White Guilt


Race has replaced sex as the primary moral focus of America.

The question is; how did this happen? When did Americans decide to make social morality more important than individual morality? Where did it all begin?

Traditionally, American values were built around the idea that if 90 percent of individual citizens are moral you will have an excellent society—that the collective individual morals make a moral society. Then, the New Left invented the practice of using social morality as a license to disregard individual morality. They claimed that social morality is more important than individual morality and used this concept to justify the Sexual Revolution.

The New Left pushed the idea that a moral society makes for moral individuals, and therefore traditional Americans had it backwards in their emphasis on individual morality, which had originated in Christian Salvation, obviously an individual thing. The ‘new ideas’ are based on Marxism and Atheism, that it is the 'system' that makes the individuals—change the system, change the individuals.

Since the Sixties, America has experienced a measured decrease in church attendance, family stability, and public school performance. Whereas divorce, broken homes, illegitimacy, drug abuse, and crime have increased greatly.

For one measure of how America has changed, we need to carefully examine the expectations we have of our country’s leaders. Consider for a moment what would have happened if President Eisenhower had been caught getting a blowjob in the Oval Office by a young intern, and then lied about it under oath? The answer to that question is simple; he would have been removed from office. America would not have tolerated a president who committed adultery and perjury, not to mention taking advantage of his office or position to gain sexual pleasure from a subordinate.

President Clinton’s defenders argued from a position of moral relativism. They believe that what adults do consensually is nobody else’s business, and that there is no objective moral code or standard. In this view, the worst possible sin is to be judgmental. But I wonder if those same voices would have called for moral relativism and nonjudgmentalism if President Clinton had been caught on tape saying to an intern, “Ni***rs don't know how to behave.”

White Guilt
White Guilt

Black Militancy

In a free country, liberty ranks higher than social good. Freedom is an absence of any imposed vision that infringes on the liberty of individuals—not a vision of social good imposed by the state.

Negroes in the civil rights movement used nonviolent protest to persuade white Americans that race was not a moral reason to mitigate the rights of individuals in a free society. The next generation of young black leaders preferred militancy, confrontation, and lists of demands. They were angry and felt that being black meant they were under no obligation to common decency or regard for their own country.

Conventional wisdom says this rage was the natural explosion of the psychically wounded to acts of injustice and oppression. But if this is true, why did we not see black rage before the Civil Rights Bill of 1964? Oppression does not necessarily produce anger or rebellion. The outrage of slaves did not end slavery; it was the moral umbrage of whites that ended it. The cost of that umbrage—the Civil War with its 700,000 dead white boys, tens of thousands of orphaned children, hundreds of thousands of widows, and over a million mothers and fathers grieving over their dead sons.

Anger is never acted out by the oppressed except in one setting: when they perceive weakness in their oppressors. This rage is not inevitable; it is chosen only when the oppressed perceive an opportunity to win spoils of some kind.

It is opportunism to nurture anger as the central feature of racial identity. The opportunity was only there because America had moved beyond white racism, not to racial neutrality, but to white guilt that could be manipulated by black anger. White Guilt and Black Power are two sides of the same coin.



Black America long longed for freedom, but once they got it they felt a sense of loss.

Almost fifty years later, African Americans voluntarily practice separatism in black student associations, black professional organizations, black churches, black congressional caucuses, and black gatherings of every kind.

White guilt produced a vacuum of moral authority that made American institutions legitimate only if they first prove a negative—they are not racist. The fear of being called racist motivates American corporations, universities, and other organizations to declare devotion to diversity through racial quotas.

"I raped a lot of white women.  Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women...I felt I was getting revenge." ELDRIDGE CLEAVER
"I raped a lot of white women. Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women...I felt I was getting revenge." ELDRIDGE CLEAVER

Black Power

The Black Power movement adopted the Marxist phrase “raise your consciousness.” This means that blacks needed to be “hip” to the lies the world constantly offers the oppressed. The cool hipster is never surprised. He knows from the social determinism of Karl Marx that racism is institutional, structural, substructural, and systematic. This gave militants an infinitely larger racism to rage about than the simpler racism fought by Martin Luther King. Everything could be blamed on racism—even Whites moving to the suburbs to escape skyrocketing crime rates.

Only after the strongest antidiscrimination laws in history were passed did civil rights agitators suddenly respond not to actual oppression but to white guilt. The selfless men of King’s generation appealed to the moral character of America to remove racial barriers to freedom. The new black leaders were smaller men; haranguers who specialized in moral indignation to make racism ‘valuable’ to the people who had suffered it by creating new white obligations to blacks.

White guilt made the racism of previous generations a valuable currency for colored people. Instead of whites being obligated to principles, they became obligated to people of color as a group. Instead of the principles Dr. King fought for—a colorblind society with meritorious advancement for all through equal protection of the law—the goalposts had suddenly been moved, and the new plan was a direct violation of those same principles: Affirmative Action.


Black Riots

Blacks perceived white guilt as a weakness. This explains why the horrific riots in Watts, Detroit, Newark, and a hundred other cities only happened after civil rights leaders achieved their goals—and not before.

Riots by black mobs destroyed vast stretches of property and injured and killed persons of both races just a couple years after the Civil Rights Acts had been enacted. Isn't it odd that this chaos and violence occurred at the precise moment when blacks sensed that expressions of bestial mayhem would not be met with withering suppression by White America?


Racial Politics

University campuses today are notorious as totalitarian regimes of political correctness. One college banned white cue balls on pool tables because they were used to knock all the colored balls off the table. But black students claim they are surrounded by racism, that universities are racist institutions. Ask these students for specific examples and they can’t come up with any. But shockingly, today’s black students feel even more aggrieved than did black students fifty years ago. And this feeling of aggrievement is calibrated not to real racism, but to the level of white guilt on campus. White guilt produces exhibitions of racial woundedness and animus in blacks reflexively.

White guilt makes way for shakedowns by racialist hucksters—blackmail. Texaco paid $750 million to the corrupt diversity industry over an innocuous comment repeated by an executive that he learned from a diversity-training program.

In the O. J. Simpson murder trial, Johnnie Cochran made it a contest between empirical evidence and racism. He gambled that the court would be obsessed with proving itself utterly free of racial bias. He guessed correctly that the court would forego the evidence against Simpson simply to prove it was not racist.


Black Consciousness

The new black consciousness taught the Marxist maxim that, since man is so pushed around by forces much larger than himself, free will is merely a delusion with which Americans like to flatter themselves.

