5 Comments
User's avatar
HamburgerToday's avatar

The diagnosis for the most part seems correct. However, as long as one analysis uses 'universalist' or generic categories like 'student', the 'solution' will end up failing to transcend 'conservative' dogma. The issue for Whites is what should be done for Whites students, not 'students' in general. Debt relief to students detached from racial profiling doesn't facilitate the racial loyalty required for Whites to survive and thrive. A 'gift' from Whites to White students *because they are White* is the better policy. Let the darkies and jews and yellows solve their own 'student loan' problems (assuming preferential treatment hasn't solved this problem for them).

As for 'education reform', but simplest and most obvious 'reform' is to end the practice of awarding 'degrees' of any kind. If 'higher education' is to have any meaning at all, it must be detached from the 'degree mill' system that has overtaken it and destroyed the meaning of 'education' itself. Credentialism has destroyed the ability to get an education except by accident.

Expand full comment
Richard Parker's avatar

The issue for Whites is what should be done for Whites students, not 'students' in general.

That would require a revolution or a breaking off of different regions somewhat similar to the Soviet Union in 1991. I am not entirely against the idea, but that is not happening in the foreeseeable future, probably not in our lifetimes. That stated, to the extent that non-whites are part of *this* polity and part of the social contract, those who played by the rules should have this social contract upheld.

Degree mills are a problem but ending the awarding of degrees is silly. That practice originated in Europe as far I can gather and has existed since about the 11th or 12 century.

Expand full comment
HamburgerToday's avatar

I disagree. All it takes is for Whites to stop playing the game of 'one size fits all' while everyone else plays the game of 'what's in it for me?' Jews and Negros play this game all the time and the only reason they win is because Whites don't even try. And one of the reasons is that folks like yourself pretend that it would require a 'revolution' or secession in order to accomplish, so Whites think that it's 'too hard'. If every other group can think about their own group interest, so can Whites. Until Whites refuse to support anything or anyone that doesn't directly address their concerns as Whites, Whites will continue to be pushed further and further from the centers of power and culture. It's about a change of heart, a change of posture. Is it really so revolutionary for Whites to ask 'What's in it for Whites?'

Expand full comment
Richard Parker's avatar

Ever hear of the equal protection clause ? What you propose is flatly unconstitutional and could not be considered in this system.

Expand full comment
HamburgerToday's avatar

It's funny, but the jews and the negros never seem to have heard of the 'equal protection clause'. The 'constitution' says nothing about Whites acting in their own interests. It's an absurd claim. As for 'equal protection', that's obviously not a genuine concern because it's been violated countless times in the interest of 'civil rights' for jews and negros. 'Conservatives' are always looking for ways to avoid supporting White people as White people. It's really the main reason they exist.

Expand full comment