28 July, 2015

Human Equality: It’s Not Happening…

Posted by Socrates in "civil rights", communism, communism in America, Cultural Marxism, egalitarianism, equality, human equality, Lenin, Marxism, Socrates, The South at 2:55 pm | Permanent Link

(Above: a toppled statue of Lenin, who is alive and well in America: he can be found in any media newsroom, any Hollywood movie studio and any university classroom)

…yet still the Jews and the leftists will pass more laws designed to make everybody “equal.”

“But a half century after the “Dream” of legal equality was realized, we are learning that inherent human equality is simply a myth. The human-biodiversity movement, which explores the reality of human differences, flourishes online and is constantly flirting with a mainstream breakthrough. Human DNA has been fully sequenced by the Human Genome Project of 2002. Today hundreds of studies show that human groupings and races are not equal, and “equality of outcomes” will always remain an impossible goal.”

[Article].


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 02/27/16 The Latest in Human Equality: Fat Acceptance 74% similar
  3. 10/22/08 Human Equality Not Happening Fast Enough 64% similar
  4. 01/29/18 The God of Equality Must Be Worshipped 63% similar
  5. 12/23/14 The Liberal Obsession with Equality 54% similar
  6. 07/07/18 Women and Equality: a Joke That’s Not Really Funny 48% similar
  7. 6 Responses to “Human Equality: It’s Not Happening…”

    1. Mark Says:

      “[T]he Jews and the leftists will pass more laws designed to make everybody ‘equal.’”

      Utter nonsense. Neither the Jews nor the leftists ever sought “equality,” but only used the mirage and rhetoric of “equality” to rob the middle class and get richer.

      Did you ever notice that the poorest and most unequal countries fought the hardest against communism while the wealthier and more equal countries fell like rotten fruit? For example, Czechoslovakia and Cuba (the third highest standard of living in Latin America in 1959) fell relatively easy to communism, while Afghanistan, India, and Haiti successfully resisted communism. And communist China today boasts more billionaires than any other country excluding the U.S.

    2. Mary O Says:

      Reading Ann Coulter’s new book on immigration, “Adios, America.” Her criticism of John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert, for promoting the 1965 change in immigration policy, generally attributed to their brother, Edward, surprised me. Perhaps due to their tragic and untimely deaths, they are not criticized as often as contemporary public figures.

      But JFK did in fact promote all of this “equality” nonsense.

      http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/Nation_of_Immigrants_John_F__Kennedy.htm

      Source: A Nation of Immigrants, by John F. Kennedy, p. 45 Jan 8, 1963

      Quote from JFK:

      The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 undertook to codify all our national laws on immigration. This was a proper and long overdue task. The total racial bar against the naturalization of Japanese, Koreans and other East Asians was removed. Most important of all was the decision to do nothing about the national origins system.

      The famous words of Emma Lazarus on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty read: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Until 1921 this was an accurate picture of our society. Under present law it would be appropriate to add: “as long as they come from Northern Europe, are not too tired or too poor or slightly ill, never stole a loaf of bread, never joined any questionable organization, and can document their activities for the past 2 years.”

      Furthermore, the national origins quota system has strong overtones of an indefensible racial preference. It is strongly weighted toward so-called Anglo-Saxons.

      John F. Kennedy was complaining about the supposed unfairness of criminal background checks on prospective immigrants and the screening out of card-carrying Communists.

      Coulter ascribes the Left’s desire for huge immigration to the fact that the immigrants act as a machine which will always vote in their favor.

      The way JFK was questioned over his religion may have seemed unfair, given the way that Jews are always given a free pass over Israel. But did his political behavior provoke these questions?

      Note that he refers to “racial preference.” The subsequent phrase “so-called Anglo-Saxons” is code for Whites. He is trying to make it sound as though he was just referring to snobby Mayflower descendents; but doesn’t use the word “ethnic,” or “religious,” or “cultural,” but “racial.” He is stating that a law under which Whites are preferred is indefensible.

      To paraphrase JFK: A White nation cannot be defended.

    3. Max Says:

      The more equality laws they pass to make us more equal. The more unequal we actually become.

      It has nothing to do with equality.

    4. fd Says:

      John and Bobby Kennedy kicked off the 2d Reconstruction. JFK romanced the Klan to secure the solid South during his campaign for President. After winning first chair in Washington, John and Bobby invaded the South with freedom riders and Federal troops to lock-down Ole Miss (100% White) to force integration. The brothers suffered the same fate as Lincoln and the Russian Czar who allied with the Federals in the 19th century. Johnson completed Kennedy’s work of amalgamation.

    5. fd Says:

      JFK and LBJ destroyed the solid South (100% democrat). The racist democratic South was still hanging Negroes in the 1970s, before the party collapsed and bled out.

    6. CW-2 Says:

      Joe Kennedy Sr was jew wise, in fact he appeared to sympathize with NS Germany, but I strongly suspect he cut deals with jews in order to get favorable media treatment for the political aspirations of his sons, particularly JFK. Any competent investigative journalist of the time should have had a relatively easy task in digging up the abundant ‘indiscretions’ of the Kennedy boys but nothing was heard of it. JFK was a jew tool to the extent that media bosses could pull the rug from under him if he didn’t play ball on such issues as snivel rights and immigration ‘reform’.