Amanda Kijera: Liberal Human Rights Activist Raped in Haiti


.. and doesn’t learn a thing … blames White men for Haitian oppression.

We are not your weapons – we are women

By Amanda Kijera, civic journalist and activist in Haiti

Two weeks ago, on a Monday morning, I started to write what I thought was a very clever editorial about violence against women in Haiti. The case, I believed, was being overstated by women’s organizations in need of additional resources. Ever committed to preserving the dignity of Black men in a world which constantly stereotypes them as violent savages, I viewed this writing as yet one more opportunity to fight “the man” on behalf of my brothers. That night, before I could finish the piece, I was held on a rooftop in Haiti and raped repeatedly by one of the very men who I had spent the bulk of my life advocating for.

It hurt. The experience was almost more than I could bear. I begged him to stop. Afraid he would kill me, I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care that I was a Malcolm X scholar. (he didn’t see her angel halo, Ed.) He told me to shut up, and then slapped me in the face. Overpowered, I gave up fighting halfway through the night.

Accepting the helplessness of my situation, I chucked aside the Haiti bracelet I had worn so proudly for over a year, along with it, my dreams of human liberation. Someone, I told myself, would always be bigger and stronger than me. As a woman, my place in life had been ascribed from birth. A Chinese proverb says that “women are like the grass, meant to be stepped on.” The thought comforted me at the same time that it made me cringe.

A dangerous thought. Others like it have derailed movements, discouraged consciousness and retarded progress for centuries. To accept it as truth signals the beginning of the end of a person–or community’s–life and ability to self-love. Resignation means inertia, and for the past two weeks I have inhabited its innards. My neighbors here include women from all over the world, but it’s the women of African descent, and particularly Haitian women, who move me to write now.

Truly, I have witnessed as a journalist and human rights advocate the many injustices inflicted upon Black men in this world. The pain, trauma and rage born of exploitation are terrors that I have grappled with every day of my life. They make one want to strike back, to fight rabidly for what is left of their personal dignity in the wake of such things. Black men have every right to the anger they feel in response to their position in the global hierarchy, but their anger is misdirected.

Women are not the source of their oppression; oppressive policies and the as-yet unaddressed white patriarchy which still dominates the global stage are. Because women–and particularly women of color–are forced to bear the brunt of the Black male response to the Black male plight, the international community and those nations who have benefitted from the oppression of colonized peoples have a responsibility to provide women with the protection that they need.

This entry was posted in Crime, Haiti, Negroes, Race Relations, Racism. Bookmark the permalink.

332 Responses to Amanda Kijera: Liberal Human Rights Activist Raped in Haiti

  1. Charlemagne says:

    How would it be a Nordish ethnostate if “other White European Americans” are included as well? Wouldn’t it then be a White European ethnostate?

    Bernard,

    Well, I suppose that is what I overall meant, and am happy to see that Richard McCulloch accepts this view as well. Either way, as a White or a ‘Nordish’ state, the Nordish elements will largely predominate, so I suppose its a bit semantic, but either way (since Nordish is not a synonym for Nordic) ‘Nordishness’ at least recognizes (I think) the other, non-Nordic genetics of the European peoples (such as Alpine, Dinaric and Atlanto-Mediterannean) that McCulloch identifies as Nordish, as well as the classical Hallstatt and La Tène Nordic cultures and peoples — the unmixed Nordics of antiquity.

    I assume Nordish means someone with some or appreciable degrees of Nordic ancestry, again, not merely as a synonym for Nordic, which would not be accurate. Additionally, of course, Nordishness is not limited to NW Europe — it is to be found even in south and eastern Europe as well.

    Hence, since much of the indigenous and predominant Alpines, Dinarics and Meds of much of central and northern Europe assimilated in to the Anglo-Teutonic and Celtic cultures of their own countries — I don’t see much of an issue in assimilating America’s numerically smaller south Euro and south Med minorities — be it in a White or a Nordish ethnostate.

