Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Anti-Racist is a Code Word for Anti-White: In Harrison, Arkansas, Group Puts Up Billboard Fighting Anti-White Racism; Blacks Demand Sign be Removed; Mayor Jeff Crockett Explains: The Sign is Not What We are About—We are Anti-White

By Nicholas Stix

A tip ‘o the hate to Occidental Dissent, grandmacaesar, and Noel Wise.

I’d like to see 100,000 of these signs go up all over America, but if one lowly sign can cause so much outrage, even a few spread around the country could have an incalculable effect on liberty. What’s one of Colin Powell’s favorite terms? “Force multipliers.”

Hey, everything I know about racism, I learned from blacks.

Note how the racists are all trying to get the sponsor’s name, so they can try and destroy his life.

And get a load of the white lady, Dena McGlynn, who complains that the billboard “Goes against everything that the Diversity Council and the high school and Mrs. Millburn taught the young that are growing up here in Harrison, and I just wish that they’d take it down.” That’s kind of the point, lady.

At least the reporter got a counterpoint quote, from Josh Rosenberg: “As a white American male, if you say anything about anybody else, you’re automatically racist.”

I see the slogan posted by readers in media comment sections several times a week, and always vote it up.

Finally, in the second video, I don't hear any of the "anti-racist" activists denying the sign's message. They merely seek to silence the message and the messenger, including by violating his property rights, and anything else that they can think up.

Anti-Racist is a Code Word for Anti-White Billboard (Arkansas TV News)


Harrison Mayor Jeff Crockett’s Response to Billboard


Upload and post by grandmacaesar

Published on Oct 17, 2013

On October 15th, 2013, a new billboard went up in Harrison, Arkansas. On October 17th, the mayor met with supporters and protesters for a scheduled statement.

The man who paid for the sign was interviewed that day as well, by the Harrison Daily Times. This article appeared on the front page of the Saturday-Sunday, October 19-20 edition.:

Man Behind the Sign

by BRYAN HIX "The primary need for the First Amendment -- that is, protection of free speech -- is to protect unpopular truths," says the man who told the Daily Times he rented the billboard that has proven contentious not only in Harrison, but across the entire U.S.

In an interview conducted Thursday, October 27, the billboard's sponsor -- who asked that his name remain anonymous -- discussed some of the reasoning behind his decision to post the message.

"The word, 'racist' is a loaded term -- loaded against white people," the man said. "It's a public secret. Everyone knows it's the truth, and yet, no one will talk about it."

"This is an issue unique to white people in America. In reality, non-whites don't have to measure their words -- they are not constantly required to consider whether or not their words are going to offend someone. If you're white in this country, you have to constantly 'self-censor,' or risk be unfairly branded a racist. If someone, who happens to be white, disagrees with one of President Obama's policies, for example, that person is often branded a racist."

The man further says that this societal, kneejerk reaction -- that of labeling those with dissenting opinions "racist" actually serves to intimidate good people and stifles free speech, even when their dissenting opinions have nothing to do with race.

"True progress depends on not labeling any one segment of our society as 'racist,'" the man said, "or implying that racism is the exclusive domain of white people."

As for why he has chosen to remain anonymous, the man says his identity is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

"What's important is the message," he says. "It was deliberately designed to prompt debate and discussion -- to highlight the double standard that exists in this country, with respect to expressing differences of opinion. Again, the First Amendment was not intended to solely protect a select few -- it is meant to protect everyone."

"The reaction to the billboard has really illuminated the issue," the man continued, "and the protesters are proving my point for me. For the most part, people have been successfully conditioned to react in a certain way when they see or hear the word 'racist.' We're witnessing the product of that conditioning."

With regard to the backlash Harrison Signs has experienced for leasing him the billboard, the man said he believes it is unfortunate.

"They have displayed their genuine commitment to the spirit of the First Amendment," he said, "they've passed that test."

Asked about why he has chosen to neither confirm nor deny any affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan or other white-supremacy groups, the man says he wants to maintain the focus of the controversy on the message, rather than the messanger.

"Read it, think about it," the man said. "The message stands on its own. It shouldn't be colored by any presumed associations."


There was another article on the front page titled "Task Force Plans Reaction". I won't print it in its entirety. It didn't mention in the article, but it appears as if the "supporters of the Harrison Community Task Force on Race Relations" meeting may have only been four people (including the writer of the article). Here's a sample paragraph from the article:

Prior to adjourning the meeting, attendees sought to settle on a slogan to offset the sentiment expressed on the billboard. After the initially proposed "Love Thy Neighbor" was deemed to be "too Christian," and another slogan, suggested by a representative from Equality Revolution---"Love, Equality, Human"---failed to gain support, the group ultimately settled on "Love Your Neighbor."

I suspect their time would be better spent having a quilting bee.


Glaivester said...

Is anyone taking donations to put up more of these signs?

Anonymous said...

From my standpoint it is not so much the message of the sign, the correctness or incorrectness of the content but rather the reaction. The fevered and frenzied and over-the-top response does say a lot. Even if the sign and the message are 100 % wrong in all regards, that persons react as they do seems to say a lot and it is not good.

Anonymous said...

This sign is correct in the sense that as minorities have defined "racism" by THEIR definition ONLY whites can be racist. That is not true, but that is what has become, validity not even a question. Whitey not only is racist, and only whitey can be racist.

And don't try to say otherwise, or you see what occurs.