Black consciousness taught that Americans of African descent should proudly make their race more important than their individuality to trigger white obligation.

Black leaders began to preach that responsibility was a tool of oppression. The honest, hardworking, black family man was derided as complicit in his own oppression because responsibility was an illegitimate value for blacks—a white cultural value.



The Great Society was a redistribution plan for responsibility that demanded white America accept responsibility for black success. President Johnson relieved blacks of the moral responsibility to make something of themselves. In addition, the expectation that they would carry the same responsibilities or meet the same standards as whites was abolished. Racial privilege and power, derived solely from the color of a man’s skin, was used to excuse blacks from moral constraints and even from obeying the law—because of what their ancestors had been through.

From this time forward it became social injustice to hold blacks accountable for their own problems. No matter what social pathologies permeate the black community—poor academic performance, staggering rates of illegitimacy, or shocking epidemics of criminal behavior—individual responsibility does not apply to black men. In fact, to behave responsibly was considered submission to white authority.

If blacks had left America in the 1960s and moved back to Africa, this militancy and rage would have been pointless. Blacks would have been forced to do the hard work all groups must do to survive and build a society around universal, time-honored concepts such as family unity, individual initiative, self-sacrifice, and delayed gratification.

Black Power therefore became a militant belief in white power and a denial of black power, since the overarching theme was that whites must take responsibility for black success. Black leaders portrayed their own people as perpetually weak, helpless, and inferior. Even now, a surefire way to anger black leaders is to state that Black Americans should stand on their own two feet without government crutches.

Preferential treatment from employers and colleges tells everybody that minorities cannot compete with whites unless far lower standards—if any—are expected of them. This sadly overlooks the reality of human nature: it is hard work, imagination, discipline, sacrifice, and relentless effort that makes success sweet; not simply being given a better life you have not earned because you agitated for social justice.

When blacks display their weakness in academics, you do not hear calls for them to work harder on reading, writing, and arithmetic—or for parental responsibility. You hear calls for school busing, Ebonics, Black History Month, more black teachers, multiculturalism, inclusiveness, diverse reading lists, lowered standards for testing of black children, and the preposterous idea that black kids can’t learn unless they go to school with whites.

If a black boy can’t read or write, there must be injustice in the woodpile somewhere. He won’t be asked to speak properly—that would be culturally insensitive. Instead, he will be made the object of abstract compassion by those who associate scholastic excellence with Eurocentric Elitism and rote skill development with repression.



Freedom came to Black America, and it scared the hell out of it; because freedom walks hand in hand with responsibility. Without the excuse of oppression, the group proved unable to compete as equals, which appeared to confirm the stereotype of inferiority.

The generation of Martin Luther King carried itself with quiet dignity and accepted the moral authority of America—that America was good and great apart from racial barriers. They sought to conform to every code of common American decency—in dress, speech, and manners—to show themselves civilized. They were grateful to live in the nation where black people had a standard of living ten times higher than blacks had anywhere else in the world.

The next generation made militant action the proof of genuine blackness—and even those who were not militant acted as if they were. Identity as power meant black leaders no longer had to rely on actual ideas—of which they didn’t have any. Being black meant accepting racial victimization, not as an event that might happen, but as a permanent sense of identity. This way, anger can be used as a political force even when there is no actual victimization. Thus, the only purpose served by the political identity of blacks is the manipulation of white guilt.

Dissent from this party line became heresy. Failure to be militant; failure to play the victim; would result in charges of being an Uncle Tom—a traitor to the race. Blacks must have a militant disregard for the white “system” and show contempt for the “white world.” Traditional American values, rules, and expectations were to be dismissed as white oppression. Thus, we see a rash of young black men refusing to work for "the man”; giving up the Christian Faith for Islam; and dropping their “slave names” for jerry-built African names.


The Sixties Counterculture

White men played critical roles in the civil rights movement. But after the age of racism was abolished, black men expelled white men from their movement. White women, on the other hand, were allowed to stay if they were willing to provide sexual favors to prove they weren’t racist.

The youth of the 1960s spawned a counterculture that was decidedly anti-American. America was not only inherently racist; it was also sexist, greedy, repressed, and evil. Not much good was seen in the country that had made these young people the most privileged group of human beings who ever lived.

Besides the bigotry and oppression, a little bastardized Freud was mixed in with the Marxism to produce the idea that America was uptight, plastic, and unworthy of love, all because it was sexually repressed. Making sexual openness a social virtue was one of the devil’s greatest tricks ever. One of the cherished fables of the counterculture was that people free of all sexual inhibitions were super cool. These concepts were spread by Herbert Marcuse and R. D. Laing and remade the mindset of America’s youth that sin was good and not to sin was bad—conforming bad, rebelling good.

The generation of the Sixties was the first to win its adolescent rebellion against its elders, who were worn out from surviving the Great Depression and winning World War Two. The last thing they wanted was a huge fight with their own children.

Young rebels are as old as humanity, but usually they are humbled as they eventually learn the truth that they have underestimated the wisdom of their elders and ancestors, and overestimated their own juvenile ‘wisdom.’ Winning the rebellion cheated them of an important rite of passage, and unfortunately, so falsely inflated their egos that they never grew up. Instead of finding direction in history and experience, they recklessly devalued the past. Therefore, traditional values came to be associated with Neanderthals who wanted blacks in their place and women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen.


White Guilt By Shelby Steele

Thus was created the concept that white heterosexual men were the only nonoppressed people in America—heck, in the world. They had somehow oppressed their equals in every way—Blacks, Women, and Third World Peoples—throughout human history. They were the warmongers, exploiters, plunderers, and ruiners of the environment with their capitalism. The only way a white boy could be on the moral side of important issues was to reject the nation built by his forefathers, to reject what that nation stood for; its values, traditions, customs, institutions, and authorities.

White Guilt endowed Marxist Atheists (The New Left) with the power to transform everything about America—religion, education, housing, government, the law, the corporate world, and the military. It also served to almost abolish Freedom of Association and to drastically diminish Individual Liberty.

The world’s greatest public school system found itself ravaged with decades of mindless, pernicious ‘reforms.’ Handouts became entitlements. Everyone except heterosexual white males would form permanent grievance groups that to insult or offend might be a violation of laws passed to protect their tender feelings and surely a ticket to a reeducation camp or permanent unemployment.

