“Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one.” ― George Orwell, 1984
Iconoclasm is the social belief in the importance of the destruction of images or monuments for religious or political reasons.
People who engage in or support iconoclasm are called iconoclasts.
Iconoclasm - Wikipedia
The fall of Communism in 1989-1991 was also followed by the destruction or removal of statues of Vladimir
Lenin and other Communist leaders in the former
Soviet Union and in other Eastern
Bloc countries. Particularly well-known was the destruction of "Iron
Felix", the statue of Felix
Dzerzhinsky outside the KGB's
headquarters. Another statue of Dzerzhinsky was destroyed in a Warsaw square
that was named after him during communist
rule, but which is now called Bank
Square.
Now the USA experience another epidemic of similar type.
During the George Floyd protests of 2020, protesters pulled down several statues which they considered symbols of the
Confederacy, slavery, segregation, or racism, including the statue of Williams Carter Wickham in Richmond, Virginia, and the
statue of Edward Colston in Bristol in England.[113][114] And further political strife in the wake of the George Floyd protests
has resulted in the removal of the John Breckenridge Castleman monument in Louisville, Kentucky; plaques in Jacksonville's
Hemming Park, renamed in 1899 in honor of Civil War veteran Charles C. Hemming, which were in remembrance of deceased Confederate
soldiers; the monumental obelisk of the Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument and a statue of Charles Linn in Linn Park,
Birmingham, Alabama; a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee in Montgomery, Alabama; and, in Alexandria, Virginia, the
Appomattox statue, leaving the monument's base empty yet intact.[115] Furthermore, multiple statues have been vandalized,
including a George Washington and Thomas Jefferson statue, both founding fathers of the United States, as well as statues of
Winston Churchill in London, England, a statue of Pim Fortuyn, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, a statue of Piet Hein, Rotterdam, the
Netherlands, and a statue of Christopher Columbus in Boston, MA which was beheaded.[116][117][118][119] Not only statues were
affected, but also museums such as the Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam, the Netherlands that was smeared with paint and street names in
Tilburg were crossed out as well.[120][121]
Funny thing about "Black Lives Matter till November 2020" color revolution is that around 80% of protesters are white students
(only one in six is black) brainwashed by identity politics. It looks more and more like a reincarnation of Mao's cultural revolution
with the new Red Guards in charge. "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of
the beginning."
At some point such a movement typically becomes difficult to control (as in French quote by Jerome de Angers "Appetite comes as soon
as you start eating the meal") and bites the hand that feeds it. Which in our case means Neoliberal Democrats in November.
Mao solved this problem by promptly exiling all hongweibing to the countryside, when they performed their role of weakening
opposition to his cult of personality and became dangerous.
There were many similar "erasing the past" movements in in Germany (with book burning), the USSR (with iconoclasm and churches burning,
as well as statues toppling) , communist China (Mao cultural revolution which turned into a huge tragedy), and several xUSSR and Eastern
European countries after conversion from the discredited Soviet version of state capitalism to neoliberalism in 1990th (mostly communist
past and WWII monuments toppling).
Part of those "topplings" are non-objectionable (many communist regime statues were plain ugly), part led to the destruction of a
valuable pieces of art. Please note the most of them were less then 100 years old. When older statues are toppled, the question about
sanity and morality usually arise. Idiotic excesses plays quite an opposite effect painting protestors as vandals.
Moreover "woke" movement might well grossly overplaying the racist card and that might backfire like was the case with McCarthyism
, which lasted five years or so and then became the dirty word. They are really lucky that Trump proved to be such a despicable coward.
The accusation of being racist now sounds exactly like accusation of being a "bourgeois element" under Stalinism. It invites repressions,
especially in academia.
While the whole thing is more like farce than tragedy , if we use Marx famous quote (Black lives matter till November elections only),
it is still pretty scary.
Another witch hunt, an increasingly strident and intolerant political culture of racial 'wokeness' as a smoke screen on excesses
of financialization, outsourcing/offshoring and deregulation.
Some people now discuss whether this is a color revolution (let's say stage three of Purple revolution against Trump with Russiagate
and Ukrainegate as two previous stages), or not.
...Do not bother with racism or anti-racism. It is a faux-agenda, like gay or homophobe, like fem or trans, like toilet gendering.
Real people aren’t interested in this sort of nonsense. Blacks are not interested in anti-racism, either. It is mainly White Wokes
that are, and they will follow whatever the newspaper tells them to follow.
Seattle has very few blacks but many Wokes, that’s why it is the centre of the ‘anti-racist’ campaign. Even if Trump went around
kissing the sneakers of black youngsters, he wouldn’t change anything. Blacks are not hostile to him, not at all, but people who
speak for them, the Dem Wokes, definitely are.
...President Trump does not send troops to meet the rioters, he does not arrest the mayors of the cities who told him to buzz
off, he does not depose the generals who apologize for taking photos with him, and he does not take action against the corporations
that support the rioters.
The popular satirist C. J. Hopkins argued in his column in the Unz Review that this is smart. Trump refused to play the role of
Hitler, and didn’t give his opponents any reason to remove him and seize power.
Yea, he won’t make a convincing Hitler. But he will do an excellent Yanukovych, the Ukrainian president who was afraid to act
against the colour revolution instigated by the State Department lady, Mrs Nuland, and in the end was forced to flee to the Russian
city of Rostov.
Opponents of Trump do not pull any punches. Read their headlines.
The Seattle mayor told President Donald Trump to “go back to your bunker”.
Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser: Trump is living in my backyard.
Armed Group Protects Confederate Statue in Kentucky: Arrest Them for Insurrection and Sedition.
Trump Exposes 1100 Graduating West Point Cadets to Possible Coronavirus Infection So He Can “Dominate” the Weekend Media.
This Is Deadly’: Trump Scraps Protections for Transgender Patients and Those Seeking Abortions.
But Trump is folding and retreating. They told him – how dare you to stage a rally on June 19? After all, this is a holiday for
Black Americans, the day when Lincoln freed the last slaves. On such a holy day, it is impudent of Trump to show his face in public.
And Trump retreated, shifted the rally to the June 20, although there were ostensibly thousands of requests for the rally.
I’m not a conservative, no way; I am not a supporter of the current regime. I think that a revolution – even the fake one, organized
by Soros out of the GayLib crowd, lightly sprinkled with Africans for colour – will do some good for America and the world.
The American troops are already leaving Germany after only 75 years of occupation. There are more than 100 major bases overseas
that can be evacuated if the revolution persists. Fine and dandy.
... ... ...
Our colleague Andre VItchek suggested we should not describe the process going on in the US, as a ‘colour revolution’. Firstly,
the protesters shouldn’t be discouraged, let alone ridiculed. Secondly, all these revolutions are different, he says. These are weak
arguments.
First, I endeavour to understand and explain events, and I leave encouragement to others. Second, colour revolutions are revolutions
made for the benefit of oligarchy. They remove the ruler who is too strong-willed or social-minded for the billionaires’ liking.
And they utilise legitimate grievances of the people. They ride on the people like a rider rides a horse.
It means that a colour revolution can shift and turn into the real thing, like a horse can throw down the rider and gallop away,
but this is not the usual turn of events.
The Mask Revolution in the US has too strong a support from corporations to be anything else but a colour revolution. “Black Lives
Matter Receives $100 Million from Foundations, in addition to more than $33 million in grants to the Black Lives Matter movement
from George Soros through his Open Society Foundations”, says Policemag (the article was removed but can be accessed via archives.com.)
It can’t be decoupled from the Covid pandemic, or rather, from the lockdowns. These unusual means of disease control are deadly
for small businesses and for free-lancers. Big corporations survive and even grow fat; small ones die. Control over the population
increases. Free-lancers are forced to join the regular labour force and work for a large corporation; or die. The actors of the revolution
will be destroyed by the success of their enterprise. We shall know the revolution became a real one, when the revolutionaries fight
the corporations. Likewise, the enemies of the colour revolution should not fight Blacks and minorities; they should fight the corporations
that use the Blacks as their cannon fodder.
This is clearly "divide and conquer" style event as it alienates a large part of population about symbols that in most cases
clearly "fell into obscurity" and historical memory about them is fuzzy for probably 90% of population.
Identity politics is tolerated and even promoted because it does not make any substantive changes. It does not affect economic
relations, much less take money out of the financial oligarchy pockets.
Actually nationalists are noted fighters with icons of the past. They want their own version of history and can't accept any alternatives.
That confirm the saying that that history is the future overturned into the past.
Pulling statues down or calling for the removal of "problematic" portraits isn't motivated by a desire to forget the past, Michel
Foucault argued. It is a way of returning to it and reigniting its conflicts
. Blake Smith in The Washington Examiner : "What we are in the habit of calling 'identity politics,' and particularly political
movements based on (somewhat contradictory) appeals to racial solidarity and anti-racism, depend on a 'certain way of making historical
knowledge work within political struggle.' So argued Foucault in Society Must Be Defended , a 1976 book based on a lecture
series about 'political historicism.'
Many on the American Right hold Foucault, along with his French postmodernist contemporaries, partly responsible for the emergence
of identity politics. It would be more accurate to say that Foucault was one of the first, and sharpest, analysts of the way identity-based
political movements appeal to history and ignite what he called 'race war.' . . .
Hiding their crimes with myths, the oppressors have made the oppressed forget who they are and what they have suffered. But the
signs of that historical violence are all around us -- in statues, place names, and everyday language. Purging the culture of these
signs is not so much an ethical demand that the past conform to present values as it is a way of plunging the present back into past
conflicts, which the oppressed now stand a chance of winning."
Peter Hitchens makes a similar point in a short piece on iconoclasm in England
in First Things : "It is the Rhodes statue that is controversial. But this is no longer really about Rhodes. In the last few
days it has been under police guard. Not long ago a large demonstration, wholly ignoring supposed rules about avoiding viral infection,
gathered beneath it while shouting about decolonization, as if Britain still had an empire. Perhaps they wish it was so. People need
enemies, and dismantled empires are nothing like as good for this purpose as living, breathing ones . . .
And all over Britain, statues of forgotten politicians, merchants, generals, and admirals (and now the blue plaques that commemorate
them) are being investigated, to see if they in some way celebrate a wicked past. Even the looming sculpture of Winston Churchill
in Parliament Square has been first scrawled on by protestors (who also defaced a nearby monument to Abraham Lincoln) and then hidden
in a box by Greater London's feeble authorities.
This is a good indication of the state of modern Britain, teetering on the edge of a cultural revolution so severe that its greatest
modern figure has lost his power as a unifying force and memory."
It seems that the wokesters who claim that they are "anti-racists" still can't tolerate the
memory of a man who defeated history's most murderous racist. The Thursday defacing of a statue
in Canada is the latest effort to cancel Hitler's implacable foe.
A Downtown statue of Sir Winston Churchill has been vandalized after someone dumped red paint
all across the replica of the former British prime minister...
Churchill, who served as prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955, is
seen as a national hero for his leadership during the Second World War but held many views
that would be deemed racist.
Perhaps the 20th century's greatest adversary of communist and fascist dictatorships,
Churchill has of course been found wanting by today's dictators of political fashion. This
week's vandalism follows several such instances over the last year involving a U.K. statue of
Churchill in London's Parliament Square. In Canada, Mr. Labine reports:
Elisebeth Checkel, the president of the Sir Winston Churchill Society of Edmonton, said this
is the first instance of the statue being vandalized that she's heard of and was disappointed
to see it happen.
She said Churchill has a complicated legacy and believes it is important to look at him in a
balanced way.
"If we look at any historical figure, we will find the same thing," Checkel said. "If we look
at almost any person from the 1880s, we would find their views were if not repugnant to us
nowadays, we would find they were disagreeable for sure. If you look at Churchill's later
actions and life as he grew, as we all hope to do, his views did change. The balance should
be celebrated because without Churchill we would not even have the right to protest in this
country."
Licia Corbella
writes in the Calgary Herald that this week's vandalism of the statue is "another act of
woke totalitarianism." She adds:
Mark Milke, president of the Sir Winston Churchill Society of Calgary, says it's chilling to
contemplate what the world would be like now had Churchill not been there.
"Imagine if Churchill hadn't been there and the United Kingdom either did a peace treaty with
Hitler or fell during an invasion," said Milke...
"Nazi Germany would have controlled much of Europe... with the Soviet Union controlling the
other half and Imperial Japan raping Asia. Canada and the U.S. would have been pretty much
alone in the world..."
"Churchill is not a Civil War general from the South fighting to protect slavery. He's not
Joseph Stalin or Chairman Mao or Adolf Hitler," continued Milke.
No he's not. In fact Churchill was a stalwart opponent of the ideologies promoted by all
three of the 20th century's most infamous mass murderers. "For the historically illiterate who
like to throw paint on statues," Ms. Corbella notes the bloody legacy of Churchill's enemies
and adds:
What never seems to get mentioned is these statues are works of art. This destruction is not
unlike the Taliban destroying the Buddhas of Bamiyan in 2001. These woke folk are
Talibanesque.
As for Churchill, Ms. Corbella asks: "If we allow his legacy to be torn down, whose, pray
tell, can stand?"
Fortunately Ms. Corbella is not standing alone. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney tweets :
People should continue to debate Churchill's complex legacy & record, but vandalizing
public property like this is shameful.
No member of the greatest generation can meet the standards of contemporary wokeness. But we
should still honour those who secured our peace and freedom.
Canadian Parliament member Pierre Poilievre adds :
Don't schools teach history anymore?
Now the woke warriors attack the statue of Winston Churchill--the greatest anti-fascist of
all time. He beat Hitler and Mussolini for crying out loud.
Do these vandals wish he had lost?
Coincidentally it was on this day 81 years ago when Churchill addressed the British House of
Commons after the German army had overrun France. Said
Churchill:
I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival
of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of
our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be
turned on us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If
we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward
into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United
States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new
Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.
Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British
Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was their
finest hour."
If wokesterism could last for a thousand years, would it ever result in a great
civilization?
he fallen Christopher Columbus statue outside the Minnesota State Capitol after a group led
by American Indian Movement members tore it down in St. Paul, Minnesota, on June 10, 2020.
(By Tony
Webster/Flickr)
In the general chaos of the summer of 2020, it was a typical moment. At the Minnesota State
Capitol in St. Paul, a band of activists -- primarily from indigenous-rights groups -- had
slung ropes around the neck of a statue of Christopher Columbus and pulled it down by
force.
The moment meant different things to different people. For the woke left, it was another
culture war victory in the age of 1619 and BLM -- a small and long-delayed comeuppance for the
colonial oppressors. For the right, it was the latest advance in the onslaught of the cultural
arsonists -- as cities were burning and statues falling down, it seemed that little would
survive the spontaneous rage inspired by the death of George Floyd in that same city just two
weeks before.
But it was hardly spontaneous, and it had little (if anything) to do with the death of Mr.
Floyd. The destruction of the Columbus statue on the Capitol grounds -- installed by Italian
immigrants in 1931 as a pushback against discrimination -- had long been an explicit goal of
the region's American Indian activists. The eruption of riots in the early summer simply
provided an excuse. As destruction reigned, Twin Cities native activists decided to join in,
taking the opportunity to follow through on something they had wanted to do for decades.
It's actually fairly representative of what happened in major cities across the country this
summer: local activists had an axe to grind, and the superimposition of a national narrative
gave them all the cover they could ever need. (Any outburst of disorder that happens to have
occurred after late May is qualified in the media as a "protest following the death of
George Floyd" -- a carefully crafted non-descriptor.) It's representative, too, of the
interplay among the unholy trinity of the modern activist left: grassroots radicals, big-money
donors, and the big money itself -- concentrated in funds where the donor foundations invest
their dollars.
The St. Paul statue-toppling was organized by a man named Mike Forcia, a member of the Bad
River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians. Forcia is also the chairman of the
Twin Cities branch of the American Indian Movement (AIM), and of AIM Patrol.
AIM -- the most prominent network of indigenous activists in the country -- is commonly
billed as a grassroots organization. In some ways this is true. AIM was founded in Minneapolis
more than half a century ago, as the Indian Relocation Act of 1956 and other federal policies
geared toward assimilation created sizable urban communities of Indians drawn away from
reservations. Over the years, much of AIM's public profile has been shaped by scattered bands
of activists engaging in highly visible stunts, such as the occupation of Alcatraz from 1969 to
1971.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.426.0_en.html#goog_1649891056 00:00 / 01:00
Loading Ad
Even today, the national network remains fairly decentralized -- sometimes ostentatiously
so. After Forcia's arrest, AIM's national president Frank Paro "was adamant that the rally was
not sanctioned by A.I.M. or associated with the organization," according to court documents
. Paro even went so far as to assert "that Mr. Forcia is not affiliated with the National AIM
organization" -- an interesting claim, given Forcia's identification as chairman of AIM of the
Twin Cities.
It's certainly possible, though -- AIM's decentralization leaves a door open for false
claimants, and even the recognized national organization underwent a schism in 1993. Whether or
not Forcia is associated with Paro's national AIM organization -- and regardless of who has the
strongest claim to the trigram -- it is certain that he is extensively connected in the
activist movement of the Twin Cities. The Facebook page he runs for the region under the AIM
banner has over 12,000 followers. As of 2010 he was vice chair of the Minneapolis American
Indian Center, one of the city's most important hubs of native activity (political and
otherwise). He revived and sustains AIM Patrol -- a sort of neighborhood watch on steroids,
founded to limit police presence in the urban Indian community -- which had been dormant for
decades. And at the very least, he commanded enough influence in the community to organize and
execute a protest which drew no small crowd and successfully destroyed a public monument that
had been standing for nearly a century. Mike Forcia is no mere unlovable rogue; he is a key
player in a network that remains as lively and robust as it was when Minnesota's first Indian
radicals began to organize three generations past.
But it would be a mistake to think that the Twin Cities' indigenous activism remains
"grassroots" in any meaningful sense. In fact, the cause is supported by some of the region's
biggest philanthropic organizations, which in turn support themselves by extensive activities
in finance capitalism.
The most notable of these is the Bush Foundation, founded in 1953 by Archibald Bush, a
childless executive at 3M. At his death in 1966, Archibald Bush left his fortune to be put
toward good works, with no political caveats. Over the intervening decades, the Bush Foundation
has shifted ever leftward in tandem with the philanthropic establishment at large; under
current president Jennifer Ford Reedy, the foundation has gone fully woke .
Institutional connections have been made with the flagship establishments of far-left big
money, such as Borealis Philanthropy and the mother
of all wokeries, the Tides Foundation. But the Bush Foundation is
especially known for its contributions to indigenous causes -- totaling just under $100 million
from 1982-2019, with most of that total concentrated in the last few years as the foundation
amped up its
focus on the cause. This includes over $1 million to the
Minneapolis American Indian Center, where Mike Forcia was vice chair.
Another of Bush's biggest beneficiaries is the Minneapolis Foundation, a sizable
organization whose scope is limited to the local community, and the recipient of over 40 Bush
Foundation grants. Interestingly, the Minneapolis Foundation's Director of Impact Strategy,
Economic Vitality -- as well as director of grant-making and special projects, according to her
LinkedIn -- is a woman by the name of Jo-Anne Stately who is active in indigenous affairs
herself, including a six-year stint as vice president of development at the Indian Land Tenure
Foundation. (The ILTF is another recipient of over $1 million
in Bush Foundation funds.) In 2013, the Bush Foundation provided a grant of $100,000 to the
Minneapolis Foundation to support the Northside Funders Group, a third impact investment
organization where Stately happens to serve as co-chair. (Whether Ms. Stately is any relation
either to the late Elaine Stately, co-founder of AIM and namesake of its Peacemaker Center in
Minneapolis, or Angel Stately,
associate of Mike Forcia and prominent witness
to the death of George Floyd, remains unclear.) What is clear is that the indigenous
activist network of the Twin Cities (and likely elsewhere) has moved far beyond the ragtag band
of urban Indian change-makers in the first decades after relocation.
Of course, like big philanthropy in general, these organizations aren't drawing their funds
from static coffers. Archibald Bush left the foundation endowed with just about $300 million, a
number dwarfed by current assets of more than three times as much. The Bush Foundation, and the
Minneapolis Foundation, and Tides and countless others, all rely on investment to sustain and
grow their resources. The Bush Foundation's 990 disclosures
show just how extensive that reliance is, including substantial investments in Sequoia, one
of the nation's leading venture capital firms. Such relationships are sure to raise questions
about the dependence not just of progressive groups on capital, but of capital on progressive
groups. How long could firms like Sequoia survive without groups like the Bush Foundation
underwriting them? That's a question that must be asked, and the exact same question should be
directed at the radical groups that this relationship enables, like those who took down
Columbus in St. Paul.
