Anti-White Racism, 1961
Above is a video from a French television documentary entitled "Faire face" made in 1961 by Igor Barrère and Etienne Lalou. The purpose of the documentary is obvious: to instill in people a horror of racism, even when there is no racism. For example, it is not racist to want to be like those around you. It is not racist to prefer the color white to the color black. The children in the video are exploited for this purpose, and yet, despite the manipulative leading questions from the journalist, it is the children's honesty that shines through, not their "racism". On the other hand, the malicious intent of the journalist cannot be disguised by any pretext of concern for humanity.
Introduction:
Introduction:
At what moment in our lives do we put our fingers in the diabolical? The most natural and most innocent action, that of a child who clings solidly to the category to which he belongs, who doesn't want to be different from the others - is this not already a racist reflex?
At 14" the conversations with children begin:
- Do you like colors?
- Yes.
- Do you like white?
- Yes, sir.
- Why do you like white?
- Because I find it's pretty.
- Do you find that white looks clean?
- Yes.
- Do you like black?
- No, sir, I don't.
- Why?
- Because it is too dirty.
- Do you like stories about the Indians?
- Yes.
- Who do you prefer in the stories about Indians? The whites? Or the Indians"
- The whites.
- Why? (The child hesitates.)
- When you prefer something there has to be a reason. Why do you prefer the whites?
- I like them better because they are like us.
- In this school there are pupils who do not have the same color skin as you do. You like them?
- Yes.
- They're your friends?
- Yes.
- Would you like to look like them?
- No. I prefer to be white.
- And if you were in Africa, in a school where all the children were black and you were white. Would you like that?
- No, I would want to be black.
- Why?
- If I'm in a school where the others are black, I prefer to be black, and if I'm in a school where the others are white I prefer to be white.
At 2'01" the second child is questioned:
- Imagine you are in a school in Africa where all the children are black and you are white.
- Oh no.
- Why?
- Because there would be only one white, and that would be me.
- That would annoy you?
- Yes.
At 2'17", the third child (arms crossed):
- If you woke up one morning and found you were a little black boy. Would you like that?
- I would sometimes like it.
- And if you were in Africa in a school where all the children were black and you were white, would you like that?
- No.
- Why.
- I would be ashamed.
At 2'42", the fourth child :
- Would you like to be in school in Africa, as they are here, that is to say, you would be in a school where all the children were black and you were white.
- I would prefer to be like the others.
At 2'57" the fifth child (buttoned-up shirt):
- In this school, there are little boys of color, some who are black, some who are Asian. Do you like them?
- Yes.
- Are some of them your friends?
- Yes.
- If you wake up in the morning and find you have become black, like them, would you like that?
- No.
- No? Why?
- Because I don't like the color black.
- And if you were in Africa in a school where all the children were black, and you the only white, would you like that?
- No.
- Why?
- Because I wouldn't be like the others.
The scene switches to WWII and the roundup of Jews, a totally different topic from what preceded, as readers' comments have noted. The narrator forces a comparison:
From those happy children to this terrified child, from those candid comments to the horror of the death camps, there is less distance than one might think. The truth is, we are all, more or less, in some way or another, racist. And it's only by being conscious of this that we can avoid becoming the accomplices of crimes against humanity like those committed in our country less than twenty years ago.
The video is posted at François Desouche, with over a hundred comments. Here's a sampling:
- In 2012 there's no need to go to Africa to find a school with just one or two whites.
- The journalists of 1961 were already idiots!
- And would Igor Barrère and Etienne Lalou prefer to be white or black?
- What's fascinating is that all of the children's responses prove their total absence of racism: they are friends with blacks and Asians, and they have nothing against the fact of being black (but it has to be in Africa). And yet, the commentary says that these responses are not far removed from the death camps, and that we are all racists. (…)
- This interrogation of children is unbearable.
- Poor kids, back against the wall, faced with an interrogation from the Soviet era.
- So this all started with the early days of television. I thought the brainwashing was more recent.
Labels: Anti-White Racism, Education, Intellectual Terrorism, Media
posted by tiberge @ 4:57 PM
15 comments
links to this post
15 Comments:
Yes, a Soviet era interrogation, turns one's stomach. And then to transition to the images of the Holocaust, simply without shame. It wasn't enough that these kids were willing to count African kids as friends and classmates as we all have, the way had to be paved for acceptance of métissage. One really sees the insidiousness of the media already starting at this time.