Since the obvious achievements of white men in creating the modern world of liberty, prosperity, and technology made them look vastly superior to everybody else on the planet, they must be made to seem ‘morally’ inferior. And that meant that Christianity—the religion spread by white missionaries—also had to be deprecated.

The power and supremacy of the West that the world accepted as a moral truth of white superiority must be replaced with an ideology that propagates the idea that the wealth and power of white men came from an innate capacity for evil—that white men dominated their equals by lying to them and stealing from them, committing violence against them, exploiting, excluding, enslaving, and annihilating other groups (the victims, the disadvantaged).

White Americans lost the right to be proud of the awesome accomplishments of their forefathers. In turn, they became the only group in America denied the right to a positive racial self-consciousness. To be accepted by mainstream American institutions, whites must pledge allegiance to diversity. The very idea of being proud to be white is impermissible.

White guilt made it impossible for whites to express pride in an indisputably great civilization. It robbed them of the moral authority to stand for the ideas and values that had made America the greatest country in the history of the world. Thus, personal responsibility, hard work, individual initiative, delayed gratification, academic accomplishment, commitment to excellence, competition by merit, and the honor of achievement—all of which could be called acting white—were denied moral legitimacy.

First Black Candidate for President

"Many whites flatter themselves that the Negro male's lust and desire for the white girl is purely an esthetic attraction, but nothing could be further from the truth. His motivation is often of such a bloody, hateful, bitter, and malignant nature."
"Many whites flatter themselves that the Negro male's lust and desire for the white girl is purely an esthetic attraction, but nothing could be further from the truth. His motivation is often of such a bloody, hateful, bitter, and malignant nature."

The Bigotry of Low Expectations

White guilt has produced all sorts of silly racial policies supported by white liberals, who desire to prove themselves innocent of racism. They pile social science crap to the sky, written in opaque language, to convince themselves and everyone else that there exists a “compelling” State interest in “diversity” that justifies making the preferring of one race over another legal.

Of all the justifications of racial preferences, none includes an analysis of why minorities do not qualify on their own; why they cannot compete using the same standards. If the problem cannot be identified, how can they identify the solution? Those whites who call for racial preferences are not interested in the reasons why preferences are necessary or the reasons why diversity is good. They are only interested in dissociating themselves from their racist forefathers. A convincing display of non-racism would be impossible without racial preferences, because not enough minorities would qualify for admittance to our top universities.

Most of the best universities want their freshman class to be at least 8 percent black but only 1 percent qualify. So they lower the qualifications to meet this quota without regard to the integrity of their institution, standards of excellence, or the unfair discrimination against Whites and Asians. When a university that has not discriminated against blacks for at least several generations gives racial preference to the child of two black professionals with advanced degrees and six-figure incomes it is clearly implying racial inferiority. And that, even with a total absence of racism and a privileged life, black children will not ever be able to compete with whites—even white kids from broken homes mired in poverty.

White liberals believe they are culturally, socially, and morally superior to the common run of whites. Their basic belief is that whites must facilitate the success of blacks because the liberals themselves are white supremacists who think blacks are intellectually inferior to them. The whites of the New Left absolutely think themselves vastly superior to previous generations of Americans who—unlike them—were shamefully racist, sexist, imperialist, materialist, and judgmental to boot. These elites see themselves on some pedestal because their ideology dissociates them from these greatest of sins.



Our universities today are full of nihilists who teach, and take, courses in postmodernism, the new historicism, deconstructionism, race and gender studies, and “ethnic literature,” the latter by which they mean writings by people who are not white—why not call it that? If it truly meant “ethnic” wouldn’t French and German writers qualify for ‘inclusion?’ The leading lights of these subjects are not real thinkers, they are dissemblers.

The underlying assumption is that the great Western literary canon is bigoted and racist. The appeal of ethnic literature is not excellence, but the supposed social virtue of multiculturalism—inclusion made a literary value, the writings of people whose colored ancestors were oppressed automatically assigned literary merit. So to honor excellence is racism? But excellence sees no color and excellence is by nature exclusionary. This is the embrace of mediocrity in the name of social fairness.

Unbelievably, people who propagate these ridiculous ideas are praised for their ‘foresight’ in ‘meeting this need’ of ‘alienated’ minority students. But how about the idea that writers of color should be included in student studies by merit? This would respect not their skin color but their talent. The ethnic literature classes create literary ghettos of mediocre writers.

This is a ‘deal’ that is low and cowardly for both races. For whites it dissociates them from the white guilt they have been taught. If any black opposes lower standards for the sake of ‘inclusiveness’ and ‘diversity’ he is seen as the worst kind of evil race traitor—a Conservative.

White progressives at colleges build whole careers by implementing and managing programs of social virtue at the expense of academic excellence. Merit and excellence are words associated with white privilege and oppression by the politically correct progressives. Apparently this is supposed to make everybody feel good—except those people who value excellence and merit. If merit preserves white hegemony then there is clearly the disincentive for excellence and an incentive for mediocrity.

Black writers such as Toni Morrison and James Baldwin are praised for their anger and racialism, not for their writing talent. Their writing has become required reading in schools out of some mythical idea that blackness alone makes trite writing valuable to black students—out of some misplaced loyalty—and it shows that whites feel the pain of black anger.

The work of dissociation always erodes the quality of its host institution. It is at war with intellectual difficulty and any kind of accountability—both stigmatized as oppressive in the age of white guilt. Those who took power by dumbing down curriculum—and therefore dumbing down generations of our young people—have destroyed the greatest public education system the world has ever known.


Very few black elites will criticize their brothers and sisters for not taking responsibility for themselves and their children. All blacks are aware that 70 percent of black babies are born out-of-wedlock—90 percent in some cities. And they all know that this represents a serious problem of irresponsibility. To pretend it is not true is to lie to oneself.

Martin Luther King’s generation demanded freedom for blacks based on democratic principles; and opportunity for blacks to advance based on individual responsibility. They insisted that blacks were individual human beings who should be judged as individuals and rise or fall as individuals and therefore it was wrong for the government to make them be a race. They even fought against having to identify one’s race on school or employment applications.

Americans have stood by as our public schools have declined from the best on earth to the worst. Black English in the inner city is far worse than in the Fifties. The New Left made a deal with the devil because of its ‘bigotry of low expectations.’ The progressives failed the country while they flattered themselves out of a self-congratulating moral elitism as the culture declined precipitously all around them. All of their solutions failed to solve the problems they were designed for. To this, all they can say is: "It would have been worse without our progressive programs (social engineering) and the tens of trillions of dollars of our nation’s wealth flushed down the drain forever."

