18/02/2010

Niggers and Ethnics: “men, half-men, wimps”

“Nigger” is just a substantive derived from the Latin adjective “niger-nigra-nigrum” (“black” in the three genders of that language). It doesn’t have any negative nor positive intent.

In English that term didn’t either have any specific intent. In the American “politically-correct” slang that term has been vetoed assuming just its willingness to offend disregarding the meaning it tried to vehicle. “Nigger” refers to anyone who is considered of a “marginal” value for the society not due to lack of natural gifts (intelligence, beauty, grace, harmony) or vocational education (literary, musical, graphical, technical, commercial, relational) but for his “lazy” style of life (laziness or lack of: courage, character, self esteem, pride) that gives him an unreliable status that hinder him to be selected as an equal-right partner in the mutual daily effort to build the common-wealth in the community and to protect it from a recognized, shared identification of “alien” challenges.

In this sense “nigger” has been used to stigmatize individuals of any race and nationality (Africans, Irish, Italian “Dagos”, Chinese) but, seldom it has been used against native-american red-skin nations or against the “mafia members” or the “black panthers”.

I have always considered black fellows as “negro” never as “nigger” while I have often classified as “nigger” fellows behaving in despicable ways disregarding their race, religion or level of education. Whoever strives daily to earn his daily bread using honestly his profile of skills deserves respect from his peers. Anyone who tries to live daily parasitically without earning his income deserves the social stigma disregarding his race, status, level of education, sophistication of moods and relational style. The free market competition is the bench-mark where our social evaluation gets built our level of credibility and social recognition.

Al Gore’s Nobel Award doesn’t enhance his social status. Neither does Al Gore’s Oscar Award to the movie built upon his fake-demagogical book. Obama’s Nobel Award instead was accepted by that successful self-made political leader with a sense of ironic contempt (“a ‘preventative’ award” he said clearly to the bunch of political parasites who had awarded him just to seek influencing his future political decisions with a scientific abuse of science!).

We find often in politics (as well as in any other field of human endeavor) white “niggers” and negro “idols”. Joe Louis, Louis Armstrong, Billie Holiday, Martin Luther King, Farrakhan, Malcom X, Condoleezza Rice are just a few examples of fellows negroes who deserve admiration and respect for their brave hood (even if we may not share their ideas and proposals). Pork-barrel-hooding demagogues active in Congress with their demagogical proposals are “niggers” disregarding their race, religion, status or education. Often we can find “nigger” descendents of any race exploiting the fortune built illegally by their brave (sometimes criminal) fathers. Al Capone or Lucky Luciano weren’t labeled as “niggers” in a period when the bulk of Italian new-comers were still keeping a scary, low-profile, low-self-esteem behavior that attracted them the “nigger” stigma (they were mocked as “Dagos” from the most usual last-name ‘D’Agostino’ of that wave of immigrants). Obama has shown being a “half-negro” but absolutely not a “nigger” at all. He has shown a fast capacity to “change” his approach and behavior adapting his former understanding of the “real world”. This is sign of an eminent intelligence for any leader. If the model you have of reality doesn’t find confirmation “in the field”, the “model” is likely to be wrong rather than “reality”. Obama isn’t “hung up” on any ideology, he is flexibly adaptive and learns quickly to “change” his decisions rather than pigheadedly decide to “change” the world. Hitler, Ahmadinejad or Napoleon were “niggers” while William Pitt, Talleyrand, Kissinger, Reagan, Nixon, Gandhi, Mandela, Bhutto and Obama aren’t. 

Obama seems having gone wise after his initial pro-socialist approach to offer "strategic solutions"!? (NO government is able to "offer solutions". He shall merely only care for a solid and consistent foreign policy both to enforce abroad the "1776 values" by political, trading and MILITARY actions, and to “show the flag” armed by a great carrot associated to a huge stick like GOP Teddy used to say.

It’s really true what Ann Coulter wrote: “if Democrats had any brain, would vote Republican”.

