I’ve found the most ludicrous article that’s ever been published on this ridiculous thing we call the Internet: https://medusamagazine.com/beyond-pro-choice-the-solution-to-white-supremacy-is-white-abortion. It’s short but loaded, and as I was reading it, I was sure that it was satirical — but it’s not.

I will ignore the blatantly racist and violent tone of the article for now and instead address some of the loaded statements contained within the article:

1. “Whites are embedded from birth with the sense of common white identity, and this identity conditions them to replicate the white family unit, thus furthering the cycle of white supremacy in America.”
   1. I don’t know about y’all, but I don’t know what the author is talking about when she says “common white identity.” I feel the same amount of connection to a Caucasian stranger as I do to an alien: none.
   2. I will give credence to the concept of racial loyalty, but loyalty is not the same as identity. (E.g.: I’m loyal to my friends, but I do not identify as them or with them. We are each our own person.) In addition, racial loyalty is not just a Caucasian phenomenon. If it were, all-black juries would be allowed to hear a case involving a black defendant… but such a situation is avoided whenever possible because racial loyalty can be seen amongst people of all races.
   3. How does “replicating the family unit” further the “cycle of white supremacy?” I can’t wrap my head around that… and not even because the author uses words that imply that white people are practically robots who are programmed to reproduce upon first sight of a fellow white person. She makes this grandiose statement, but offers no facts to substantiate her claim. She even ignores the fact that white births are outnumbered by minority births… but that’s probably because that fact is in direct contrast to her claims.
2. “Second, the notion of ‘choice’ in abortion is inherently white supremacist and ableist. Women of color do not often have the same privilege to choose termination as do white women.”
   1. These statements can be invalidated with the well-known fact that black children are aborted three times more often as white children , which means that women of color, technically speaking, have greater opportunities than white women when it comes to the “privilege to choose termination.” This is because the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, specifically targeted African Americans, who she considered inferior beings, and established her so-called clinics in neighborhoods heavily populated by minorities. As a result, women of color have a far easier time than white women when it comes to getting to a Planned Parenthood clinic.
3. “White women should be encouraged to abort their white children, and to use their freed-up time and resources to assist women of color who have no other choice but to raise their children.”
   1. The more times I read this article, the more convinced I become that the author stole her ideas straight out of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. If I even need to describe what’s wrong with encouraging someone to not have/kill their children simply because of the race of said children, then it is clear that this article is falling on deaf ears.
4. “[W]omen of color are forced to stand alone in their plight to raise the next generation of Americans.”
   1. I don’t think that the author realizes that there is a difference between “the next generation of Americans” and “the next generation of black Americans.” The United States is a diverse land, home to people of many different ethnic, national, and religious backgrounds, and by advocating for the gradual eradication of one, you are decreasing the amount of diversity you so often claim to love.

We all know that the left is pro-choice, and that a lot of democrats are so supportive of abortion they are willing to renounce fellow democrats who come out as pro-life. (I’ve seen this happen. A liberal member of the pro-life club I run at school was forced to choose between College Democrats and Spiders for Life because being a member of both organizations was causing too much strife within our school’s democratic community, and in the end she sided with the group that had been willing to tell her to get lost because she had a dissenting opinion on one subject.) While I don’t agree with their opinions or their so-called logic, I accept it… or I did. If the view expressed in the cited article is shared by a substantial number of democrats, then I am afraid that their agenda has taken radicalism to a whole new level. After all, they are literally calling for the eradication of an entire race.

I couldn’t decide whether or not I should cite the article I’m responding to because I was afraid that it would just draw more attention to it. The article should wither away and die, like the author wants the white race to do… but maybe, just maybe, people will read the cited article and realize just how far off the deep end liberals have gone. I mean, for as much as liberals want to criminalize hate speech, they sure spew a lot of it — but that’s their right, as per the First Amendment. Nevertheless, I urge you all to stay vigilant. A civil war is on the horizon… but whatever you do, remember that we are in the right — in more ways than one.