This article is based entirely on the book by Shelby Steele White Guilt.

More by this Author

  • Social Etiquette

    Social Etiquette and Manners includes Rules for Etiquette, Driving Etiquette, Shopping Etiquette, Clothing Etiquette, outward expressions of decency that hold society together, courtesy is contagious.

  • The House of David

    The House of David was a religious colony in my hometown of Benton Harbor, Michigan. When I was a boy I was mesmerized by the magical, mysterious House of David. My father grew up around the House of David,...

  • Women of Fox News

    Laura Ingraham, whom I met once, appears often on Fox News as a political commentator. She is a breast cancer survivor. Laura Ingraham is a bestselling author and the sixth most popular radio talk show host in...

Comments 269 comments

yourhomiebrian 6 weeks ago

I am on twitter @yourhomiebrian telling the world whats good about black skin James.

Big E 6 months ago

Alton Sterling situation. I would not want to be a white policeman for anything in the world. Black skin will help the police.

Big E 9 months ago

Google dark chocolate tan. A company in sweeden has invented the dark chocolate tan. I don't know if it is in the usa yet.

Things are looking up for the white man.

a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. I think that white skin is that link for the white man.

black skin will make the white man stronger, safer and better than ever before.

black skin would have protected Hulk Hogan last summer. And Donald Sterling. Black skin is like a tattoo that says don't F with me.

James please give me some feedback. I know you are busy. Do you have any news on race? Are you excited about the dark chocolate tan?

If the white man was smart he would send white skin packing!

White man and black skin need to merge. Just like food lion and giant.

Big E 11 months ago

A youtuber named Bios3training temporarily changed his appearance to black. He did it through spray tanning. He did it to make his muscles look bigger for bodybuilding competetions. He did it in august of 2013. He is bald. You should google him. He is wearing a red jersey in the picture where he is black.

Big E 13 months ago

I changed my name to big E. From daddy oreo. I am a friend of b dawg.

James Watkins, BIG NEWS!

If you google the name Jeff Kephart you will find a white man who changed his appearance to black. You may have to look through all the pictures to find him but he still has blue eyes and straight hair.

He says he takes melonotan to get his skin dark. I don't know if melonotan is even FDA approved I have even read it is illegal in the united states unless a doctor prescribes it. I don't know for sure though. I asked a friend who wants to be a cop and he doesn't know if it is legal or not.

I read it is legal in Australia though. There is also a 39 year old Australia man who claimed to change his color to black with melonotan.

Maybe you can find Jeff Kephart on Facebook. He does have a youtube account. I am not good with facebook or technology so do not know how to contact him.

I would love to go undercover as a black man. If the opportunity was right. I need it to be safe and affordable and legal to do it one day.

b dawg 19 months ago

James watkins

b dawg 19 months ago


good news! It is possible. The president of the naacp is a white lady disguised as a black lady! I just heard about it. I was telling a coworker who wanted to be a cop how black skin could protect him. He agreed and told me about naacp lady. That is good news for policemen. And many other white males. And the white community period.

hope to hear from you again. peace.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg~ Yes, it has been a long time since I have responded to comments here. I took three years to write my first book, and now am working on my second book. Not enough hours in the day, I guess.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

big daddy oreo---Thank you for your thoughtful remarks. That is quite a handle you've got there too. I appreciate the visit.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

Kenja---Thank you for taking the time to come over and read my piece. I appreciate your kind compliments and your insightful commentary. Many from the New Left who wreaked havoc on America since the 1960s now see it all through rose-colored glasses, as if they were born into a horrible place and remade it into near Utopia. But by any measure, every social pathology is far worse today than in the 1950s: crime, violent crime, sexual perversions, dishonesty, corruption, babykilling, immorality, drug addiction, pornography, filthy entertainment, adultery, fornication, promiscuity, making sexual objects out of women, child abuse, sexual abuse, spousal abuse, public vulgarity, lack of manners and civility, suicide, laziness, and mental illness, especially depression (even among children,not to mention 1 in 5 adults needs happy pills to make it through a single day of their brutal deprived lives).

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

Brian--- You've got some good ideas. I wish you luck. Thanks for visiting.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

no body~ Thank you Brother Bob. I sure appreciate your encouragement and the awesome accolades for my Hub. God Bless You!

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg---The idea of white men turning their skin black through technology to gain the benefits of Affirmative Action and to stop from being lambasted for 'breathing while white and male and heterosexual' is duly noted.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg~ I found some analysis of the Snickers commercial you mentioned: "It can quite literally change you from an effeminate white comedian into a tough, African American head coach. Robin Williams does not seem to carry the same weight or convey the same manliness as the African American coach he later becomes. Williams mutters rather superfluous comments, like the one about tea cozies, which, through association is connected to tea, which is then connected to the idea of being lady-like and prim. However, in choosing a white male as the hungry personality, Snickers brings up racial stereotypes; this ad perpetuates the idea that African Americans are tougher or more dangerous than whites and that they can instill more fear within us."

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

Red Oaks~ Profound comments you made @ Mike.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

Mike---I surely appreciate your fine remarks. You just might be onto something there. Thanks for visiting.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

Red Oaks--- I see that you never did publish any Hubs.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 19 months ago from Chicago Author

A Little TRUTH~ Thank you very much for taking the time to read my article. I appreciate your excellent comments. You said the Moors lived in America long before any whites did? I have certainly never heard that one before. :-)

B Dawg 19 months ago

James Watkins,

Can you imagine how much it would have helped all those white policemen in Baltimore and Ferguson if they were able to go undercover as black cops. Black skin would have saved their butts! From what I have investigated there is no easy way for a white person to change their skin color to black. They would have to be rich. I wish they would invent the dark chocolate tan. I heard that no white people have ever asked to change their skin color to black.

I have told people in my area and online about going undercover as a black man and for some reason most people just are not buying it. There are a few that realize my idea is the best option. I have told a couple of friends who want to be policemen. A black friend who has a brother in law that is a white policeman.

I am more convinced now than ever that a black employee would work harder much much harder and be more motivated if the boss was black.

James are you still down with my idea? Have you learned anything in the past 2 years since we talked that points to the white man going undercover as a black man?

