Whites are among the most insecure group I've studied. Studying them has made me realize that just calling it "racism" is too simplistic and doesn't explain most of their behavior. There is something more...
Like, when discussing race, they only engage when the topic seems to favor their kind, allowing them to perch on a fabricated moral high ground to judge others. They sustain conversations only as long as their lies steer the dialogue, forcing opponents to chase them in futile attempts to change their minds. The moment they realize the discussion they initiated is turning against them, especially when the opposition demonstrates a firm grasp of history and sociology, they shut down. They resort to trolling, yapping like toddlers, or deflecting to unrelated topics. Serious discussion about their behavior is basically impossible; they only entertain their simplistic observations about other groups. Apply the same simplistic lens to their own people, and suddenly they demand context or accuse you of being anti-white.
For example:
Them: "Native Americans massacred their own. Africans massacred their own. Asians massacred their own."
Me: "Europeans killed over 60 million of their own people in three decades, around a century ago."
Them: "Well, the Red Army was fighting National Socialists, yap yap, bla bla bla... The Japanese and Chinese killed each other too."
Me: "Okay, but what was the race of those involved in killing over 60 million Europeans? You point to race for every other group, so what was the race in my examples?"
Them: Immediate block, more trolling, or incoherent deflection.
When you highlight that "their own" group’s history is more destructive when judged by their own simplistic standards, they suddenly can’t comprehend the discussion. Even the most “honest” white, who claims to value open debate about racial differences, only wants to discuss it on his own terms, focusing solely on points that can be weaponized in their favor against other groups.
Them: “Stereotypes are rooted in truth; they don’t exist out of nowhere.”
Me: “Great. Is the stereotype about whites and bestiality or pedophilia rooted in truth?”
Them: “Well well but but but...That’s Jewish propaganda…”
Their fragility is glaring. They demand unflinching scrutiny of others but cry foul when their own history or stereotypes are examined. This fragility shows a deep fear of being exposed as no better, or worse, than the groups they vilify. Their obsession with racial hierarchies crumbles under equal scrutiny, revealing not superiority but a desperate need to deflect from their own flaws. This intellectual cowardice ensures they never engage in good faith.
P.S. Their need to LARP as others to push their narrative is another glaring sign of their insecurity. A group that supposedly “has everything” yet still feels compelled to impersonate minorities, foreigners, or even anonymous “everyman” figures online to create the illusion that their views are universal. Then they hide behind phrases like “It’s widely known,” “It’s universally accepted,” or “We all know” to shield their simplistic nonsense from scrutiny. This tactic betrays their fear that their ideas lack legitimacy unless propped up by fabricated consensus. They’ll create fake accounts pretending to be Black, Jewish, or Asian to “validate” their talking points, as if their arguments can’t stand on their own. It’s a pathetic admission that their ideology isn’t as “obvious” or “natural” as they claim. Their reliance on sock-puppeting and echo chambers shows a deep-seated need for validation they can’t achieve through honest discourse. Meanwhile, they accuse others of “virtue signaling” while their entire identity revolves around performative superiority and manufactured agreement.
Rep!
