Who Really Benefits From Institutional Racism?

The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.
— Aristotle

As someone with both mental and physical disabilities, I’m all too familiar with the feeling of being treated as a second class citizen. “Progressives” and race baiters claim that because I’m White I benefit from institutional racism. I suffer from stigma because I have a mental health disability. Doctors have even refused medical treatment because of my bipolar diagnosis. Clearly I’m not enjoying preferential treatment – quite the opposite. Non-Whites often blame institutional racism if they don’t receive the special treatment they demand. They claim that Whites are the ones who really benefit from institutional racism. However, in practice, it’s the non-White races who benefit the most from institutional racism.

How Institutional Racism Benefits Non-Whites

Two of the most common terms used to justify anti-White racism are “White privilege” and “institutional racism”. Both are bigoted insinuations that belonging to the White race automatically means you get unfair social and financial opportunities which are denied to non-Whites. “Institutional racism” is a common excuse to blame White people for non-White failure to achieve something – a passing grade at school, attendance at the post secondary institution of their choice, the job they wanted. It’s easier to claim racial –victim status and blame someone else for your failures than to admit that perhaps you should have studied harder or taken a course to qualify for that job. Institutional racism is defined by Oxford Dictionaries as follows:

Racial discrimination that has become established as normal behaviour within a society or organization.

Proponents of institutional racism insist that the only way to fight this racial discrimination is to give non-Whites advantages and special treatment. This, in their view, would “level the playing field” and help non-Whites to “catch up” to the level of privilege that Whites supposedly benefit from. Their endless claims about the unfair advantage Whites enjoy also justify anti-White hatred, discrimination and hate speech.

Some Whites deny that institutional racism exists at all. Not only does it exist, it runs increasingly rampant in many areas of modern society. As such, it exacts a steep toll on society. Its victims are not brown, but almost exclusively White. Below, I list several examples of who really benefits from institutional racism.

Preferential Covid Vaccine Access (Canada)

The Trudeau regime has monumentally bungled its entire covid response, especially their lack of vaccine procurement. As of this writing (February 18, 2020) Canada is among the last countries, behind even third world countries, to procure a stable and adequate supply of covid vaccines for its citizens. As if this weren’t bad enough, the Trudeau government has announced that they will prioritize vaccinating members of non-White and indigenous races over almost all other Canadians.

While the safety and efficacy of these vaccines is debatable, the fact remains that soon governments will impose vaccine passports on the public. These passports will control access to social services and health care, as well as the ability to shop for necessities or even travel from one neighbourhood to another. The regime will keep unvaccinated citizens under house arrest, while those with passports will be able to resume their normal lives. It’s likely that Trudeau will implement his vaccine passport system before they vaccinate everyone. Under the government’s “preferred races first” vaccine distribution system, who really benefits? Healthy Whites certainly won’t benefit. Instead the government will lock them down and treat them as second class citizens until they finally receive the vaccine – at the back of the line.

“Disproportionately affected” equals racial favouritism

The excuse for this blatant racism is that non-Whites are “disproportionately affected” by covid-19. The Trudeau regime claims (while failing to provide any proof) that covid has disproportionately affected “racialized and marginalized” populations in Canada, and that “systemic barriers to accessing necessary supportive care” for COVID-19 also exist for non-Whites in urban settings. They claim that these “barriers” are also related to factors such as poverty, systemic racism and homelessness.

What the Trudeau regime didn’t tell the public is that indigenous peoples living in remote northern provinces benefit from institutional racism by receiving vaccines while the government was telling the rest of Canadians that there was little or no vaccine available. This despite the fact that those who live in remote areas are by far the least likely to contract covid compared to people in more populated areas. Another inconvenient fact is that even if these northern natives do contract covid, their chances of dying from it (except for seniors and the immunocompromised) are less than 1%, even without medical intervention. This federal government map shows the percentages of the vaccinated population by province as of February 4, 2021.

The negroes have jumped on the bandwagon, demanding preferential vaccine access for members of their own race. In Toronto, they have even formed a so-called “Black Scientists Task Force on Vaccine Equity” to lobby for special access. Unsurprisingly, they claim that their race is more vulnerable to covid because of “racism”. So far there is no scientific evidence that blacks or any other non-White race are genetically any more susceptible to covid than Whites.