Btw there is a book called black like me. You can get it in the bookstore. A white man went undercover as a black man in the 1960s! It is a whole different ball game in 2015. Black skin would be a blessing for most white men today! Hope to hear from you again James. Peace.

big daddy oreo 22 months ago

I think bdawg is right on the money. You can see it in the recent white police vs black people in the news.

This is what I think is the problem. You got to have balance. You can not expect a white law enforcement team to handle all the black crime. You need much heavier black law enforcement team. Black people are much more likely to listen to a black authority figure.

They need more black bosses and teachers in suburban and rural areas. Once again black people are more likely to listen to a black person than a white person.

I think there is a shortage of black role models and more than needed white role models. So like b dawg suggested it would be nice if they could have some white cops, bosses and teachers change their appearance to black to help out. A white authority figure is not going to be successful with black people without help from black authority figures.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 23 months ago from Chicago Author

Thank you very much for the encouraging words. I appreciate you 'old friend' for reading my article. God Bless You!

An old friend 23 months ago

James, I've read your work for years and it's always excellent!

Ayn Rand said-

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot be defenders of minorities."

When we die, we face God alone, not as a "group". So those who rely on group decisions to decide on what is right or wrong only refuse to take personal responsibility for themselves - hence the mess we're in now. Until a person takes personal responsibility for their, thoughts, feelings, and deeds, they're not really an adult. Which is the entire point of the nanny state!

Again, excellent thinking. Keep up the good work.

Kenja profile image

Kenja 3 years ago from Long Island, NY

Well developed, sincere piece, with many good points. That said, there is something so incredibly interesting in human nature where we are strongly drawn to secret plots, conspiracy theories or some "big puppet masters" magically beyond the normal view of most people. (its why The Da Vinci Code sold so well)...

But it's equal opportunity imagining: the Right sees a Grand Plot to take over individual liberty, at the very same time, the Left sees the same from the other side of the looking glass.

(More often than not, they're just seeing a reflection of their own fears, their particular worldview and their own partisan thinking).

The piece starts out that the New Left "invented the use of social morality" (over individual morality) as if there was a group of revolutionaries in some back room back in the 60s carefully plotting with brilliant strategy and a great, malevolent Plan.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The 1960s were first, last and foremost a wild, disorganized, spontaneous, and sometimes woolly-headed reaction against the constricted, cold war Organization Man of the 1950s, outdated Puritan strains, and of course the Vietnam war.

They were a reaction (and an overreaction) to hypocrisy, authoritarianism, social sheepishness and once again, a very bad war, one built up on false premises, faulty assumptions and a worldview so tilted that we slipped and failed -- a very small and backward country defeated the world's strongest military.

But that's a side issue, albeit a large one.

If ever a group of "revolutionaries" was disorganized, reactive, and sometimes downright immature, it was the New Left and anti-war Left (inc. the Black Panthers) of the 1960s. There was no great social "invention" here and no plot to replace individual conscience with social engineering.

Aside from rage, rebellion for rebellion's sake and some wild street theater -- there was also a real gut reaction to very real and long-embedded racism, second class treatment of women in business, sports, academia, and politics, homophobia, and a wide range of callous, ignorant and mean-spirited thinking.

Guess what? Individuals with individual consciences (many quite religious) acted against real (not conjured, not imagined) injustices, mistreatment and deeply embedded prejudices.

And guess what? America rose to the occasion once again (not without some struggle, as always). It sure in heck is better to be a woman, a black person, a Latino, a gay person, an artist, or a "misfit" in 2014 than it was in 1964.

It's also better to be a white person today. The freedom and dignity of all elevate not only those once referred to as "minorities" or "queers" or "kooks", they elevate those who looked down on them, held them down or ignored them.

Take a look at South Africa. Nelson Mandella didn't only liberate the tribes of South Africa, he liberated their former oppressors too.

Leftist social engineering or simple human decency -- and not so simple human bravery?

brian 3 years ago

I liked some of the ideas I read on here. I would love to go undercover as a black man. Maybe get a job as an assistant manager and use my blackness to get more productivity out of black employees.

b dawg 3 years ago

Black skin would have been a shield for george zimmerman. Paint the pigs black.

no body profile image

no body 3 years ago from Rochester, New York

So many points, so much great information that explains what most look at as unexplainable. America and individuals have been afraid of reactionary violence for so many years that they don't know what to say and will never tell what they think for fear of their lives being changed forever by some "visionaries" on a quest for a utopia in this world. Great writing, very brave and truthful. Love you Brother. Bob.

A Little TRUTH profile image

A Little TRUTH 3 years ago

B-Dawg, you give a whole new meaning to the lyrics of the song "Paint it Black"! You may want to use it as a ringtone.

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

I don't know if you are still around but I have some good news for you. Several people that I have spoken to that work in a tanning store say that there is something they do called a custom air brush. With this procedure they can get your skin black in 5 minutes. It costs about 50 dollars and lasts about 7-10 days. The good news is if you work at a tanning store you can get free tans. It may be worth it for some white men.

I also have left several notes in bathroom stalls stating how black skin could help many white men in our society. I kept it short and sweet. I have probably left about 8 already and I am just getting started. Peace.

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins and Red Oaks,

I saw another example of where black skin would have been a shield for the white man. I was at the comedy club Friday night and there was a redneck comedian that went off on a white female who was with a white male. The white female came back from the restroom and accused the comedian of talking about her. The comedian said something. Then the girl said your not even funny. The comedian went off on that girl and said get the F*** out of here. He cussed her out and called for security. The white male and female left. (You had to be there). This was an example of white on white crime I guess LOL! But I thought the same thing I would think if I saw a black person going off on a white person. That they would not dare try that on a black man.

If that white girl was a black man or if her boyfriend was a black man I am over 95% sure he would not have talked that way to her. Total disrespect. If they would have been black he would have been much more tactful. If I knew the people I would have told them straight up that black skin would have protected them.


B-Dawg 3 years ago

Red Oaks,

I guess the commercials are no big deal. Those white guys are getting paid. But you have to understand I know a white guy that lost a very high paying job over racial politics. I know that black skin would protect the white man from racial lawsuits. Black skin would protect the white man from black sin. I have an eye for detail when it comes to race.

I know there are a lot of white guys in the world that get picked on and get no respect. I want to let these types of white men know that they would get more respect if they were black. People would treat them better. Authority figures who are white men would get more respect also if they were black. Why because the black man has street cred. If you have black skin people assume you know how to protect yourself. Black skin is the best protection a man could ever have. And I am trying to get more black people to come out and tell people black skin = protection but they seem just as lost as most white men are.

