others' dicks? Well we're just gonna say an anime girl made your game instead of you, how about that?!"
 
Super recent but the "Hatsune Miku created Minecraft" shit from 2019. Imo it was one of the first major examples of the sheer autism and childishness of twitter trannies at work and there's something about it that's just so unbelievably cringe and irritating beyond anything I've ever seen before. "Oh you don't like seeing faggots marching down the streets sucking each others' dicks? Well we're just gonna say an anime girl made your game instead of you, how about that?!"
Worst case as in pathetically unable to change a narrative, trying to meme a neon blue fictional weaboo character. This short lived 'joke' didn't even end up doing anything to the already depressed notch or the knowledge that he was mostly responsible for the game, as would make sense to anyone with above 50 iq points.
 
But being bullied or shamed for being white, while bad, is not "genocide." Calling it "genocide" functions as an excuse not to do anything productive in response to it, i.e. rallying fellow citizens of all colors to oppose this stuff.
It's not genocide, but it's one of the stages of genocide. Whites are treated like Jews in 1920s Europe and are the most discriminated against group in the US (and most Western countries) despite being the majority. The George Floyd Riots were basically an anti-white pogrom.

Whites are anywhere between 4 and 6 on the classic Ten Stages of Genocide.

View attachment 3509280
By the way the white population is not "shrinking" in the US. It merely appears to be shrinking because Levantine Americans, mixed Hispanics, some Jews, and other people the alt right would not consider to be white are no longer identifying as white because it is not advantageous anymore.
Pedro the brown construction worker will never be white, even if Juan the green-eyed Spanish-looking telenovela actor probably is.
 
It's not genocide, but it's one of the stages of genocide.
It's just straight up genocide though.

Screenshot_20220720-122128_Lightning.jpg

Memo fredrick jaffe from the 70s, who was vice president of planned parenthood:


Screenshot_20220720-122351_Lightning.jpg
 
Any sort of insertion of troonism/girl boss shit into ancient history. I find that shit more egregious than we wuz kamging. It seems every year now we dig up some tomb of someone from some past culture or civilization and it is used to say vikings were trannies or that the Neanderthals chopped dicks off because this skeleton has a female structure yet is buried with traditionally masculine items.

It can't be that this skeleton was a man that by some genetic fluke had bones similar to a woman's or that this is the wife or concubine of some chieftain, it has to be the person buried there was a troon or girl boss omg yass slay kween!

Remember when they were digging around Pompeii a few years ago and made casts of a hollow of two distinctly males holding eachother as they died. Everyone went omg they are gay lovers and the people studying it went with that. Of course it has to be they are gay, they can't be friends or brothers or father and son embracing in their final agonizing moments.

How about Cheddar Man? Would you believe it if I told you making him black was all speculation. It was, they had no genetic data to suggest he was black, some wokoid just did it anyways. Makes me glad Egyptians are so protective of their history when they make lifelike busts of mummies and shit they just give them a med/Arab look because in all likelihood Ancient Egyptians probably largely looked like meds or Arabs until you got into the Upper Nile.

I could make an anecdote about the accurate Jesus models making him look like a Palestinian but that basically falls under the same category of what Egyptians do where he probably also looked like a Med based on his Aramean origins.
 
all the buildings currently at Teotihuacan are modern reconstructions and are just less than 100 years old and this fact is obscured or excluded from almost every article about the site

there seems to be some kind of connection between that project and the Mexican Revolution

https://www.iccrom.org/sites/defaul...2021-04/convern9_04_02_earroyoszetina_eng.pdf

Apparently in Mexico this revision was done under the direction of the Escuela Nacional Preparatoria which was a newly privatized college which began practicing destructive historical revisionism on basically every front imaginable. It wasn't just the ruins that were rebuild in some cases, it was national monuments that were "improved".


Basically all those ruins you see in Latin America that are fixed up was to make people race-mix so instead of separate races you had a BLOB whose only ties were to the Nation-State, which is a Spook (exists as much as a ghost). You know, so they don't have the problems that the Soviet Union had which was everyone was a nationalist in like Estonia, Ukraine, Lativa, and etc.
i'll defend it, before then the whites were roughly in the year 300 of constant indian attacks and were fucking fed up with it, the idea of "la raza" was creating to basically brainwash all the indians into believing that everyone was the same race, therefore they should stop trying to destroy everyone and everything. mind you unlike say the US where they did stuff like affirmative action in conjunction with the melting pot, the mexicans just left it at "la raza" and despite how the people in the media, in banking, in all the highest positions in the land were all clearly a different race than the plebs because of they were all part of the same race, the ones up top didn't have to fear getting killed as often. and once all those resources that used to be spent rebuilding and protecting from indian attacks suddenly could be used for other projects suddenly Mexico became near first world, literal major cities were founded and oil companies and mines and it coincided with a golden age that lasted a half century, all from just tricking the darkies into not committing crimes anymore. While that is obviously bad from a history basis, another century of Comanche-esque bullshit would have probably led to even more destruction.

it would also decrease racism, usually when the white landowners would fuck their redskin maids and produce a mixed child that the maid would be forced to raise, the kid would experience a lot of scorn, but if everyone is part of the same race he'd only have to be confronted with unconscious bias instead of racism. it also helps police investigations too. The officer legitimately pulled you over because you fit the description, or maybe he had a hunch. you'd be surprised how much better society runs when minorities can't use the race card to get out of everything.
 
Back