    I think Nordicreb sums up my personal feelings rather perfectly -

    In my birth country (forgive me for protecting my anonymity) there are enough third world trash, that Italians and Spaniards don’t stand out much at all, anymore. I was probably 15 before I realized that my blue-eyed and light brown-haired friend (last name Vitelli) was Italian. But there you go…

    As far as the White community in North America goes, I feel that unity between Nordics, Slavs and White Meds is a necessary and good thing.

    Well said Nordicreb, very well said indeed. It is the height of folly to myopically focus on the small numbers of south Euros in America — who are already decent, well-adjusted and assimilated White American citizens — and overlook the MUCH LARGER PROBLEM that we of European descent face from all kinds of Third World aliens, up to and including non-European Caucasians (wink wink, nod nod), who cause way, WAY more problems than any Greeks or southern Italians do, even on their best day.

    *You are a fair debater on this subject Bernard, and for this I thank you. I also thank the others who can calmly discuss this issue without it turning in to a personal vendetta or a hobby horse of theirs. Even those who may or seemed to have done this, and of who I challenged over, such as MGLS and Reginald, are good and sincere men and overall great commentators whose input and views I respect. I as well meant nothing personal in my criticisms and differences of opinion with them, or anyone else. It’s just that I feel we have to keep our focus on the larger issue of White and European survival, and put the other issues, such as sub-racial and ethnic differences, in their proper perspective.

  2. Bernard says:

    Well, I suppose that is what I overall meant

    Charlemagne,

    So then your answer to Captainchaos’s original question is that you are opposed to a Nordish ethnostate on the North American continent?

    I believe in Nordish preservation. I don’t have a problem with your position on this either way, but I do wish you could be straightforward about it.

  3. Charlemagne says:

    So then your answer to Captainchaos’s original question is that you are opposed to a Nordish ethnostate on the North American continent?

    I believe in Nordish preservation. I don’t have a problem with your position on this either way, but I do wish you could be straightforward about it.

    Bernard,

    No, like I said before, I am not opposed to Northern European preservation. It is just that I am somewhat more nuanced about it, especially concerning the realities of American Whites and exactly just what constitutes ‘Nordishness’.

    For full disclosure, I absolutely prefer to see a White ethnostate verses a strictly ‘Nordish’ one (which even McCulloch himself, the coiner of the term ‘Nordish’, has come to favor). Either way, the northern European sub-race and culture will predominate, so this is what I was trying to convey, if you took the time and the decency to read all that I had to say, and not question me like an attorney as if I was on trial or something.

  4. Bernard says:

    Charlemagne,

    No, like I said before, I am not opposed to Northern European preservation.

    To be specific, we’re talking about a Nordish ethnostate in North America, not vaguely about Nordish preservation.

    For full disclosure, I absolutely prefer to see a White ethnostate verses a strictly ‘Nordish’ one (which even McCulloch himself, the coiner of the term ‘Nordish’, has come to favor).

    They’re not mutually exclusive. A Nordish ethnostate in North America doesn’t mean there can’t be other White ethnostates, Med ethnostates, White ethnostates that include both Nords and Meds, etc.

    Either way, the northern European sub-race and culture will predominate, so this is what I was trying to convey, if you took the time and the decency to read all that I had to say, and not question me like an attorney as if I was on trial or something.

    I read everything you wrote. You weren’t that clear. I’m still not sure what exactly you mean when you say that you “absolutely prefer to see a White ethnostate verses [sic] a strictly ‘Nordish’ one” and whether or not that answers Captainchaos’s original question. If Nordish folk sought self-determination and sovereignty in our own ethnostate in North America, would you oppose its formation?