There are so many people that think that a black male gets treated bad. That is the biggest lie in the world. I think that a black male gets treated like a king. Women love black men. Black skin attracts women. Also you get better treatment from the black community. I just feel like you have better protection being black.


A Little TRUTH profile image

A Little TRUTH 3 years ago

Red Oaks, yes, it certainly can!

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

@James-- Before I made my last post that didn't make it through (due to the link that must have automatically flagged it), I didn't recall that guy's video being that over-the-top until I had already linked it here. I remembered it being pretty bad, but not THAT bad. But by then it was too late to delete it. I should have found something more acceptable to support what I was saying. I don't know if you ever clicked on it, hopefully not. I had a lot of stuff linked from a long time ago and had forgotten just how in-your-face some of the video makers' deliveries were. The video had 1.5 million views and actually did do a good job of pointing out the huge double standard about how the suffering of white men, no matter how severe, is hilarious on television. But the video author tries to convince everyone that a television show was sexist against men (particularly white men) by first calling the women the "C" word. I thought that was very offensive and foolish of him, although he did get 1.5 million views. It would be like me video blogging about a television show that featured blacks being racist against whites while using the "N" word in my opening dialogue before even showing the clip of the show to my viewers. Quite foolish :-)

Thanks for not posting that comment of mine here.

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

A Little TRUTH -- Much appreciated. I like what you say about unraveling every riddle. If we execute the scientific method, we can solve almost any of the phenomena we are talking about here. By far, the biggest mistake in analyzing social scenarios is failure to account for ALL observable facts. A plausible but incomplete definition of a problem is far, far worse than an incorrect one, in my opinion. Although it is plausible that white male bashing in advertising could be preemptive on the part of advertisers who have social agendas or ideals that they aspire to give oxygen to, a much more plausible definition is that they are simply reactionary. Nearly everyone stops developing hypotheses once they find one that's pretty good. Then they point to vast data that support it -- and they actually find convincing supportive data. Finally, they draw a conclusion with unshakable confidence. Although they might have executed a pristine and logical analysis to the phenomena, they did not consider ALL the possible causes. They could have developed a very different conclusion of the same veracity, quality, and detail, had they chosen a different initial hypothesis. People are too quick to say, "Ahh haa! All of my data makes since! Those marketers are following a Cultural Marxist doctrine and have an AGENDA!" However, they fail to see that the marketers are just marketing, nothing more. They just do 'what works'. And certain things 'work'. But 'what works' in our particular culture can be revealing, can't it?

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

A Little TRUTH-- First, thanks!

I agree with your second paragraph totally and couldn't have said it better myself.

What these guys are saying about the terrible portrayal of the white male in the media is very real. But it is a very real representation of what their target marketing base responds favorably too or, at the very least, a representation of what corporations predict they will respond favorably to and are fairly reassured that it won't cause an uproar. Since you say that you haven't noticed this type of thing yet, I want you to take a look a look a short video. It's definitely not safe for work and maybe even not safe for your home, but I can't find a better illustration of how wide the double standard actually runs in our culture: If you could watch the first two minutes, you might see some good examples of this type of thing. This aired during a summer morning, while children were out of school, too. But the public finds this acceptable. All cultures have their flaws. Even this one.


A Little TRUTH profile image

A Little TRUTH 3 years ago

Red Oaks,

Spot on! You are very perceptive, observant, logical and unbiased. I agree totally.

If you realize that, according to law, the no. 1 purpose of any publicly traded corporation is to increase shareholder value through maximizing profits, you can ‘unravel every riddle’.

Your second paragraph basically espouses not using skin color as the basis for anything - not playing any “race card” for any reason, and also the first amendment. I wholeheartedly agree with that.

I saw those insurance commercials, but I actually didn’t notice the skin color of the various characters. That’s why I like to read these comments so I’m not totally clueless on some of these race issues.

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

B-Dawg, I know you are addressing James but I wanted to chime in here, if I may. You said "What did white guys do to piss off these auto insurance companies?" I don't think white guys did anything to piss them off. They are in the business of making money -- plain and simple. Companies today are desperate to corner the market and are falling over each other to be the company to outgun the competition. Making fun of white men must be a successful marketing strategy. If a marketing department does not perform, i.e., contribute favorably to the company's sales through the use of marketing that gets results, they will get replaced by a marketing staff that will. Their marketing objective cannot possibly be to belittle white men for any reason other than its contribution to their financial success. It's not insurance companies who have the social justice agenda; it is their viewing audience and customer base. Marketers simply appeal to the mainstream and the mainstream thinks favorably of mocking and ridiculing the "good ole privileged white male patriarchal ruling elite."

I in no way, shape, or form can allow myself to get behind any course of action that will categorize white men as another "victim class" whom advertisers cannot criticize for fear of politically correct sensitivities. White men are the only group of people left that has not painted itself as a victim class. This is something to be cherished and upheld for as long as possible. Suing for defamation of character because someone with one's sex or race is depicted unfavorably in advertisement is an attack on freedom of speech and expression. Yes, it is annoying to see that the complete moron who backs his big truck over a lady's car in an insurance commercial just so happens to be a white male in each and every scenario, but it is a fatal errror to misuse the legal system to interfere with free speech. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said that we must be warned that there is always a threat that the American people will vote for laws that take their freedoms away from themselves. When people stop enjoying seeing white men emasculated and moronized, the market will respond by replacing that model of advertising with something more effective. But this won't happen a day before that occurs. In a society that upholds free speech, the members have to deal with the annoying, repulsive, and even downright reprehensible free speech of the majority. But to use legal force to manipulate the outcome of free speech is a totalitarian regime's sweetheart. I don't like to see white men belittled any more than you do but I will fight to the death for a company to have the right to market in any fashion they see fit, as long as they are not calling for violence against or genocide of white men in their commercials.

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

I have a few questions for you.

Do you think The medias portayal of the strong mighty black man and the weak pitiful white man will increase the chances of a small % of white men trying to get a race change?

Do you think that all the white women flocking to black men will increase the chances of some white men trying to get a race change years down the road?

What did white guys do to piss off these auto insurance companies?

Every single one of them State Farm, Progressive, Geico and All State has a demasculating white man in them. I think white men should sue them for deframation of character or something.