Any extra susceptibility to covid arises from a combination of poverty, crowded living, working in public facing jobs, lifestyle habits such as obesity, not following public health guidelines, smoking and drug and alcohol abuse. These factors are rampant among the black race. However, the poor of all races also suffer from the same socioeconomic factors. Negroes or other non-Whites should not benefit from institutional racism to get priority access to covid vaccines. After all, the same socioeconomic factors also exist among Whites.

The “racialized” are first in line for vaccines, while the disabled are first in line to be murdered

But rather than taking lifestyle or health status into account, federal and provincial health authorities are pandering to the race baiters. As a result, certain races will benefit from preferential access to vaccines, while others of all races who really do need priority vaccine access such as the non-black poor and homeless, people with co-morbidities and the disabled, (who are the most marginalized of all) will be denied the vaccine until after the “racialized” receive it.

Prioritizing “racialized” people in a pandemic over those who are genuinely in need is so vile that almost none of Trudeau’s paid mainstream media outlets are even reporting on the scheme. But thanks to deliberate lack of coverage from the same mainstream media, the disabled have been by far the most marginalized and neglected group during the pandemic. This is despite the fact that many disabled people are at higher risk of covid complications than the “racialized” because of their disabilities. Yet none of the few news articles about vaccine prioritization by race have even mentioned the disabled.

Disabled people are also conspicuously absent from federal government vaccine allocation pages. So far the only initiative announced for the disabled during covid is to pass Bill C-7 to make it easier for us to be murdered aka euthanized. No wonder the disabled don’t appear on the government’s racial vaccine priority list or in their paid media outlets. If anyone should be complaining about lack of access to vaccines, it’s not black or indigenous race baiters.

“Higher” Education

The educational system is another place we find institutional racism. Brown people in general, and blacks in particular, have lower IQ’s than Whites and Asians and they score abysmally low marks. Nobody expects them to work nearly as hard to succeed in college or university. The educational system rewards them for their intellectual and personal failings. It starts with entrance exams, or SATs in the US. People of different races are assigned different passing grades which allow them to get in to the college of their choice, among other things. In the US, an SAT score has a major influence on a student’s future, from which college they get in to, to which career they will succeed in. Who really benefits? Primarily blacks, who get to pass this exam with a score that’s considerably lower than what an Asian has to achieve. This article provides details of the scheme:

Lee’s next slide shows three columns of numbers from a Princeton University study that tried to measure  how race and ethnicity affect admissions by using SAT scores as a benchmark. It uses the term ‘bonus’ to describe how many extra SAT points an applicant’s race is worth. She points to the first column.

African Americans received a ‘bonus’ of 230 points, Lee says.

She points to the second column.

‘Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.’

The last column draws gasps.

Asian Americans, Lee says, are penalized by 50 points — in other words, they had to do that much better to win admission.

‘Do Asians need higher test scores? Is it harder for Asians to get into college? The answer is yes,’ Lee says.

The issue here is that members of some races are naturally smarter than others, or have better school attendance and study habits. Asians often score higher on SAT exams than Whites, so they are actively penalized by 50 points. Negroes and their allies blame the smarter kids along with “racism” for their own low marks – institutional racism. They then compensate for their lower achievement by gaming the system so that their race benefits while penalizing the smart for being smart. Hence the “bonus” points. Their transparent attempts at gaming the system are a form of institutional racism. Anyone who is smarter than a negro (i.e. everyone else) is the victim of this underhanded tactic.

This chart shows Harvard’s acceptance rate by race of students with similar qualifications.

Institutionalized racism in the UK education system

Anti-White racism in postsecondary education is exponentially worse in the UK. The entire government has sold itself out to non-White immigrants. Their government has conducted a country-wide “race disparity audit” scrutinizing all aspects of British society for signs of “racism” (against browns). This includes instructing universities to change what they teach in order to favour under- and non-achieving races. This includes what they call “decolonizing” the curriculum.

“Decolonizing” means removing mentions of any White European achievers and replacing them with third world role models. Universities whose brown students aren’t doing as well as or better than White students will be sanctioned by the UK government. In addition, universities are pressuring professors to indoctrinate students about “White privilege”. This is another anti-White racist term describing a non-existent phenomenon. It’s a convenient way to excuse underachievement in non-Whites.

