Thursday 22 December 2016
White Guilt
Postscript: Whites are economically dependent upon White supremacy to make any kind of living; while also being psychologically-dependent upon trying to force everyone else to accept such White superstitions in order to artificially create the very superiority which the use of force proves does not actually exist. After all, genuine superiority does not require the use of force and, like vodoun, only works if everyone else dreads it. This latter fact makes Whites crucially-dependent on the fears of others before they can ever believe in themselves (albeit by faking self-esteem, in this way).
Permission granted to reproduce & distribute this posting in any way, shape or form; provided mention of this Blog is included.
All other rights reserved.
Saturday 23 July 2016
INCIDENTS AT KENT LIBRARIES
Head of Libraries, Registration and Archives
Kent History and Library Centre
James Whatman Way
MAIDSTONE
Kent
ME14 1LQ
UNITED KINGDOM
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
RECORDED DELIVERY
RE; INCIDENTS AT KENT LIBRARIES
If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
William Shakespeare (1564-1616), English dramatist, poet. Shylock, in The Merchant of Venice, act 3, scene 1.
Thank you for your letter of 1st February 2016, to which this a first response.
Like all White supremacists, the Library Service thinks it is judge, jury & executioner in its own cause, with no reason to take into account anyone else, objective evidence, equality-before-the-law, harassment, discrimination, etc.
You demand the courtesy and respect I rarely receive from library staff. In the past, it has been suggested that I am a liar and a violator of the Computer Misuse Act – all without any evidence, whatsoever. I have been patronisingly told that double-booking the library Personal Computers (PCs) is impossible, that the Library Service utilises Closed‑Circuit Television (CCtv) (without telling anyone in writing) and that White customers can randomly-determine which services Black customers are allowed to use.
Bizarrely, I was even once told – in writing – that I was in the library after it had closed to download Internet pornography and that a Website you do not filter and which contains nothing in violation of the Acceptable‑Use Policy (AUP) was one I should avoid, in future. I was also once stopped from using the PCs at Tonbridge library simply because the White staff thought they could – unilaterally – do so without any written warning or reason being given. The ban was quickly lifted, after I verbally-complained, despite it never existing in the first place: Schizophrenics and paranoiacs are not respecters of objective facts.
Needless to say, iIt became clear that the Library Service is institutionally‑racist and I told it so, in writing.
Courtesy is the by-product of self-respect; hence, the ease with which I display it. Self-respect is what the White staff clearly lack, since it has to be earned – a goal to which White library staff are too lazy to work toward: Only the lonely demand the respect that they lack the necessary get‑up‑and‑go to earn. Because it is impossible to legislate for love, your letter reeks of the condescension of those who cannot respect themselves enough to display the courtesy for others that they demand for themselves from them; hence, your bizarre claim that the situation you people have created is escalating – but from what to what and by whom?
Your organisation's lack of courtesy and respect for others means you believe you are above criticism when asked why the Library Service filters anti‑racist & Caucasian‑mocking Websites from public viewing: A question you still have not answered. (There is no reference on the AUP regarding anti‑racism being a blockable category.) Any criticism of the essence of White culture leads Whites to suppress what they do not agree with, in this case: Anti-racism.
Because it is impossible to double-book library PCs, it is impossible for me to continue using a PC that has been booked by someone else – as you falsely claim – unless I know their Library‑Card number & Personal Identification Number (PIN). That you imply you do not know this means the Head of Libraries does not know how the library systems work. The White supremacist who tried to intimidate me from continuing my ongoing computer session that day simply thought Black people can be disrespected, harassed & abused to satisfy the inane requirements of White supremacy. I can therefore do likewise, in the interests of racial equality, to Whites but, once again, my self-respect prevents me from doing anything more than give back the disrespect I am given.
You claim Library Volunteers are allowed to harass, interfere-with and pester customers who have not asked for help and treat them as though they are ignorant. This means I can condescendingly do likewise, but do not do so out of self-respect – I simply make it very clear that their behaviour is unacceptable and move on. Alleged staff disabilities offer no excuse for profound discourtesy and arrogant disrespect for others – such social-disability and emotional-ineptitude implies the existence of a presumably-incurable disease allowing all rude people to get away with their rudeness by claiming an inner and irresistible compulsion to do so. This would also mean that people so afflicted could never be courteous and respectful to customers and should, therefore, never be employed. Yet, the Library Service employs many losers, freaks & morons in the belief in its impunity from having to obey the normal rules of healthy social interaction. For sheer unprofessionalism, they are very hard to beat. (I leave my problems at home – where they belong – as should others.)