  5. Silver says:

    Crapandchaos, please refrain from putting words in my mouth. You’re passionate, I get it; and I’m patient, and I can excuse a lot, but the truth still matters. I’ve never said I believe those populations were “essentially nordic.” I’ve said that, based on the evidence, it’s reasonable to believe a nordic element was once much more widespread in those parts and likewise reasonable to attribute to it the leading role those civilizations played. But I’m far from believer in strict biological determinism so, in comparison to an unabashed nordicist (and I think it’d help to cure your insolence for you to remedy that — to get bashed, preferably by one dem dagoes that so offend you :-wink) like yourself, I’m also inclined to downplay the significance of it.

    Bernard,

    You have a choice. You can make it easier to support you, or, as you overwhelmingly tend to, more difficult. Personally, I regard race important enough to support repatriating en masse to ancestral homelands. If the idea is behind race is better living around one’s own kind (or around kinds closely enough related to make it seem the same thing), where exactly on planet earth that takes place is actually of secondary importance. But most people don’t come close to seeing it that way, so some form of partition is the most sensible course of action. The easiest way to overcome reluctance to embrace racialism is (a) offer a territorial reward; give people a territorial objective to strive for; (b) present political racialism in terms that garner support rather than engender opposition. With respect to (b) the extremist sort of revulsionism (see vnntard “Johnny’s” comments on this thread) that motivated ‘early adopters’ is totally divorced from average people’s experience of the racially unlike is (c) a leading factor in why people regard racialists as “crazy” (they don’t see anything to be revolted by) and (d) while not ‘true,’ in the sense that anyone who embraces racialism is a ‘stealth nordicist,’ can be sufficiently disturbing that those otherwise inclined to seek and support a racial solution can instead find their resolve to resist reinvigorated.

    (An excellent question to ask: why is Hunter Wallace blind to the above? Why, seemingly, are all would-be racialist leaders? Is it inaccurate? If so, how? If not, why remain blind to it?)

    Finally, I think that while there’s little question that social relations between (using the term loosely) northern and southern Europeans (and, fuck it, Jews, if we’re to be honest) are easily of a sufficiently amicable nature to qualify as an ‘ingroup,’ there remains a dormant dividing line that inevitably reawakens whenever racial conscioussness rises to the fore and it makes sense to formulate policy on the basis of it. It’s certainly in the interests of any southern European who desires a racial future in N. America to support racialism, and there is good reason to believe that that support can be retained despite the requirement/necessity/desire to part ways with him; whether that takes the form of exclusive southern territory, or mixed southern and northern territory (the latter sure to be preferable to sizeable contingent, both northern and southern) is not, I would argue, a particularly pressing matter. Ranters like Reginald who absurdly appear to believe his racial interests require him (and his kind) to be included among nordics can be safely ignored.

  6. Silver says:

    The distinction is a valid ethnic and cultural difference. That was the point of Reginald sharing the genetic information, which has been supported by other sources. Jews are not Europeans. Jews refer to themselves as “Semites”, as in “Don’t be anti-Semetic, Silver!” and they mean themselves.

    But the dividing line is decidedly arbitrary, and decidedly at odds with what one observes visually. The “genetic information” perspective promotes a view of racialism that contends certain people are carriers of pathogens that is similarly at odds with people’s emotional experience of the racially visually alike and is one that people tend to find instinctively repulsive. It’s a view that I believe, to use the phrase for a third time, will most certainly be at odds with the reason the vast bulk of people will ever embrace racialism for: that life is easier and better around people more like oneself rather than less like oneself (both racially and culturally or culturally/historically), the exclusion of those one might otherwise be inclined to consider alike being a mere byproduct of the necessity of having to draw the line somewhere. It goes without saying that my perspective isn’t one shared by the majority of this blog’s readers, who are among the most highly motivated racialists, and for whom ‘real world factors’ seem to be an afterthought, but given that the preservation they desire would certainly result (ie even if it’s not proferred as the most important reason to racialize) it strikes me as more than a little curious that it so often seems to be dismissed out of hand.