The end result of the UK’s pogrom against Whites in their university system is that Whites have stopped enrolling in postsecondary education. A constant barrage of racist hostility at school is driving White students out of higher education. Another factor is the increasing impossibility of being able to compete with favoured races for spaces in university and for jobs. The UK educational system is robbing young Whites of education and opportunities while less deserving non-Whites reap the benefits. Twenty three UK universities are now majority brown. Only 29% of White high school graduates in the UK even bother to apply to university. Would you sign up and take out huge loans to attend a university which flings doors of opportunity wide open for brown students but slams them in the face of Whites?

Costs of racism in education

The costs to humanity of these racist schemes are legion. Soon Whites all over the world will stop bothering to apply to attend racist universities. Whites are losing the right to education in favour of those who aren’t smart enough. When a negro goes to college, most of the time taxpayers foot the bill for at least part of their tuition.

Every space a negro takes at a university is one less space available for a smarter and more deserving student. Finally, the few blacks who graduate invariably end up getting jobs based on “Affirmative Action” – more institutional racism. As a result, we end up with incompetents in skilled positions, incompetents who can cost people their lives. The so-called negro “doctor” in the above photo is a perfect example of who benefits from this scheme. Would you want this dumb, smug, lazy, unqualified individual looking after you?

Respect and Dignity – But Not For Whites

My next example comes from the same leftist rag. Some time ago, they decided to start capitalizing the names of all races – except Whites. Readers were notified of this change in policy in a proud, arrogant editorial:

“I believe there is no contest here: Why not capitalize these words given how much it matters to those who care deeply about how the media depicts and names them? Why withhold something so simple — but clearly, so meaningful — as an uppercase letter?

To that end, I am pleased to tell you that the Toronto Star decided this week to begin capitalizing “Indigenous,” in all instances, and “Black” in reference to Black people, identity, community and culture.”

A few fatuous paragraphs later:

“‘Readers have been urging us to capitalize Black and Indigenous for some time as a mark of respect, just as we capitalize other ethnoracial terms such as South Asian, Latino and Roma,’ said Anthony Collins, the newsroom’s style chief and co-chair of the style committee that recommended this change to senior management. Editor Michael Cooke signed off on this immediately.”

“To be clear, as Collins said in a memo to newsroom editors, the Star will not be capitalizing white or brown because ‘they do not describe a shared identity and experience the way Black does.‘

This is pure false equivalence to justify blatant anti-White racism. “Brown” is a colour. It does not denote a single race. At best, it denotes any group of races and ethnicities which all share the characteristic of brown skin. White, on the other hand, DOES denote a single race. What these editors are really saying is “every race deserves respect and dignity – except the White race.”

The Toronto Star is one of the top five media outlets in Canada. Would they have published such a blatantly racist and discriminatory article 20 years ago? Of course not! But due to today’s accepted brand of institutional racism, non-White races benefit from special treatment and “respect”. Meanwhile it’s open season on White people, who don’t deserve the same level of “respect”.

The most violent thugs benefit from lighter sentences because of institutional racism

In Canada, the prison population mainly consists of two species: negroes, and “Indigenous peoples”. There’s a laundry list of similarities between the two groups. Both groups are responsible for the vast majority of violent crime in Canada. They cost the taxpayers and society billions of dollars per year in enforcement, criminal justice and incarceration. Liberal excuse makers claim that racism is what puts them behind bars, rather than their own criminal behaviour. Nobody knows for sure if this is true, because governments and police routinely suppress racial information about criminals, for fear of being called racists. Nevertheless, here’s a chart from a University of Toronto study conducted in 2011:

In February 2021 the Trudeau government is moving to repeal mandatory minimum penalties for drug offences and some gun-related crimes, claiming they do not make Canadians safer and unfairly affect indigenous and black offenders. The federal Ministry of Justice says that too many lower-risk and first-time offenders, including a “disproportionate” number of indigenous and black people, are being locked away due to policies that are proven not to deter crime.