"Peace On Earth"
Reminds me of the Swedish comicSven Melander interviewing a little girl about what Swedish children are supposed to think at the time, 1985.
Only by listening to the tone, you will get the idea
The supposedely child-friendly "journalist" starts the interview by asking little Anna what she wants the most in the world, and little Anna says
- A doll.
Of course, this is the wrong answer, so the "journalist" says "Nooo, that was not what I was thinking about...you know, something bigger..what then?
- A bicycle.
- Nooo, not a toy....Something that everybody in the whole world want...
- Food..?
Still not the correct answer. The "journalist" goes on until he finally has to put the words in little Anna's mouth. The correct answer is at the time, 1985, "Peace on Earth", "Fred på jorden".
tiberge, I think this video also goes to prove your post about The Global Lie, further proving the time perspective, for how long this lie has been going on.
Anti-White Racism/Hate/Bigotery, 2010: "Europe at the dawn of the 21st century is a global joke, a decadent and weak continent, despised by its enemies and viewed with pity by its friends. Outsiders don’t expect Europe to generate anything new, quite a few will be surprised if it even survives." (Fjordman)
Mr. Krebs,
Fjordman has expressed our dilemma very well, but this is not a definitive statement of capitulation. It is an observation of the disaster that is befalling our civilization. A disaster that still could be stemmed if people were not brainwashed by so many malignant forces, such as the journalists featured in this post, and the one parodied in the video.
The relentless brainwashing by the media and the left-wing school systems, and the low-level popular culture that deadens young people's minds are just some of the factors that have led us to our decadent state.
Training teachers in anti-racism
Norway
Courses will be held to "prevent another Breivik"
"“This is going to be one of the most complicated achievements in Norwegian schools,” says Rolf Mikkelsen, a researcher at the University of Oslo, to the newspaper Klassekampen [“Class Struggle” — a communist newspaper].
Mikkelsen has been selected, along with others, to put together a
training course this autumn for the “prevention of anti-Semitism, racism and undemocratic attitudes” aimed at teachers and school administrators."
"Fjordman has expressed our dilemma very well, but this is not a definitive statement of capitulation." (tiberge) I have never called Fjordman's claim a statement of dilemma or capitulation. I have called his claim a statement of racism, hate-monguering, bigotery (or whatever word you prefer to say preconceived derogatory despising) againt Europeans.
How would you react to a statement that "USA at the dawn of the 21st century are a global joke, a decadent and weak country, despised by its enemies and viewed with pity by its friends. Outsiders don’t expect USA to generate anything new, quite a few will be surprised if it even survives"?
Mr Krebs,
Many conservatives in America are justifiably afraid that this is how America will so end up if we don't put an end to certain types of destructive behavior and if we don't restore freedom of debate on topics that make people uncomfortable: for example, women should not be in the army or the Marines side by side with men; young children should not be taught that homosexuality is normal; Islam is not compatible with Western values; equality of outcome in education is not attainable because people are not endowed intellectually equally, nor are they equally motivated, nor do they have equal aptitudes; giving high grades and scholarships to people who did not earn them is bad for the country; pandering to small special interest groups such as homosexuals is a sign of weakness; perversions can be tolerated within limits, but not accepted as norms, and this is true of gay marriage as well; issues such as euthanasia should not be legislated because there is grave danger that people will be put to death needlessly; health care should be an open market, not socialized. If the Europeans want socialized medicine that is their business, but we do not want it. The Supreme Court of the United States should be dedicated to preserving, not changing, the constitution. Those are some of the issues which need to be more freely debated, lest the U.S. fall completely into the hands of the Left and the Dark Ages will be upon us. The most sensitive topic is crime. Until we are free to speak freely about who is committing most crimes we will continue to put the lives of Americans in danger. In today's America crime is racially motivated, as it often is in France. We should be free to discuss this without being called racists.
These are some of the reasons why the West, both Europe and America, are decaying. The over-arching problem is that we have lost our nationhood, our feeling of belonging to a specific nation with a specific heritage. We have replaced two thousand years of civilization with a suicidal open-borders policy and we have allowed the most infantile members of society to rule in the media, the schools, and the government.
So, yes, America is becoming decadent possibly to the point of no return. But for you that is a good thing, is it not? since you are a man of the times, while I look back to a time of better standards, and forward to the day when those standards will once again guide us. That day may never come, but I still look forward to it.
Finally, if someone insults America in her traditions, her contributions and her beauty, then I am angry, of course. But if someone says America is decadent, then I say,"You are probably right, but that's not the way I want it."