  7. KickChimps says:

    Priceless. Liberalism is a mental disorder. Maybe when the AIDS kick in she will realize that her negroe pets are true animals.

  8. imperil says:

    Observations of an African Man’s Western Girlfriend
    http://anafricansqueen.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/an-africans-queen/

  9. Charlemagne says:

    Bernard,

    This is my opinion on what I envision for the idealized future of European and/or Nordish Americans, from the very architect of the ‘Nordishness’ concept himself: Mr. Richard McCulloch –

    The revision now basically includes all Gentile Europeans in the same country, instead of proposing separation from the more hard-core distinct Mediterranean types that make up much of the population of southern Europe. This makes my proposal consistent with the “official” TOQ definition of our racial “in-group” although at a racial cost to the northern European racial identity of the country. Still, it has reached the point where it now seems totally unrealistic, even quixotic, to try to separate the hard-core Mediterranean elements in the US population from other Europeans, as so many of them are now largely assimilated, and even more difficult to draw some line between assimilable and unassimilable elements in the Italian-American, Greek-American or Spanish-American populations. Of course, in Europe itself we still could and should encourage the preservation of the different racial groups in their own historic nations, even perhaps northern Italians as distinct from southern Italians, but in the European-American population it now seems that the political cost of promoting such an effort would exceed the racial benefit. …

    …Significantly, this creates a de facto multiracial country in my plan, consisting of a racially-regionally defined group of non-European Caucasians (including Jews with few exceptions) along with a diverse group of Europeans mated to non-Europeans and their mixed offspring, and those who have adopted non-European children, as well as those European family members who choose not to be separated from their race-mixing and racially-mixed relatives. But, for Europeans, inclusion in this multiracial state would require an actual act of producing non-European offspring, either naturally by intermixture or by adoption, either by oneself or a close family member, and not simply a general choice or preference for a multiracial state. Perhaps a little poetic justice here for the Jews, who have been the great promoters of multiracialism and diversity, the environment they have always sought to create as beneficial to them and their interests. …

    http://www.toqonline.com/2010/03/separate-or-die/#comment-6845

  10. Charlemagne says:

    I read everything you wrote. You weren’t that clear. I’m still not sure what exactly you mean when you say that you “absolutely prefer to see a White ethnostate verses [sic] a strictly ‘Nordish’ one” and whether or not that answers Captainchaos’s original question. If Nordish folk sought self-determination and sovereignty in our own ethnostate in North America, would you oppose its formation?

    OK Bernard, I will try to be as clear as humanly possible here for you:
    If anyone wants to form, or join into, a particular ethnostate, for any reason, that is their prerogative, and for that I would of course not be opposed.

    However, in regard to a Nordish ethnostate, it has always been agreed upon from McCulloch, and other racialist writers as well, that they wished to accept into such a Nordish state all assimilated White people of Mediterranean ancestry, from wherever that may have originated from (either Britain or ‘Barcelona’), as long as it was not considered ‘hard-core’, overly swarthy, Med.

    Like I also said before, a great deal of the British gene pool is of Mediterranean blood anyway (Atlanto-Med rather than ‘hard-core’ south Med), so, since many Americans are of British descent, a good deal of them, and a potential Nordish-American ethnostate would have appreciable amounts of Mediterranean genes its gene pool anyway. So I saw, as McCulloch did, assimilating a *few* more south Euros into this future state would not be a problem — since many have already assimilated generations ago anyway since eastern and southern European immigration was essentially ended in 1924 (a lot of people forget this).

    To reiterate: Nordish does not mean ‘Nordic’ — and most people, in America and much of northern Europe are Nordic-Mediterranean, and Nordic-Alpine hybrids, so a potential Nordish ethnostate on the North American continent absolutely will and must have to reflect those sober realities.

    Does the ‘prosecution rest’ now? ;}

  11. Bernard says:

    If anyone wants to form, or join into, a particular ethnostate, for any reason, that is their prerogative, and for that I would of course not be opposed.

