The president and vice-president of Georgia’s Mercer University, William Underwood and Larry Brumley, agree. The US media agrees. Everyone quoted by the media agrees. Anything pro-White is ‘divisive’ and ‘controversial.’ This is essentially the message of NBC 41 WMGT’s article about the recent posting of flyers around the Mercer campus calling for a White History Month. The article, written by anti-White reporter Rachad Hollis, reads almost like an opinion piece from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a notoriously anti-White organisation which contributed to the climate of hate and intolerance that led to an act of domestic terrorism this summer in Washington, DC. Hollis describes the flyers as ‘controversial.’ He quotes students who agree with his opinion saying that the flyers are ‘pretty divisive’ and ‘there to start trouble.’ One student quoted in Hollis’ biased article states that ‘racism is still real’ and claims that the flyer ‘shows how real racism is in our community.’
As noted in a previous SNN article, culturally and racially-specific groups are active and welcomed at Mercer University. There is a Black Law Students Association, Hispanic Law Students Association and a South Asian Law Students Association. As well, the Organization of Black Students, Muslim Students Association and National Society of Black Engineers all operate on campus with the university’s support. None of these racial and cultural groups are denounced by reporter Rachad Hollis, President William Underwood or Vice President Larry Brumley as ‘controversial’ and ‘divisive.’ Only efforts which portray Whites in a positive light are ‘controversial.’ Only groups which advocate for the interests of White students are ‘divisive.’ Only months set aside to acknowledge the contribution of Whites are denounced by the media and leaders in academia. It’s clear that regarding those whom Hollis, Underwood and Brumle may claim to be ‘anti-racist,’ what they really are is anti-White. Once again we see that anti-racist is really just a code word for anti-White.
Note: If you object to the anti-White bias of Rachad Hollis’ article, email him at rhollis@41nbc.com and ask him to apologise to the White people in his audience and revise his article so that it is no longer anti-White.
Also see: Mercer University president denounces ‘White History’ flyers
I love how anything pro-White is automatically labeled as “racist” by them. As though the fact that I’m proud of my European ancestry and my Southron heritage, and the fact that I *don’t* want to see my people destroyed automatically means I must *hate* everyone else who isn’t like me. The ignorance of these people is astounding.
I wouldn’t say it is “ignorance” but much worse. I contend it is quite deliberate, and designed to intimidate whites on the basis of their Christian conscience to be quiet and submit to the ideology they are attempting to make dominant. As such it is a part of the overall Gramscian tactic to attack a part of a society, this case the dominant white culture which is Christian, for the purpose of advancing Marxist ideology in the targeted culture. The rejoinder whites must employ in this attack is that failing to accommodate whites as the state as accommodated others is to exclude whites on the basis of their color and to explicitly discriminate against them on the basis of their color, culture, and historic contributions to the development of western civilization. As such it is illegal, bigoted, and fundamentally anti-white and practicing hatred. It is un-neighborly behavior.
cinaed57, you took the words right out of my fingers….
But the simple question is; Why is something fair for one and not another? That’s the bottom line they will not answer. Although we know the answer we cannot acknowledge it without it making us targets for even more radical anti-white attacks. It boils down to the real “racists” being the ones doing the name calling in the first place.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur