Young Turk’s Effeminate Neo-Marxists

I’m going to go through and offer some off-the-cuff commentary on this absurd “news” report, produced by the Young Turks.

11 seconds in …

While the racially ambiguous neo-feminist Lisa introduces the content of this hit-piece, notice the self-righteous smirk of her co-host John.  He clearly thinks the White Student Union is ridiculous.  They must not teach unbiased and fair reporting at the Young Turk University.

18 seconds in …

After neo-feminist Lisa announces the WSU’s campus patrols, metro-sexual John responds by saying … “as you do”… in imitation of pop humor “sarcasm” memes.  Forming student patrols with the intent of policing the campus to stop crime, is apparently so far out of the ordinary for white people, that John saw fit to comment.

He continues his line of sarcasm by joking that this is sooo normal (obvious sarcasm; he doesn’t think this is normal at all) that even his fencing club did it.

I bet you enjoy poking other guys, John.

Moving on …

40 seconds in…

Neo-Feminist Lisa discusses the CPAC panel, in which little ol’ me caused a national stir by defending historic Southern viewpoints concerning segregation and slavery.  At 1 min. in, she says the panel, which was meant to show that Republicans weren’t racist, ended up showing the “racism” of many of the panel’s members.  By “many” she must have meant me and Heimbach.  And we were certainly treated as outcasts by every one else in that room.

No, there’s no indication that mainline republicans are “racist” (neo-feminist Lisa never graces us with a definition of that term, by the way)…they remain just as neo-Marxist as the hosts of this Young Turks “news” cast.

She says:  “this was unfortunate, and…(dramatic pause)…very telling.”

“Telling” of what, neo-Feminist Lisa?  If I had to guess, I’d say she thinks my performance implies that her darkest nightmares might actually be true.  Although, if she’s like many of the other neo-feminists I’ve dealt with, it might be her darkest fantasies she’s thinking about?

1 minute 25 seconds in …

They finally begin a discussion of statistics.

A lot of the opposition Matthew Heimbach has received over these patrols, has focused on claiming they’re superfluous.  “Towson students don’t need protection!” it’s said.  “Everyone is perfectly safe here, and there’s certainly no indication of unbalanced crimes perpetuated against whites”.

At 1 minute 34 seconds in, metro-sexual John chimes in with some arbitrary stats (he never cites any sources).  Towson, according to M-S John, is ranked 1,087 out of 1,309 schools…then, engaging in more passe’ sarcasm, he declares “that sucks”, prompting neo-Feminist Lisa to chime in, “yeah, that’s pretty unsafe”.

Well, if the little white piece of paper a reporter is holding, declares that the school ranks 1,087 out of 1300, then I guess it must be true.  (Neo-Feminist Lisa cites the school’s campus police data-base, but it’s unclear if they’re getting their stats from there, or how the campus police even record their stats).

According to the FBI stats, violent crime in the Baltimore area is much higher than the national average.  That fact alone is enough to justify student patrols.

And, as we’ll see, it’s not student patrols in particular that these two Marxists object to, but rather, student patrols carried out by Matthew Heimbach.

At two minutes and six seconds in…

Neo-Feminist Lisa says there are “clearly” ties of racism here (again, what that means is entirely ambiguous).  She says the WSU is very “neo-nazi-esque” … really Lisa?  How so?

Well, apparently, it is Heimbach’s use of the word “commander” that, in Lisa’s expert opinion, identifies him as a neo-Nazi.  Then her brave and hard-charging co-host, metro-sexual John, spouting more tired sarcasm, says that he always loves it when people give themselves nicknames.

Not that factual accuracy matters at this point, but it was the left-wing wackos (like the two hosts of this show) who gave Heimbach the nick-name “commander”, implying that he was the leader of a neo-nazi group.  So, get this:  Lisa thinks the WSU is very “neo-nazi-esque” because of Heimbach’s title “commander” – which was given to Heimbach, because left-wingers thought he was very neo-nazi-esque.  Kind of a vicious circle, eh?

Moral of the story:  anyone who stands up for white interests will be branded a “neo-nazi” even if they’re not neo-nazis.

Radical leftists (like our two hosts), have no interest in factual accuracy.