The lesson here is not that there's some massive, shady conspiracy behind the people who
destroy our cities. It's that no conspiracy is necessary. All that's required is a seemingly
innocent, and entirely unguided, process. Money falls into the wrong hands: the hands of the
woke, or even the merely progressive. Sustained by the kind of mega-scale investment that now
defines our economy, that money allows so-called community organizations to function without
any real dependence on the community, and thus without accountability to it. The connection to
such national networks also seems to muddy the mission of such organizations, folding them into
a broad and ever accelerating progressive agenda.
And when the cultural green light goes live -- this time George Floyd flipped the switch --
the combined power of big money
"... Seeking to impose on others the conformity it enforces in its ranks, articulate only in a boilerplate of ritualized cant, today's lumpen intelligentsia consists of persons for whom a little learning is delightful. They consider themselves educated because they are credentialed, stamped with the approval of institutions of higher education that gave them three things: a smattering of historical information just sufficient to make the past seem depraved; a vocabulary of indignation about the failure of all previous historic actors, from Washington to Lincoln to Churchill , to match the virtues of the lumpen intelligentsia; and the belief that America's grossest injustice is the insufficient obeisance accorded to this intelligentsia. ..."
"... Today's cancel culture -- erasing history, ending careers -- is inflicted by people experiencing an orgy of positive feelings about themselves as they negate others. This culture is a steamy sauna of self-congratulation: "I, an adjunct professor of gender studies, am superior to U.S. Grant, so there." Grant promptly freed the slave he received from his father-in-law, and went on to pulverize the slavocracy. Nevertheless . . . ..."
"... Today's gruesome irony: A significant portion of the intelligentsia that is churned out by higher education does not acknowledge exacting standards of inquiry that could tug them toward tentativeness and constructive dissatisfaction with themselves. Rather, they come from campuses, cloaked in complacency. Instead of elevating, their education produces only expensively schooled versions of what José Ortega y Gasset called the "mass man." ..."
"... A barbarian is someone whose ideas are "nothing more than appetites in words," someone exercising "the right not to be reasonable," who "does not want to give reasons" but simply "to impose his opinions." ..."
"... The barbarians are not at America's gate. There is no gate. ..."
A nation's gravest problems are those it cannot discuss because it dare not state them. This
nation's principal problem, which makes other serious problems intractable, is that much of
today's intelligentsia is not intelligent.
One serious problem is that the political class is terrified of its constituents -- their
infantile refusal to will the means (revenue) for the ends (government benefits) they demand.
Another serious problem is family
disintegration -- e.g., 40 percent of all births, and 69 percent of all African American
births, to unmarried women. Families are the primary transmitters of social capital: the
habits, dispositions and mores necessary for flourishing. Yet the subject of disorganized
families has been entirely absent from current discussions -- actually, less discussions than
virtue-signaling ventings -- about poverty, race and related matters.
Today's most serious problem, which annihilates thoughtfulness about all others, is that a
significant portion of the intelligentsia -- the lumpen intelligentsia -- cannot think. Its
torrent of talk is an ever-intensifying hurricane of hysteria about the endemic sickness of the
nation since its founding in
1619 (don't ask). And the iniquities of historic figures mistakenly admired.
An admirable intelligentsia, inoculated by education against fashions and fads, would make
thoughtful distinctions arising from historically informed empathy. It would be society's
ballast against mob mentalities. Instead, much of America's intelligentsia has become a
mob.
Seeking to impose on others the conformity it enforces in its ranks, articulate only in
a boilerplate of ritualized cant, today's lumpen intelligentsia consists of persons for whom a
little learning is delightful. They consider themselves educated because they are credentialed,
stamped with the approval of institutions of higher education that gave them three things: a
smattering of historical information just sufficient to make the past seem depraved; a
vocabulary of indignation about the failure of all previous historic actors, from Washington to
Lincoln to
Churchill
, to match the virtues of the lumpen intelligentsia; and the belief that America's grossest
injustice is the insufficient obeisance accorded to this intelligentsia.
Its expansion tracks the expansion of colleges and universities -- most have, effectively,
open admissions -- that have become intellectually monochrome purveyors of groupthink. Faculty
are outnumbered by administrators, many of whom exist to administer uniformity concerning
"sustainability," "diversity," "toxic masculinity" and the threat free speech poses to favored
groups' entitlements to serenity.
Today's cancel culture -- erasing history, ending careers -- is inflicted by people
experiencing an orgy of positive feelings about themselves as they negate others. This culture
is a steamy sauna of self-congratulation: "I, an adjunct professor of gender studies, am
superior to U.S. Grant, so there." Grant promptly freed
the slave he received from his father-in-law, and went on to pulverize the slavocracy.
Nevertheless . . .
The cancelers need just enough learning to know, vaguely, that there was a Lincoln who lived
when Americans, sunk in primitivism, thought they were confronted with vexing constitutional
constraints and moral ambiguities. : Too much learning might immobilize the topplers with
doubts about how they would have behaved in the contexts in which the statues' subjects
lived.
The cancelers are reverse Rumpelstiltskins , spinning problems that
merit the gold of complex ideas and nuanced judgments into the straw of slogans. Someone
anticipated something like this.
Today's gruesome irony: A significant portion of the intelligentsia that is churned out
by higher education does not acknowledge exacting standards of inquiry that could tug them
toward tentativeness and constructive dissatisfaction with themselves. Rather, they come from
campuses, cloaked in complacency. Instead of elevating, their education produces only
expensively schooled versions of what José Ortega y Gasset called the "mass
man."
In 1932's "
The Revolt of the Masses ," the Spanish philosopher said this creature does not " appeal
from his own to any authority outside him . He is satisfied with himself exactly as he is.
. . . He will tend to consider and affirm as good everything he finds within himself: opinions,
appetites, preferences, tastes." (Emphasis is Ortega's.)
Much education now spreads the disease that education should cure, the disease of
repudiating, without understanding, the national principles that could pull the nation toward
its noble aspirations. The result is barbarism, as Ortega defined it, "the absence of standards
to which appeal can be made."
A barbarian is someone whose ideas are "nothing more than appetites in words," someone
exercising "the right not to be reasonable," who "does not want to give reasons" but simply "to
impose his opinions."
The barbarians are not at America's gate. There is no gate.
Karl Marx once said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce. Nothing
proved the truth of Marx's claim better than the farcical battle over the statue of St. Louis
in, yes, St. Louis which followed hot on the heels of the tragedy of George Floyd in
Minneapolis.
The battle over the statue began as an exercise in identity politics, and before long it
degenerated into an example of identity theft. The main protagonist in this story is Umar Lee,
who was born Bret Darran Lee in 1974 to a southern Presbyterian family and grew up in
Florissant, Missouri just outside St. Louis. Lee may or may not be Black, which is an
ideological marker based upon but independent of biological fact, because he claims, according
to The Jerusalem Post that he "has two younger siblings who are half African-American."
[1]
On August 9, 2014, Michael Brown Jr., an 18-year-old Black man, was fatally shot by
28-year-old white Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the city of Ferguson, Missouri, a
suburb of St. Louis, leading to extensive rioting . After the death of
Michael Brown, Lee got involved with the Black Lives Matter protests in Ferguson, and was
arrested on two occasions and, in his words, "locked up." After getting fired from his job as
cab driver, Lee became a full-time, but little known activist. In 2015, Lee noticed that
statues started coming down in St. Louis, largely because of agitation on the part of St. Louis
Jews. At some point during this period, Lee made contact with Ben Paremba, an Israeli
restauranteur who was "passionate" about promoting Israel and other Jewish causes. At this
point Paremba was as little known to locals as Lee, but all of that changed after the Jewish
press took notice of their petition to remove the statue of St. Louis and began promoting them
as social justice crusaders, if you'll pardon the term.
In a series of tweets, Lee tried to establish his position as an aggrieved Muslim, bringing
up the Crusades as the cause of his grievance, but the underlying source of his complaint was
inspired by a group of Jews, who were incensed that the city where they had come to study had
erected a statue in honor of a king who had burned the Talmud.
Once Lee mentioned the term "anti-Semitism," the Jewish press began carrying stories which
lionized Lee as a crusader for Jewish rights. Because of his philo-Semitism, Lee soon found
himself lionized in the Jewish press. Writing for the Jewish Telegraph Agency, Ben Sales
described Lee as "a local activist who started the petition and also took part in a
successful drive to remove a nearby Confederate monument in 2017. Lee, Sales continued, "is
not Jewish but started the petition because of Louis IX's anti-Semitism." [2] Because Lee's
petition called St. Louis a "rabid anti-Semite" who "inspired Nazi Germany," it began "drawing
Jewish support" from St. Louis Jews like Rabbi Susan Talve, "the founding rabbi of the city's
Central Reform Congregation, who said taking it down would help advance racial justice in the
United States." According to Talve, St. Louis Jews have "been talking about that statue for a
long time." Talve then added that removing the statue would be "a very important part of
reclaiming history, reclaiming the stories that have created the institutionalized racism that
we are trying to unravel today. If we're not honest about our history we will never be able to
dismantle the systems of oppression that we are living under."
"Susan Talve hated Cardinal Burke," according to one Catholic familiar with the local scene.
He went on to say that Burke told him that Talve had "an animosity toward me for reasons that I
don't understand." Blinded by over 50 years of the failed experiment known as Catholic-Jewish
dialogue, his eminence was evidently incapable of seeing that Talve's animosity toward him was
based on her ancestral animosity toward the Catholic Church, which he led in St. Louis at the
time. Unsurprisingly, Rabbi Talve's animosity toward the Catholic Church has turned her into an
advocate of Lee's attack on the statue.
St. Louis Catholics were determined to ignore the ethnic animosity behind the struggle.
America Needs Fatima, a front group for the Brazilian cult Tradition, Family, and Property
joined the fray, criticizing "limp-wristed politicians" who were giving in to "revolutionary
extremists." ANF Protest Coordinator Jose Ferraz, claimed that "American Catholics" who were
"strong in their faith" were being "pushed around by anarchist revolutionaries," but without
identifying any of the actual players in the dispute.
After local activist Jim Hoft announced that a group of Catholics associated with his
website Gateway Pundit was going to defend the statue, Lee issued a statement describing what
he clearly knew to be a group of Catholics as "White Nationalists" along with "those on the
alt-right such as those who held the infamous and tragic rally in Charlottesville."
Hoft then responded by claiming that Lee deliberately misrepresented the Gateway Pundit
rosary group as white racists: "We are Christians and Christian allies who believe we still
have the freedom to practice our religion in America. We are organizing a prayer rally with
Catholic and Christian men. And now we are being threatened -- In America. We will not
apologize for our Christianity. Not in St. Louis."
The leader of a local rosary group, taken in by Lee's propaganda, began to suspect that
local Catholic activists at the rosary protest "might be backed by white supremacists" and
warned his group off. He then retracted his first tweet after he learned that the Rosary rally
was being sponsored by local activist Jim Hoft's Gateway Pundit and TFP-America Needs Fatima.
Neither group talked about the Jews. As a result, neither group was able to discuss the
conflict's most significant player. Both groups as a result became proxy warriors in an
exercise in street theater which kept the true dynamics of the conflict hidden.
In his article, Sales found a local Catholic who made a valiant attempt to defend the city's
eponymous saint, only to be shot down later by Talve, who opined that "Asserting that your way
is the only way I think is always wrong" with no sense that this was precisely the gist of what
the local Jews and their Muslim front man were imposing on the citizens of St. Louis.
Hoft called Lee's claim that "those on the alt-right such as those who held the infamous and
tragic rally in Charlottesville," were responsible for the demonstration defending the statue
"a lie," and added "There is no one from the Charlottesville rally or linked to the
Charlottesville rally or who promoted the Charlottesville rally who will be at the prayer rally
(that we know about)."
Lee's determination to turn the statue battle into a racial conflict began to generate
opposition from the Black community on Twitter, inspiring one observer to write "Fuck Umar
Lee's Bitch ass. He got fired for taking a company video to start racial tension. He's white.
Not Black. Sorry POS."
Activist, Author and Ex-Cabbie Umar Lee
By now it was obvious that the Black population of St. Louis, in spite of being dragged into
Lee's ad hoc coalition, had no dog in this fight. St. Louis, it turns out, never owned slaves.
Once the racial element disappeared from the conflict, its religious dimensions began to
emerge. The battle over the statue was a religious war between Catholics and Jews, in which
both sides were eager to cover over the conflict's true ethnic configuration. Both Lee and Hoft
were determined to obscure the identity of their opponents as well as the identity of their
backers. As one local observer put it, "Jews end up being in a win-win situation. Either Lee
succeeds in toppling the statue or Hoft succeeds and becomes the gay-married, pro-Zionist hero
to the local bishopless Catholics who are too fearful to organize on their own. Nowhere do
Catholics, or Blacks, or Muslims get a win out of this. Being pro-Zionist on some level
probably gives Hoft permission to misbehave sexually, since Jews are the authors of gay rights
as a movement. It's his way of paying them back, even though he is deeply conservative, like a
typical Iowa farm boy, raised Catholic, in all other areas."
Even after the Catholic-Jewish nature of the conflict became apparent, Lee continued to
portray the pro-statue crowd as white racists. In the days leading up to the Saturday rally,
Lee tweeted a picture of the blonde-haired Hoft with this text by way of explanation. "This is
the guy behind the White Nationalist rally on Saturday at noon on Art Hill. This is why it's
important for us to show up at eleven. . . . Jim Hoft and the Gateway Pundit were absurdly
wrong." [3]
A few hours later, Lee tweeted: "I will never allow Nazis, racists, and White Nationalists
to hold rallies in St. Louis without a response even if it's just me." [4] Hours later, Christine
Eidson Christlieb tried to set the record straight when she tweeted "The people praying the
rosary every night at the statue aren't white nationalists. That's just false. They are
Catholics." [5]
Ignoring Christlieb's tweet, Lee continued to promote identity theft, tweeting on June 24
that "White Christian Nationalists and the alt-right have announced a rally on Saturday at the
Louis IX statue. Please RT and share. We need to counter. Calling all Catholic and Christian
Men and their Allies." The bogus request for Catholic support when Lee knew it was Catholics
who were on the other side of the protest saying their rosaries exposed the hidden grammar of
Lee's strategy, which involved denying his opponents their actual identity and turning them
instead into "white nationalists," a group which could then be deprived of their constitutional
right to free speech and assembly. I discussed this ploy in my article comparing the Arbaeen
march in Dearborn, which was considered legitimate because of its religious sponsorship, and
the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, which was illegitimate precisely because the
protesters were "white," a designation which deprived them of any constitutional protection.
Lee knew he was dealing with Catholics, but he insisted on calling them white supremacists
because that was the category that would demonize them.
Lee's tweets throughout the period leading up to the June 27 protest gave a clear indication
that his real animus was against St. Louis's Catholics, not white supremacists or nationalists.
Lee tweeted "Mel Gibson is probably the most prominent traditional Catholic and critic of the
modern church known to most Americans. He is also a raging anti-Semite who beat his wife. The
Twitter army defending Louis IX I'm sure are huge fans of his."
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-6&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1275341953585090561&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fejones%2Ficonoclasm-in-st-louis%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=500px
Umar Lee Leading a Protest at the St. Louis Statue
Umar Lee is not your typical Muslim. He said nothing about the plight of the Palestinians
who were about to lose control over the West Bank. He failed to mention the connection between
the knee hold which presumably killed George Floyd and ADL sponsored seminars which introduced
Minneapolis police officers to Israeli instructors in Chicago in 2012. Instead he claimed that
"Bringing down the Louis IX statue won't be the [first] time Muslims and Jews coordinated in
St. Louis to stamp out evil." Then combining two contradictory tropes, Lee described his
opponents as "alt-right Catholic fascists," whose "favorite hobbies" were "burning and looting
Jews and impaling heretics." Instead of defending the statue of St. Louis IX, Lee felt that his
Catholic foes could better spend their time studying Jewish history and volunteering "to help
the many thousands of sex crimes victims in the church."
Statues are a sign of hegemony. They help you identify the ruler, and if not the real ruler,
the man those in power would like to have as their ruler. In a revolutionary era, the statues
of the former ruling class must come down. The most striking instance of this was the statue of
Stalin in Prague, which came down as soon as Communism collapsed in the period from 1989 to
1990. The removal of Stalin's statue left an empty pedestal in its place, but just as nature
abhors a vacuum, so pedestals will not remain empty. The first occupant of the empty Stalin
pedestal was a statue of Michael Jackson, who brought his own statue to Prague when he played a
concert there. He was the hegemon of the 1990s. The last time I was in Prague that pedestal was
occupied by a weird crane-liked gnomon which moved in sync with some unheard rhythm of the
spheres, making it seem like a metronome keeping time to an unknown melody.
The battle in Charlottesville in 2017 was ultimately a conflict over a statue, in this case
a statue of Robert E. Lee, which celebrated the "redemption" of the South which occurred a
generation after the Civil War, when the South drove the last remnant of Yankee soldiers from
their soil. The Lee statue was erected, as were many others celebrating Confederate soldiers,
to celebrate the new regime.
During the revolutionary spring of 2020, numerous statues were deposed. Not surprisingly,
the statue of Lenin in Seattle escaped the mayhem which visited that city unscathed, as did the
most recent addition to statuary in South Bend, Indiana, the statue of Rev. Theodore Hesburgh,
CSC, president of Notre Dame University and civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr. The
latter statue expresses better than any other the system of control which it symbolizes. The
short-hand explanation of that system of control is the civil rights movement, which celebrates
breaking laws with some higher purpose in mind. A recent article noted that 60 percent of
people in their 20s believe it is okay to break the law for a good cause. Of course, who gets
to determine whether the cause is good did not get mentioned in that article. That is why the
Hesburgh-King statue is important. It was based on a photo taken in Chicago in 1966 (most often
erroneously stated as 1964). When Martin Luther King arrived in Marquette Park, one of
Chicago's many ethnic neighborhoods, the Lithuanians living there greeted him with a hail of
rocks and bottles, one of which staggered King as he got out of his car. Needing help to
prosecute the ethnic cleansing of Catholic neighborhoods in Chicago, King gave Hesburgh a call
and together the two icons sang "We shall overcome" at a rally at Soldier Field that
summer.
The statue is, in other words, a celebration of two of American history's most famous proxy
warriors. As a pawn of Jewish money and Quaker organizing, King obliterated the traditional
Black power structure in Chicago, symbolized by Bronzeville, which was the Black ethnic
neighborhood. As a pawn of the Rockefellers, Hesburgh betrayed fellow Catholics in Chicago in
order to get funding from their foundations, especially the Population Council run by John D.
Rockefeller, 3rd. So the South Bend statue is in no danger of coming down because the
descendants of the oligarchs which turned King and Hesburgh into political icons have found a
new set of proxy warriors in Antifa and Black Lives Matter, who have arrogated the civil rights
mantle to themselves in a bid to stamp out the last remnants of representative government in
the United States. Pedestals will not remain empty. Prepare yourself for a Jeff Bezos statue.
Just as King and Hesburgh were proxy warriors of the oligarchs in collaboration with each
other, so Lee and Hoft are proxy warriors of the oligarchs in opposition to each other.
In the spring of 2015, the iconoclasts of St. Louis succeeded in getting the Jesuit-run St.
Louis University to remove its statue of Pere Pierre-Jean De Smet, a Belgian Catholic priest
who worked as a missionary to the Indians in the Mid-West and western sections of the United
States of America. [6] The Jesuits caved in to
pressure from "a cohort of students and faculty" who complained that the De Smet sculpture
"symbolized white supremacy, racism, and colonialism," [7] at least according to
this news account, which and alumnus disputes, claiming:
Saint Louis University did not get rid of the statue of Father DeSmet. They moved it to the
newly renovated Saint Louis University Museum of Art (SLUMA). There, the statue is prominently
shown quite beautifully along with other artifacts and artwork from the early founding of St
Louis and its Catholic heritage. One could argue that they removed it from its outside area
because of the pressure that the university faced to remove it, but there was never a "cohort
of faculty and students to remove it." During my four years as a student from 2006 to 2009, I
never heard one comment about the statue. I attended the university with a lot of people from
various ethnicities who never mentioned it once. We would also pass it by on a daily basis. I
personally think that this "cohort" was made up and that no one ever had a problem with it,
whether liberal or not. It was made into a problem by those who would like to destroy
Catholicism. The Jesuits should have left it where it was but at least they had enough sense to
keep it and showcase it prominently in their museum, which I will repeat, is
beautiful.