Well, let's hope that the "half-negro" root of Obama has given place to the "half WASP" root of his mom (a "daughter of flowers" though!!!) for the sake of survival of our western civilization.

Unfortunately USA feels being entrenched into "the last Alamo" while they are right experiencing the beginning of "the final triumph" of the "Spirit of '76". Exactly as their 1700, 1800 and 1900 "pioneers" experimented the growth of "intermediate triumphs" of it while shaping gradually today's USA; still “the dream” of any individual aiming to join the civilization of the Brave and of the Free.

Until USA (we liberal-democrats all over the world) doubt upon this true reality (reality is always rough and tough) we won't understand that the "Spirit of '76" offers just the right to work-out in full freedom our own individual concept of "felicity" (by enforcing a "bubble up" style of government "of the people, for the people, by the people"). While the European paradigm (but in general the old-times top-down sort of government "upon its subjects") is "the wise ruler" who collects OUR resources in order to DISTRIBUTE us equal portions of "felicity" of an "optimal structure" as ensured by the long-sighted "wise ruler" and his consultants. This brings to suicides in Sweden or to "education champs" everywhere someone isn't yet able to appreciate the "superiority" and the "inevitability" of the "socialist" approach to survival (since: God doesn't exist, the resources are limited and - hear, hear - the man-made-global-warming is about to destroy humanity!). A ridiculous nightmare! A bunch of bullshit that ultimately offers only MAN the choice between awaiting the final death of the Earth being benevolently assisted by an equal spread of poverty and desperation or use all his degrees of individual ingenuity to ensure HIS family, in good neighborhood spirit, the best possible "emulation" of "felicity" there-included starving in freedom, dying shoulder-to-shoulder while trying to enforce HIS faith and belief, and all the bullshit Utopias that anyone of US is entitled to imagine worth his dedication and death. Without any "overhead" mark-up imposed by parasitic corporations of "wise and benevolent" RULERS. No ruler takes power by promising "sweat & tears", all of them are promising an Eden of Felicity (perhaps limited to the "pure arian race"). The liberal democratic leaders instead promise "sweat & tears" to get rid of the menace of national or foreign RULERS like William Pitt, Willy Churchill and Margie Thatcher did in old-times UK.

The USA voter will cast a good conservative vote (either democrat or preferably republican) next November to evaluate the growth of conservativism of kid-Obama. If he'll result a wise, half-black american then they’ll confirm him in 2012, else if he keeps-on being a socialist-oriented (a half-nigger as most of the communist-oriented white guys in Hollywood and in the Media are) they’ll cast a vote for the GOP in 2012.

The rest are wishful thinking worth the Al Gores and Al Qaeda's who try to oppose the "ultimate triumph" of the American Utopia (and the Western Civilization inaugurated 2000 years ago in Rome) around the world!

The recent, fast progression of industrial internationalization shows an associate progress of the new global governance. A progress that inevitably results slower both for the need to refer the political negotiations to already well-rooted interests in the international market and to give a preminent, selective attention to the associated hierarchy of the leading-interests in the course of consolidation in the new productive geopolitical context. Finally slow due to the connected “resistances” opposed by the old Nation States and by the obsolescent interests of their corporative organizations (all of a growing parasitic character in the light of the new unified market).

This phenomenon hits any State concerned by the industrial globalization. The hegemonical protagonists of the present phase (USA and China), those concurring immediately after and already active in gregarian roles within the ongoing process (India, UK, Commonwealth), and those less available to accept a gregarian role in the present process for their larger loss of status or their presumed greater negotial power (basically the EU), and finally those lacking any concrete negotial alternative unless based on economical or military blackmailing (“producers of commodities” towards whom diplomatic actions run from the hegemonic protagonists or those which feel being excluded from the present phase and seek therefore to build “resistance fronts” – je more sterile as less competitive the sponsoring system).