At two minutes and 30 seconds in…

Neo-feminist Lisa informs her audience that giving oneself a pretentious nickname is very “representative” of what neo-nazis do.  Well, I didn’t know Lisa was an expert on the racially self-conscious right; I’d love to read her critical evaluation of American National Socialism.  Oh wait … she’s not an expert on American racialist movements?  She doesn’t know what she’s talking about?

Hey Lisa… if giving oneself a nickname is “representative” of Neo-Nazis, then Lil’ Wayne, Jay-Z, Ice-T, Vanilla Ice, Slim Shady, and many others must be closet national socialists, right?

My mind is blown!  Wow!  What an informative piece of investigative journalism.  Lisa and John should win a Nobel Prize!  (How’s that for sarcasm, John?)

At three minutes and 18 sec. in…

The hosts admit that student patrols are helpful after all, … but, who cares about that, right?

At three minutes 30 seconds in…

Metro-sexual, effeminate John, dropping his sarcasm for a moment and picking up an arrogant (and somewhat naive) leftist mantra, implies that Heimbach’s WSU patrols are little more than imitations of George Zimmerman, who, as all of us pretentious, left-wing radicals (ie: the important people) know, was on the prowl, looking for a poor, cherub-cheeked negro child to murder.

The arrogance of this sort of implication is insulting.  John, not everyone in the world is a left wing neo-Marxist like yourself; not everyone naively adheres to your Zimmerman narrative.

I know that makes baby Martin Luther King Jr. cry, but facts are the facts.  Do your job and report them, instead of spouting off incoherent leftist dogma.

At three minutes 47…

Metro-sexual John implies that if it were socially acceptable to brand oneself with a military title, he’d love to be called Rear Admiral.  Yeah…I bet you want to be a rear admiral, John.  Maybe you and your fencing bros could dress in sailor suits together and do covers of the Village People?

Four minutes and 8 seconds in…

They demand to know why Heimbach needs to clarify and specify his actions and press releases.  Um, … maybe because of the penchant among radical leftists (like the two hosts) to mischaracterize and defame his organization?

At four minutes and 28 seconds in…

Metro-sexual John says that he can’t think of anyone “less appealing” than a white woman who cares for her race.

Barring the fact that this coward would never defame the honor of a white woman in the presence of any antique European man, the fact is, John has no concept of what a real lady is, nor would one give him the time of day if he even desired her.  (Of course, we have our doubts if John desires women in the first place).

At four minutes and 38 seconds in…

John continues his cowardly tirade by saying that usually it’s only males who get caught up in this “stupid, xenophobic, neo-nazi-type b/s.  But what’s the appeal for women?  Uggh”.

If John was ever brave enough to have a public debate with a racially-self conscious advocate for “white rights”, he’d find out very quickly that they are much smarter, more well-read, and better prepared for the debate than he could ever hope to be.

And also, what’s the appeal for women?  Well, they like strong, masculine males, and tend to reject effeminate, metro-sexual hipsters.

Even neo-feminists can’t resist masculinity (even though they’d deny it to their grave).  I know this first hand.

So much for “open-minded” tolerance at America’s educational establishments.

This entry was posted in General and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Young Turk’s Effeminate Neo-Marxists

  1. At the same time, the “Young” Turk, Mr. Uygur is getting older and grayer! Good job, Father Time!

    • Watch Uygar debate Jared Taylor it’s brilliant.

      • I disagree. One doesn’t have to insult non-white civilizations in order to make the point that denying freedom of association to white people will cause White Genocide. Answering the anti-white’s questions like the pro-white, Mr. Taylor, did in that debate is called tailgating.


      • No matter how many times you drill the Mantra into the enemy their not gonna change. I personally agree with Alexander Dugin gobalism is the root cause of white genocide. Something Bob Whittaker and the Bugsters do not address.

      • When you see politicians debating, do they change the mind of their opponents… or do they expect to?

        NO, they are debating for the benefit of the audience; to show the audience new points about the topic, and to show the politician’s strength in communication and leadership.

        Globalism won’t be brought up by the pro-white using the Mantra is because globalism isn’t as important as massive immigration and forced assimilation… the only direct causes of White Genocide.

        However, you may be right “blacklodge156”, in that globalism is at the root of the problem – my critique is that debating should be to alert the public of White Genocide, not to suggest policy. Once the public and policy makers agree that the genocide is happening, that it is wrong and that it must be stopped, progress in other areas… such as implementing nationalist policies vs. globalist ones.



Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s