Protestors Argue at the Statue of St. Louis
Two years later, St. Louis mayor Lyda Krewson caved in to the same sort of pressure when she
removed a Confederate statue from the same Forest Park neighborhood where the statue to St.
Louis is located. [8] The statue of Columbus
was also removed in 2017, largely at the behest of Rachel Sender, a graduate student in
biological anthropology at Washington University who claimed that Columbus "represents racism,
colonialism, slavery and white supremacy and should not be given any honorable remembrance or
be a symbol of Tower Grove Park." [9] In attempt to give some
background on Lee and his petition, local Catholic activist Jim Hoft described Rachel Sender as
"some idiot . . . from New Jersey." Sender, however, was much more forthcoming than Hoft in
describing both her identity and motivation in wrecking that city's statues. Buoyed by the
iconoclasts' success in removing the Columbus statue, Sender jumped on the bandwagon to remove
the St. Louis statue, tweeting that "St. Louis was a crusader known for persecuting Jews. This
is also the only city I've experienced [sic] blatant anti-Semitism. His legacy should not be
honored! Lyda Kewson, City of St. Louis, Change the name of St. Louis. Sign the petition."
[10]
Lee was lionized in the Jewish press because even though Lee calls himself a Muslim, he not
only talks like a Jew, he also got the idea of tearing down the St. Louis statue from Jews. In
a recent interview, Lee told The Jerusalem Post "that he became aware of the statue's
history when Rabbi Hershey Novack of the Chabad on the Campus at St. Louis University held a
Tisha B'Av gathering by the Louis IX statue to remember the atrocities he wrought on Jews in
France." [11] Lee was in effect
only doing what he was told, after Novack and local Israeli restauranteur Ben Parembo said,
"Hey, that statue needs to come down. Jewish kids going out with their parents to [park's]
[sic] art museum don't need to be looking at this anti-Semite."
Lee may be the only Muslim in the world who is not upset about the United States moving its
embassy to Jerusalem, thereby making it the capital of Israel. In fact he's planning a trip to
Jerusalem, where he plans to "do a little dance. . . to commemorate the fact that loser [i.e.,
St. Louis IX] never made it to Jerusalem." In the meantime, Lee "will be drafting a letter to
@Pontifex asking for the decanonization of King Louis IX." On June 21, Lee informed his twitter
followers that he was "working on Lindbergh too. Must go. No Nazi named streets in St. Louis
Couny [sic]!" In addition to being a descendant of Robert E. Lee, Umar Lee did time for some
unspecified crime. It was during his stay in prison that he became aware of Jewish history and
the fact that St. Louis "burned Talmuds and embarked upon two crusades." He also learned that
St. Louis was "a Catholic town," a fact which led him to embark on a career as a reformer of
the Catholic Church, forcing him to oppose "some hateful pre-Vatican II trends that are being
repopularized." At some point during his study of Jewish history, Lee discovered that "a group
of Jewish students from Washington University and a rabbi gathered at the statue [of St. Louis]
on Tisha B'av" [or this ninth of Av, the day on which the temple was destroyed]. [12] From
reading the article, Lee also learned that King Louis "organized the burning of 12,000 Jewish
manuscripts in Paris, reasoning that the Jewish manuscripts might corrupt his good Christian
soldiers." [13] The book burning was
small potatoes compared to the destruction of the Temple, but the statue gave local Jews a
reason to feel aggrieved and test the local political waters to see how much clout they had.
Lee discovered that Jewish clout had increased considerably over the past 11 years, and that,
during the revolutionary spring of 2020, the time was ripe to press the issue.
Knowing that the Jews were itching for a battle with that city's Catholics, Lee engaged in
identity theft by claiming that the Catholic protesters were white because religion was a
category which still afforded constitutional protection. Recognizing that any conflict between
Catholics and Jews, with Muslims and Blacks playing minor roles, was unwinnable, Lee attempted
to drag the mayor into a fight against "white nationalists" knowing full well that enlisting
her in a battle against that city's Catholics, a group which made up 26 percent of the
population would have meant political suicide. Hence, Lee's persistent efforts to turn the
rally into something which it was not, as when he wrote: "Does St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson
have a problem with alt-right White Nationalists having a protest at the Louis IX statue on Art
Hill this Saturday?" Lee's tendentious formulation of the issue bespoke a combination of
identity theft and moral blackmail. The two issues are, of course, related and the link was
America's Civic Religion, otherwise known as the Civil Rights Movement, otherwise known as the
Black-Jewish alliance. Anyone who had the Black-Jewish alliance on his side occupied the high
moral ground and was on his way to winning the argument by default, because his opponents
lacked a moral leg to stand on. Because of Hollywood and public education, support for the
Civil Rights movement had replaced the ten commandments in America's mind as the source of
moral guidance.
But, as Anne Hendershott pointed out in her book The Politics of Deviance , deviance
is constant. That means that for every precept of the moral law you subtract from your
behavior, you have to add a precept of political correctness by way of compensation. Sexual sin
is the usual motivation for subtracting precepts of the moral law from your conscience. The
public school system in America as well as higher education has as one of its main goals the
sexual corruption of every student unfortunate enough to enter its doors. The moral vacuum that
education creates is filled by tales of the Civil Rights Movement, which proposes Martin Luther
King and Rosa Parks as role models. The sense of grievance and contempt for the positive law
which King and Parks stoked found fulfillment in the homosexual movement which invoked their
name to stoke contempt for the natural law.
So one way to calm your conscience because of the abortion you had is by becoming a
fanatical member of Antifa or a supporter of Black Lives Matter. The Civil Rights Movement of
the '60s was in many ways moral compensation for the adoption of contraception among Protestant
sects. Unsurprisingly, 1964 was the year of both the pill and the Civil Rights Act. This is not
a coincidence.
The battle over the statue served as an update on the Triple Melting Pot. Protestants were
nowhere to be found in this conflict. Their place had been taken by Muslims, who were still
negligible in terms of political power or cultural presence, but they could become significant
if they allied themselves with the Jews, the part of the Triple Melting Pot which was still
negligible in terms of numbers but whose cultural and political power had increased enormously
over the past half century. St. Louis is the home to 60,000 Bosnian Muslims, who harbor animus
against Jews that is now common in the Islamic world, largely because of how Israel has treated
Palestinians. Umar Lee is the exception that proves the rule. Thanks to the state of Israel,
Muslim antipathy to Jews is a widespread phenomenon, but it is not the case in the drama
surrounding the state of St. Louis. If Umar had come out in favor of the Boycott Divestment and
Sanction movement holding Israel accountable for its crimes against Palestinians, he'd still be
driving a cab.
What began as an exercise in identity politics soon devolved into a case of identity theft.
After Lee called the Catholics white nationalists, local Catholic activist Jim Hoft responded
by calling Lee's Jewish coalition "Marxists." When it came to the battle of the St. Louis
statue, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church was missing in action. Archbishop Robert Carlson,
ordinary of the archdiocese of St. Louis, defended the statue, but his comments had little
effect on public opinion because he is on his way out the door. His appointed successor,
auxiliary bishop Mitchell Rozanski of Springfield, Massachusetts, had nothing to say on the
issue. As a result, Hoft became defensor fidei by default, in spite of the fact that Jim
Hoft's relationship with Catholicism is even more troubled that Umar Lee's relationship with
Islam.
Hoft was born and raised in Iowa, but he got his start in local politics in St. Louis after
he established a national internet presence by founding the Gateway Pundit website, which took
the typically conservative line on issues as other websites began to engage in liberal
waffling. Conservative, at this moment in time, had less to do with the Republican populism of
St. Louis native Phyllis Schlafly, and more to do with the Neoconservatives who took over both
the party and the movement over the course of the 1990s. Specifically, that meant that Hoft was
rabidly pro-Israel, even to the point of posting a picture of him and Bibi Netanyahu on the
Gateway Pundit masthead, and disallowing any criticism of Israel or Jews from its combox.
Hoft's loyalty to Israel has earned him Jewish friends, such as film producer Michael Rudin,
who featured Hoft in a 2019 episode of the TV Series The Conspiracy File s and who is
also featured in Hoft's masthead.
In keeping with an even more recent trend in Republican-style conservatism, Hoft announced
that he was a homosexual after the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando because he "just had
to." Not long after coming out of the closet, Hoft married a gay Filipino in what purported to
be a Catholic ceremony at the rebel St. Stanislaus Church in St. Louis. Not content to keep his
sodomy private, Hoft took out an elaborate wedding announcement complete with picture of him
and the boy, who is about a foot shorter than Hoft.
Hoft's Gateway Pundit has gone on to become a fact-checker's dream, with article after
article in mainstream outlets like the Washington Post describing Hoft and his website
as retailers of conspiracy theories and fake news, but Hoft continues in his role as the Jews'
favorite dumb goy. Hoft's fanatical, pro-Israel chest-thumping Catholicism is a compensation
for homosexuality, and a manifestation of what we might call the Michael Voris syndrome. In
addition to being useful to the Jews whenever they need someone to make the Catholic Church in
St. Louis look ridiculous, Hoft has become defensor fidei by default because in St.
Louis, as elsewhere, nature abhors a vacuum. Archbishop Robert Carlson's defense of the statue
was weakened by his status as a lame duck. [14] The Archdiocese
issued a statement defending St. Louis as "an example of an imperfect man who strived to live a
life modeled after the life of Jesus Christ" and a "model for how we should care for our fellow
citizen." His defense was further weakened by the fact that he did not identify the group
responsible for wanting the statue removed. Catholics, as a result, were once more engaged in
cultural shadow boxing against enemies they could not identify.
That means that the fate of the statue rests in the hands of Carlson's successor,
Archbishop-elect Mitchell Rozanski, who will be installed as St. Louis's new ordinary on August
25, which is, not coincidentally, the feast of St. Louis IX. The fate of the statue rests of
Mayor Lyda Krewson, who is both a Catholic and a liberal Democrat, which means she is pulled in
two opposite directions. She has come out in favor of retaining the statue, but some Catholics
are not sure she can withstand the political pressure pulling her in the opposite direction,
since she has already presided over other acts of public iconoclasm. As a Catholic mayor
presiding over the fate of the statue of a Catholic saint in a city with a large Catholic
population, Krewson finds herself confronted with a revolutionary situation during an
interregnum. The driving force behind that revolution is the Jewish revolutionary spirit.
Because of that fact, the impending arrival of Mitchell Rozanski is not cause for optimism.
Rozanski grew up in Baltimore and is a protégé of Cardinal Keeler, who is the
patron saint of Catholic-Jewish dialogue in the United States and author of a document on
Catholic-Jewish relations that was so heretical that even the notoriously philosemitic United
States Conference of Catholic Bishops refused to publish it. On June 18, 2009, the USCCB took
the unprecedented step of condemning its own document on Catholic-Jewish relations, warning
unsuspecting readers that Keeler's "Reflections on Covenant and Mission should not be taken as
an authoritative presentation of the teaching of the Catholic Church. In order to avoid any
confusion, the USCCB Committee on Doctrine and the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious
Affairs have decided to point out some of these ambiguities and to offer corresponding
clarifications." [15]
Archbishop-Elect
Mitchell Rozanski
In an interview with Rozanski which appeared in the National Catholic Reporter ,
Keeler was described as "a legend in the field of Jewish-Catholic dialogue" and "one of
Rozanski's mentors." [16] Eventually Rozanski
succeeded Keeler as moderator for Catholic-Jewish relations. On February 24, 2017, Rozanski
wrote a response to the shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in his capacity as
U.S. Bishops' Chairman on Interreligious Affairs, expressing "deep sympathy, solidarity, and
support to our Jewish brothers and sisters who have experienced once again a surge of
anti-Semitic actions in the United States. I wish to offer our deepest concern, as well as our
unequivocal rejection of these hateful actions. The Catholic Church stands in love with the
Jewish community in the current face of anti-Semitism." [17]
In an article which appeared in the Springfield, Massachusetts Republican , Rozanski
was quoted as saying, "I fear that the current level of demonizing anyone of a different
opinion sadly will only lead to even more levels of violence and affronts to our fellow human
beings, created in the likeness and image of God." [18] The article went on
to say that the suspected shooter in the attack referred to Jews as "children of Satan," which
the paper described as an "anti-Semitic social media posting" with no indication that the term
came from Jesus Christ in a confrontation with the Jews portrayed in the Gospel of St. John. I
make the claim that there is a historical continuity between that confrontation in the Gospel
and 2,000 years of revolutionary ferment on the part of the Jews in my book The Jewish
Revolutionary Spirit.
Unlike Justin Rigali and Raymond Burke, "whose legacies remain divisive," Rozanski plans to
deal with the polarized situation in St. Louis by promoting "more dialogue, more understanding,
more study of the way that police deal with different situations. And what happened to George
Floyd in Minneapolis was totally, totally unacceptable, totally beyond the pale of whatever
should be done to anyone who is being taken into police custody."
There are, of course, Catholics in St. Louis who can provide a cogent defense of retaining
the statue, but they are currently in hiding, fearing repercussions from Rozanski, whom one
"local Catholic in a very sensitive position that requires him to remain anonymous" described
as their "new super-ecumenical and politically correct Archbishop." As I have said many times
before, the Church can have good relations with the Jews, or she can have unity, but she can't
have both. Rozanski's good relations with the Jews is a sign that local Catholics are in for a
hard time if they try to contest the anti-Semitism label which has been imposed on them by Umar
Lee and his Jewish backers in their defense of the statue. One such Catholic provided the
following defense of the statue, while at the same time declining to give his name:
Saint Louis IX was a devout follower of Jesus, who was scrupulously honest, humble, a
generous and unfailing lover and benefactor of the poor, and a peacemaker and unifier of
factions within his kingdom. It is for these and other virtues that he was canonized by the
Church. Just as we don't eliminate the name and statues of Martin Luther King because he was
a womanizer and a plagiarist, nor should we dishonor St. Louis because of his policies toward
Jews and his crusading ventures. These need to be understood in their historical context of
medieval Christendom – very different from today's secularized world. We're told his
statue is "offensive" to Jews and Muslims. Tearing it down would be deeply offensive to
hundreds of thousands of Catholics in this area, and to quite a few others as well.
As the intensity of the conflict surrounding the rosary vigils increased, the author of the
above statement began to wonder if it had been strong enough in stating the case for St. Louis.
When a local priest attempted to debate with the protestors, a shouting match ensued with no
conclusive outcome. The author then brought up the issue of the Crusades by contexualizing it
with a discussion of Zionism:
It's a pity the priest leading the rosary and the other Catholics there didn't defend St.
Louis from the charge of being "genocidal" and a "murderer." The Crusades were basically a
defensive movement against constant Muslim encroachment on the west and Christendom, which
they vowed to conquer and destroy, and to regain the Holy Places in Palestine which they had
seized after the Holy Land had been under Christian control for over three centuries before
the Muslim invasions of the 7th century. What prompted King Louis to embark on a crusade was
that in 1244 Muslim forces invaded Jerusalem, massacred many Christians there and desecrated
churches and holy places. So it wasn't "Islamophobic" or "genocidal" for a Christian king to
want to defend them! How can Jews condemn Christians for seeking to reclaim lands formerly
under Christian control when they themselves (or at least the great majority, who are
Zionists) justified their takeover of Palestine in 1948 for the same reason, namely, that it
belonged to their ancestors until foreigners (the Romans) conquered it and dispersed
them?
He then addressed the issue of burning the Talmud:
St. Louis was following the precepts of Lateran Council IV and the popes of his time in
having copies of the Talmud banned and burned after it was found out that this volume (only
then recently translated from Hebrew) contained repulsive blasphemies against Jesus and the
Blessed Mother. Regarding Mary, "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played
the harlot with carpenters" (Sanhedrin, 106a). As regards Our Lord himself, he is said to be
now in hell, being boiled in "hot excrement" (Gittin, 57a). Why? "Jesus the Nazarene . . .
and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, [and] led Jews astray into idolatry"
(Sanhedrin, 43a). "He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone. . . was cut off from
the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent" (Sanhedrin 107b, Sotah, 47a). He
"learned witchcraft in Egypt" (Shabbos, 104b). [19]
Jonathan Greenblatt
Missing from this discussion is the role Jews play in getting people they don't like
de-platformed from social media, which is the modern day equivalent of burning the Talmud. On
the same Saturday as the protests at the St. Louis statue, all of my books were removed from
Amazon at the behest of the ADL, the main organization promoting Jewish censorship of the
media. Unlike the ADL, the Inquisition gave the books it burned a fair hearing. Now, because of
Jewish concepts like "hate speech," anyone can lose his livelihood without trial or explanation
at the hands of the same people who take umbrage at burning the Talmud. The only thing
necessary is mention of the magic word "anti-Semitism," which ends all discussion and leaves
the accused person guilty without any possibility of clearing his name. St. Louis, according to
our author:
was no "anti-Semite" (which properly speaking is a racial prejudice, like that of
Hitler); but he was indeed anti-Jewish, i.e., against Judaism as a religion, for the reason
that Jews bitterly hated Christianity (as the Talmud demonstrated) and often worked to
undermine the faith of Louis' Christian subjects, whose eternal salvation he sought to
protect. The consistent position taken by the medieval popes was the Jews were not to be
molested, and their worship was to be tolerated, provided they didn't work to oppose or
undermine the faith of the Christian majority. When punitive measures were implemented or
authorized by the Church, it was because the Church judged that Jews were not abiding by that
condition.
As his final point, our author points out that if the Jews had power over Christians to
implement the Talmud which St. Louis ordered burned, Christians would have died. That's because
Jews only believe in tolerance when they are a powerless minority, and they believe in it only
as a strategy to undermine the coherence and unity of the dominant culture until they get the
upper hand, at which point they become ruthless persecutors of those who are weaker than they
are. Israeli treatment of Palestinians is a good indication of how Jews act when they get the
upper hand. Bolshevism in Russia is another example. Once the Bolsheviks seized power in
Russia, the Jews who controlled that movement turned the instruments of state power against the
Russian Christians whom they saw as their ancestral foes by creating instruments of terror like
the Cheka, which was invariably a Jewish-run operation because Russians were reluctant to
torture and murder other Russians, whereas the Jews who made up the majority of that
organization had no such compunction. "St. Louis's medieval methods," our author continues:
were not such as we would find acceptable today, when a much greater degree of religious
toleration and emphasis on individual rights has been a part of Western culture now for
centuries; but we have to understand St. Louis and other great figures of Christendom and
U.S. history in their own historical context. The idea of a religiously "neutral" or secular
state was unheard of anywhere in the world until after the French and American Revolutions
more than 500 years after St. Louis lived. No religion in those days gave much
emphasis to religious toleration. The Jews themselves (never mind the Muslims!) would have
been very oppressive to Christians if they had been in power, as the Jewish laws set out in
the Babylonian Talmud make clear, even though most of them couldn't be implemented. For
instance, "If a gentile hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed" (Sanhedrin, 58b); "When a Jew
murders a gentile there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may
keep" (Sanhedrin, 57a). Indeed, gentiles are dehumanized: "All gentile children are animals"
(Yebamoth 98a); "Gentile girls are in a state of niddah [filth] from birth" (Abodah
Zarah, 36b). If this, and the vitriolic Talmud slurs against Jesus and Mary cited above, are
not "hate speech," what is?"
As some indication of the parlous state which Catholic-Jewish dialogue has created in the
Catholic Church, America Magazine turned to a Jewish Lesbian convert to Catholicism, who
explained the situation in St. Louis to its readers in the following way: "King Louis IX, whom
Catholics know as St. Louis, ordered the burning [of the Talmud] after a rigged 'disputation'
in which a Jewish convert to Christianity debated a rabbi about whether the Talmud was
blasphemous." [20] So are the above
passages blasphemous? Are they in the Talmud? If the answer to those questions is yes, in what
sense was the disputation rigged? Eve Tushnet, who is the author of this article as well as the
author of Gay and Catholic: Accepting My Sexuality, Finding Community, Living My Faith,
never gets around to answering that question. Nor does she tell us whether the statue should be
taken down or left in place, nor does she tell us in what sense someone who describes herself
as a Jewish lesbian has converted to the Catholic faith.
The fact that the author of this eloquent defense of St. Louis chose to remain anonymous out
of fear of retaliation from that city's incoming bishop is a good indication that the violence
will increase. America is now in the middle of a full-blown revolution because largely Jewish
revolutionaries broke the Motion Picture Production Code in 1965 and inundated the country with
pornography and other forms of sexual subversion, which left subsequent generations weakened,
demoralized, and incapable of sustaining their own culture and institutions. The year 1965
inaugurated the failed experiment known as Catholic-Jewish dialogue as well. More than anything
else, the sort of Catholic-Jewish dialogue which the incoming bishop learned at the knee of his
mentor Cardinal Keeler crippled the Catholic Church's ability to defend the moral order in
American society. Repurposed as our "elder brothers" and friends, Jews qua Jews became
the unopposed sponsors of virtually every subversive movement in American culture from abortion
to gay marriage, from race-baiting political correctness to family destroying feminism, from
warmongering neo-Conservatism to brutal shoot-the-protesters-in-the-back Zionism, alienating
people who should have been America's friends because of Israel's barbarous behavior. The Jews
have never abandoned their ancestral commitment to revolution, and now revolution has arrived
at the gates of the Gateway, as the Black revolutionaries who have always been the Jews' proxy
warriors, from the founding of the NAACP to the infusion of George Soros money into the coffers
of Black Lives Matter, broke down the entrance to a gated community two blocks from the St.
Louis statue and continued the march which began after George Floyd died. Threatened by what
looked like a home invasion and abandoned by the local police, who had been told to stand down
by that city's feminist mayor, Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey stood their ground on the front porch of
their house brandishing the weapons that they were forced to exhibit because the cops refused
to come to their assistance when called.
The rally at the statue ended up being much more violent than anticipated as brass-knuckled
Black Lives Matter thugs beat up elderly Catholics who had come to say the Rosary. [21] Some of
the Black Lives Matter demonstrators arrived with firearms. All of the Catholic demonstrators
were unarmed. According to various reports, Black Lives Matter protesters attacked Catholics
praying near the Apotheosis of St. Louis statue in St. Louis. And why did they do this? Were
the Black thugs who took the cane away from a 60-year-old Catholic praying the Rosary and beat
him with it upset about Louis IX burning the Talmud or his position on Albigensianism? I doubt
it. You can view that attack at the link in this footnote. [22] Umar Lee's portrayal
of Catholics as white supremacists, fresh from Charlottesville, is responsible for that
Catholic's injuries. Lee is guilty of incitement. If he and the man who carried out the attack
go unpunished, we can expect more violence.
In reaction to the violence at the statue on Sunday, the Islamic Foundation of Greater St.
Louis issued a stunning rebuke to Umar Lee in a statement on Tuesday, June 31, saying that
removing the statue of St. Louis "will not erase history." The Islamic group went on to say
that they remained "committed to work on interfaith relationships based on honest dialogue and
mutual respect." It did not recommend taking down the statue of St. Louis. Instead it was
saying there were voices of reason in the Islamic community in St. Louis and that Lee's
campaign had no support among the people who did speak for Islam in that city. As one local
Catholic put it after reading the Islamic group's report, "The Jews have overplayed their
hand."
Mr. Greenblatt's attempt to use the ADL to resurrect the Black/Jewish alliance has created
problems of its own. With Israel's annexation of the West Bank looming, the ADL is concerned
that the backlash that the annexation is sure to cause, might spread to its proxy warriors in
Black Lives Matter, as in fact did happen in England [23] :
The "stakeholders analysis memo," which was issued by the ADL's Government Relations,
Advocacy, and Community Engagement department and marked as a draft, warns that the group
will need to find a way to defend Israel from criticism without alienating other civil rights
organizations, elected officials of color, and Black Lives Matter activists and supporters.
The memo suggests that the group hopes to avoid appearing openly hostile to public criticism
of annexation while it works to block legislation that harshly censures Israel or leads to
material consequences, such as conditioning United States military support. [24]
The ADL was not the only Jewish organization supporting Black Lives Matter. According to a a
report in the Jewish Telegraph Agency, "More than 400 Jewish organizations and synagogues in
the United States have signed on to a letter that asserts 'unequivocally: Black Lives Matter.'"
[25] Those groups
represented a broad spectrum "of religious, political, gender, and racial identities. The list
of signatories -- from small congregations to major Jewish organizations -- represents millions
of Jewish people in the United States, the organizers," according to the statement.
The problem in cities like Seattle, Chicago, and St. Louis can be laid at the feet of those
cities' lesbian and feminist public officials, a group which is incapable of enforcing the law
because they see the law as a manifestation of patriarchal oppression. This encourages anarchy
because it allows Jewish-funded thugs like Antifa and Black Lives Matter to act with impunity.
It also encourages political opportunists like Umar Lee to mount assaults on the social order
because they can blackmail those officials because of the guilty conscience which arises from
abortion and sexual perversion. The Church is complicit as well when it appoints bishops who
are known for their skill in appeasing Christ's enemies.
The video of Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey's confrontation in St. Louis garnered over 16 million
views in less than 24 hours, not because violence ensued, but because violence was averted, at
least for the time being. [26] But the assault on
the McCloskeys continues as a signature petition to disbar them is wending its way to the
Jewish head of the local lawyer's disciplinary board. Planning to fight fire with fire, the
McCloskeys have hired a Jewish lawyer to defend them.
As of this writing, St. Louis Circuit attorney Kim Gardner is considering filing charges
against the McCloskey's for defending their home. Gardner was elected in 2017, with the help of
George Soros money. [27] In addition to
supporting Gardner, Soros also funded the Ferguson riots. [28] During Gardner's
tenure as Circuit Attorney, felony prosecutions dropped dramatically. Of the 7,045 felony cases
which the St. Louis Police Department brought before the circuit attorney in 2019, only 1641
were prosecuted, despite claims of significant evidence to prosecute presented by the police
union. [29] After reducing the
cash bond for numerous offences, or removing it altogether, Gardner announced that she was no
longer going to prosecute "low-level" marijuana possession cases. At this point, Gardner
declared war on the State of Missouri. In February 2018, Gardner indicted Missouri Governor
Eric Greitens. [30] Three months later,
the governor's office filed a suit against William Don Tisaby, the ex-FBI agent Gardner had
hired to investigate Greitens. Gardner then went all the way to the Missouri Supreme Court to
block the appointment of a special prosecute to investigate her handling of the Greitens
investigation but lost. That grand jury also brought charges of misconduct against Gardner but
ultimately failed to hand down any indictments.
In 2019 Gardner pleaded guilty to repeated campaign finance violations dating back to her
time as a Missouri State Legislator, but avoided conviction by reaching "an agreement with the
Missouri Ethics Commission to pay a settlement of $6,314 in lieu of a $63,009 fine." [31]
In January 2020, Gardner filed a civil rights lawsuit against St. Louis City and St. Louis
Metropolitan Police Department on the basis of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment,
and the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1865 alleging a racist conspiracy. The City of St. Louis called the
case "meritless," and Jeff Roorda of the St. Louis Police Officers Association called it "the
last act of a desperate woman." [32]
On June 3, 2020, Gardner released all 36 of the rioters who had been arrested in the wake of
the George Floyd protests. [33] Gardner is
sympathetic St. Louis's revolutionaries because ever since her election, she has been involved
in her own attempt to overthrow the government. The fate of the McCloskeys, who have been told
that the rioters are planning to return to their house, now rests in the hand of this woman and
the police force she has beaten into submission with the help of George Soros.
Whether violence prevails in the future, no one can say at this point, but the best
indication of its likelihood can be found in the fate of the statue which represents that
city's patron saint, and the fighting spirit it inspires in those who are determined to resist
the Jewish revolutionary spirit, as St. Louis did in Paris eight centuries ago.
[19] The last three
Talmud citations here were accessed 6/26/20 on the Jewish website http://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm, where they are quoted
with approval in an article arguing Jesus was a "false prophet".
Great article, I had no idea of the background behind these various incidents. I saw each
clip on various media channels, but never knew that they were all connected.
Couple of comments:
1) Jewish-Catholic dialogue appears to be a one way shouting match. I have yet to hear of
Jews altering the Talmud to remove the anti-gentile and anti-Christian passages from that
turgid tome.
2) "nor does she tell us in what sense someone who describes herself as a Jewish lesbian
has converted to the Catholic faith." She's obviously an infiltrator, like several of the
major participants in Vatican II. I'm no Catholic, so I'm not about to lecture anyone on
Church history, but there are a few volumes out there on the founding of the Jesuit order and
how gentiles and jews battled for control of it over subsequent decades. Infiltration of
Christian churches is as much of a Jewish tradition as Purim.
3) It was from your work that I finally gained a better understanding of Jesus and his
criticism of the Pharisees. Shame to see it disappear from Amazon, but I fear anything that
even remotely offends Jewish sensibilities is going to be hard to find in future. I believe
they even banned Jewish historian Leni Brenner's book on the transfer agreement.
Interesting to know about the fake-negro and fake-Muslim Umar Lee or Talcum XX. There's
already a fake-negro from KY who's known as Talcum X. He's the one who is stationed at
Haaaavaaahd who collects 20K a pop for speeches advocating that all non-black portrayals of
Christ and Mary be destroyed and churches burned. His BLM followers seem to have been busy in
the past week. Perhaps E. Michael Jones should do a follow-up on this noxious clown. This was
a very informative article with a lot of insightful background provided.
Interesting to note that the first ones to show any resistance to this atrocity were some
Brazilian Traditionalist Catholics. Most of the ones from Murika are too busy fellating the
BLM (Black Looming Monster) created and funded by nice folks like George Soros, who isn't
even a fake Nazi but an actual Nazi employee who (along with his father) aided the famous
Adolf Eichmann in the asset-looting of Hungarian Jews in the wake of the Nazi overthrow of
Admiral Horthy's regime.
Horthy's government refused to send the local Jews to Hitler even though they were allied
with the Germans in fighting the USSR. Isn't there a special division of the Juctice Dept.
devoted to hunting down folks who were involved even slightly with the Hitler regime?? Guess
when you buy citizenship in the Rotten Banana Empire (Soros' was via a special act of
Congress – the finest money can buy), the fearless Nazi-hunters shy away.
One of the worst things Giuliani did was bring back urban revival. If DEATH-WISH-style NY
had continued, America would have been far more conservative.
All that urban renewal and wealth made the city slickers more cosmo and snotty.
The USA is now so wracked with immorality, perversion and identity politics – its
difficult to see that it has a future.
And having read about Lee and Holt, Talve and Gardner I was instantly reminded of the thread
from yesterday. 'Who Should be Shot?'.
With the infestation of pure evil which is ripping apart the society and internal peace of
the American people – are there no patriots left .?
When there is no law, no protection for decency, fairness and justice – the time must
come when citizens need to defend themselves.
Obviously in St Louis that time has come ..
But the brainwashing now is so deep seated, so professional and so ugly but well financed
– it seems to me that the USA will be consumed from within, without the white
population even turning off their TV sets until the killing, raping and looting hits their
actual front doors.
And it will.
The barbarians are no longer at the gates – they are destroying and 'cleansing' all the
concept of history and any 'American dream'from inside the very heart of the country.
Karma – perhaps.
Since E. Michael Jones endorses Christianity, it is appropriate to remind him that
Christians destroyed the holy places of their rivals, destroying statues and libraries of
antiquity, bringing down holy oaks of Germanic tribes etc..
And you Americans did it in Germany not too long ago, even destroying completely
unpolitical statues of Arno Breker and other artists.
So it is all a bit hypocritical.
Nota bene: I don't endorse this destruction in America, and I even lament this, because I
see it as a sign of weakness of the White race, and I identify as a White man, and I see
those who are bringing those statues down as my enemies. But a bit more self-reflection would
certainly be appropriate, if you want someone to sympathize with you.
I guess it surprises me less that Jesus Christ is still being persecuted by the old Jewish
remnant than that the remnant has found so many allies at this point in our history. I'm
equally unsurprised that a much more effective coalition is thereby being formed to oppose
the remnant. Satan, being a liar from the beginning, always makes the same mistakes. He/She
turns a series of small victories, like rampant pornography and an army of weak, duped
Christian leaders like Hesburgh, into a conflagration that demands a response from God, like
the Resurrection.
"But the brainwashing now is so deep seated, so professional and so ugly but well financed
– it seems to me that the USA will be consumed from within, without the white
population even turning off their TV sets until the killing, raping and looting hits their
actual front doors."
I see no evidence that you are wrong. And Trump fiddles while America burns.
And you Americans did it in Germany not too long ago, even destroying completely
unpolitical statues of Arno Breker and other artists.
Breker was artist to the Third Reich, which was a political movement and hostile to
Christianity. While Jones thoroughly condemns all aspects of Nazism he does believe the rise
of Hitler and the Third Reich is attributable to Bolshevism.
Fortunately the cultural record of the 20th century is quite full and easy to access. And what
I see is, until the 60s, Catholics getting along just fine.
The Motion Picture Production Code, before that the Hays Code, certainly pre-Lambeth, when
Protestants and Catholics worked together, America was a paradise, compared to today's
Godforsaken mess.
They could have kept things that way. But the Jews gained game-changing power after WWII. And
since you couldnt name them, you couldnt fight them. And since you couldnt fight them, you lost.
Father
Coughlin , says: July 14, 2020 at 2:42 pm
GMT
appropriate to remind him that Christians destroyed the holy places of their rivals,
destroying statues and libraries of antiquity, bringing down holy oaks of Germanic tribes
etc..
Nope. They Christianized them. Pulled out of them what was true, noble and beautiful and
modified what was error.
Jul 12, 2020 Tyrants HATE This 500 Year Old Trick for Ending Tyranny
The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude, the 16th century treatise on tyranny and obedience by
Étienne de La Boétie. James and Keith highlight some of the book's key insights
and detail how they apply every much to our situation today as they did when they were
written.
Jun 29, 2020 Armed Couple Facing BLM Mob SPEAK OUT "We Were In FEAR OF OUR LIVES The
Agitators WERE WHITE"!!!
When an angry and unruly BLM mob trespassed onto private property homeowners Mark and
Patricia McCloskey armed themselves to protect their lives and their property after the mob
uttered threats that they would kill them.
August 22, 2017 The racist origin of gun control laws
Congress demolished these racist laws. The Freedmen's Bureau Bill of 1865, Civil Rights Act
of 1866, and Civil Rights Act of 1870 each guaranteed all persons equal rights of self-defense.
Most importantly, the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, made the Second Amendment applicable to
the states.
@Chu N – In a
letter to the American people, Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew today announced plans for the
new $20, $10 and $5 notes, with the portrait of Harriet Tubman to be featured on the front of
the new $20.
Secretary Lew also announced plans for the reverse of the new $10 to feature an image of the
historic march for suffrage that ended on the steps of the Treasury Department and honor the
leaders of the suffrage movement -- Lucretia Mott, Sojourner Truth, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth
Cady Stanton, and Alice Paul. The front of the new $10 note will maintain the portrait of
Alexander Hamilton.
This is a very stupid and uneducated reply. There is so much evidence of wholesale
destruction of "pagan" heritage by Christians. No serious Christian scholar denies this. Read a
bit on the topic.
It is amazing to me how adding that X-factor to the equation seemingly always makes the
incomplete picture make perfect sense. Tucker led his show with the McCloskey story last night,
but he can't say outright many of the hidden variables. He does a better job than anyone in the
MSM by far at leading the horse to water, but will they drink?
though it should be remembered that our Republic was founded upon people saying no to unjust
laws and compacts, hence the Declaration of Independence!
Thus Martin Luther King Jr promotion of non-violent opposition to injustice should not be
condemned, for it is part of the greater important tradition in this country, and it was
precisely the fork-saluting weather underground marxist maoist thugs abetted by funding through
the Ford Foundation, etc to Soros of this day, that wanted to stop King, through murder, to
launch violence and race war as that strategy of divide and conquer is now being deployed once
again.
For it should be remembered that King, like Trump today, was calling out against the Vietnam
war, as Trump was the only antiwar candidate in 2016 against the Obama Bin Bush Bin Clinton Bin
Bush perpetual war machine, where the call for Trump's assassination is by those who want to
stay in Afghanistan, saw nothing wrong with destroying the African nation of Libya by a black
President Obama, the destruction of Syria, etc and are hell bent on stopping cooperation for
world development upon the McKinley American System Model which the Belt and Road and New Silk
Road initiatives were modeled.
Trump unfortunately is in bed with some very poisonous elements, but some of those elements
even understand that no one will survive a nuclear war very much on the table and being
provoked by various elements .
Under pressure from the NAACP, this one is also being exiled.
I have always liked this one because it is a very accurate depiction of an Army of Northern
Virginia rifleman just as they embarked on the Gettysburg Campaign in 1863.
On the pediment is inscribed "Leesburg to her sons who fought for constitutional
government."
The revolution continues. The tactics never change.
Catholic philosopher Ed Feser (professor, Pasadena City College, CA) has an amazing blog
post "The popes against the revolution" where he cites papal encyclicals from late 19th and
early 20th centuries condemning every aspect of this revolution we're currently seeing in
America. From the destruction of cultural artifacts being a common tactic of communists to
how police protection and punishment of criminals is necessary for social order to how
socialism and communism are intrinsically evil.
The Church condemns anarchism and socialist revolution
[A] deadly plague is creeping into the very fibres of human society and leading it on to
the verge of destruction We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost
barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all
the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek
the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day,
strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning – the overthrow of all
civil society whatsoever. (Pope Leo XIII, Quod Apostolici Muneris 1)
[T]he most disastrous national upheavals are threatening us from the growing power of
the socialistic movement. They have insidiously worked their way into the very heart of the
community, and in the darkness of their secret gatherings, and in the open light of day, in
their writings and their harangues, they are urging the masses onward to sedition; they
fling aside religious discipline; they scorn duties; they clamor only for rights; they are
working incessantly on the multitudes of the needy which daily grow greater, and which,
because of their poverty are easily deluded and led into error... (Pope Leo XIII, Graves de
Communi Re 21, 25)
'Slavery is not mentioned'. It would not matter if it was, because the current era Red
Guards do not care about slavery or about rewriting history.
Like all socialists or useful idiots they have only an eye on the great and glorious future,
or as the delightful Kshama Sawant concisely states .. 'a world based instead on solidarity,
genuine democracy, and equality – a socialist world.' To that end the falling statues
have included those of emancipationists and Liberals, purely for the purpose of demonstrating
the relative powerlessness of stood down law enforcement, rubbing their own willpower in the
face of the middle class, and pushing the psychological boundary of normality.
The latter is of great significance to them. After the statues, place names, particular words
and designated reactionary organisations are neutralised, they can then begin to enact
legislation, in activist Democrat enclaves, once seen as absurd but lately seen as expected
and deserving of acquiescence. Have a listen to AOC's thoughts on the matter of this never
ending revolution (which we know does end like all revolutions, after various stages of
chaos). https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1275633659291136001
'We will not stop'(and then we're going to keep pushing anyway).
We have a similar Rifleman statue in Charlottesville and the pediment has an inscription
"Confederate Soldiers, defenders of States' Rights". Although in downtown Charlottesville's
Court Square, it's on Albemarle County property and not subject to Charlottesville's City
Council whims.
Is that the one that has "Love makes memory eternal?" inscribed on the base? A French Army
friend visiting with his wife read that and wept saying we have nothing like this. At
Gettysburg he told his wife on Cemetery Ridge "Le General de Brigade Armistead etait blesse a
mort just ici avec sa main sur la bouche d'un cannon." (Brigadier General Armistead was
mortally wounded here with his hand on the muzzle of a cannon.)
after 40 years of the long march through the institutions (look it up) the education
system is producing what the marxists who took it over want it to produce. If we can ever
start it will be a long road back.
Loudin County Va,Leesburg,is the birth place of my Great,Great grandfather,William Henry
Andrews born in 1811.He married Elizabeth Goff and they moved to Monticello ,Jefferson County
Florida in 1833 when it was a territoty.............Both the city and county name was in
honor of Thomas Jefferson.............William Henry's first son,my great grandfather,John
Slicer Andrews, enlisted in the 50 th Ga Regiment "The Santlla Rangers" in 1862.........This
regiment eventually was assigned to the ANV under Lt General James Longstreet.They were
involved in the battle of Gettysburg and on July 4th 1863 John Slicer Andrews was captured at
Cashtown PA.He spent about 19 months in Union prisons .He died years later of "consumption"
which his doctor said was a result of his prison stay..........One of John Andrew's son was
responsible for the Florida Legislature to pass a bill giving Confederate widows a
penson.
