Steve Sailor's conservative hypocrisy: A critic of liberals who persecute conservatives, while he covertly endorses NYT persecution of white Africans

According to Wikipedia: “Steven Ernest Sailer is an American journalist and movie critic for The American Conservative, a blogger, a VDARE.com columnist, and a former correspondent for UPI. He writes about race relations, gender issues, politics, immigration, IQ, genetics, movies, and sports.”

I am neither a conventional liberal or conservative. I am a truthseeker: many of my working hypotheses on social, political, ecological and many other issues include ideas from the vast spectrum of ideologies, whether liberal, conservative, nationalist, green, libertarian, etc. I evaluate a principle based upon the evidence that supports it, and that is it. I do not practice political correct ideological arse-kissing, simply so that I can be allowed into some ideological group, and now feel happy, cause I can call myself a 'blah blah-ist'. I have plenty of time for a sincere liberal, conservative, black, green, pink. I fucking hate hypocrits, who demand from others, that which they do not practice themselves.

My knowledge of Steve Sailor is that he is an avid critic of liberal hypocrisy. I have no problem with hypocrisy being critized and exposed, whether it is black, white, liberal or conservative.

One of the principles I love about what conservatism allegedly stands for (at least it does for some people, but clearly not for Mr. Sailor) is that an individual or idea is evaluated upon its merit. Not its colour, not its political correctness, not the size of its PR account, ITS MERIT. That means that if you are a sincere conservative who practices this principle of evaluation of any individual, based on their merit (the quality of their character or the factual evidence for the principle), then you do not care one iota for whether Tom Thumb or Galileo has zero followers to adhere to their principle or idea; because you evaluate the principle and idea on its merit.

In my opinion, those whom I consider CREDIBLE in thier exposure of hypocrisy; are those who practice what they preach. Who hold themselves to the same standards that they demand of those whom they criticise and expose.

For if you are not capable of holding yourself to a particular standard of conduct; but demand that others live up to that particular standard of conduct; and if they don't you call them a hypocrit; what does that make you, if you don't even live upto this standard you demand of others?

A few days ago, Mr. Sailor posted an article to his blog, which was also posted to VDare, criticising the New York Times for censoring information or arguments related to surplus populations.

The article Notice Anything Missing was about a New York Times OpEd, by Herbert J. Gans: The Superfluous Worker. It deals with surplus workers, and examines the reasons for why the economy is incapable of providing enough work for the surplus workers.

Mr. Sailor criticises the article for avoiding including immigration as one of the reasons for why America has surplus workers. A valid criticism of censorship by the New York Times of politically incorrect information and evidence, regarding the political controversial issue of immigraiton, it would prefer not to discuss in its article.

I posted a comment to Mr. Sailor's article, detailing the information about the complaint and charges filed against the New York Times, for fraud, in regarding its censorship of charges filed against it at the ICC for censoring South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Fraud (which deals extensively about how and why the TRC deliberatley avoided confronting the surplus population problem in its TRC enquiry, to examine how this surplus population was manufactured and politically manipulated to foster political violence):

Fraud & Corruption Charges filed against New York Times: Arthur Brisbane & Celia Dugger; for Conspiracy of Censorship of SA’s TRC Fraud at ICC:

Excerpt: Radical Honesty Charges at ICC against, among others New York Times:

The Complainants Requested the ICC: Prosecutor’s Office to:

Initiate an investigation into the allegations that the respondents are to be held criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of TRC FRAUD, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures.

Complainants allege the Defendants cover up and censorship of the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movements (i) Frantz Fanon/Black Consciousness (‘liberation by violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers’) (ii) Black Liberation Theology (‘violent elimination of ‘whiteness’); and (iii) Houari Boumediene/Black Power Breeding War (“The wombs of our women will give us victory”)[1] inspired TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION FRAUD (“TRC FRAUD”) perpetrated against citizens of South Africa, and predominantly against white Afrikaner/Boer/Settlers; is committed in the context of endorsing the ANC’s institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by Africans over other racial groups, particularly Boer/Afrikaners and committed with the intention of maintaining the African ANC regime.

All aforementioned newspaper publications whom charges have been filed against continue to refuse their duty to report this information in the public interest, by censoring this information from South African and International citizens.

Mr. Sailor proceeded to CENSOR the comment; exactly like the New York Times censored the argument about immigration as a contribution to America's surplus employment problem.

Mr. Sailor does not like the New York Times censorship about issues contributing to the surplus population problem, but is quite happy to censor such issues from comments on his blog.

Note to Mr. Sailor, posted as comment to: Notice anything missing:

Please take note of the following article: Steve Sailor's conservative hypocrisy: A critic of liberals who persecute conservatives, while he covertly endorses NYT persecution of white Africans.

As a blogger who practices honourable constructive criticism; you are provided the opportunity of response, and your response shall be published in full; should you wish to discuss the allegations against yourself.

27 November 2011 17:20 (GMT+2)