Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Christopher Clark: "Well-Meaning" White Man Rejects Opposition To His "Integrated" Bedroom

Christopher Clark with his black female partner
The Context of White Supremacy welcomed White journalist and writer Christopher Clark live from South Africa to exchange views on Racism. During the exchange he made these critical points:
  1. Clark agreed that there is a System of White Supremacy defined as: a global system of people who classify themselves as White and are dedicated to abusing and/or subjugating everyone in the known universe whom they classify as not White.
  2. Clark concurred that it is logical for non-white people to suspect that any White person - including himself - could be a White Supremacist/Racist.
  3. Clark conceded that the counter-racist thought that supports why any sexual activity between a White person and a non-white person is inherently exploitative and incorrect behavior under the System of White Supremacy is logical.
  4. Clark failed to provide any strategies for Victims of White Supremacy to accurately differentiate between "well-meaning" Whites and Racist Whites.
After the broadcast, Clark submitted this expletive-laced reflection on our discussion. His commentary is unedited.
Hi Gus,
I just re-listened to our talk and the subsequent "commentary", if it can be called that. 
Firstly, I think it's a huge cop out for you to dismiss so much of what I said and in such a callous manner once I was already off air. I would have been more than happy to deal with your snarky comments on air, but I guess that wouldn't have worked so well with your agenda, right? 
Secondly, how dare you speak about my relationship with my partner the way you did both while I was on air and even more so subsequently. Excuse my language, but you know sweet fuck all about her, her background, her family or the details of our relationship. Who the fuck are you to say that we won't stay together, or speculate about why we are not already married, or to assume that that is automatically my decision rather than a mutual one, or her decision for that matter? Who the fuck are you to assume that you can police other people's life or relationship choices, whatever their race? 
Thirdly, I was being completely genuine when I thanked you for the "grilling". I am sincerely interested in understanding more about racism and how to confront it, and I felt I had learnt valuable lessons from you and your callers in this regard, even though I don't agree with everything that was levelled at me. I don't see how seeing this as valuable and giving thanks for that is something that can also be perceived as negative. But then it seems clear now that you are incapable of taking anything from a white person as something that is not completely and inherently negative. Please tell me how the fuck such a one-sided view is productive for anyone, black or white? 
And yes, much of our conversation was uncomfortable for me. Why is that "bad"? I have honestly never had to answer or counter some of the questions or theories you posed, whether from white people or black people, and I certainly wasn't expecting some of them either. But was I dishonest at any stage? Absolutely not. When I was uncertain about something, I said as much. When I hesitated or chuckled, it was because I was feeling nervous or awkward or stunned by the directness of a question and didn't have a definitive answer. I'm also acutely aware of professing certainties about such complex issues that I am still learning about and analyzing on a daily basis. 
Next up, do all white people sit around and conspire about how to "talk to negros" in a manipulative and evasive way? Did I honestly hear you ask that question? Are you fucking serious??? 
Newsflash my man: there are good people trying to "do the right thing" and live their life right across all races, including among whites. There are most definitely non-racist and anti-racist white people, though they are admittedly a minority. There are also prejudiced people across all races, including among blacks. 
I think I know myself pretty well, and I know that I am a good person who tries to treat everyone I encounter with respect, empathy and dignity. I honestly think it's sad that you are obviously so unwilling to see the good in certain types of people or situations. I came onto your show with nothing but good and honest intent, and you refused to see that -- I think you'd already made your mind up before we even started talking. Hence the resounding triumph in your voice whenever you felt I'd lived up to your preconceived ideas. 
And then to even be insulted by you for defending my own mother. . . that was a new level of bullshit for me. Who wouldn't stick up for their own mother if they thought she was being portrayed unfairly (and later greatly misquoted / taken out of context in your "commentary")? It's not because she is "white", it's because she is a good woman who I love and who has done a tremendous amount for me. How the fuck is sticking up for someone like that so hard to understand? And the fact that I am unwilling to disclose the contents of a private email she sent me says nothing apart from the fact that I'm not willing to share everything with someone who I don't know live on air. And with regards to the lack of "addendum" you pointed out on the post about what my Mum said to me, I didn't think it was necessary to what I was trying to get across in that blog post. 
Also, if I were you I'd do some more research on what Bantustans were before you start throwing that word around. Just some friendly advice before you start talking about ignorance :) 
In all honesty, you lost all credibility for me when I listened to your commentary. That was just really shitty talk radio man. 
I'm sure you'll find some way to turn this all around and make it about my inherent racism and white power or policing your blackness, but it's really not about any of that. It's just about you behaving like a presumptuous, judgmental asshole. 
So fuck you, quite frankly.
Cheers, 
Chris

8 comments:

Jennifer A. Thompson said...

Mr. Clark is a hypocrite too. So, I congratulate you Mr. Renegade for exposing him and his own self-incrimination. Great job!

Anonymous said...

Tacky, trashy, and terroristic as usual.

Anonymous said...

Typical white people! Always trying to SEEM like the good white person but deep down in their spirit, they're just natural born devils!!

Anonymous said...

They have no spirit! PALE PINK DEVIL!

Ras said...

I have always said white peopl put EXACTLY who and what they are in movies. Vampire movies, werewolf movies etc. They will show you one face publicly and/or in person then show you their true predatory, cannibalistic, parasitic behaviour. Usually when they either get you behind closed doors or in a position l where they think you're vulnerable or when they think their words will remain private. Obviously he didn't think you would expose him. That way he felt free to be his racist, terroristic true self.

I love when you interview white people. It gives the best insight to the wholesale racist/white supremacist terrorists they ALL are and the myriad of ways they practice racism. Ways in which they have successfully fooled and beguiled 98% of nonwhite people not to be able to perceive. He is so good at it that he has acquired for himself sadly, a Black female he abuses everyday and he has trained her sadly to call a tragic arrangement a relationship.

That is why they have gotten away with their behaviour for the last 2000yrs minimum. They keep doing what they do because the same old tactics work. This article exemplifies how mentally damaged Black people are by any sexual contact with white people:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fired-fort-lauderdale-cop-jason-holding-black-girlfriend-hearing/

There is no more powerful a fairytale on earth than the myth of a "GOOD" white person.

Freethoughthiphop said...

When the parasite can't invade the host.It will get angry. The language he used is his normal cadence.Slave master type tone.His language got decoded.He was exposed.

Anonymous said...

As usual in order to creeate confusion, this onswer seems not on the problem but just being on the person, which is teh major tool they use to get you out of your nerves. Reading this answer is full of lessons.
The problem is that at any moment it seems to be on the subject but jsut on the person, emotional response.
As mr Fuller says " If you don't undersatnd white supremacy which is racism waht it is and how it works everything else that you undersatnd will only confuse you", any white person remains as long as white supremacy exists a racist suspect.

Anonymous said...

You all take about ending "white supremacism" when, it actuality, you're talking about racial conflict/a race war. Something you've already lost.