america_first_1776

There is something to address with most of the rest of what you've posted, but I'm baffled as to why you're including interracial crime stats. Do you think a non-racist is only supposed to rob people of their own race or something?

I'm going to answer this in two parts, with the first pointing out the obvious, that blacks are indeed more likely to be perps of counted hate-crime statistics than whites.. I say counted because I believe that many instances of black crime against whites that were racially motivated are not counted as hate crimes because of political pressure. I could give countless examples, but I don't have the time to get into anecdotal evidence. However, my second part to this answer is this... if the statistics were reversed and it was whites committing a disproportionate amount of violence on blacks, you bet your ass that every government and cultural institution would say that it was because of some sort of implicit hatred/bias whites had against blacks. That whites did it because they thought blacks were "easier targets" or something. But you don't even get to explore that option here because any such study that attempted to figure this out conclusively would get pulled for "racism."

But back to the main point, you can't get elected as an openly racist person, and could lose your job if you get outed as a racist, etc.

Racism is a made up word popularized by the jew Trotsky back in during the bolshevik revolution. And the reason why you lose your job if you are deemed to be racist is that <2% of the population controls all media, government, and cultural institutions.

There are narrow exceptions, as there are pockets (left leaning web news outlets and maybe the San Francisco political sphere) where you could be anti-white.

This is such a gross understatement of where it is acceptable to be anti-white that I can't believe you really think that.

The polling about people's perception of race relations tells a story, which is that people were optimistic when Obama got elected, and less so as smartphones became commonplace and videos of people being racist would go viral.

Or, maybe it's because the people saw what happens when you elect a black guy who wasn't initially seen to have huge grievances against whites, but were eventually revealed? I don't think the smart-phone explanation explains the poor race relations in the 90s though. I think it is part of the reason, I'll give you that. However, maybe the way to look at the smart phone use is that it's pointing out the reality and breaking the facade the media/government has been lying to us about since the pro-diversity movements first started in the 60s. Seeing your own people being brutally assaulted or killed by others is something that drives a protective natural instinct in many people throughout this country that hasn't gone away despite all the brainwashing. I don't see smart phones going away any time soon, though I do see social media sites banning inter-racial violence videos only when it's anyone else on white crime. So the future of this country is either going to be that all races including whites have their own racial interest (if all videos of violence are able to be shown) or a future where everyone else hates white people (if these social media sites are successful).