Diana, would that long road back start at the door of the Education Secretary, an
appointment currently held by Betsy deVos ? Although the powers of that appointment are
limited by the US Constitution, it would seem to be the ideal coordinating office for the
redress of the decline that you describe.
Betsy DeVos herself does not seem up to that task, and those who appointed her would not seem
to have that intent. She seems a lovely and comfortable sort, devoid of any need to overwhelm
those who would at least be ideological opponents.
I see in the Richmond Times Dispatch today that the wokies now running the commonwealth
have decided that the way to get the bronze Lee down is to cut him in three pieces.
George Santayana's aphorism; "Only the dead have seen the end of war" seems inadequate for
a time in which the effigies of soldiers are mutilated. For me, the wokies' lack of respect
for the dead betrays their faux concern for the living.
One month after the killing of George Floyd, the mass multi-racial demonstrations against
police violence are in danger of being hijacked and misdirected by reactionary political forces
who are attempting to promote racial divisions, sabotage the unity of working people and youth,
and undermine the development of the class struggle against capitalism. This campaign is
now concentrated on desecrating and destroying the statues of figures who led the American
Revolution and the Civil War.
It is difficult to find words that adequately express the sense of revulsion produced by the
monstrous attacks on memorials that honor the memory of Abraham Lincoln, the United States'
greatest president, who led the country during the Second American Revolution that destroyed
the Slave Power and emancipated millions of enslaved African Americans.
On the evening of April 14, 1865, less than a week after the surrender of the main
Confederate army, which brought the four-year Civil War to an end, Lincoln was shot in the head
by the pro-slavery actor John Wilkes Booth. Nine hours later, at 7:22 on the morning of April
15, Lincoln died of the wound inflicted by the assassin. Standing beside Lincoln's death bed,
Secretary of War Edwin Stanton famously declared: "Now he belongs to the ages."
Lincoln's martyrdom produced an outpouring of grief throughout the United States and the
world. The working class recognized that it had lost a great champion of democracy and human
equality. Karl Marx, writing on behalf of the International Working Men's Association, wrote in
the days after Lincoln's assassination that he was "one of the rare men who succeed in becoming
great, without ceasing to be good."
Abraham Lincoln was an extraordinarily complex man, whose life and politics reflected the
contradictions of his time. He could not, as he once stated, "escape history." Determined to
save the Union, he was driven by the logic of the bloody civil war to resort to revolutionary
measures. In the course of the brutal struggle, Lincoln gave expression to the
revolutionary-democratic aspirations that inspired hundreds of thousands of Americans to fight
and sacrifice their lives for a "new birth of freedom."
Every period of political upsurge in the United States has drawn inspiration from Lincoln's
life. Since its opening in 1922, the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC has been the site of
some of the most important moments in the struggle against racial oppression and for equality.
In 1939, when Hitler's Nazis were on the march in Europe and fascism had many sympathizers
among the American ruling elite, the famous African American contralto Marian Anderson was
denied the right to sing at Constitution Hall. So instead she sang on the steps of the Lincoln
Memorial before a crowd of 75,000.
In 1963, at the March on Washington, Martin Luther King, Jr. stood at the same location as
he delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech, calling for equality and racial integration before a
crowd of 250,000. Later in that decade, tens of thousands of youth protesting the Vietnam War
assembled at the monument.
It is not coincidental that the working-class upsurge of the 1930s was associated with many
great artistic depictions of Lincoln, including the films Young Mr. Lincoln (1939) and
Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940). Aaron Copland's beloved orchestral-narrative
masterpiece, Lincoln Portrait (1942), concludes with the declaration that the
sixteenth president of the United States "is ever-lasting in the memory of his countrymen."
But now, 155 years after the tragedy at Ford's Theater, Lincoln is the subject of a second
assassination. This one must not succeed.
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington DC's nonvoting delegate to Congress, said she will
introduce a bill to remove the famous Emancipation Monument from the Lincoln Park in
Washington, DC. The race-fixated protesters have declared their intention to tear down the
monument, which was paid for by former slaves and movingly dedicated by black abolitionist
Frederick Douglass in 1876.
"The designers of the Emancipation Statue in Lincoln Park in DC didn't take into account the
views of African Americans," Norton stated in a Tweet. Democrats assert that the statue demeans
"the black community" because it depicts Lincoln freeing a slave crouched in a runner's pose,
which the sculptor intended to symbolize the liberation of the Civil War.
Norton's reactionary effort is being supported by Democratic Party officials in Boston, who
will hold hearings in the coming weeks to entertain demands for the removal of a replica of the
Emancipation Memorial in that city.
Lincoln is not the only leader of the anti-Confederate forces to be targeted. In San
Francisco last week, a statue of Ulysses S. Grant, the great general of the victorious Union
army and later president of the United States, was torn down.
An even filthier example of the racialist campaign is the desecration of the Boston monument
honoring the legendary 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment. The 54th Massachusetts,
led by abolitionist Robert Gould Shaw, was the second all-black regiment organized in the Civil
War. Protesters object to the fact that the 54th, famously depicted in the film Glory
(1989), was commanded by a white officer, Shaw. Holland Cotter, the New York Times'
co-chief art critic, slandered the monument as a "white supremacist" visual for its depiction
of Shaw leading his African American battalion.
Another Union monument, a statue of abolitionist Hans Christian Heg (1829–1863), was
pulled down Tuesday night in Madison, Wisconsin. The statue was beheaded before being thrown
into a nearby lake.
A Norwegian immigrant, Heg led the 15th Wisconsin regiment, known as the Scandinavian
Regiment, against the Confederacy. Prior to the war, Heg, a member of the Free Soil Party,
fiercely opposed slavery and headed an anti-slave catcher militia in Wisconsin. He was killed
at the age of 33 at the Battle of Chickamauga in September 1863.
The Socialist Equality Party rejects all the lame liberal excuses and justifications that
are offered to legitimize the desecration of these memorials. Actions, whatever the motivations
ascribed to them, have objective significance and very real political consequences.
The assault on Lincoln monuments and other memorials honoring the leaders of the American
Revolution and Civil War are political provocations aimed at whipping up racial animosities.
Such provocations are well-known forms of communalist politics, which resemble the burning down
of Muslim mosques by Hindu fanatics or Hindu temples by Muslim fanatics. Here in the United
States, the statues are being attacked as examples of "white" rule.
The attacks on the statues are the outcome of a campaign by the two capitalist parties and
various reactionary elements in the upper-middle class to racialize and communalize American
politics. The growing intensity of this campaign is a response to the upsurge of working-class
militancy, which is seen as a threat to capitalism. Far from welcoming the interracial unity
displayed in the demonstrations against police brutality, the ruling elites and most affluent
sections of the middle class are terrified by its political implications.
In the promotion of racial politics, there is a division of labor between the Democratic and
Republican parties. Trump and the Republicans pitch their appeal to the most politically
disoriented elements in American society, manipulating their economic insecurities in a manner
intended to incite racial antagonism and deflect social anger away from the capitalist
system.
The Democratic Party employs another variant of communalist politics, evaluating and
explaining all social problems and conflicts in racial terms. Whatever the particular issue may
be -- poverty, police brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemic -- it
is almost exclusively defined in racial terms. In this racialized fantasy world, "whites" are
endowed with an innate "privilege" that exempts them from all hardship.
This grotesque distortion of present-day reality requires a no less grotesque distortion of
the past. For contemporary America to be portrayed as a land of relentless racial warfare, it
is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the class
struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of perpetual racial
conflict.
Even before the outbreak of the pandemic, efforts to create racial foundations for
contemporary communalist politics were well underway. The New York Times , the
principal voice of corporate and financial patrons of the Democratic Party, concocted the
insidious 1619 Project, the central purpose of which was to promote a racial narrative. The
main argument of this project, which was unveiled in August 2019, was that the American
Revolution was undertaken to protect North American slavery and that the Civil War, led by the
racist Abraham Lincoln, had nothing to do with the ending of slavery. The slaves, so the new
story went, liberated themselves.
The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions. In this case, the contradictions are those embedded in the staggering levels of
social inequality produced by capitalism. These contradictions can be resolved on a progressive
basis only through the methods of class struggle, in which the working class fights consciously
to put an end to capitalism and replaces it with socialism. Efforts to divert and sabotage that
struggle by dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial identity lead inexorably in the
direction of fascism.
Through the promotion of a racial version of communalism, all factions of the ruling class
seek to divide the working class so as to better exploit it and ward off the threat of
revolution. It is no coincidence that when American society is straining under the weight of
the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000 people and sparked an economic crisis
on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are ever-more ferociously seeking to make
race the fundamental issue.
The alternative to the politics of racial communalism is the socialist politics of
working-class unity. This is the program of the Socialist Equality Party, and those who agree
with this perspective should join our party.
This is an excellent piece. I in no way consider myself a socialist, but I do believe that
politicians and the media and all around bad people have bastardized and driven a wedge
between what could be.
Great article.
"An even filthier example of the racialist campaign is the desecration of the Boston monument
honoring the legendary 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment. The 54th
Massachusetts, led by abolitionist Robert Gould Shaw, was the second all-black regiment
organized in the Civil War."
This attack demonstrates the utterly anti-historical, politically relativist nature of the
current "protests". These protesters hate reality, & wish nothing less than to bend
history to their own short-term, selfish & impulsive demands. They do NOT represent
working people, the 99%.
"The attacks on the statues are the outcome of a campaign by the two capitalist parties and
various reactionary elements in the upper-middle class to racialize and communalize American
politics. The growing intensity of this campaign is a response to the upsurge of
working-class militancy, which is seen as a threat to capitalism. "
Absolutely correct. Dozens of multi-billion dollar corporations are jumping on this racialist
bandwagon. Their presence should arouse the suspicion of even the most stupid of "useful
idiots".
"The assault on Lincoln monuments and other memorials honoring the leaders of the American
Revolution and Civil War are political provocations aimed at whipping up racial
animosities."
when i read Lincoln, and when i read Trotsky these days, i know in my heart that that they
consciously spoke to future generations as much as they did to their contemporaries -- they
knew the struggle to be fierce and long, and so the imperative to speak to future generations
-- when i read Lincoln and Trotsky, i am not reading a history book, i am listening to a man
speak directly to me about the times i live -- they want to tell us what they learned, they
want to guide us and strengthen our spine for the battles ahead ! a hundred, a hundred-fifty
years since they lived ? they understood that, the length of the struggle, and this is why
they speak so clearly to us, like a hammer ringing on a blacksmith's anvil ! they live in our
hearts and continue to lead us, they are beloved of the workers in this world
Obama's second term was seared by civil unrest over the multiple murders of young black
men by racist cops... but no 'rainbow CIA color revolution' against Obama was required at
that point so the carnage was glossed over and the protests suppressed. This year however the
CIA Democrats need to harness identity politics to destabilise Trump's regime in time for
November (to get war with Russia back on track); furthermore American oligarchs are petrified
at a class uprising after Lockdown so have instructed their mass media to seize on the the
George Floyd killing, lionise the spontaneous protests, and spin them (with
billionaire-funded NGOs like Black Lives Matter) to create a largely state-sponsored
worldwide 'reaction'... to channel real class anger into the deadend of racial division.
Not sure how others see it but I see the mass protests that erupted (that saw democrats
and trump both attacking, the former attacking the multiracial character especially) as a
different thing to what is taking place now at the sites of these statues of Lincoln, Grant
etc. I believe the media are trying to treat them as part of the same thing while even
admitting there is only the tiniest fraction of the numbers at the statues I mentioned above
compared to the numbers demonstration before. The latter is about shifting everything into
race where there was a real fear of class gaining expression in the mass demonstrations.
When the unions know, and the transnational corporations more than know, and the workers
of the world all know and how that tens of thousands of workers are infected with the
Corvid-19 virus and thousands upon thousands are dead or in the process of dying of it
under
a forced labor pogrom, but the American people aren't told and the workers are bullied and
threatened not to bring it up, evidently, and lied to about the figures, thereby take to
manipulating and degrading the Black Lives Matter banner and movement by using them like
Trojan horses bloated with divisive racialist and identity politic of the Democratic Party--
the capitalist antebellum slaver class potty and the complicit Nationalistic anti-labor
unions whom we got the skinny on and know of here and now-- in order to divide, confuse,
isolate and decimate the working classes and swallow up what's left of the middle class
medium and small indie businesses -- while, in tandem, the Republican Potty mops up the rest.
WORKERS LIVES MATTER!
I agree that the goal of the government and media is to delimit, or kettel, the substance
of these demonstrations to race...by submerging the multilpicity of issues at stake under an
incessant, obsessive racial narrative. They know its about much more than that and so do the
people in the streets.
Lincoln was an advocate of slavery as long as it wasn't expanded, he wanted to make the US
a whites only country like Edmon Barton of Australia later did with his constitutionally
connected self governing colony, and Lincoln while "freeing slaves" continued enslaving and
murdering Native Americans. I hold no anger to those who wants to target his monuments and
remove them.
Can you put this into the context of what the article is about, namely that the racialist
narratives being promoted seek to divide the working class today?
Western culture (which includes America) is built on a foundation of so many lies and half
truths that any objective critical examination causes it ti crumble like a house of cards.
Hero worship and symbolism die hard in the minds of the "symbol minded" (Carlin).
spot on comrade and Rest in power to George Carlin along with Bill Hicks and Frank Zappa
one of the finest dissident artist, truthtellers and mythbusters. Carlin was the Miles Davis
and Picasso of stand up comedy, the older he got, the better :)
haha! your against tearing down monuments that glorify and engage in half truths and
propaganda and instead of engaging in dialogue you want the censorship? wonderful!
If it's propaganda, like your comment about Lincoln being a white supremacist, yes, in my
humble opinion but than again I actually studied history most my life so I'm not going to
make up things to justify why the world is the way it is today. That's why the SEP is a
principal party based upon scientific Socialism unlike you who uses his emotions as
facts.
He is on record as saying he did not agree with blacks and whites as equals and living in
close quarters. He said that the white race was superior to the black race. It is on
record.
You are a historical falsifier. You are taking certain incidents out of their context, and
ignore the process of history. Your worldview is superficial and reactionary.
I'm what you call an inconvenient truthteller and mythbuster much like this outlet, and
its ok to not always agree with authors and what I said about Lincoln is historical fact,
sticks and stones Comrade.
Why is it that we want our designated heroes to be two dimensional? Lincoln like most of
the Founding Fathers by his own admission was a White Supremacist in the strictest sense.
They all believed and expressed in their writings that the White race was superior to the
rest of humanity (Blacks, Asians, Natives, Hispanic....).
If Lincoln was a white supremacist, what would you call John Wilkes Booth? As for the
founders expressing superiority in their writings, I'd like for you to prove that it against
"Hispanics", seeing the term was created in the 1970's. You don't even know what you're
talking about yet you try to revise history. Read a book and you might learn something.
Nice try at misdirection, but the Founding fathers have openly expressed many times in
multiple correspondences that they believed that the White Race was naturally superior to all
other races on the face of this planet. It's not hard to find and they were not shy about
saying it out loud so I suggest you take your own snarky advice and read a few books
yourself. Also, I used the term "Hispanic" which is now Latinx (?) to include peoples in
their time who were a mixture of Spanish and Native who actually did exist in their time.
Note that the term "White Supremacist didn't exist in those days as well but the Fumbling
Fathers clearly fit the description.
You still didn't provide any correspondence because they don't exist so who's really
misdirecting. Also I was responding to your misinformation about "Lincoln, by his own
admission was a White Supremacist in the strictest sense", and I said prove it but you can't
because you only know how to read NYT propaganda. The Hispanic part of your comment is the
most ridiculous. I guess the fumbling fathers, pathetic and infantile insult, must of had a
time machine to travel to the future and oppress people that were just called Mexicans back
during their time. I'd tell you to grow up but grownups don't troll.
Lincoln didn't believe that. His placing into law the right for black people and freedmen
to vote showed he no longer held even a whiff of prejudice and Douglass said as much. Lincoln
was not a racist and certainly not a White Supremacist which was the ideology of the
confederacy. He was a heroic revolutionary who stood firm while others folded.
First of all Lincoln was a man not a two dimensional heroic fictional caricature like you
put forth. In many correspondences he like most White men of his time saw the Negro and
Natives as inferior. As far as being exceptional I say John Brown, William Lloyd Garrison and
the Quakers fit that description. They could rise above convention and see humanity
objectively.
No, what WSWS and anybody reasonable wants is for people to study history and describe and
quote people accurately, not repeat absurd slanders or recite carefully edited quotations.
(Always the same ones)
Blatant falsehoods like "Lincoln was an advocate of slavery.." or pulling down a statue of
Lincoln are exactly the kinds of stupid, self-destructive act that agents provocateurs lead
movements and dupes like Eleanor Holmes Norton into doing.
The deepest point of the attack, why it is so crucial for these Bad Guys to attack Lincoln
et al is because:
(a) Lincoln was on our side. He was on the side of the slaves, the downtrodden, the
working class, black or white. and
(b) Lincoln was a rare, great and heroic leader. He - and we - succeeded in the real
world . Most others - say Garrison, by his own admission - would have failed.
It's easy to spout the correct slogans and positions. Infinitely harder to put them into
practice, to lead a whole country into saying them. Lincoln did. Lenin did. No matter where
or when, such leaders are the supreme target of the pro-slavery forces, who do anything to
blacken their name and falsify their memory, who endlessly work to split us.
Their supreme aim by this is to demoralize us and convince us that we have NEVER succeeded
once, that we cannot win. No, if one studies Lincoln and the Civil War we can learn - we did
win then. So we can win now.
Should all critics of the website's prevailing wisdom be lumped into one category? You use
the term "Bad Guys" to describe people who question convention (a term Dick Cheney & the
"Intelligence Community" frequently deploys) or as you put it "attack Lincoln." As an atheist
I have no Messiahs and very few heroes. Lincoln was a human being like you and I.
The North won the Civil War because A.) they had more fighting men. B.) they had a greater
manufacturing capacity to make weapons of war. If the circumstances had been reversed the
South would have won. Trial by combat where good always conquers evil only happens in the
movies. Personally, I am not pro-human slavery be it ancient Egypt, Rome or America, but I am
pro-facts; even if said facts don't neatly fit into one's heroic narrative.
Should all critics of the website's prevailing wisdom be lumped into one
category?
I did not and did not intend to. By "Bad Guys" I meant the ruling class and their agents
provocateurs. I was not including you or anyone else here necessarily in that category. But
people who spread blatant lies or contrive to get statues of Lincoln or abolitionists pulled
down for malicious purposes.
I was trying to explain why there are so many peddlers of crap history about Lincoln etc.,
explain their ultimate aims and how this is an effective tool of oppression. And noting that
they have seriously misled, divided and damaged left/liberal/progressive forces. They appear
to have fooled you and Youri in this thread.
As for Garrison, whose objectivity you praise, what was his objective, final estimate of
the living Lincoln? A few days before the assassination Garrison gave a rousing speech to
tumultuous applause - briefly mentioned above - where he repeatedly said "I will not hear a
word said against Abraham Lincoln" . Garrison said that Lincoln showed himself a wiser
strategist and better abolitionist than he, Garrison, because he had succeeded at the
enormously difficult and absolutely necessary task of leading public opinion - to win the
war, to eliminate slavery everywhere in the South. Garrison before the war had sometimes
merely aimed at eliminating slavery in the USA by - Northern seccession. As Garrison
knew, Garrison could preach to the converted. But Lincoln didn't have that luxury - but still
succeeded.
So my point is again that the anti-Lincoln narrative is the one that doesn't fit "the
facts", that requires prejudice and contorted arguments and politically edited revisionist
history. Not the "heroic narrative" - which the facts, warts and all, happen to fit far more
neatly into.
What you refer to as a "anti-Lincoln narrative is just people like me pointing out that
bases on Lincoln's own words he was a White Supremacist. The question seems to be is it
possible for a confessed White Supremacist to fight a war and strategically free the slaves?
Yes.
We'll get this before the people, and
then tell the people all, and, while we are at it, ask
the working class if those who don't
mind at all might take some time off to recall the Union
Army as our Second Amendment is now
half empty as we're needing to finish ,for once and for all, Reconstruction restarting
from where Lincoln's murder left off!
" The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions."
False consciousness, as Engels wrote to Mehring, is the underclass thinking and acting a role
written by the ruler. Such is racialism.
