Bigot
In Merriam-Webster: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
In this post, I propose a kinder, gentler definition. My definition removes the word “hatred,” meaning that, for me, bigots are often not guilty of hating, but they are always guilty of intolerance, a “little b” bigot if you will.
Little b bigots of America, I have read the things you post, and those posts are revealing. I address you directly now:
I know how you feel. You are defensive about being labelled a racist. It makes you angry. Well, calm down. As I said, I am not calling you a racist.
Who or what are you then?
You are the ones who claim that the “Liberal” media is biased in favor of people of color who achieve a measure of success. You often make the same false claims in regard to the media’s coverage of successful women. Again, you are not a racist, because garden variety bigotry is not bounded by racial considerations. Your defining characteristic is that you immediately ridicule and object to any mention of success by anyone who does not fit your mold. The success of others diminishes you in absolutely no way!
You often exaggerate by saying that crimes against the “main-stream” are under-reported or not reported at all. You are, of course, selectively reading the news. The stories you claim do not exist are right in front of you.
Insidiously, you often single out Americans of predominantly African descent by saying they should drop any other concerns they may have in favor of putting a stop to “black crime”. Crime is everybody’s concern but pointing an accusatory finger in one direction as opposed to another is not helpful.
Shame on you! Your lack of tolerance is reprehensible!
No Rich, I think he could be an apparatchik in the Ministry of Truth, to control definitions and bestowing labels.
Leon:
No thanks on your suggested elevation of me into the upper echelons of socialist hierarchy.
Expanding the definition of bigot is big of you.
“…are always guilty of intolerance, a ‘little b’ bigot if you will.”
No, I won’t.
It is reasonable to not tolerate dangerous behaviors. Property crime should not be tolerated and yet there are now Democrat attorneys general in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York who don’t prosecute.
We, the defensive reactionaries, hate slander from racial socialists. We don’t owe anyone reparations. We did not cause some groups of people to economically perform differently from other groups. Systemic racism is today’s witchcraft.
We believe in liberty and personal responsibility. We celebrate success. Our heroes include Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Senator Tim Scott, the late Walter E. Williams, and others. Our racial bias is to want people to succeed.
It isn’t we who think that the success of others is somehow taken from us, it is Marxists who push that dangerous nonsense. An honest look at history shows that private property markets produce the greatest material good for the greatest numbers of people. Socialist Democrats call profit “greed” and blame market capitalism for our ills.
We do selectively read the news that is selectively chosen, selectively written and selectively edited for our consumption. And so do you. All information has assumptions and, gasp…biases.
Shame on me? I’m reprehensible? Are you running for Commandant of the Gulag?
Richard: In reply to your rejoinder, I say, Ouch!
I keep stepping on sensitive issues with those same kinds of results.
Allow me to say that my original comments about tolerance were never meant to imply tolerance for criminality in any form.
I too believe in a meritocracy and in the possibilities of success and wealth generation in a true Democracy.
I only meant to chastise the benighted few who complain about the “injustice” of today’s media coverage, falsely claiming that it exhibits an anti-white bias.