Then, tiberge, will you answer my question? How would you react to a statement that "USA at the dawn of the 21st century are a global joke, a decadent and weak country, despised by its enemies and viewed with pity by its friends. Outsiders don’t expect USA to generate anything new, quite a few will be surprised if it even survives"?
Do you want to debate? Do you refuse to discuss? Do you support freedom of debate? You do not want to freely debate Fjordman's claim?
A few days ago, NASA landed the Curiosity rover on Mars (900 kg several million km away). Is this event an evidence that "USA at the dawn of the 21st century are a global joke, a decadent and weak country [that don't] generate anything new"?
A few years ago, Airbus lauched the A380 and Boeing launched the B787. Are those event two evidence that "Europe and USA at the dawn of the 21st century are global jokes, decadent and weak continent/country [that don't] generate anything new"? (please do not reply that mankind cannot fly in the sky because it's againts God's will, it would make me very sad)
By the way, refusing women in army is an opinion, claiming that Boston is the capital of Georgia is a mistake at best, a lie at worse. As I wrote elswere, I support freedom of tough. But I am against false claims and against lies.
Mr. Krebs,
I answered your question. I do not appreciate criticisms of America when they are aimed at her accomplishments, or when they are motivated by jealousy, ignorance or unjustified hatred of a successful and rich nation, one that was not founded on promiscuity or welfare subsidies, but on a sense of individuality and responsibility. And I feel the same about France, England and Europe in general. Insulting a country without cause is an expression of ignorance. I do not believe Fjordman spoke out of ignorance. I have been alive for seven decades and I recognize not only that "times have changed", which is normal, but that we have lost our purpose, and that those of us who appreciate the sacrifices made to build and preserve this country are no longer at home in our own land. Filthy people, degrading behavior, whorish-looking women, radios blaring crap music from cars, foul language, confront us everyday. Poorly raised children, women too busy to care for their kids, poor nutrition, obesity, epidemics of diabetes and STD's, etc… are everyday facts of life. This was never true of America before 1968, even though I am not trying to say we did not have problems. But we were a people dedicated to solving problems, not creating them. Today, to escape crime and degradation, we have to take refuge in our homes. People who jog are killed, people innocently walking their dog are killed, homes are broken into, well-educated conservative parents have to home-school their children, and there are always these psychopaths who kill wantonly in a theater or a post office or somewhere, disseminating even more terror. Everywhere there is danger, and we are not allowed to say anything except "It's a random occurrence. It makes no sense." The stifling of righteous indignation, here and in France, is one reason why we often think that only violence can result from this concerted effort to prevent people from being free to speak. Recently in America several people have been taken to court for growing vegetables on their own property. There is no rational explanation for this except that those who seek centralized control over our lives cannot endure the sight of people freely growing their own food, and refusing to eat the garbage sold by fast-food chains.
You said elsewhere that you are for the West and that you are for complete reproductive freedom for men and women. Well, that is what you have in Europe, and demographically you are slowly being replaced by non-Europeans. Women will not have children if they can get free abortions, and couples will not marry if they sense they are an endangered species. In such a climate why should white men feel any sense of responsibility towards women and family life?
See Part 2
Part 2
While we want many freedoms, we have to be mature enough to realize that without responsibility freedom leads to license and depravity.
While we want our country to be great, we have to be mature enough and honest enough to admit that something is wrong, possibly fatally wrong.
It is well-known that whites in America will soon be a minority, if it is not already true. But they are still the only doers, the major achievers. If Curiosity was a success, it was primarily due to American initiative, not Algerian, Peruvian or Senegalese. If America is to survive at all she has to face the truth about the lower level of intelligence and the uncivilized behavior of other peoples, and, without insulting them or harming them, allow them their rightful place in society, no more no less. If necessary she has to send them back to their homeland, whenever adapting to America is impossible. Previous immigration was always selective - Europeans of Christian (or Jewish) heritage. It was the change in immigration laws in 1965 that brought in peoples from non-European countries. But in Europe it was worse because of the EU, Schengen, and an incredible propaganda effort.
(I have no problem at all with enterprises such a Boeing or Airbus, nor can I fathom where you would have gotten such an idea.)
If America can regain control of her boundaries, her cities and her common sense, we do have a chance to save ourselves. But if we are outnumbered, then it will be a calamitous decline. We are already seeing it, and this is why I have nothing but sympathy for Fjordman's observation, even though I feel we still have a chance to avert the worst.