So long as Whites continue to believe Black people only have second‑class citizenship rights, they will always be confronted with the Black rage Whites are so frightened of, yet spend so much time provoking. (Perhaps this will teach Whites how to improve their low standards of behaviour?)
Because White staff side with the White supremacist customers it they molly‑coddles, the Library Service remains an institutionally-racist ghetto. Your letter never mentions the fact that I was courteous up until the White staff and White customers decided that a Black man had no rights they need respect and that lies could be freely told about him. And I am very happy to deal with the White supremacists you fear since I obtain no benefit from White supremacy and thus possess no fear of losing such unearned advantages. (You Whites are trapped within the ethical limitations of your culture, I am not.)
I also know of no non-derogatory terms for White supremacists other than expressions such as: “Fuckhole” or “White cunt”, nor am I aware of many more effective means to scare Whites out of their racist torpor: An easy thing for a Black man to do, since Whites are already scared of Black people.
The police never contacted me about any of the incidents you mention, so you are either a liar, have been lied-to or both. (Trying to frighten me with another institutionally-racist organisation like the Police Service is never going to work because I have not initiated any criminal wrongdoing – the White staff and White customers always do that.)
Your attempt to spin the many recordings I made in Kent libraries over the years shows just how frightened you are of being objectively observed; that is, having your institutional racism pointed-out to you. When the staff realised I was doing it, they suddenly became more polite than before; making me realise even more suspicious that without White supremacy their mediocre talents would achieve very little for them in life. It also explains why there is no CCtv in Kent libraries, since this would provide further proof of how degenerate so many of the White staff & the White customers really are. You are absurdly-surprised that I am willing to fight back (my right) – as if White supremacy were a god-given right enshrined in a statute law that has never been shown to exist – as if I were suffering from drapetomania.
You will appreciate that institutional racism – even the Ethnic Monitoring carried out by the Library Service is racist – will not be tolerated. None of the incidents you mention were initiated by myself – since I routinely avoid the company of White people – and I have better things to do than waste my valuable time with my inferiors. You will need to provide ethnic minorities with a written assurance that Library staff will treat them with courtesy and that their White supremacist tendencies and those of White customers will be both curbed and punished – for the good of all. (I do not need to demand your respect, I already have this for myself.)
Your comments about me are racially-one-sided, lacking in supporting evidence & without credible witnesses – only complaints made by Caucasoids are ever believed. Your Negrophobic unwillingness to provide a public service to the darker-skinned can be ameliorated by simply treating Black people as you would wish to be treated – then you would have no rational reason to fear the inevitable Black response to White supremacy. But White supremacy is, in itself, supremely irrational; explaining why incidents like these never happen to Whites. Because I cannot change my skin colour, it is for you to change your negative attitude toward it – if you possess the moral courage, that is.
Sincerely,
Robert BUCKNOR
Postscript: Please stop sending me e-mails to return library items when you have banned me from entering any Kent library – it just shows how stupid White supremacy is.
Saturday 16 January 2016
ZERO TOLERANCE FOR INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM
This is what Anti‑Racism sounds like - get used to it
At around 15:30, on Thursday, 7 January 2016, at Tunbridge Wells Library, a White male (sitting with a friend using PC4, in the chair for PC3) refused to move from this chair to allow me to use PC3 - after my asking him politely to do so (hear attached audio). (PC3 had been booked for me by a member of staff.)
He arrogantly suggested I use the chair in front of PC2, but I pointed‑out the rather obvious fact that if someone uses PC2, then they will have no seat. He then suggested I use the seat for the Computer Buddies - but, then, where would they sit? I was clearly addressing someone of limited intellectual ability and achievement.
| img0393b.jpg | |
|
I then asked the same member of staff who booked PC3 to ask him to move. At first, she offered to book another computer, but I demurred; preferring to use the original computer she booked me; to avoid being placed in the position of the Black man having to kow tow to the White - for no good reason.