    Charlemagne,

    This is the kind of straightforward answer I was looking for.

    But then you immediately qualify it with the following:

    However, in regard to a Nordish ethnostate, it has always been agreed upon from McCulloch, and other racialist writers as well, that they wished to accept into such a Nordish state all assimilated White people of Mediterranean ancestry, from wherever that may have originated from (either Britain or ‘Barcelona’), as long as it was not considered ‘hard-core’, overly swarthy, Med.

    You seem to be making an exception for those who want to form a Nordish ethnostate that contradicts your statement that you wouldn’t be opposed to anyone who “wants to form, or join into, a particular ethnostate, for any reason.”

    I highly respect McCulloch and his intellectual work. But you’re making an appeal to authority by bringing him up and a vague “agreement” as if he were some infallible pope or something. Our ethnostates may not be established until decades in the future after McCulloch has passed on. In that case the desires of the people forming the ethnostates should take precedence over his opinions and wishes.

    I don’t understand why you keep bringing up “Atlanto-Med” blood in the British gene pool. I think when we distinguish between Nordish and Mediterranean, we’re “discounting” somewhat any possible ancient “Atlanto-Med” admixture. The Vandals invaded North Africa, Sicily, and Southern Italy. The Vikings and Normans invaded and controlled Sicily and Southern Italy for a time. Some of their genes probably made it into the Med populations there. That doesn’t make them Nordish. There is some American Indian ancestry among some Whites in North America. That doesn’t mean a White ethnostate must include American Indians.

  12. Charlemagne says:

    I don’t understand why you keep bringing up “Atlanto-Med” blood in the British gene pool. I think when we distinguish between Nordish and Mediterranean, we’re “discounting” somewhat any possible ancient “Atlanto-Med” admixture.

    Bernard,

    Atlanto-Med blood in Britain is not ‘ancient’ — it is the indigenous blood of the Isles — and much of western Europe — before the arrival of the conquering continental Celts and Germanic peoples, all fantasies to the contrary.

    As I and others have said as well, most Britains, whatever their sub-racial background, are not ‘Anglo-Saxon’ either. The Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes and Vikings were continental Teuto-Germanic invaders of Britain, who always were a relative minority, who heavily and culturally ‘Anglicized’ the Celto-Roman, and the more indigenous Pictish natives. Anyone who knows British history understands that it was a centuries-long, ongoing struggle between the (largely Germanic) upper-classes, elites and aristocracy of southeastern England in their consolidation of the Kingdom, verses the common folk.

    The British class system bears evidence to these historic patterns to this day — as well as the sometimes brutal wars of conquest against Scotland, Wales and Ireland. ‘Braveheart’, anyone??

    As I mentioned a few comments back, the motivation for many to wish to overlook or discount these things, is the understandable desire for most people to wish be the descendants of the ‘conquerors’ — rather than the *conquered* — which more often than not is actually indeed the case.

    In reality, though, we are descended from both, as is virtually all nations and peoples on planet earth. So, nothing unusual there.

  13. Bernard says:

    Charlemagne,

    Your endless wordgames are getting to be exasperating. It’s like arguing with a Jew. Your arguments are of the exactly same type that were used to argue against the concept of races in general, and against the White race in particular.

    I don’t care how much you assert that there’s all this “Atlanto-Med” blood in the British peoples. Even so, that doesn’t negate the difference between Nordish and Med, and the common understanding of those terms.

  14. Reginald says:

    “Ranters like Reginald who absurdly appear to believe his racial interests require him (and his kind) to be included among nordics can be safely ignored.”

    I never said such a thing. If actual Nordics want to break off from the other Whites I’m not against that.

    The question is whether it’s Nordics breaking off from other Whites, or a significant number of Southern Europeans and Slavs being kicked out.

    Also it is a question of timing.

    Nordic-Whites should have the right to secede from a White Ethnostate, just as Muslim-Indians seceded from India.

