Saturday, July 21, 2018

Bakery fires two women for being white

Yep.  There's just no other reason.  They had the temerity to be white.  The offended woman in question was black, and a known activist.  So the black woman walks in after closing time and places an order.  The two white women followed company policy and said it was past time to order.  The two white women had already turned away other late comers, some of whom were white.  The activists, however, suspected she was denied service because she was black.  This is because we know that you can always tell a racist by the color of her skin. 

The activist turned to America's Cybergulag, and the lynch mob was formed.  Almost immediately, the company admitted that there wasn't a reason to suggest the employees were racist or anything. In the end, however, they said impact outweighs intent.  The employees did the right thing, but the wrong type of skin color was offended.

This is no different than Jim Crow era America, just turned on its head.  No, scratch that.  When Tom Robinson was sent up the river, at least he was accused of wrong doing.  When people wanted Blacks to be punished or lynched, they accused them of trumped up charges.  They at least knew that to cover their racism against blacks, they had to validate it by coming up with some false accusation of wrongdoing.

But not so in our post-Christian society, where forgiveness, mercy, and reconciliation are tossed on the trash heap along with concepts of justice, law, presumption of innocence and the need for evidence.  In a post-truth era, who cares?  We accuse because.  And sentencing is expected.  And the bakery in question complied.  We have no concern about coming up with a charge of wrongdoing.  It's enough that we accuse.  No wrongdoing is needed.  Guilt is based upon who says guilt.

These girls, likely just trying to make money to get by, were fired because of the color of their skin.  The woman who accused them was heard because of the color of her skin.  The bakery went along and the proper skin color was catered to, since that's what our society demands.  Racism 101, 2018 style.

If you argue that the white women are just whiny white butt-hurt, or that it can't be wrong since all the beautiful people in our society wouldn't care (has the MSM run with this?), then just remember something important.  The same would have been said by the same people a hundred years ago, it's just that the skin colors would have been switched.

We're simply replacing evil with evil, doing away with wrongdoing by replacing it with wrongdoing.  If you've ever wondered how people throughout history could have been party to the evils and terrors and idiocy of the past, you need only turn on the television, read a newspaper, or look out the window in America 2018.  You'll have all the case studies you'll ever need.


  1. If I were running a cafe, we would have a policy for this. Cheerfully seat the customer, hand him a menu, and draw his attention to the printed policy which states: 'Service outside of posted business hours is available after payment of a non refundable $300.00 catering fee.'

    1. That might work. Unfortunately, based on this case at least, it wouldn't matter. The employees followed policy, and clearly applied it to whites as well as the offended customer. But the offended customer was black, she felt the employees were only doing this to her because she was black, and the company fired them accordingly. That's called guilt by skin color, and there aren't many policies that can overcome that.


Let me know your thoughts