Hi! Thanks so much for writing this! I totally agree that we can't let anything divide the
working class – we've got to stay united if we want to win this fight. Thanks for
advocating for us. I'm a little confused about where the author wants that unity to come
from, though. Is the author saying that we should ignore all of the things that specifically
black folks have faced (namely, slavery, explicitly racist torture at the hands of vigilante
groups and the state, subtler practices like redlining that were still clearly predicated on
race rather than just class) and expect them to join us in the fight? Isn't it our job, as a
class and as a movement, to make sure we are advocating for ALL working class (and poor)
folks? Don't we want to unite all people against the ruling class? Isn't that where our power
comes from? I guess I'm just not sure why Black folks would want to join the movement if we
don't address the inequality they've disproportionately faced – if they join, and we
don't address these things, and we win, then the socialist society that comes after is still
full of folks who have benefited from racism, and internalized the subtleties of white
supremacy (I am not saying that anyone in our group is a racist. Just that our society was
built by white folks to cater to their own needs, while Black folks were enslaved, and our
systems still live in that legacy. White folks consider majority-white spaces the norm. We
turn a blind eye to the over-policing of Black neighborhoods because it is easy to buy into
the idea – one that our ancestors passed down to us – that Black folks are
inherently more likely to be criminals. But Black folks are dying at much higher rates that
while folks. We don't notice it because it feels normal to us. But Black folks do. Don't take
it from me, though- are there Black folks within the movement that could potentially speak to
this?). I am wondering why it is not our job to advocate specifically for justice for Black
folks – if our goal is equity, and the Black working class has less of it than the
white working class, why does fighting for that equity undermine the movement? Isn't justice
for all what we're fighting for? Why would anyone join us if we are not paying attention to
the specifics of their struggle? Any clarity you have would be so helpful – thank you
in advance!
Racism was invented to divide the working class. Social equality cannot be achieved under
capitalism--that is an oxymoron. Reforms addressing racial issues will not do away with this
underlying contradiction under capitalism. Marxism needs to be taken into the working class
to all workers. Workers need to understand they are part of the historical process. You said,
"our society was built by white folks to cater to their own needs, while Black folks were
enslaved". This is a wide generality; "white folks" obscures the class nature of society. All
workers are still enslaved. To paraphrase Engels, the difference between chattel slavery and
wage slavery is that the slave is sold to a master all at once and is his individual
property; the wage slave must sell himself piecemeal, by the hour etc. and not to an
individual but to the ruling class as a whole. Thus wage slaves cannot get free until they do
away with the class structure.
Actually, two remarkable events happened before I fled the responsibility of party
building before your parents were born. The predecessors of this party circa 1974 when the
working class wave , now gathering , ebbed. Mind you graduate school and profiitable careers
were available, unlike now. Until then, I answered a lot questions like your , just before
Feminism gathered force and Black Nationalism turned into Black Capitalism. You know, mayors,
policemen, nasty capitalists. That red hot revolutionary Eldridge Cleaver opened a Better Get
a Gun fashion outlet in Beverly Hills no less. There are shameless opportunists who
discovered their race as their most important contribution now beside you on the streets.
One more things, just as all the comrades left for grad school , the Trostkyists of SEP
built a socialist youth movement among black youths in New York for which a comrade was
murdered. Not only that, but SEP as Workers League relocated to Detroit where it had a base
in the black working class among auto workers. One thing though, we are not all alike and
should just get together. It took rivers of Trotskyist blood to drill that in, and every
attempt to ignore it met with disaster.I am a supporter. Join.
You make it sound like there's no black workers already in the socialist movement. These
advocates of racialism are not your average black working class, some instances they're not
even black. What they are primarily drawn from are upper middle class, privileged layers
despite all their yarns about white privilege, who advocate this stuff precisely to block
class unity and class consciousness. And when you get down to our level, there really ain't
that much difference. Plenty of enough white workers getting harassed and murdered by the
State. I say don't let the upper middle class speak for workers
Just that. The guys I work with who happen to have varying shades of skin color and we all
discuss from serious matters to the inane and joke together, it's all the same stuff. Same
worries, same troubles, same concerns. We all know there's racism, each of us whatever our
background take offense to it because we know it's an attack on all of us at the end of the
day. Plus we all know Obama was a fraud, that it doesn't change anything for us putting more
black people in boardrooms or the police - we all still get attacked and screwed around. And
we all take offense when these self appointed representatives of race start telling us that
our real enemy is each other rather than those destroying our livelihoods with job cuts,
speed ups, austerity, attacks on rights and war.
White workers, black workers, Latino workers, male, female, straight, gay whatever - can be
won to socialism without having to resort to adapting to the middle class advocates of
identity - in fact, if that's what the wsws and SEP were to adapt to, it wouldn't win over
any workers; it might win over very reactionary elements of the middle class though who would
use this as platform to get more privileged positions.
My mistake - did not mean to imply that Black folks are not part of the movement. Now that
you mention it, though, my experience within the movement has been with mostly white men - do
you happen to know if the party has significant Black membership? Not rhetorical, seriously
wondering!! If you have the time, I'd also love to know more about these proponents of
racialism - in my experience, many of the activists leading the charge in the current moment
Black folks from working class or poor backgrounds (pointing to some of the national and
local organizations who are doing work right now - naarpr/caarpr, for example, a lot of local
youth-led orgs leading the charge in Chicago). Would you be able to send me more information
about the upper middle class background of this movement? Thanks!
Yes, there is significant black membership in the SEP and the ICFI. Always has been since
before I became a part of it. A major section of the ICFI is in Sri Lanka and the Sri Lankans
are South Asian and yet they are a part of the Trotskyist movement and have a long history
within it. True socialists have never been racists. Also see:
https://www.wsws.org/en/art...
Kaline below has given some links, I would also suggest searching for as much background
information as possible from the wsws on the efforts of the ruling class, media and academics
to racialise matters. In fact I would suggest the book on pseudo left and the Frankfurt
school and postmodernism. This isn't just about racialising but the whole effort of
postmodernism to deny the working class the tools to study history and formulate a class
perspective.
On that score I won't say no black worker can't get caught up in racialism, just as no white
worker can't get pulled behind white supremacists - great efforts are made to subordinate
different sections of the working class to various middle class organisations, perspectives
etc. But what I'm trying to convey is these things we're seeing (not the mass protests but
pulling down statues of historically progressive figures), while they may involve worker
elements, are formulated and given full vocalisation first and foremost by the upper middle
class. These are not spontaneous attitudes that the mythical black community just pops out
with (and it is mythical: Obama, Powell, Beyonce etc are not part of what George Floyd,
Trevon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Gardner etc are). Where the socialist movement has been
attacked, pushed back and betrayed by so called socialist forces (who incidentally began
spouting the same identity politics and attacking class conceptions) obviously sections of
the working class have come under middle class influence. But to tackle that one has to
ruthlessly expose this identity politics and be somewhat bold in it recognising and having
confidence that identity politics isn't some bottom up, natural expression or reflection of
the real state of affairs. That's revealed very quickly when engaging in discussion with
other workers of all different stripes. Of course the first stage is understanding where
identity politics comes from, how we got to be here and what identity politics expresses.
Apologies I'm replying quickly between shifts.
aristocracy. Our party is a part of the same milieu, not of the basic exploited masses of
whom the Negroes are the most exploited. The fact that our party until now has not turned to
the Negro question is a very disquieting symptom. If the workers' aristocracy is the basis of
opportunism, one of the sources of adaptation to capitalist society, then the most oppressed
and discriminated are the most dynamic milieu of the working class..
Always liked how the politics of racialism is the first to silence and attack black
workers and deny their existence within the socialist movement, just as feminists silence
women workers and Zionists silence workers of Jewish descent.
Are you a member of the socialist equality party?
An historically important perspective. I would like to extend my most profound thanks to
David and Niles, and the editorial staff of the WSWS as a whole, for the incredible work they
have done in preparing the ground for the struggle against these aptly called "lame
liberals."
The attacks on the Great Emancipator remind me of Goya's painting of Saturn eating his
children at birth on the off chance they might overthrow him.
Two paragraphs in this article strike me as being worthy of serious study:
"The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is to conceal real social
contradictions. In this case, the contradictions are those embedded in the staggering levels
of social inequality produced by capitalism. These contradictions can be resolved on a
progressive basis only through the methods of class struggle, in which the working class
fights consciously to put an end to capitalism and replaces it with socialism. Efforts to
divert and sabotage that struggle by dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial
identity lead inexorably in the direction of fascism.
Through the promotion of a racial version of communalism, all factions of the ruling class
seek to divide the working class so as to better exploit it and ward off the threat of
revolution. It is no coincidence that when American society is straining under the weight of
the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000 people and sparked an economic
crisis on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are ever-more ferociously seeking
to make race the fundamental issue."
One of the most revolting things about contemporary liberalism is how incredibly fascistic
it is. It seems impossible for the Democrats to mention anything without turning to the
fetishistic zoological Idealism of Race with a capital R. While liberals might not (yet) be
fascists, they certainly think like fascists.
In November, the state-sanctioned choice - and by extension the only choice presented to
the American people by the state mouthpieces in the corporate media - will be between a
military junta under the "auspices" of the CIA Democrats/latter day Maoists or a
quasi-fascist regime under Trump. Democracy in America - specifically bourgeois "democracy" -
is on its last legs. Only the intervention of the working class, led by a genuine socialist
leadership, can avert a catastrophe that will threaten all of humanity.
"The designers of the Emancipation Statue in Lincoln Park in DC didn't take into account
the views of African Americans. It shows. Blacks too fought to end enslavement."
First, the statue was funded by donations from freedmen, gathered by members of the
Western Sanitary Society, an abolitionist-run organization. The impetus for the monument came
from a freedwoman named Charlotte Scott, who declared in the wake of Lincoln's
assassination:
"Colored people had lost their best friend on earth I will give five dollars of my wages
towards erecting a monument to his memory."
At least $16,000 was raised, including from African American Union soldiers who had fought
at some of the key fronts in the Civil War.
A description of the artist's design for the monument states: "In the original the
kneeling slave is represented as perfectly passive, receiving the boon of freedom from the
hand of the great liberator. But the artist has justly changed all this by making the
emancipated slave an agent in his own deliverance. He is represented as exerting his own
strength, with strained muscles, in breaking the chain which had bound him."
As the WSWS states, the reactionary interests of those bound up with the destruction of
these monuments today must, by definition "require a no less grotesque distortion of the
past."
This monument was created in 1876, at the height of the revolutionary-democratic upswell
known as Reconstruction. In attacking this monument, representatives of the ruling class
today, including its nominally "liberal" representatives, are seeking to topple the legacy of
a genuine multi-racial upsurge of the population against racial hatred and discrimination. In
today's case, it is to fundamentally hide the fact that the root cause of racial oppression
and racism lies in the depths of poverty and social inequality, and militarism on a massive
scale, that happens to characterize capitalism today.
In tearing down this statue, they will attempt to complete what the remnants of the slave
masters failed to do in the time of Reconstruction. Nathaniel Bedford Forrest would be
proud.
Trotsky: I believe that the first question is the attitude of the Socialist Workers Party
toward the Negroes. It is very disquieting to find that until now the party has done almost
nothing in this field. It has not published a book, a pamphlet, leaflets, nor even any
articles in the New International. Two comrades who compiled a book on the question, a
serious work, remained isolated. That book is not published, nor are even quotations from it
published. It is not a good sign. It is a bad sign. The characteristic thing about the
American workers' parties, trade-union organizations, and so on, was their aristocratic
character. It is the basis of opportunism. The skilled workers who feel set in the capitalist
society help the bourgeois class to hold the Negroes and the unskilled workers down to a very
low scale. Our party is not safe from degeneration if it remains a place for intellectuals,
semi-intellectuals, skilled workers and Jewish workers who build almost isolated from the
genuine mass. Under these condition our party cannot develop -- it will degenerate.
We must have this great danger before our eyes. Many times I have proposed that every member
of the party, especially the intellectuals and semi-intellectuals, who, during a period of
say six months, cannot each win a worker-member for the party, should be demoted to the
position of sympathizer. We can say the same in the Negro question. The old organizations,
beginning with the AFL, are the organizations of the workers' aristocracy. Our party is a
part of the same milieu, not of the basic exploited masses of whom the Negroes are the most
exploited. The fact that our party until now has not turned to the Negro question is a very
disquieting symptom. If the workers' aristocracy is the basis of opportunism, one of the
sources of adaptation to capitalist society, then the most oppressed and discriminated are
the most dynamic milieu of the working class.
Trotsky was writing as always to to align the subjective consciousness of the working
class with objective reality. The words you quote were written in April, 1939, when support
for mixed marriages was in the low single digits, when the experiences of integration in the
wars just about to begin had not yet occurred, when less than a quarter of the Great
Migration had concluded and thus few blacks and whites had yet had the opportunity to sort
out common cause in the great industrial struggles, as had already been illustrated in the
Flint sit-down strike where workers chose their only black fellow worker, Roscoe Van Zandt,
to lead them out of the occupied plants in a victory parade. Gallup would not even poll to
measure acceptability of a black presidential candidate for another 19 years, when the number
was a mere 38%.
That's the objective reality at the time with which Trotsky was seeking to align the
subjective consciousness of the working class to forge a political instrument.
Are you maintaining that the objective reality is unchanged today?
No that is not what I'm suggesting at all. Obviously much has changed since 1939.. we no
longer have sharecroppers and it's no longer the case where a major section of blacks work as
servants.. but it also easy to think that 1939 was "so long ago" and that these words no
longer hold any relevance. The black working class remains even today one of the most
oppressed sections of the working class and today large sections of this population are
entering into the class struggle. I think the party should consider the best way under TODAYS
CONDITIONS to recruit and educate those workers. Bring them under the banner of the 4th
international. Immigrant workers are a very similar case, and similar conditions exist for
unskilled workers compared to the various "professionals" and skilled labor. This era was
birthed from the yoke of the last. The working class is much more unified along race lines as
you have pointed out. That means we as revolutionaries we are in an even more favorable
situation to this work. It does not mean that the work is unneeded. This article states the
growing movements are under danger of being hijacked by reactionary petite bourgeois forces
and that is true but only as true as the revolutionary proletariats failure to bring these
working elements entering struggle under our banner. I do not suggest we adopt any program
from the 30s and 40s. I do however think the party could benefit from Trotsky's suggestion of
a 6 month worker recruitment rule.
Though not a party member I recommend George Breitman's writings on American Black
nationalism--as distinct from the narrow cultural nationalism of too many Black Panthers, the
New Black Panthers especially--expounding on and integrating pertinent thoughts of Malcom X
and Trotsky. Recently Vladimir Zhirinovsky suggested Blacks be assigned three states
bordering Canada as a homeland and/or go to Liberia. Needless to say such sweet revenge
dreams of Russian elites for the very real dismembering of their lands by Washington's ethnic
cleansing pot stirring a la Yugoslavia/Syria ad nauseam coming home to roost may approach
reality as the US rich find it hard to bottle their race genie.
"Before exhausting or drowning mankind in blood, capitalism befouls the world atmosphere
with the poisonous vapors of national and race hatred...
An uncompromising disclosure of the roots of race prejudice and all forms and shades of
national arrogance and chauvinism, particularly anti Semitism, should become part of the
daily work of all sections of the Fourth International, as the most important part of the
struggle against imperialism and war. Our basic slogan remains: Workers of the World
Unite!"
This article is critical in countering the dangerous communalist agenda of the social
layers seeking to prop up the Democratic Party and prevent the working class from achieving
its political independence. This is part of a trend that's taking place on every continent.
Our movement is leading the way in opposing this attempt to derail the emerging revolutionary
movement of the international working class.
The toppling of statues of progressive figures such as Lincoln is part of a broader attack
on rational thought. At stake is the entire progressive heritage of the Enlightenment and the
centuries-long struggle for social equality that, since the birth of scientific socialism in
the 19th century, has been embodied in the Marxist movement -- -today the Trotskyist
movement.
What do the forces who toppled the Lincoln statue have to say on pressing contemporary
issues such as imperialist war, climate destruction, extreme social inequality, etc. that
cannot be understood through racial theory.
Why is it that Abraham Lincoln was a symbol of the fight for equality and social justice
across the world? Why, during the American civil war, did workers' display such heroic
solidarity in enduring the cotton famine -- -which paralysed much of the cotton industry due
to the collapse in trade? Why did workers' in 19th century Manchester in northern England
collect the money to build a statue of Lincoln in their city? This article explains this:
How the British workers' movement helped end slavery in America .
In Britain, the IYSSE (UK) saw that identity politics and the historical falsification
associated with it was a direct attack on Marxism and workers' class consciousness that had
to be countered. We polemicise against the pseudo-left in their attempts to promote a
postmodernist re-writing of history motivated by the defence of their social privilege
against the long-term interests of the working class.
We attacked the "Decolonise Education" movement, which is raising its head again today in
the article
The racialist agenda of the "Decolonise Education" movement . We explained their slogan
"Why is My Curriculum White?" as follows: "The classification of philosophers based on their
skin colour, rather than their place in the historical development of human thought, is
combined with an attack on the entire progressive tradition of the Enlightenment."
I strongly encourage all class-conscious workers and young people to take up an active
study of history and the theory of Marxism which is essential to orient oneself in today's
complex and rapidly-changing world political situation
The campaign by the Stalinists against their opponents, Leon Trotsky constituting their
greatest enemy, involved the greatest wholesale destruction of history ever seen. The banning
of books, the murder of an entire generation of genuine Marxists and the greatest crime, the
assassination of Trotsky in 1940. Photos that included Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev--pretty
much anyone who fell afoul of Stalin and the bureaucratic interests he defended--were
airbrushed out history with the intent to obliterate their role in the October revolution.
Their books were destroyed, any positive mention of them were eliminated and they were
slandered as "fascists", "Mensheviks", "counter-revolutionaries". No lie was too outrageous
in defaming Stalin's victims.
Vadim Ragovin, the great Russian historian once said that the "Russian people did not only
not know their future, they did not know their past." This falsification of history went far
in eliminating the Trotskyist alternative to Stalinism and enshrining Stalin--the gravedigger
of the revolution, the antithesis of Lenin--as the supposed incarnation of Bolshevik/Leninist
resoluteness.
The present campaign against Lincoln, Grant and others, is remarkable for the fact that
they are targeting revolutionaries. Bourgeois revolutionaries, but none-the-less,
revolutionaries. Those revolutionists carried out the greatest destruction of wealth,
slavery, to that point in history. No monuments to capital, such as the infamous Charging
Bull in front of Wall Street, (my city has a stack of oversized coins as a monument to
capital) have been the target of such vilification, vandalism or destruction by the
instigators of racialist politics. They indeed know what class they are oriented to.
My favorite Lincoln story took place shortly before his assassiation when the great
liberation army had captured the confederate capital of Richmond. Lincoln visited the city
shortly thereafter and walked around to have a look. An older Black man recognized him on the
street and ran up to him declaiming "The Messiah has come" and bowed down. Lincoln asked the
man to stand up saying: "Get up man. As long as I am president you don't need to bow to
anyone but God."
Yup. That one and and another one on the same trip.
In reference to you, colored people, let me say God has made you free. Although you have
been deprived of your God-given rights by your so-called masters, you are now as free as I
am, and if those that claim to be your superiors do not know that you are free, take the
sword and bayonet and teach them that you are ...
This is the man that malicious deluders contrive into an enemy of freedom and black people
and capitalist pawn. And there are dupes aplenty pulling down statues and presenting the same
old predigested delusional arguments, prepared for them by capitalist slavocrats, even
here.
Division does not have to be sewn into the working class. It is there as it has been for
centuries. "The color line" remains the border of divide between white workers and those of
color. What is most important is that millions of white workers have joined the struggle.
I too condemn the desecration of the statues and yes the identitarians and the Democrats
are riding the tide, attempting to bring the ships into the the harbor of electoral politics,
however equating this movement as "racial- communalist" is just as dangerous. The cops are
doubling down and people of color will remain the usual suspects. I have to think that the
32% of Trump supporters who supported the burning down of the police precinct in Minneapolis
were from it's working class wing. That is way significant.
Participation in the movement should always be critical but using the "racial-
communalist" term not good
The Democrats and the pseudo-left seek to undermine the legacy of the Civil War and the
related abolitionist and Underground railroad conductors precisely because it shows
workers (and middle class) collaborating across racial and ethnic "lines" towards positive
change, which helps solidify, rather than break up, an increasingly militant and working
class, which is increasingly coming into conflict with the whole capitalist system, which the
Democrats and pseudo-left rabidly defend. Workers of all races are shown daily working
together in protests against the police violence of the capitalist state, exploding daily the
myth of the "racist white working class". It is the duty of the socialist to oppose these
racial-communalist attempts to divide the working class by the bourgeois and
petty-bourgeois.