Finally, you take up more of my time than other readers. If you do not know by now what my blog is about, I suggest you take a rest and clear your thoughts. Read the header of the blog: "To help you stay au courant of what French patriots are doing and saying in this time of turmoil and loss of nationhood."
I am not a debater. I do not debate. This blog is not a forum for debates. Comments are different, because theoretically they do not necessitate my presence. However I respond to them whenever possible. When I spoke of debates, I was speaking of national discourse, on television, primarily, and in the newspapers. There is some debate on radio, but it is often vulgar. High quality discussions, where the traditionalist, Christian, anti-socialist, anti-feminist, anti-homosexualist viewpoints are given equal time and legitimacy has vanished from the scene. Most of our "conservatives" are as cowardly as your UMP party. It all happened very fast. Our values slipped through our fingers, and no one tried seriously to stop it. Now no one is even allowed to think that anything is wrong.
If you like the Europe of today, I congratulate you. You are a happy man. We are the dinosaurs. Ending one's life as a dinosaur is not the worst thing.
"I answered your question." (tiberge) No, you didn't.
"Insulting a country without cause is an expression of ignorance." It is worse than that.
"You said elsewhere that you are for the West and that you are for complete reproductive freedom for men and women. Well, that is what you have in Europe, and demographically you are slowly being replaced by non-Europeans. Women will not have children if they can get free abortions, and couples will not marry if they sense they are an endangered species. In such a climate why should white men feel any sense of responsibility towards women and family life?" Because the current French fertility rate is 2.0 children/woman. Women in France do have children. French people do have family life. Will you ever stop to spread misinformation about France? Or should I say lies?
"I have no problem at all with enterprises such a Boeing or Airbus, nor can I fathom where you would have gotten such an idea." I was asking you a question about Fjordman's claim that "Outsiders don’t expect Europe to generate anything new".
« If you do not know by now what my blog is about, I suggest you take a rest and clear your thoughts. Read the header of the blog: "To help you stay au courant of what French patriots are doing and saying in this time of turmoil and loss of nationhood." » I concur that your blog is not about spreading informations and trues about France.
"I am not a debater. I do not debate. This blog is not a forum for debates. [...] When I spoke of debates, I was speaking of national discourse, on television, primarily, and in the newspapers." So on one hand you worry the lack of debate of others, and on the other hand you do no debate yourself. You are hypocrite here.
"If you like the Europe of today, I congratulate you. You are a happy man. We are the dinosaurs. Ending one's life as a dinosaur is not the worst thing." And now your are claiming that my fate will be worse than death. Will you ever stop to spread threat and hate speech? Will you acknowledge that your speech is actually full of violence, or treath of violence?
But thank you for acknowledging between-the-lines that you don't like the Europe of today. This is a step forward in explaining your agenda and telling the truth.
PS: I guess you support the prosecution of three women who "insulted in a sacrilegious manner the centuries-old foundations of the Russian Orthodox Church", but could you confirm?
Mr. Krebs,
The French fertility rate is high due to immigration, not to ethnic French births. At this blog we are concerned about preserving the original French stock and the traditional French values. Immigration has gotten out of hand and threatens the preservation of French culture.
Regarding Boeing and Airbus, enterprises can be formed and people can be industrious and original so long as there is freedom. Neither Europe nor America is entirely dead. We are in the process of losing our Judeo-Christian culture, and our family values, but there are still people who are living traditionally, and who are creating new things. A body takes a long time to die. This is why we are all interested in the fate of France and Europe and America. The question for us is "Will we survive or not". The answer is probably no, because there are so many malignant forces who hate us. You constantly accuse me of hatred. I am only attempting to give support to our cultural heritage and traditions, and to uphold the higher standards of the past.
This blog provides Americans and others with the patriotic view of France, and her crisis. This is not a Socialist, Communist, feminist, homosexualist, Islamist website. It is tradition-oriented. For you, that means I am telling lies, and for me, it means I am telling the truth. But I acknowledge that there are different visions of the world, and your vision is not my vision.
I do not have time to spend in debate. I indicated to you that your comments take more time to answer than they are worth since nothing I say arouses anything but accusatory and contemptuous responses form you. I am not a hypocrite for not debating. Debating is a skill, an art, I prefer to leave it to those more skilled than I. I present what the French media and blogs are saying about their country, and I accept most, not all, comments, but the purpose of this blog is to inform my readers about France. Extended discussions are for television, college seminars, books, and other websites, possibly like Brussels Journal or Jihad Watch.
