Stephen Flurry Says 'White Males' Are Being Persecuted

Stephen Flurry of PCG has produced an article, Watch Out for White Men, bemoaning how 'white males' have 'taken a beating' in America. (Races do not actually exist by the way.)

How? Are whites denied jobs that they are entitled to? Are beating physically assaulting white males because of who they are. Let's take a look.

White males have taken a beating in recent weeks. First it was legislators in Arizona, branded as Nazis in some quarters, because they had the gall to clamp down on illegal immigration. Then it was Arizonans in general, labeled as racist for supporting tougher legislation, even though this majority support included many Hispanics—those who are legal citizens of Arizona.

How can criticism of Arizona's harsh immigration law be seen as 'beating' 'white males'? Clearly it refers to whoever was behind that law. Many 'white males' do not support it. How can this be called 'beating' 'white males'?

Then there was President Obama’s snub of white males all across America. Trying to rally his base to carry Democrats to victory in 2010, Obama called on women, youths, blacks and Hispanics to get involved—as if white males had nothing to do with his 2008 victory.

So President Obama made one, solitary comment that omitted white males. How is this 'beating' 'white males'? He works with 'white males' all the time. I'm sure a lot of his political contributions came from 'white males'.

When prodded to speculate on who this loner might have been, Bloomberg said he was probably “home-grown, maybe a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill.”

Flurry belittles Mr. Bloomberg's speculation that the Times Square bomber could have been a right wing extremist, ignoring the fact that there does exist a small but violent far right culture in America which resorts to violence. We've just had the Hutaree militia arrested for plotting terrorism recently. These are real concerns.

How is that 'beating' 'white males'? What about all the other 'white males' he deals with?

But before we jump to any conclusions about Muslim men, or their faith, let us remember the fundamental doctrines of political correctness: America’s greatest strength is its diversity. Any perceived threat against our diversity is of greater concern than terrorism itself.

Now terrorism is a very serious matter but, let's be honest, you are in greater danger of being killed crossing the road or driving a car then being killed in a terrorist attack in the USA.

Terrorisn is a concern but we must not let such concerns rob us of a free society, or detract from other concerns which actually have a greater chance of killing you. Stephen Flurry is wrong to be dismissive of such concerns.

On Tuesday, rather than apologize for targeting Republican tea partiers who oppose Obamacare, Mayor Bloomberg responded to Shahzad’s arrest by offering praise for the Pakistani community and its positive impact on New York. He then issued this stern warning to every non-Muslim in the region: “We will not tolerate any bias or backlash against Pakistani or Muslim New Yorkers.”

Every ethnic group has “a few bad apples,” Bloomberg lectured, after dabbling in a bit of his own racial profiling the day before.

Speculating that the Times Square bomber may have been a far right man of the same ilk that recently threw bricks at political offices, or even Hutaree, is 'beating' 'white males'?

It is sad that Flurry chooses to minimize very real concerns about potential backlash against minorities and instead complains that white males are being picked on.

This list of grievances at how 'white males' have been 'taken a beating' is very unimpressive to say the least.

Consider these words from the Anti-Racist Action Network. I don't necessarily agree with everything this group says but these words offer some insight into why the racism of white people is to be feared more than that of others in our societies, because only 'whites' have the power to forge a racist society that disadvantages minorities.

• We think that racism is two things: the belief that people can be divided into separate and distinct categories of "races" that can then be ranked according to which ones are superior or inferior to the others; and the power to act on this belief in a way that harms people. There is only one "race" -- the human race.
• While "non-white" people may believe that races really exist, it is "white" people that hold the power to put such beliefs into practice to hurt people.
• Science has proven that even though races are not real on any biological basis, racism is very real, and groups defined as distinct by racism face very real social, political and economic differences as a result.
• This is why "white" people perpetrate the majority of hate crimes in our society, or why the victims of racism are almost always people of color.
• Sometimes, "white" people are the victims of racism or racism occurs between different people of color. But compared to the amount of people of color victimized by institutionalized white racism, it's not hard to see where the real problem lies.

Considering that things are like this it sad that PCG chooses to use their voice to claim that white males are being persecuted by criticism of Arizona, one alledged omission by the President who happens to be descended from 'white males' on his mother's side, and speculation that the Times Square bomber was white. That's nothing.

Considering HWA used to ban interracial marriages it is not surprising that PCG should be blind towards the concerns of minorities and instead worry about their own selves.