What's gonna happen as the economy continues to go down? It seems the ruling class did all
it could to send the working class down various blind alleys....now it's gonna come back,
through reactionary methods, to haunt everyone.
This is what I have to say about it all.....we asked the capitalist ruling class nicely to
make meaningful changes, the ruling class said they would. Nothing changed because they
lied.
So now, the working class is taking the matter into its own hands.....and it ain't gonna
look pretty. Heads are gonna roll.
Vast amounts of the working class have, over their lifetime, been manipulated by the
capitalist class.....so the working class is mostly confused and is in the process of lashing
out in all directions.
As hard as the wsws tried to fight against the liberal classes 1619 disinformation
project, many in the working class were not reached. That is the strength of anti working
class propaganda. And what Socialists are constantly fighting against.
As with the ethos of Capitalist Realism , it's easier to see the end of the world than to
see the end of capitalism.
This is an enormously important statement that deserves the widest possible international
readership. Particularly important is the section explaining the division of labor between
the capitalist parties. The fascistic filth emanating from the White House, scripted by
Stephen Miller and similar elements, is being "answered" by equally reactionary communalist
backwardness. The New York Times is the most consistent and determined purveyor of this, and
there seems to be no limit to how low they are prepared to go.
Another passage in this article that should get special attention is the timing of the
current campaign against Lincoln and others, "It is no coincidence that when American society
is straining under the weight of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more than 120,000
people and sparked an economic crisis on the scale of the Great Depression, the Democrats are
ever-more ferociously seeking to make race the fundamental issue."
They are desperately working to divert the progressive but limited response to police
murders into the Democratic Party. They need to whip up as much tension and confusion within
the working class as they possibly can, precisely because they know what is coming over the
next few months, as millions confront additional mass layoffs, evictions and other attacks.
The more that workers and youth are fixated on "race" the less they are able to unite against
these threats of the pandemic, economic devastation and the threat of dictatorship.
Targeting "anti-Confederate" forces is just what you'd expect from the party of slavery,
Jim Crow, and now the no less despicable identity politics, not to mention it being the
oldest capitalist party in the world.
I can understand (but certainly not sympathize with) the twisted logic used against
statues of Grant and Lincoln but why Heg? Was it because he was white? I recall one of the
funeral rants of the Reverend Al Charleton about racism as "the DNA" in the American
character revealing the dangerous influence of the 1619 Project that may soon become
mandatory in colleges and schools.
Regrettably, there are otherwise sane people who genuinely argue that any statue depicting
any person who had white skin and a penis has to be taken down.
What a fantastic writing! The fight against communalism takes center stage for socialists.
The SEP is the the only genuine socialist tendency, defending historic gains as an
indispensable part of building a new working class counteroffensive. Please share this
document widely! Perspective is critical! Not one inch to the "lame liberals" and no
adaptation to racialist politics!
On the subject of "building a new working class counteroffensive", if I may:
The protests since May 25 have often begun peacefully only to be taken over by well-trained
violent actors. Two organizations have appeared regularly in connection with the violent
protests -- Black Lives Matter and Antifa (USA). Videos show well-equipped protesters
dressed uniformly in black and masked (not for coronavirus to be sure), vandalizing police
cars, burning police stations, smashing store windows with pipes or baseball bats. Use of
Twitter and other social media to coordinate "hit-and-run" swarming strikes of protest mobs
is evident.
What has unfolded since the Minneapolis trigger event has been compared to the wave of
primarily black ghetto protest riots in 1968. I lived through those events in 1968 and what
is unfolding today is far different. It is better likened to the Yugoslav color revolution
that toppled Milosevic in 2000.
America's Own Color Revolution
By F. William Engdahl
Region: Europe, USA
Theme: History, Intelligence, Police State & Civil Rights
Niles and David, as you note, "Whatever the particular issue may be -- poverty, police
brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemics -- it is almost
exclusively defined in racial terms."
And as you note of Trotsky, " The purpose of lies about history, as Trotsky explained, is
to conceal real social contradictions."
Which is exactly why this meta-causal cancer of the under-diagnosed Disguised Global Crony
Capitalist Empire must be fully exposed, expunged, and/or surgically and peacefully 'excised'
in a Third American "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin du Rivage] by 'we the American
people' firing a; loud, public, sustained, 'in-the-streets', but totally non-violent "SHOUT
(not shot) heard round the world" to ignite a Third American people's peaceful and complete
"Political/economic & socialist Revolution Against Empire" to lead the world toward
socialist democracy as our first one did in 1776 and our second one did in 1861 -- but
without the muskets.
One can only react with disgust and hatred for those in and around the Democratic Party,
who hiding behind the phrase "fight racism" are doing the exact opposite. The article is spot
on in exposing the sinister motives behind the attempt to erase from historical memory any
vestiges of this country's revolutionary past. As workers are risking their lives in the
assembly plants and warehouses, it is obvious whose interests are served by these outrageous
acts and proposals. Young people must reject those who spurn history. You must draw a line in
the streets against those who would do these things, and instead break out of the straight
jacket imposed by both capitalist parties and the media to keep these protests fixated on the
questions of "race".
Fellow Comrades the liberal bourgeois establishment in America are intentionally using
racial Communalist politics in order to divert the public from the growing class antagonisms.
Now one group is using ultra nationalism and authoritarianism as the only way forward while
the other one is using race and gender ideas as part of their orientation in this upcoming
elections. Basically they are both seeking to divide the working class along reactionary
slogans and agendas.
They are both working together to perpetuate the system and divide the people. They know
what they are doing. They are diverting any thought about changing the laws that allow the
oppression to begin with, here and abroad. We are doomed because the majority of people are
under their spell and have no desire to think critically.
This is a moving and brilliant defense of the revolutionary democratic foundations of the
United States, which provide an impulse today for the working class to carry out the third
American Revolution--the socialist revolution to put an end to capitalism as part of the
world socialist revolution. The American bourgeoisie very long ago repudiated the
revolutionary democratic ideals that inspired the American Revolution and the struggle of
Lincoln and the North in the Civil War. That repudiation finds expression today in the
denigration and attack on those revolutions and the figures who led them. As the Perspective
explains, there is a division of labor in this assault between Trump/Republicans and the
Democrats, but both have in common the fact that they utilize racialism to do its traditional
dirty work of seeking to divide the working class and undermine the class struggle against
capitalism.
Of particular importance, as noted by other commentors, is the following observation:
"This grotesque distortion of present-day reality required a no less grotesque distortion
of the past. For contemporary American to be protrayed as a land of relentless racial
warfare, it is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the
class struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of
perpetual racial conflict."
Further down, the statement asserts: "Efforts to divert and sabotage that struggle by
dissolving class identity into the miasma of racial identity lead inexorably in the direction
of fascism."
In that connection, there is a parallel between the struggle being led by the SEP, WSWS
and ICFI against the promotion of racial-communalist politics and accompanying falsification
of history in the US and the struggle our movement has been and continues to wage in Germany
against the rehabilitation of Hitler and the Nazis by the ruling class and the falsification
of German and world history to declare the source of all the evils and catastrophes of the
20th century to be the October Revolution and establishment of the Soviet Union.
BG, the form in which these mass eruptions take in the states is, and has to be, different
than that of European and other countries.
Statutes have been desecrated and toppled elsewhere. Some deservedly without doubt.
For the mass of youth whose knowledge of historical events is one of great distortion and one
sidedness.
In their eyes, statues in major squares and other prominent places represent powerful and
powering pillars of the establishment. Hence the "senseless" vandalism.
Only those divorced from and hostile to the revolutionary aspirations of today's youth
fail to perceive and grasp that.
Thank you Niles and David for this excellent perspective. As you explain, a section of the
ruling class is attempting to hijack what is a progressive multi-racial movement opposing
police brutality and other forms of social injustice to promote reactionary racial and
communal politics in a desperate attempt to maintain the capitalist order. I strongly
encourage all of our readers to carefully study the material produced by the WSWS on the 1619
project. Understanding this history is critical in orienting ourselves to answer these new
racial attacks. Permit me to quote from the end of our analysis of the NY Times reply
defending the project to five historians, "As Marxists, we understand and have settled
accounts with the limitations of the bourgeois-democratic revolutions of the 18th and 19th
centuries. We know very well the difference between ideological rationalizations and
historically determined realities. But those who are not inspired by the world-historical and
universal ideals proclaimed by Jefferson's immortal Declaration and Lincoln's Gettysburg
Address are neither socialists nor revolutionaries. Those who glibly surrender positions won
through the shedding of blood in the past will never conquer new ones."
"The uncompromising defense of the progressive heritage of the first two American
revolutions is necessary for resisting intellectual retrogression and political reaction,
educating the working class, and, on that basis, building a powerful American and
international socialist movement."
What a wonderful article about our surreal times. I keep dreaming that I'm in a movie
theatre again and again which is strange because we can't go there anymore, at least not at
the time being. These times are so strange. For a memorial of Abraham Lincoln to be under
attack... this is something I could have never imagined a few years ago. Thank you Niles
Niemuth and David North for providing historical background about the statue, even a little
bit of history is such a profound thing and of course history is repurposed time and time
again to serve anyone's political agenda. Rage is not a particularly rational thing and takes
on incomprehensible forms.
"The Democratic Party employs another variant of communalist politics, evaluating and
explaining all social problems and conflicts in racial terms. Whatever the particular issue
may be -- poverty, police brutality, unemployment, low wages, deaths caused by the pandemics
-- it is almost exclusively defined in racial terms. In this racialized fantasy world,
"whites" are endowed with an innate "privilege" that exempts them from all hardship."
I think this is wrong. The Trump movement is defined by prejudice (banning muslims,
scapegoating immigrants, anti-black racism etc.) so for us to have a president right now, a
con artist (I'll emphasize the black community) who began his entire campaign by saying the
first Black president was not born in America, talking about how a black lives matter
protester attacked at his rally "should have been roughed up" in 2015, playing footsies with
the KKK, called Africa a "shit hole", Mike Pence comparing Donald Trump to Martin Luther King
Jr. etc. all of this snowballing into today of course people of color and anyone who
empathizes is outraged. Every day of this has been a dangerous embarrassment for the black
community.
Yesterday:
Fired Wilmington cop: "We are just going to go out and start slaughtering them f -- -- ni
-- –. I can't wait. God, I can't wait."
This kind of thing is going on all over the country. The most tangible issue is certainly
class in the sense I think it's the most practical thing for us to focus on, at least it's
all we can focus on because there's no rational way to end the racism that exists between
people, but at the same time, to think that any amount of money, healthcare, or well-being
for this person and his family would stop him from being prejudiced doesn't make sense. There
is a long history of racism and we are at a moment where America is undergoing a radical
shift in its diversity.
"In this racialized fantasy world, "whites" are endowed with an innate "privilege" that
exempts them from all hardship."
There have been 44 white male presidents.
Again, of course amongst white men class supersedes the identity group, but that being
said certainly there is such a thing as white privilege, in so many different ways, this
country was built to revolve around property owning white men. Donald Trump's presidency is
defined by this. If President Obama had done even one of the things Trump does on a daily
basis he would have never been president. That is white male supremacy. We went from
Republicans being critical of Michelle Obama for showing her shoulders as first lady to
having an ex-centerfold as first lady. The double standard couldn't be more apparent.
We have a republican party who yes have constituents who have suffered under the aegis of
neoliberalism but not disproportionately in comparison to the people who vote blue. Their
political movement is defined by prejudice. This is not a "racialized fantasy world" people
are under attack.
I agree that class is the salient issue but also at the same time as we're seeing with the
trump movement prejudice can be used to get people to vote blatantly against their own
interests in supporting a con artist. So how can class be addressed without first
acknowledging racism? I don't have the answers for this question, no one does. Hatred is a
bulwark which swaddles capitalism.
If you think class warfare is wrong, you are in the wrong website and have missed the
point of the article. When class war is initiated by the working class, liberation is on the
agenda.
Every time I think I cannot be more disgusted with the Democrats, I am wrong. There is a
certain slime that is all over the Democratic Party that eeven the Republicans cannot match.
I guess it never occurs to any of the protesters that destroying your history is creating a
form of collective amnesia. No notice is taken that what is happening witht this wonton
destruction of history sure looks a lot like what happened in Iraq during the U.S. Invasion
when many historical treasures of what was the cradle of civilization were either destroyed
or looted. Just a complete erasure of history and, of course, if you do not know who you are
because your memories, your history, have been erased, then how will you move forward? You
are a tabula rasa at that point so the future can only be met unprepared and with
trepidation.
That, as today's perspective explains, is exactly the point. Figures like Jefferson, Grant
and Lincoln (Lincoln!!!!) are shat upon and denigrated. No effort is made to understand them
as historical figures in the context of their epoch and the giants they are in world history.
What can we learn from them and other historical figures and do right where they went wrong?
I guess if history's destroyers have their way we'll not be able to learn anything at all.
Just as intended. I say let the statues be and down with the CCOOTs (Criminal Capitalists Of
Our Times)!
''This grotesque distortion of present-day reality requires a no less grotesque distortion
of the past. For contemporary America to be portrayed as a land of relentless racial warfare,
it is necessary to create a historical narrative in the same terms. In place of the class
struggle, the entire history of the United States is presented as the story of perpetual
racial conflict.''
A very profound encapsulation of what we are seeing going on now. As others have commented
, history does not travel on some moral straight line. Lincoln could not escape the powerful
contradictions of his time, he could only guide the progressive forces where he could.
It is not for us to idealise Lincoln, nor for those who do so in the negative. When push
comes to shove the reactionary essence of the racialists is that they offer no way out for
black or white . The ''purity of their outrage'' is nothing but a case of bad wind, and it is
not an accident that it comes from those orbiting the Democrats.
Good point about racialists offering no way forward for the whole working class,
nationally and internationally. How could the constricted racialist narrative, by dividing as
opposed to uniting, have anything to lend to progressive change, which can only be
accomplished through the unity of the working class and socialist revolution? How can the
legacy of racial oppression and discrimination, effecting most acutely the black masses as
opposed to the affluent African American layer, be overcome with this regressive co-option of
a progressive mass struggle that erupted in the past month?
Unmentioned in this critical call to arms by David and Niles is the role of the pseudoleft
in actively promoting this racialist campaign of vile and reactionary iconoclasm.
The pseudo-Trotskyist "Left Voice", co-thinkers of the Argentinian Morenoites, is
spearheading an attack from within the New York DSA against "class reductionism" purportedly
represented by Jacobin Magazine. This attack recently led to the cancellation of a live
streaming event featuring African American scholar, Adolph Reed. Reed, one of the scholars
interviewed by the WSWS in the campaign against the 1619 Project, was charged with "class
reductionism". The identity politics sensitive DSA, a club within the Democratic Party,
capitulated to the internal attacks and cancelled the event just as it was to begin.
Another pseudo-Trotskyist Facebook page yesterday attacked the WSWS and the SEP for its
"Hands off the Monuments" call. The Trotsky's Armored Train and rolling Pizzeria (?) Facebook
page, featured a screen shot of the WSWS with a warning to "Please stay away from the WSWS
and the SEP!" Site members followed with a lengthy thread of scurrilous attacks on both the
WSWS and the statues, especially the Jefferson Memorials. Jefferson is dismissed as a rapist
for his inter-racial relationship with the slave, Sally Hemings. This writer fought a rear
guard action on this site to combat the slander of the WSWS and to set the historical record
straight. Obviously these poseurs are very much afraid of the class perspective of the
WSWS.
Very interesting, especially concerning the "Left Voice" intervention in the New York DSA
and the DSA response. Well, Dr. Reed likely wouldn't have been much appreciated by that bunch
anyway, though he was
(along with all the learned, honest historians who came forward to conflict with the 1619
Project) greatly appreciated by WSWS readers. However, it would have been good if any
leftward moving workers and youth in attendance had some exposure to real history, including
a class based perspective. But, of course, the pseudo-socialst Dem club wouldn't want that!
By the way, my wife and I really found your contribution to the discussion of the previous
related Perspective by Tom and Niles of a few days ago quite enlightening on the plight and
response of the European indentured servants (slaves in all but name) on the Tidewater
tobacco plantations.
Yes, the "Jefferson was a rapist" trope is the common thread of the pseudo-left, fitting
right in with their support for MeToo and hostility to Julian Assange.
My goodness, not Moreno. So they are still about wouldn't have thought. He was, of all
things for Che Guevera, but not Castro, and led many youths to the early grave. Actually, the
Pabloists were big on Castro but not old Moreno who thought that Castro had Che killed and
the famous picture of Che's corpse on his ill-fated adventure doctored. Castro was not amused
and the Pabloists stopped dropping by/ He was allied with a dude called Posadas who
eventually got obsessed with inter-galacting communication from Bolsheviks in Outer Space. I
actually read article defending that nonsense in the Jacobin. The obscurantist have again
pushed themselves to the front.
I find at least Posadas was amusing in his somewhat more innovative ideas about
intergalactic travel and talking with dolphins. At least it follows a historical materialist
line which would say that productive forces can not be unleashed to their full potential
until the constraints of private mode of production, classes are abolished. Aliens,
theoretically and scientifically would and could exist given our own existence. Intergalactic
travel would be surely one of the most pressing issues of a worldwide socialist republic
after addressing earthly needs.
During the Russian Revolution peasants took to burning down the huge houses of the local
rich landowners.
The Bolsheviks had to intervene and patiently explain that these were now the property of the
working masses.
The peasants were of course almost universally illiterate.
It is probably more true to state that those that are desecrating and destroying statues
of Lincoln and others are miseducated.
This article is one of a series published by WSWS attempting to rectify these backward
destructive measures.
I don`t want to be annoying. It was bitter opponents of Lenin and the Bolsheviks , the
Social Revolutionaries, SR who led the peasants. The Bolsheviks had nothing to do with the
burning of mansions, and had no intention to stop the burning of mansions and seizure of
land. They formed strategically the worker-peasant alliance, but had insignificant influence
and numbers at this first stage of the revolution.. There were lot of troubles with the
SR`s-- and the peasants after.
I was not aware of suggesting the Bolsheviks had anything to do with the burnings. My
comment, bad grammar included, stated the Bolsheviks intervened to stop the arsonists.
The vast majority of peasants knew nothing of Bolshevism at the time.
It was the Bolsheviks agrarian program, which none of the bourgeois parties -- Cadets, SR --
could match in any shape or form, won the multimillioned peasantry to Socialist Revolution
under Lenin and Trotsky.
The vast majority of demonstrators across the global have not heard of WSWS or even the ICF,
yet alone be aware of its program. Dissemination of our program is a precursor to proletarian
revolution.
You miss the point. They are not so much miseducated as representing a definite social
layer. They reject the class basis of this racialist campaign, which is led by the New York
Times and Democratic Party to divide the working class. These forces seek to turn the
democratic sentiments and anger of young people in a reactionary form.
Note that they don't put forward any social demands, against the ravages of the lives of all
working class people created by the Pandemic and the economic crisis of the past decades.
Let us all get this article around as widely as possible, to wage a struggle against this
communalist attempt.
BLM demonstrators are heterogeneous in terms of race ethnicity, religion, age, but
undoubtedly predominantly youth. Every photograph has elucidated that.
I do not think I miss the point.
The pent up frustrations and anger following years of police violence, austerity, insecure
jobs, poor education and opportunities for youth is expressed in every street disturbance --
what the bourgeoise press calls senseless violence.
Undoubtedly elements amongst them are conscious of their actions, but for many the
opportunity to fight all that is perceived to be "part of the repressive state" cannot be
missed.
Being part of millions strong demonstrations has its own momentum. That scares the ruling
elite.
Destruction of statues is not just a US phenomenon, it is global.
It's not pretty, but it could be the opening shots of World Socialist Revolution.
We cannot impose our own values upon the masses.
What this and previous articles have set out to achieve, I believe, is to educate these
millions not to be mislead. Learn the lessons of history, lessons that capitalist education
has denied them.
WSWS has to intervene and direct these revolutionary stirrings away from identity politics
and to advance under the banner of the ICFI.
decades of undermining of class politics by Social democracy, trade unionism, Stalinism make
this a difficult task; difficult but not impossible.
That social layer is also well-organized and well-funded in varied salaried political
formations , including Black Lives Matter and those who would "occupy" space. They come out
of nowhere, disorient and as quickly disappear into profitable progressive Democratic Party
beds. Mayakovsky called them in a failing Russian Revolution under Stalin--" Bedbugs". Great
play..And so they are.