In USA too therefore grows the need to seek a new strategy of foreign political action suited to produce an hegemonic role in the global industrial scenario. An acceptable one by the majority of the concerned foreign Countries (to gain a leading-role in the context of the future institutions og global governance i.e.: NATO and UNO of tomorrow). A strategy that may collect adequate continuity too of National political consensus in the USA (to grant continuity along the inevitable duration of the transition processfrom yesterday’s stability of the industrial system and the stability of the coming system, already solid but still in the course of consolidation and extension.

Obama shall challenge (hopefully with open mind free of ideological prejudices) both the new problems of foreign politics (credibility and ideological hegemony), and those (equally new but more critical for his political survival), that impose him to formulate a proposal of action fully compatible both with the prevailing “common feelings” of the electorate (transversal conservativism), both in relation to the present economical interests and to the arising ones. The political proposals cannot allow incoherence nor the evolution of the economical difficulties can be clearly perceived until they take a definite shape. Obama shall therefore define an unique “paradigm” suited to legitimate his National and foreign policies with high capacity of adaptive flexibility as required by the turbulent character of the ongoing change.

Such a “paradigm” may be presented by Obama within attractive and suggestive rhetorical concepts (where he is eminent). The paradigm shall though be clearly stated for the less learned and the most sectarian or egocentrical american electors. Besides it shall result attractive abroad too to convince the electors of foreign Countries that the USA is still a “diverse”, “unique” subject. The desirable object of desire for the individual emigrants or to pretend the resident voters their national governments to emulate its attractive legitimacy paradigm. The supranational USA hegemony is namely due to the suggestive level of attraction produced by its liberal constitution and by the individualism of its history of “continual pionierism” rather than from its GNP, its military power, the distributed welfare or the excellence of its military conquests, of its scientists, artists, politicians and philosophers. The emigrant in the USA doesn’t expect to receive “food stamps” of the welfare state (a traditional paradigm of Europe and of the Countries whose top-down governments deliver an “equitable” incomes’ planning). He asks instead to get rid of the oppressive corporations of illiberal and authoritarian states and be left free to “earn” in holy peace his daily bread in family, within responsible and compassionate communities. He asks being able to get rid of the dreamless bore (of the even most effective welfare states) and to be allowed “dreaming” to build a “felicity” whose composition, consistance and security would only depend from his own daily dedication and from the prudent choice of the best suited physical and social environment subjectively judged worth to host his family.

In this perspective of positive “projection” that the USA “paradigm” benefits historically in any Country of the globe (from Sweden, India, Pakistan, Black Africa, Russia, China and EU) it seems difficult to believe that Obama (a non-nigger) would propose his USA electors and the present worldwide derelicts a “paradigm” centered on the “incomes planning” and on the “welfare state” inspiring the liberal-radical media, marxist-nuts and Acorn activists. Those are anti-historical, unsustainible objectives of the “son of flowers ‘70s revolution” that still infect the most parasitic “subtle minds” of the USA economy (petty-writers and pro-marxist utopists trying to spread their “common sense” thanks Hollywood and the demagogical Media). The “good sense” electorate both democratic and republican is basically conservative and reactive to proposals as the spontaneous and suggestive ones of the “tea parties” and the preachers non-financed by the industrial groups (Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, Scott Brown, Huey Long, Charles Coughlin, Pat Robertson) neither right-wingers nor left-wingers, just “conservative” in the “Spirit of ‘76” that promised Freedom from the State. A minimal, non intrusive State intended to limit its fiscal greed and managed by a Government that, as Jefferson stated, “is liberal if it fears the citizen while is autoritarian if the citizen fear it”.

With these background, the acceleration of the globalization and the strict timing available, I doubt that a “non nigger” Obama could decide to propose the mid-term and his second term elections a “paradigm” inspired by the bankrupted, disgusting utopia of the european welfare state concept.

Everything may happen but I believe that we could bet on Obama’s refusal to suicide politically. Yes “change we can” so can Obama, Acorn and all the illiberal bunch of intellectual parasites in Hollywood, in the Media and in the Congress in Washington DC.