BTW, There is a new snickers commercial with Robin Williams where he is a not so tough football coach and they give him a snickers bar and he turns into a strong mighty black man football coach. Maybe you can check it out on youtube. Peace.

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

Mike-- I have heard that theory many times. In fact I was once convinced by that theory to the point that I widely voiced it myself. However, that is no longer my perception. The government is not nefarious or conspiratorial, I don't believe. White guilt in the media is, indeed, omnipresent. But I don't think the government had anything to do with it. The government, in my opinion, just operates -- and arguably inefficiently. The government, in and of itself, has no net agenda. Some people who work for the government might have agendas, but they follow a generic, middle-of-the-road protocal while on duty at their government agencies. Thus, their agenda cannot materialize into policy making in a clandestine (or Saul Alinsky, if you will) fashion, I don't think. Although I do hear this idea expressed very often.

Sometimes government entities such as the public school system may be left leaning -- even radically left leaning, however. But I think it is because of the Leninist-Marxist teacher unions and the large percentage of liberals in academia. But even they, in my opinion, are not efficient and disciplined enough to organize and execute a social engineering scheme. Let's face it. The military or the CIA can barely effectively orchestrate a successful propaganda operation. And when/if they do, it is a reaction to a much more serious social force than to something of relatively small importance such as some racial demagoguery.

I don't even think that the media has an agenda. Liberal bias is ubiquitous in the meda. The portrayal of white men, especially the white American father, as foolish, repulsive, and servile to his wife and female children is not the exception; it is the rule. However, I think that screen writers and marketing departments are just writing scripts that they think are entertaining but appealing to the general public. For example, when a person is to be kicked in a sensitve area on television by a child in order to make an audience laugh, they don't even "think" to select a black man to be kicked between the legs by a child or a white female to be punched in the breast by a black male: that would not generate the desired response of laughter needed to sell the product in the commercial. However, a child or a white female being selected to kick a man between the legs IS funny and does sell products. I don't think there is an agenda. It's just "how we are" in a sense. We just have a mode that we operate within where things that are considered offensive don't often materialize into conscious thoughts when we feel festive, while things that we don't find offensive do.

This double standard comes from the fact that most people more emotionally dominant, where their actions and thoughts are mostly governed by their limbic region, rather than objectively dominant, where their actions and thoughts are mostly governed by their frontal lobes. I might be alluding to the incorrect parts of the brain. It has been a while since I took psychology. But I think you get the basic idea. Our emotional brain tells us to feel more empathy for more vulnerable people -- or more vulnerable classes of people -- that need more protection from being harmed, disparaged, made to feel ashamed, or taken advantage of in some way. This means that there is in general more empathy for, sensitivity to the image of, and cultural awareness of minorities and women. The majority unconsciously sees those particular demagraphics as having less agency and less intellectual agility needed to protect themselves from demagraphics of greater agency, greater intelligence, greater natural talent for upward socio-economic mobility, and greater charisma needed to become rulers, inventors, etc.

Women and minorities are clearly socially protected from being disparaged. This only leaves white males -- the only demagraphic left unprotected from such derision and ridicule in the media and society at large. If white males fall into this category, in some ways it can be seen as a compliment; if society unconsciously regards white males as positioned highly enough, or intelligent and powerful enough, or of superior genes, then wouldn't white males also fall into the category of those who would need less protection from ridicule as a class? Perhaps the fact that white males are so widely debased by society unconsciously to the extent that it even propagates right onto the silver screen and into marketing departments, means that white males are perceived to be all of those aforementioned things. Perhaps some of those things are actually correct and minorities and women are telegraphing that message to us.

Maybe this cultural anti-white male phenomena we are seeing isn't hatred or government orchestrated class warfare to keep us divided. Maybe people would be even more divided if it weren't for government intervention. Think of it this way, if the government completely stayed out of our lives, i.e., dissolved the police departments, there would be some extremely serious class warfare. The white supremacists would be in a literal war with the Crips. The Marxists would be in a literal street melee with the Tea Party. In many ways, the government circumvents class warfare each and every day. Also, the most tyranical dictatorships never want people divided; they want everyone united for the cause of their regime. So, it would make more logical since to me to theorize that the government wants everyone to think like a Leninist-Marxist so that it can gain autonomy over the American citizens. Divide-and-conquer makes since for an actual battle, but it does not make since for a government to use it as a tool to weaken the populace.

But I think our government is far too intellectually sluggish, bureaurocratic, and divided into opposing though camps of its own to possibly organize itself into a disciplined, uniformly synchronized body sufficient to use the media to divide (or unite) the populace. They themselves can't even unite. If being divided is a key step needed to weaken an entity so that it can be easily taken over, then wouldn't our government be in dire danger of being taken over by the people? After all, our government leadership is arguably much more divided than the general public.

Mike 3 years ago

I have always herd that the government wants people to be divided so that they don't rise up against them. That is why they promote racism and white guilt in movies, commercials, schools and other media outlets. It is obvious they don't want black people and white people to like each other very much whoever is behind all this. No question in my mind about that. Sad indeed.

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

I have got some good news for white men looking for protection from racial politics. I had a brief conversation with a female that happened to work in a tanning place. I asked her if they could turn white skin into black skin and she said that there is some kind of custom air brush thing that they do that could turn a white persons skin black in one day. She said it lasts 7-10 days. I don't know how much this would cost but when I think about that white man that got fired over racial politics it would have definitely been worth it for him. He lost 50 thousand a year over racial politics. He could probably keep his skin black for $200 a month and have protection from racial politics. More respect from employees. His boss probably won't ride him as hard.

So while this might cost money I am sure there are some white men in this world that would be well worth it to make this change. It would be like an insurance policy. And I think it would have its kick backs. Better protection. Better interacial relations. More respect. Etc.

I am only going by what this lady told me. But it does sound like there may be some hope for white men who don't want to deal with racial politics. Who just want to handle their business and be left alone. Who don't want to have to worry about the race card and watch every little thing they say. Black skin is the answer!


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 3 years ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg— Thank you very much for the trio of commentaries you posted here from 3 to 6 days back. I appreciate your inputs.

You write, "There are plenty of white men that would make good role models for black people. There are plenty of white cops, teachers and bosses that are qualified and in position to help black people but racial politics is holding them back. The problem is black people respond to color. There are black people out there that are willing to risk going to jail and pull out the stops to screw the white man over."

These remarks sound like the truth to me.