So, their “solution” to deter crime is to reward black and indigenous criminals with shorter sentences, and to tighten gun control for law abiding citizens again. This is the typical liberal approach to crime – lavish preferential treatment on certain criminal races, while claiming that it would be “racist” to look at the fact that these two racial groups commit a “disproportionate” number of violent crimes. Meanwhile, criminals get back onto the streets sooner to commit even more crimes, and nobody asks why these two groups commit so many offenses. Here’s what Alberta’s justice minister had to say:

“Removing tough, mandatory penalties for actual gun crimes undermines the very minority communities that are so often victimized by brazen gun violence. I also find it disingenuous for Ottawa to exploit a genuine issue like systemic racism to push through their soft-on-crime bills.

One way these two races benefit from institutional racism is that they get lighter jail sentences solely because of their race. The reason for this is, as always, institutional racism. Liberal politicians claim that racism by Whites is the only cause of negroes’ and Indigenous peoples’ penchant for criminal activity. At sentencing time, the criminal’s lawyers draw up a “report” for the judge. This “report” tearfully rhapsodizes about the poor pitiful prisoner’s racial trials and tribulations. The tearful tale, directly blaming Whites for the Indigenous person’s crimes, is the justification for the lighter sentence. More tears, fewer years.

This racist farce has been going on for decades. To add insult to injury, Indigenous prisoners are ensconced in minimum security “healing lodges” which are basically cushy apartments. The racist preferential treatment is supposed to “solve” the high incarceration rates of the people who commit the most crimes. Letting criminals out of jail faster will reduce crime? Liberal insanity at its finest.

I mentioned that Indigenous peoples are almost exactly like blacks. Both groups are underachievers, dependent on special treatment and handouts. Now the black thugs’ lawyers are trying to cash in on that similarity. They’re trying to force judges to “adopt a new way of sentencing” for their clients. In other words, they plan to apply the “more tears, fewer years” formula to negroes as well. If the whining and victim card waving works for Indigenous thugs, why not for the black variety?

A black criminal benefits from institutional racism

As an example, here’s the case of a black career criminal. He has spent more of his life behind bars than on the outside.

His distinguished resume aka rap sheet is full of violent and serious crimes. This case involves possession of a prohibited firearm and breach of a prohibition order. Interesting, given the recent furor over gun control. The bleeding hearts want a light sentence for this violent career criminal. His rap sheet is glaring proof of the futility of gun control in a country which has among the strictest gun control laws in the world. But – he’s a negro, and he’s “overincarcerated” according to his liberal apologists. They want him to benefit from institutional racism and go back out on the streets as soon as possible. That way, he can commit more escalating gun crimes including murders. The claim from his bleeding heart defense lawyer even includes an unsubstantiated assertion that his client has Indigenous blood. That would entitle him to the same racist preferential sentencing as the real Indigenous thugs.

South Africa: “Cutting the Throat of Whiteness”

Finally, there’s the institutional racism evident in world reactions to the South African genocide of White farmers. Wikipedia minimizes this genocide as “South African Farm Attacks”. Here is an excellent summary of the genocide and hideous murders taking place there. Nothing is being done to help these farmers. Any attempt to help them is met with vicious leftist and negro accusations of “racism”. Australian politicians called for the remaining White farmers to be brought to their country as refugees. They were called “racists” by both the blacks of South Africa who are committing the genocide and leftists around the world who are cheerleading for that genocide. Nowadays it’s racist to save the lives of White people. It’s also racist to stop the perpetrators from continuing their murderous rampage.

A website called Genocide Watch claims “Genocide Watch exists to predict, prevent, stop, and punish genocide and other forms of mass murder. Our purpose is to build an international movement to prevent and stop genocide.” Yet “Genocide Watch” has little or nothing to say about the South African genocide of White farmers. Its coverage of White genocide in South Africa was limited to one page dating back to 2011. The page blamed Whites for any racial strife in that country, including their own genocide. They claimed that Apartheid was the root cause. They also blamed Whites for a “history of colonial domination”.

Genocide Watch has now removed that page. Compare that to their sympathetic, up to the minute page featuring the Rohingya Muslim genocide, and it’s not hard to tell which racial groups they consider to be suffering genocide, and which group need not apply for this status. Ironically, the Rohingya page is titled “When is a Genocide a Genocide?”. It seems that “Genocide Watch” is willfully blind to the answer to their own question.