I never said or implied anything about your fate. We all have a fate. Mine is to be a conservative person, your is to be a man of modern Europe. I never said it was worse than death. You inferred that. I said being a dinosaur, i.e., a conservative, is not the worst thing. That statement has nothing to do with you. How would I know anything about your fate?
See Part 2
Part 2
Of course, I don't like many things about Europe of today, and it's not in-between the lines. It's open. I don't like degradation or loss of sovereignty or crime or neglected children or violent classrooms, to name a few things. If I travel there again I will seek out the old architecture, the beautiful untouched areas where people still live and eat and enjoy life as they have for centuries. I will look at new structures with interest. Some of them are no doubt worthy, but I doubt that I will venture into dangerous areas, where even the police no longer go, or take the subway or buses late at night, as I was once able to do long ago. I doubt that I will go to the movies, but I may go the opera. The fact that I don't like the degrading side of modern life, the fact that I don't like the loss of sovereignty brought about by the EU, the fact that I don't like crime, these things are to you a sign of hatred? They are not a sign of hatred. They are a sign of concern. I have the same concerns for America as I do for France. You are saying that anyone who has a conservative patriotic point of view, anyone who appreciates the efforts made by patriotic bloggers, writers and politicians, anyone who is concerned over the fate of their country is full of hatred????
If you are speaking of the so-called "Pussy Riot", here is a passage from Le Salon Beige:
Si beaucoup de journalistes français présentent les jeunes filles comme les victimes d’une Russie quasi-totalitaire, il faut néanmoins rappeler que les Pussy Riot ont plusieurs fois durant les derniers mois organisé des actions "coup de poing" portant atteinte à l’ordre public. Pussy Riot n’est en outre pas seulement un groupe de rock, mais le volet musical d’un groupe anarchiste du nom de Voina (la guerre) et qui ces derniers mois a revendiqué de nombreuses actions que l’on peut ne pas trouver ni "drôles" ni "subversives". Parmi elles l’organisation d’une orgie sexuelle avec des femmes enceintes dans un musée (...).
I did not follow the story, but depraved conduct in a church (or anywhere) merits punishment. Putin came to their defense, for some reason, but for me I think they should be at least fined, and forced to do public service for a year. If somebody did something like that in a mosque, what would you say? The Russian Orthodox Church is an essential part of traditional Russia, a major element in the lives of the people. The Communists tried to deprive the people of their Church. Let's hope that the Church comes out of this a victor, and that the three women are forced to admit wrongdoing.
Finally, you may leave comments, and I will decided whether or not to publish them, but you cannot expect me to continue wasting my time answering you. Your basic assumption that I am full of violence and hatred is an indication of your own inner turmoil and intolerance. I cannot answer to such accusations. Do not expect me to. If someone else wants to answer that is fine.
"The French fertility rate is high due to immigration, not to ethnic French births."
This doesn't change anything to the truthness of your previous statement and of my previous statement. Women in France do have children. Your statement that "Women will not have children if they can get free abortions" is wrong.
"The French fertility rate is high due to immigration, not to ethnic French births."
Evidence? Where have you seen that?
"the purpose of this blog is to inform my readers about France"
And this fail, since your blog misinform its readers about France.
"Extended discussions are for television, college seminars, books, and other websites, possibly like Brussels Journal or Jihad Watch."
There is no debate in Brussels Journal and Jihad Watch. There are not even comments in Brussels Journal. Can you tell me a website with free debate with the Counterjihad movement?
"I did not follow the story, but depraved conduct in a church (or anywhere) merits punishment. [...] I think they should be at least fined, and forced to do public service for a year."
Thank you for your answer.
"If somebody did something like that in a mosque, what would you say?"
I would say death penality, of course! Churches and mosques are not location were freedom of expression apply, because:
"The Russian Orthodox Church is an essential part of traditional Russia, a major element in the lives of the people."
and mosques are "an essential part of traditional [Islam], a major element in the lives of the [Muslims]".
The Pussy Riot band made blasphemy and depraved conduct, and they must be prosecuted in the same way that Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons and Elisabeth Wolff must have been prosecuted.
That's all for today, I hope I didn't wrote too much for tiberge's reading time.
PS I you prefer that I write statements rather than questions, then please say so.
Anti-White Racism/Hate/Bigotery, 2012: French White do not have children.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home