You write, "The black man is praised by the media the white man is emasculated by the media. No one feels sorry for the white man because many people feel like he is getting what he deserves. My problem with that is no white man alive today ever owned a slave. And I think 99% would not own one. And white people were enslaved by other whites, blacks were sold and enslaved by other blacks. But the white man got thrown under the bus just from having white skin."

You have uncannily keen perception, my friend.

You write, "If the white man dyed his skin black not only would he get more respect, but it would take that bulls eye right off your back."

This is true.

You write, "I mean a white man can't even criticize Obama w/o being labeled a racist. Bush was constantly hated on by black people."

That is correct again, kind sir. Well said!

You write, "Word is there is a game going on in America where a black person will randomly go up to a white person and punch them in the face. They will often record it and put it on YouTube. They often target senior citizens."

That is absolutely happening. In fact the black flash mobs have a term for it but I can't remember it, for targeting white people for assault in public.

Red Oaks profile image

Red Oaks 3 years ago from Starkville, MS

James-- Yes, it is a Gold Top Les Paul. I get that one out of the case every now and then (like when the building needs to be knocked aloose from the foundation), lol. You actually met Les Paul?! Man, that is pretty awesome. I still haven't had a chance to read those books you recommended but will very soon. I am getting ready to start interviewing with engineering firms finally! I am so excited. But am ridiculously busy. I also hope to start back writing Hubs soon. I have 3 followers but no Hubs at the moment, I must do something about that; it's like subscribing to a blank magazine, I suppose, lol.

A Little TRUTH profile image

A Little TRUTH 3 years ago

Wow, lots of good points here to think about! I learned some things and this Hub helps in putting some of the pieces together on racial issues.

You make a good point: “The very idea of being proud to be white is impermissible.” I always wondered how ‘Black Pride’ is a good thing, but if there’s any white pride it’s called ‘White Supremacy’. Not that it matters much anyway, since most people are more proud of whatever accomplishments they’ve made than they are of their skin color. Most people were born with their skin color, so how could you be proud of something you had nothing to do with?

You’ve stirred up some good commentary that has encouraged some learning on multiple fronts. My opinion is that white guilt is not quite so prevalent. It’s more of a treading lightly because the ice is thin in many areas.

The opposing comments are also interesting, and I’d like to make one of my own. You write: “If blacks had left America in the 1960s and moved back to Africa …” That statement presumes that a high percentage of blacks came from Africa. What about the Moors, who were settled in America long before the whites came? What percentage of blacks has ancestry indigenous to America? Today’s education and media systems have led many, many blacks to believe they are from Africa when they are actually of Moorish dissent.

But the most important thing to keep in mind about race is this: The elite international bankers that are controlling this world have fomented all these race issues, and they use them to divide and conquer, and to keep us distracted while they gradually advance their own agendas.

Yes, “racial neutrality” is what we need. If we could all just turn our skin inside out, then we would all be the same shade of pink, all of this would be moot, and we could all focus on more important matters.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 3 years ago from Chicago Author

Red Oaks--- I enjoyed reading your comments @ B-Dawg. Hey, is that a Gold Top Les Paul you are holding in your picture? I met Les Paul once.


B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

Word is there is a game going on in America where a black person will randomly go up to a white person and punch them in the face. They will often record it and put it on youtube. They often target senior citizens. The white man protection plan from racism is basically 1. Hide in Whiteyville (which is not as safe from black sin as you think) and 2. Let the law take care of them. The problem with that is a lot of black men are not afraid to go to jail.

I think whenever a white male is the victim of an assault like that they should go to law enforcement and DEMAND a race change. They should say if you can't protect white people from racism black skin can and will protect white people. If more white people do this the white man will be so much more SAFER if he is shielded by black skin moving forward.

Whenever you hear a white person complaining that they were victims of racism or got hustled by racial politics make sure you tell them I said BLACK SKIN IS THE ANSWER! PEACE!

B-Dawg 3 years ago

James Watkins,

I know Red Oaks has read my ideas. He may say that he is not interested now but who knows 5 years from now he may change his mind. Maybe one day he will be a boss and he will get no respect from his black employees. He may get screwed over by racial politics. He may get sued over some bogus racial lawsuit. And if that happens he might say f*** it and get a race change.

The point is the idea is out there. Getting a race change is not going to be the furthest thing from the white mans mind as long as I am around. And one day something may happen in Red Oaks life that makes him say it is time to darken up!

One of the pictures on this hubpage says don't fall for white guilt be proud of who you are. Now that sounds like something a black supremisist would want you to think. After all what makes the white man vulnerable to all those racial lawsuits, robberies, getting made fun of by the media and comedians? His white skin. If the white man dyed his skin black not only would he get more respect, but it would take that bulls eye right off your back. It would be a get a jail out of free card for slavery. The white man would be more powerful more respected and have a better, safer and more colorful future if he went black faced. Black skin would shield you from all your haters.

So at the end of the day all the white man really needs is a paint job. A little remodel on his outside appearance to get the black man and the rest of the world off his back. I mean a white man can't even criticize Obama w/o being labeled a racist. Bush was constantly hated on by black people. But pulling the race card will not get black people off your back. Black skin will. Just look at Obama. Black skin has kept black people off his back. Black people are not better off than they were when Bush was in there.

Red Oaks said that if he was black people would think he got the job from affirmitive action. Some will but some will also think that you overcame racism and that you had a bigger mountain to climb. All I know is that people would not give the white man as much s*** if he was black. That is my take PEace.

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 3 years ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg— As always, I appreciate your comments. Thank you for all the contributions you have made to our illumination on these issues.

You write, "When you are walking out to your car at night black skin gives you the best chance to get there without getting robbed."

There is no doubt whatsoever that this is true. That is a brilliant observation.

You also wrote this: "If the white man were a car all he would need is a paint job and he would be good to go. Black skin is like a shield it protects you in so many ways."

That's funny man. ROFLMAO

James :D

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 3 years ago from Chicago Author

Joe-- THANK you!! Thank you very much! :D

James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 3 years ago from Chicago Author

B-Dawg--- Thanks for that funny story from the movie theatre. I got a kick out of it. And it goes to further show that you are right in your overarching theory.

James :D

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    James A Watkins profile image

    James A Watkins3,229 Followers
    186 Articles

    James Watkins is an entrepreneur, musician and writer. James enjoys people, music, film, and books. He is a lifelong student of history.

    Click to Rate This Article