From the mouths of black folks II

The foray into twitter brought to my attention a newly-released book, Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal - America's Racial Obsession, devoted to an issue we've touched on before. Wikipedia informs me the author, Erik Rush (a mulatto neocon, I think), is officially an Uncle Tom. Some excerpts (continue reading):

The third factor for the success of blacks in America is something that I consider to be far less positive and righteous, although it has undeniably benefited certain black Americans in the material sense.

This is a phenomenon I call negrophilia. It is an undue and inordinate affinity for blacks (as opposed to antipathy toward them) that has been promoted by activists, politicians, and the establishment press for the past forty years and that has fostered an erroneous perception of blacks in the West, but particularly in America. Since the Civil Rights Movement, Americans have also been subjected to the message from the news and entertainment media, liberal politicians, and activists that people of color are somehow more noble, benevolent, and inherently less corruptible than whites.

Concurrently, the notion of whites' inherent guile, greed, and corruptibility has been promoted and reinforced. Indeed, at times, it appears that most--if not all--of the world's ills have their genesis in the actions of Northern Europeans or those descended from same. "Black culture," such as is proffered in pop culture, has been vigorously promoted by the media and largely accepted by whites, particularly white youth, though it continues to have deleterious effects upon the black community at large.

Negrophilia is not by nature a conscious partiality toward or devotion to black people, but a subliminal persuasions toward affinity and a misconception of virtue. It is essential the result of an ongoing propaganda campaign that has underpinned "positive" stereotypes, if you will. For example, negative stereotypes of some other ethnic groups are well known: Germans are harsh, the Polish, dumb; Jews are cheap, and the Irish are drunks. These stereotypes were the result of decades, if not centuries, of oral tradition, other ethnic groups passing racist tales from person to person, from generation to generation. Certainly, blacks have been included in this malign folklore; however, the tendency of established ethnic groups to engage in this fare was well-established long before blacks (or people other than the English) appeared in North America.

Similarly, positive stereotypes have been around for a long time as well. Negrophilia is different, however, and is a phenomenon that has not been seen before. Yes, there are overplayed positive (but equally erroneous) stereotypes that are familiar in our culture (Italians are tough, the French are great lovers), but never has a more intentional, focused, and precise mythos been developed to fortify a group that was not the majority in a society. [. . .]

In the intellectual sense, negrophilia is condescension; it promotes the idea that blacks cannot excel on their own merits. Negrophilia is immoral; within the parental paradigm in which our government likes to operate, negrophilia is akin to the parent who coddles the child who then experiences grave difficulty in functioning successfully when he leaves home. [. . .]

Capitalizing on the collective guilt and shame of whites, and later, by reinforcing concepts of so-called political correctness, negrophilia has, directly and indirectly, led to a situation in which blacks--ironically, despite positive aspects of the mythos itself--are seldom held accountable for their actions or state of affairs. Predatory, opportunistic members of the black community, as well as white politicians, have used this to enrich themselves and secure politicial power. In the case of blacks of this sort, their intentions and their actions have been considered above suspicion. Why? Largely because the parties offering this bill of goods have always been very judicious as regards attacking with the utmost alacrity those who would raise suspicion. Essentially, anyone in society--politicians and the press, in particular--who claimed to engage in any activity or policy calculated to improve the lot of blacks in America was given a free hand.

Those free hands, holding the broadest of brushed, also erected the "virtual temple" of negrophilia. [. . .]


In 1971, veteran television producer Norman Lear premiered a situation comedy called All in the Family. [. . .] One of Archie's nemeses in All in the Family was George Jefferson. George and his wife Louise were Archie and Edith Bunker's neighbors. They were black and fairly well-off. George Jefferson was every bit the bigot Archie was; yet there was never an indication given that there was anything wrong with this; in fact, it was glossed over so smoothly as to be a non-issue. It was George's entitlement, you see, restitution for George's portion of suffering on the part of all blacks. The Jeffersons' popularity resulted in a spin-off series of the same name. While it wasn't as big a hit as All in the Family, it was quite successful, becoming nearly as iconic. Hence, the subliminal messages of these ventures did their part to advance negrophilia, as well as to validate black racism.

These programs are but examples of what was transpiring on a more widespread basis at the time. Whether they reflected the beliefs of those involved in their production, or were Lear's perception of his contribution to "the cause" (Lear also founded the far-left political group People for the American Way in 1981), is anyone's guess. Similar fare that did not enjoy the success of All in the Family or The Jeffersons saturated the airwaves and celluloid media. [. . .]

While All in the Family and The Jeffersons were calculated to demonize white bigots and inculcate the idea that black bigotry was acceptable, respectively, Mandingo, rather than simply demonizing slave owners, demonized whites and Southerners in general, reinforcing the stereotype of the uncool, rhythmless, oblivious white buffoon that was being portrayed in more contemporary productions. It also added to the myth of black sexual prowess; one of the subplots depicted the younger Maxwell's wife (played by Susan George) satisfying that which she could not seem to satisfy within her marriage, with Norton's character, the strapping black slave, wink-wink, nudge-nudge.

[. . .] films such as Mandingo ended up being blatantly propagandistic and as ridiculous as Blacula. These are just a few poignant examples of thousands of instances of negrophilia within hundreds of television programs and films produced over the last few decades.

Not all manifestations of negrophilia are grave and potentially harmful; some are simply inane and unfortunate. Countless insidious little examples, the result of incessant subliminal conditioning, occur during the course of any given day. One needs only to look.
Norman Lear, of course, was a Jew -- as was the director of Mandingo (Richard Fleischer).


Anonymous said...

Any chance to track down the DNA of this English queen? - "German cathedral bones 'are Saxon queen Eadgyth'" -

DGB said...

"We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negros. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."

Israel Cohen, A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century, 1912. Also in the Congressional Record, Vol. 103, p. 8559, June 7, 1957

n/a said...


I saw no indication in that article they did any DNA testing, unfortunately. Just strontium isotope analysis.


The "Israel Cohen" quote was apparently fabricated by Eustace Mullins. Which is not to say it did not accurately predict subsequent events.

DGB said...

In an official pamphlet published in 1935 by the New York Communist Party’s official Workers’ Library Publishers, that pamphlet was entitled, “The Negroes in a Soviet America.” It urged the Negroes to rise up, form a Soviet state in the South, and apply for admission to the Soviet Union. It contained a firm pledge that the revolt would be supported by all American Reds and all so-called liberals. On page 38, it promised that a Soviet government would confer greater benefits to Negroes than to Whites, and again this official Communist pamphlet pledged that, I quote, “any act of discrimination or prejudice against a Negro will become a crime under the revolutionary law,” unquote. That statement proved that the excerpt in Israel Cohen’s book, published in 1913, was an official edict of the Communist Party and directly in line with the Illuminati blueprint for world revolution issued by Weishaupt and later by Albert Pike.