    However just as the Muslim-Indians had the basic decency to wait until after British power in the Subcontinent was broken before moving to this goal, Nordic-Whites should wait until after the power of the American Government in North America is broken before moving to their Subgroup based Ethnostate goals.

    Anything less would be incredibly selfish, as it would put the Whites ineligible for entry into the Nordic or Nordish Ethnostate in incredible danger.

    Obviously the Government would prefer to attack the smaller group of Whites first, and would thus try to leverage their being more Non-Whites than Southern Europeans to effect a defeat and subjection.

    This subjection would be horrific for Southern European Whites, as they’d be a vastly outnumbered minority in a sea of Blacks, Mestizos, Asians, and Jews.

    Obviously Southern European Whites would have to be complete idiots to support such an evil plan as would most likely lead to that end.

  15. Reginald says:

    “But the dividing line is decidedly arbitrary, and decidedly at odds with what one observes visually.”

    Ashkenazi Jews sometimes look White because of Climate based selection.

    If being White was primarily a question of light skin, the Chinese would be biggest race of Whites in the World by far!

    “The “genetic information” perspective promotes a view of racialism that contends certain people are carriers of pathogens…”

    Genes are not pathogens.

    “…that is similarly at odds with people’s emotional experience of the racially visually alike and is one that people tend to find instinctively repulsive.”

    So your saying Ashkenazi Jews look too much like Whites for Whites to reject them?

  16. Reginald says:

    “I don’t care how much you assert that there’s all this ‘Atlanto-Med’ blood in the British peoples. Even so, that doesn’t negate the difference between Nordish and Med, and the common understanding of those terms.”

    There is clearly a lot of Non-Nordish blood in the British Islands.

    However it appears that this Non-Nordish blood had it’s origin in Iberia, and not in the Mediterranean in general.

    The Genetic Distance between Spain and Ireland is 0.0037, much closer than you’d expect given the complete lack of a way to get from one Country to the other on foot.

    However the Genetic Distance between the Irish and other Meds is larger.

    This squares with the widely accepted Historical Theory that the most ancient inhabitants of the British Isles were identical with the most ancient inhabitants of Iberia, but not identical with the most ancient inhabitants of other Med Countries.

  17. Matt Parrott says:

    What’s this quasi-Lamarckian stuff about climate selection? Can you explain why Sicily would select for swarthy Whites and the Basque Country selects for pasty Whites? It’s not obvious to me that climate drives selection for complexion.

  18. We now have a forum for all off topic discussion

  19. Pingback: Occidental Dissent » Blog Archive » Elisabeth Mandala’s Short Career as Sojourner Truth

  20. Pingback: White woman of moderate intelligence conned into getting herself raped by Haitian man « Ice People

  21. Pingback: ENGLISH Inglourious Basterds causes hate crime; Feds raid Amish for crime of raw milk

  22. Pingback: My thoughts on Stormfront - Page 5 - Stormfront

  23. Pingback: Anonymous

  24. Pingback: Vijesti - Page 311 - Stormfront

  25. Pingback: Are young white women intentionally dating non-white men? - Page 8 - Stormfront

  26. Pingback: Antis If you would be harmed by nonwhites would you reject your perverted ideology? - Stormfront

  27. Pingback: 1.3 Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad? | Radish

  28. Pingback: ITALY: "Anti-Racist" Social Worker Raped by African Illegal Immigrant at "Anti Racist" Festival - Page 8 - Stormfront

  29. Pingback: What Real Rape Culture Looks Like

  30. Pingback: Liberal Activist Raped By Black Man In Haiti, Blames White Men | Our Tyrannical Government

  31. Pingback: Uncle Sams Misguided Children – Liberal Activist Raped by a Black Man Blames White Men

  32. Pingback: ENGLISH Inglourious Basterds causes hate crime; Feds raid Amish for crime of raw milk - John de Nugent