Respect Is Not A Civil Right

Political correctness demands respect for historically oppressed categories of people. But respect is not a civil right. It is an attitude of approval and admiration. No one can claim a right to the emotional or intellectual approval of anyone else. Indeed, to mandate such respect violates freedom of conscience because human beings should be free to assess what is right or wrong, admirable or detestable for themselves. And, then, to act peacefully according to their own assessments.

see at Vulture of Critique

If anyone (black, white or whatever) demands respect based upon some imaginary debt owed by the predominant race, instilled and perpetuated by a self-imposed supremacist “race” called “Jews” (for they even admit they are not “white”), and continued no matter what strides race relations have made over the decades, they can just kiss my ass.

I will give respect where respect is due.

Follow @BuelahMan


Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or

One thought on “Respect Is Not A Civil Right

  1. Respect is not an INDIVIDUAL right. There is no such thing as a ‘civil’ right, or the right of the ‘civilized.’ It’s just a fancy name for group oppression of the smallest minority, the individual human being, by the ‘civil’ barbarians. The fact that the individual relies on the group and the group relies on the creativity of the individual IS civilization itself. Might-makes-right-because-rights-make-the-most-might and for no other friggin’ reason. A group did not invent the machine gun or the airplane, creative individuals left alone to be creative did. Then they SYNERGIZED their individual creativities to produce UNHEARD OF might and power. The power to transcend the law-of-the-jungle THROUGH the law-of-the-jungle itself.

    ” Man’s greatness is so obvious that it can even be deduced from his wretchedness, for what is nature in animals is wretchedness in man, thus recognizing that, if his nature is today like that of the animals, he must have fallen from some better state which was once his own. ” — Blaise Pascal (1623-1662): (Pensées, Penguin, p. 59, #117, tr. Krailsheimer)

    Civilization is a win-win dialectic between groups of individuals unequal in all things except for their basic humanity. If you draw the line of humanity between one race and another, then you are by-definition considering your group superior or somehow more ‘human’ than that other race or group excluded. But racism is a free choice, sexism is a free choice, fatism (anti-fat people) is a free choice, retardism (anti-retarded people) is a free choice of free association and free choices based on free thinking are REQUIRED and MANDATORY in all win-win civilizations. They are not coercion or initiated force although they might be considered irrational choices or ‘vices’ according to some points of view. That’s alright because VICES ARE NOT CRIMES. Never have been and never friggin’ will be.

    Lysander Spooner
    Vices Are Not Crimes
    A Vindication Of Moral Liberty

    Real Libertarianism starts where all group ‘rights’ end, starting with its most obvious incranation, this nonsense of ‘civil’ rights, implying the absolute inverted BS that ‘civility’ cannot exist through the protection of the smallest minority, when it was yet another form of coercion or initiated group-rights against the individual, that of enforced segregation, that opened that can-of-worms in the first place. If individual rights protect ‘civility’ just fine as long as they follow Jefferson’s maxim. On the shoulders of giants, indeed. Feck the bedgrudgers, as Delcroix would say.

    “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’, because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” “No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” — Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816

    “Society is composed of men, and every man is a FREE agent. Since man is free, he can choose; since he can choose, he can err; since he can err, he can suffer. I go further: He must err and he must suffer; for his starting point is ignorance, and in his ignorance he sees before him an infinite number of unknown roads, all of which save one lead to error.” — Frederic Bastiat

    “The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” — Alvin Toffler

    So, what more do people need to get off their asses and go back to first principles? It’s not all that complex. Most of the work has already been done or we wouldn’t even have the civilization that the parasite feeds on today, it’s only been DELIBERATELY BEEN MADE obscure and marginalized and co-opted by a million-&-one vague, fraudulent and utterly inferior concepts, such as this crap about ‘civil’ rights, because that’s how parasitism WEDGES itself into a basically fair system, by masquerading its win-lose as a ‘more perfect’ form of ‘win-win’ which will assuage the envy of those who were fairly outcompeted and outproduced by their betters.


You Got Something To Say? Please keep your maw respectful and gab on topic.

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s