He still refused to move at her request and lied (hear attached audio) about my being impolite to him, in the first instance - I then immediately entered anti‑racism mode, in direct response to his playing the Race Card in the White environment of the library. Because he had no rational defence for his socially‑inferior behaviour, I made it very clear what I thought of him, in words that could not - under any circumstances - ever be misunderstood. I have no time, nor obligation, to enter into a negotiation (every time I use a UK public service) with a White supremacist about the civil & human rights I already possess. If Whites have not already figured‑out what equality means, they never will.
I also took photographs of him (attached) and he hid his head; revealing his tacit understanding that he was in the wrong - otherwise, why hide his head? (A member of the library staff once verbally implied to me [see 30-05-2015] that there existed a video surveillance system in the library, so this may avail him nothing.) In any case, at no point did he explain (without resorting to lies) his rather obvious desire to obstruct a Black man going about his lawful business.
| img0394a.jpg | |
|
Other White customers and staff entered the fray by siding with the White malcontent (no surprise there, given the prejudicial nature of White culture). One White male implying that the virtue of White women must not be sullied by hearing swear words - as if White women were somehow mentally‑retarded (& in need of protection from Black men). Racism, which leads to people being killed, is somehow (in the White mind) much less worse than swearing in public - which kills no‑one. And yet Whites behave as though the anger they incite is a threat to Western civilisation! - so why incite it?
Focusing on trivia is the moral inversion of a people who clearly have their ethical priorities back‑to‑front. It is also an unintelligent way to change the subject, since politeness only benefits the racist; while fighting fire‑with‑fire (my preferred method) wastes as much of their time as they wish to waste of mine. Such a focus also attempts to effectively‑legalize racial‑discrimination by trying to deliberately‑provoke Black people with whom Whites do not wish to share the same public space. Whites evade this issue by claiming that they can tell Black people how to act in public - more of the same racism Whites deny exists - while allowing contumely Whites to run roughshod over Black people’s rights.
Whites are not threatened by White supremacy (they benefit from it), so they can pretend never to see it as being a threat - in stark contrast to those who are disadvantaged by it. This means a Black person can be publicly‑abused, but woe betide them if he calls any White supremacist a cunt
. This is an unwritten rule Whites never have to follow, since they are never racially‑abused by Black people. I am happy to allow myself to be provoked, because it affords me the opportunity to offer free, hard‑to‑forget lessons to those who still have much to learn about race‑relations. And it is better than putting my fist in their faces, which would clearly be a disproportionate response in this case.
As a White female member of staff stood in my way for God‑knows‑what reason (technical assault?), it was then demanded that I leave the library and never come back that day. Since I was offered a low opinion of Black people to my face (that Blacks have no rights Whites need respect) I offered my, very clearly expressed, view of Whites; resulting from such unprovoked incivility and hostility.
| img0396a.jpg | |
|
Racist incidents will continue to happen, so long as White people are unwilling to muzzle the racist dogs that their particular ethnic‑upbringing encourages. In particular, those who think that public space exists for the venting of private prejudices, in the hope that Black people will be handicapped by having to live in perpetual fear of being harassed for the non‑crime of being Black; making it my job - out of self‑respect - to punish them for such superstition. The only equality and fairness here is to fight back, on the basis that: If non‑Blacks get in a Black man’s way, they are racist - unless they have good reason for so doing.
As Black people have had to become used to the existence of White supremacy - in order to survive and overcome it - Whites will have to get used to anti‑racism, since any violation of the principle of live‑and‑let‑live can result in a response every bit as nasty. The advantage for Blacks is that anti‑racism is ethical, because it is based upon the principle of self‑defence; while racism is immoral, because it is not. If Whites are not required to act in a reasonable and civilized manner, why is anybody else?
As I mentioned in my e‑mail of 5/6/2015?, I am happy to take the legal risks implied by my behaviour (under the Public Order Act 1986), in order to clear the White trash from my path - upon which they have no lawful business being.
Permission granted to reproduce & distribute this posting in any way, shape or form; provided mention of this Blog is included.
All other rights reserved.