Please read this article and share widely. There is developing a tendency by the
Democratic party and Republican Party, for a fascist movement, in the US, and elsewhere
around the world. Only the working class can stop this rot, lead by the ICFI, SEP and
wsws.org .
This is one of the most direct and important WSWS perspectives I have ever read. It is
both a historical corrective and an impassioned warning to the working class in defense of
history, equality and any kind of democratic rule.
The freed slave depicted by Thomas Ball's statue "Lincoln the Emancipator" has the
likeness of Archer Alexander, a real slave who never actually met Lincoln, but freed himself
and was separated from his family in order to warn Union troops of Confederate sabotage. His
act of courage, and the hundreds of thousands of slaves who risked their lives during the
war, are also memorialized by this statue. It was commissioned based upon donations by
liberated slaves. Some of Alexander's descendants today oppose tearing down this statue,
whose complex history also reflects the struggles of Reconstruction in the aftermath of the
Civil War.
Within privileged layers of academia, the distortion of history and misrepresentation of
contemporary suffering by the global working class has become a major industry. Some
students, including those with genuine democratic intentions, are being seriously miseducated
and encouraged to participate in racially divisive politics. Students and workers need to
study history now more than ever, and it is no accident that America's leading historians of
the American Revolution and Civil War have sided with the WSWS in its defense of historical
truth (see the WSWS's writings on the 1619 project). The political perspective needed to end
police brutality and economic injustice requires an accurate appraisal of past struggles for
democratic rights, and today a unified struggle by not just the American but also the global
working class. Students and workers should take note.
The statue was vandalized
over the July 4th weekend, Rochester police told local media on Sunday.
Photos from the scene show
an empty spot where the statue used to stand in Maplewood Park, as well as its debris scattered in the vicinity. The statue
was lying 50 feet from its pedestal when officers found it.
The statue
"had
been placed over the fence to the gorge and was leaning against the fence,"
police said in a statement, as cited by The
Democrat and Chronicle daily.
Carvin Eison, director of
the 'Re-Energizing the Legacy of Frederick Douglass' project, said the monument is beyond repair and will need to be replaced.
"It's particularly painful that it happened at this time,"
he said.
Dozens of statues have
been knocked off their pedestals across the country in a monument-toppling spree championed by Black Lives Matter activists,
which see it as a way of reckoning with the nation's troubling legacy of slavery and racism. While the initial targets of the
protesters were Confederate generals, later vandalism, which met little resistance from law enforcement, saw the statues of
Christopher Columbus and other historical figures being removed as well.
It's so far unclear who was behind the Douglass statue incident.
The monument, inaugurated
in 2018 to mark Douglass' 200th birthday, is part of a city-wide installation consisting of 13 statues – all replicas of a
larger statue of Douglass, which was unveiled in Rochester's Highland Park neighborhood in 1899. The statues were placed
throughout the city in places of significance to the abolitionist's life in a bid to bolster his legacy.
In a speech in 1852,
Douglass made a case against celebrating July 4th by African Americans, saying:
"The
blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are not enjoyed in common. This Fourth July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I
must mourn."
It's not the first time
the installation has been targeted by vandals. In December 2018, two students from Rochester's St. John Fisher College were
arrested and charged with misdemeanors after they were filmed dismantling one of the statues and stealing it. The students
claimed they were drunk and later apologized, calling what they had done to the statue
"a
terrible thing,"
and offered to help repair the monument.
As protesters target statues around the nation, one town is becoming a statue sanctuary city
for monuments honoring select figures.
Newton Falls, Ohio City Manager David M. Lynch has signed a proclamation that states that
the city will accept and display spurned statues of people including George Washington, Abraham
Lincoln, and certain other prominent figures.
"A Proclamation declaring that Newton Falls is a Statuary Sanctuary City and declaring a
general amnesty for George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant,
Patrick Henry, Francis Scott Key, Theodore Roosevelt and Christopher Columbus as represented by
the statues of these great leaders, and volunteering to accept these statues that have been
removed throughout the USA and place them in a location of honor in our community," the
proclamation says, according to a copy posted by
21-WFMJ .
"They founded our nation, they ended slavery, and established and protected our national
parks," Lynch said, according to
Fox 8 .
"Yes, they had warts but they laid the foundation for what we have today," he said.
Protesters in Baltimore, Maryland on July 4th
toppled a statue of Christopher Columbus and dumped it into the city's Inner Harbor.
The statue, dedicated in 1984, is the latest monument to be destroyed in what President
Trump dubbed the "left-wing cultural revolution" by "angry mobs."
According to the
Baltimore Sun , the Columbus statue has been the site of a wreath-laying ceremony right
before the annual Columbus Day parade, which, in 2019 was replaced with the Italian Heritage
Festival.
Republican state delegates and Italian-American activists held a press conference at the
statue last month to ask Gov. Larry Hogan and Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. "Jack" Young to
preserve and protect the memorials , following activists' comments about pulling down the
monuments themselves and the introduction of a City Council bill this week to rename one of
them in honor of victims of police violence.
The downed statue is one of three monuments to Columbus in Baltimore. -
Baltimore Sun
BLM thugs have already started going after patriots. They ambushed our governor at the
small town of Ackley Iowa. They were stalking her as she visited companies providing
essential services during the pandemic. Her driver refused to stop, likely saving her life.
One BLM thug was hit but not seriously injured. They are not waiting to run out of statues.
We ordinary Americans must be heavily armed at all times now. Midwest states are full of
illegals, who serve the left as an army. Open civil war is upon us whether we would have it
or not.
warsev , 3 minutes ago
What these malicious rioters don't realize is that they are handing the November election
to DJT and Republicans for senate and house. Average Americans look on the footage that
accompanies this article with revulsion; for the ideas and the people behind them. Trump will
walk away with 2020. Just keep it up, loony lefties.
vic and blood , 4 minutes ago
We have been in a race and culture war with multiple factions for some time. The presumed
winner is not overtly participating.
Most white people are oblivious, though that is changing. Too bad we are demographically
doomed.
SolidGold , 1 minute ago
Divide and conquer. Who creates that genius?
NumberNone , 12 minutes ago
Was in downtown Baltimore less than 2 years ago, it felt like you were one person away
from someone that wanted to rob you. The downtown had all the usual suspects of faux high end
shopping but the vibe was one of John Wayne Gacy in his clown suit...it had all the look and
feel that was supposed to make you happy but it was rotten to the core.
Whoa Dammit , 13 minutes ago
We can't keep coddling these stupid brats. It's time to start making their parents pay for
the mess and destruction that their ill raised offspring cause.
GoldRulesPaperDrools , 17 minutes ago
Protesters == pavement apes
House of Cards , 17 minutes ago
Terrorists you mean
Watt Supremacissss , 16 minutes ago
Crybullies.
GoldRulesPaperDrools , 15 minutes ago
Redundant but accurate ... +100_000
Silver Savior , 17 minutes ago
Columbus was a dickhead anyway.
NumberNone , 9 minutes ago
So we tear apart the country for a guy that held a gun to a pregnant woman's stomach...if
you're gonna pass judgement and replace other people's icons you might want to make better
choices.
Blackdawg7 , 43 minutes ago
I've never been a fan of Christopher Columbus but witnessing these know-nothing
sanctimonious twits destroy public property while virtue signalling makes my blood boil.
Workdove , 44 minutes ago
Not worth the 10 years in jail...
vic and blood , 50 minutes ago
History's losers are terrorizing, and soon to be tyrannizing us because Caucasians are too
civilized and docile.
Every race and tribe is programmed by God to attempt to dominate.
As an adherent of the non-aggression principle, I don't care for the binary choice, but
accept it.
Either dominate or be dominated. Only cucks believe in co-existence. I assure you our
rivals do not believe in peaceful co-existence.
unionbroker , 1 hour ago
Christopher Columbus sails out into the unknown where no man has gone before. What the
**** has BLM done. Put the statues back up and throw BLM in the water
They probably can pus a smartphone instead of demolished monuments. Their view of police as a
brutal occupying force is naive, because police is just a muscle, and it is not "white supremacy"
that is behind them. They are fighting sypmtom, not the root case.
We all remember those shots. American troops are entering Baghdad. A tank stops somewhere in
the city, cautiously, in the vicinity of a Saddam Hussein monument. After a few minutes of
apparent inactivity, a crowd is beginning to form around the monument. The crowd is not all
that big. It rallies around the figure of Iraq's president. Soon an American soldier climbs the
monument and puts an American flag on it. An Iraqi intervenes, so the flag is replaced with the
Iraqi one. And then, then some individuals begin to climb the statue, a crane arrives from
somewhere, a steel rope is attached to the monument and the crane drives slowly back, taunting
the line and gradually slanting the president's image to its feet. Eventually the figure drops
to the ground and the cheering people dance around it, deliver it kicks and carry some of the
pieces that fell off in the process away.
The alien forces have conquered the capital city of the enemy and performed an age-old
ritual that victors used to perform in the presence of the vanquished: Americans demolished the
material symbol of the enemy's sovereignty and by doing it they also humiliated the routed
nation.
In the nineties of the 20th century we could all see angry Russians in Moscow, but also
angry Poles in Warsaw and equally angry residents of other European capitals tearing down
monuments from the communist era, especially those of Comrade Felix Dzerzhinsky, the notorious
head of the Cheka (from:
Всероссийская
чрезвычайная
комиссия, i.e. Vserossiyskaya chrezvychaynaya
komissiya = The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission).
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.392.0_en.html#goog_1134708888 NOW
PLAYING
Americans Are Growing More Anxious Over Spread of COVID-19 as Cases Continue to Rise
US sets global record with 53,000 coronavirus cases in one day
Trump Reportedly Flew into Rage When He Was Briefed on Negative Russian Intelligence, So
Officials Stopped Briefing Him
Trump Says New Left Wing Revolution Is Designed To Overthrow America
Trump vows Mount Rushmore will 'stand forever'
'The White House put on a con,' Pelosi on bounty report intelligence
Donald Trump: We're doing very well in dealing with Covid-19 crisis
Bolton: 'Fickle' Trump would sell out Israel for photo op with Iran's leaders
Since the dawn of history monuments would be put up and torn down. Either act reflected a
huge political, social, religious or demographic change. Monuments are erected by common
consent of the majority of a given (national, social, religious, political) community, in which
case they are wanted as a tribute to or a memory of the community's most cherished heroes or
values, or they are enforced by occupying forces, in which case they are hated by those against
whose will they have been put up.
Monuments are only desecrated, defaced, toppled or destroyed by the enemies of those who
built them. Americans in Iraq and a part of Iraqi nation was against Saddam Hussein; a rather
large part of the Russian nation nurtured bitter memories concerning the henchmen of their
ancestors like Felix Dzerzhinsky, so they vented their anger on his images the moment an
opportunity presented itself. The divide between those who put up the monuments and those who
hated the sight of them was in each case insurmountable. What was dear to the former, was
abhorrent to the latter.
Recently a huge wave of monument desecration and monument removal has swept the United
States and to a much lesser extent Europe. It is mostly the heroes of the American South
– generals of the Army of the Confederate States – that are targeted, but not only.
Also abolitionists, 1) fighters for
American independence of other nationalities, 2) Christian
missionaries 3) and even Jesus
Christ himself. 4) John Wayne may
not be spared the same fate either 5) so much so that
a monument to a Portland elk – his ancestor was presumably a slave owner and the elk
– a confirmed racist – fell victim to the rage of American iconoclasts.
6)
All this is taking place amid riots caused by the death of a frequent prison inmate who was
caught by the police while suspected of paying with counterfeit money. The activists of the
Black Lives Matter movement, supported by Antifa 7) and heavily
sponsored by the powers that be and spurned on by the democrats performed the usual acts of
protest: burning cars and looting shops. This time two qualitatively new elements have been
added: one is the toppling or desecration of monuments and the other is forcing the police
officers to knee to the rioters. All this is happening because it is wanted by at least a
significant part of the establishment, democrats in the first place, who having failed to
impeach Donald Trump, having stopped America's and the world's economies due to the so called
pandemic now are playing another trump card in yet another effort to thwart the president
incumbent from being elected for the second term.
https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890
Shamelessness as a revolutionary act ( which see )
The democrats have decided to use American blacks to create chaos and make a distressing
impression on US citizens who should come to the conclusion that Donald Trump is not capable of
running the country. History provides ample examples when a part of the elites willing to
topple the current ruler would resort to the help of the masses in order to force the ruler's
abdication or resignation. Such was the case in France in the run-up to the French Revolution,
such was the case in Russia in the run-up to the Russian revolution. In France it was the
so-called third class that was used for the purpose, in Russia it was the proletariat, now in
the United States it is the easily excitable blacks. History teaches us that a genie let out of
the bottle cannot be put back at a moment's notice. Either the democrats have not been
attentive during their history classes or their hatred of Donald Trump is so intense that they
don't care.
What is happening now in the Land of the Free makes the whole world wonder. It fits the
definition of a cultural revolution – modelled on its Chinese or Bolshevik predecessors
– or a colour revolution known from the streets of Belgrade, Tunis, Cairo, Tbilisi, Kiev
and many other places. If the latter is the correct interpretation then the question arises
whether this time the process was initiated – as usual – by the CIA or whether it
is the boomerang hitting back the thrower. Be that as it may – power struggle apart
– the events reveal a few important things.
[1] Americans are not a uniform, coherent nation and never will be: it is always blacks
against whites, though the discrimination laws are a thing of the past, how much more slavery.
Assimilation or integration – so much propagated in Europe in view of the influx of the
people from the Third World – does not work in the least. The two races share the same
terrain, language and religion and still remain far part.
[2] Monument desecration and removal is a fight against memory. Memoriae damnatio or the
Orwellian black hole is a well-known historical phenomenon. Invaders of Egypt necessarily
obliterated the images of pharaohs; Arab conquerors smashed images of ancient heroes or
Christian saints; Christians would destroy pagan idols; Byzantine iconoclasts raised their
hands against paintings depicting Jesus Christ and saints; protestants would do the same a
couple of centuries later in northern and western Europe; French revolutionaries would even
stoop down to extracting corpses of the long-dead French kings – Capetians, Valois,
Bourbons – and desecrating them; Bolsheviks in Russia would do the same with the remnants
of the tsarist past; even worse: factions of Bolsheviks would delete from very recent memory
yesterday's comrades.
[3] The BLM movement is racist to the core. It is aimed against whites and whites alone. It
is strong because it is supported by the democratic party and its adherents and a number of
foundations. That it is anti-white is evident. White actors have been discouraged from
impersonating or even voicing characters of colour, which, however, is not the case when it
comes to black actors who are increasingly frequently cast in typically white roles. It is only
and exclusively whites who are accused of being racist.
[4] Humiliation of the white population and especially of the police. The pictures of white
people kneeling to blacks and of the policemen – armed to their teeth – to the
rioters have been spread worldwide. It is an act of humiliation pure touted of course as an act
of interracial reconciliation and mutual respect.
[5] As usual, whenever a black gets killed in a squabble or a scuffle African-Americans,
Antifa and the mainstream media are quick to pass judgement without waiting for the court
sentence, which runs counter to the well-established procedure that no one is deemed guilty
until proven. The pressure exerted by the rioters and the media without doubt negatively
affects the decision of the judges who later deal with the case.
[6] What is happening is certainly wanted by a large part of the establishment or else it
wouldn't have been happening. Black rioters know that they can enjoy a lot of leeway and they
act accordingly, looting and burning and showing disrespect for the law and the police. Many a
mayor or police chief – usually a democrat and a black – under the pretext of
deescalating the conflicts withdraws the law enforcement units from parts of the city that they
are in charge of. Consider the so-called autonomous zones in Seattle and New York held for a
time by rioters. The powers that be could suppress the riots within 24 hours if they only
wanted to. As it is, they are using irascible black communities (agitated by Antifa activists)
to create turmoil and thus to achieve political goals. Just picture to yourself a rally of
genuine Nazis raising their hands in the Roman salute: how long would they hold a public
space?
Welcome to the DSA: the Dis-United States of America!
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
People occupying parts of the city called autonomous zones remind the Kiev Maidan
protesters. They spend days and nights doing nothing, but somehow they do not go hungry. In
both cases the police are either inactive or indolent. The Maidan riots in Kiev brought about
the change of the government. The powers that be must be counting on the same in the Dis-United
States of America.
How do we know that the riots are instigated, sponsored and used by the powers that be?
Precisely because of the inactivity and indolence of the police, because of the inactivity and
indolence of local; authorities, because of the media's condoning tone towards the events.
Lastly, history teaches us that revolutions, are made by means of popular protests and these
protests are paid by very rich individuals. Professional revolutionaries whose task it was to
destabilize Russia at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries were in the
pocket of Alexander Parvus (born: Israel Gelfand) and Jacob Schiff. Individuals that later
became the driving forces of the coup d'etat – Leon Trotsky (born: Lev Bronstein),
creator of the Red Army – did not have to bother about their living.
The deletion of historical memory and the renunciation of the heroes of the past paves the
way for replacing the United States of America with something new. Maybe the Union of Soviet
States of America? At present it is the images, effigies, and monuments that are beheaded,
trampled upon, kicked and drowned. Tomorrow it may very likely be people. Such are the dynamics
of any revolutionary movement.
Saying that Lincoln is the "symbol of white supremacy" has about as much foundation as
saying Harvey Milk is the symbol of militant heterosexuality. Both were great leaders who were
killed at the height of campaigns for equality. As I discuss below, there are aspects of
Lincoln's legacy that are worthy of condemnation but even John Wilkes Booth would dispute the
claim of Lincoln as the embodiment of white supremacy.
"... Statues of Confederate generals have been taken down or vandalized, and President Donald Trump has responded with an executive order promising harsh punishments for those who continue committing the acts. ..."
Democrats are calling for John Wayne Airport in Orange County to be renamed in protest of the
long-dead actor's alleged racism, making him the latest historical figure being judged by today's
cultural standards.
"There have been past efforts to get this done and now we're putting our name and our backing into
this to make sure there is a name change,"
said Ada Briceño, chairperson of the Democratic Party
of Orange County, following a resolution being passed calling for the airport to be be given the
simple name: Orange County Airport.
Wayne's specific transgression are
"racist and bigoted
statements"
made during a Playboy interview in 1971, eight years before The Duke passed away at
the age of 72. The airport was named after the actor the year he died.
In the infamous interview with Playboy, Wayne made comments that have long been controversial,
though admittedly harsher and more extreme than in other public conversations.
"I believe in white supremacy until the Blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I
don't believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people,"
the 'True Grit' star said at one point.
If we're looking to name airports only after people who were without sin,
then we'd better drop all their names and let them be known simply by their three-letter IATA
codes. John Wayne was no saint, but he still contributed in a positive way to American pop
culture history. https://t.co/l5KD5kXuGg
The Western star also made derogatory comments about Native Americans.
"I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. [O]ur so-called
stealing of this country from them was just a matter of survival," he said.
"There were great
numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for
themselves."
The resolution from Democrats fully acknowledges the removal of Wayne's name is part of a larger
effort to axe
"white supremacist symbols and names [that are] reshaping American institutions,
monuments, businesses, nonprofits, sports leagues, and teams."
As protests against police brutality and racism rage across the nation in the wake of George
Floyd's death, more and more historical figures with monuments and landmarks memorializing them have
been targeted.
Statues of Confederate generals have been taken down or vandalized, and President Donald Trump has
responded with an executive order promising harsh punishments for those who continue committing the
acts.
As has been the case with other figures of the past being held to today's standards, some
questioned the logic of targeting Wayne decades after his death.
"Of course, John Wayne was racist. By the hyper sensitive standards of today, just about every
person who has ever lived was racist,"
conservative journalist John Hawkins
tweeted
.
BLM are not Marxists. they are Maoists and toppling statues is a natural thing for them, much like it was for "Red Guards" during
China "cultural revolution"
Notable quotes:
"... "gross form of White Supremacy." ..."
"... The Last Supper ..."
"... "No one would seriously argue that the Pieta or the Last Supper should be torn down or painted over," ..."
"... "Shaun King is just being ridiculous and provocative, and writing an article about his mad claims is just legitimising them," ..."
"... Like this story? Share it with a friend! ..."
Guy Birchall, British journalist covering current affairs, politics and free speech issues. Recently published in The Sun and
Spiked Online. Follow him on Twitter
@guybirchall
Guy Birchall, British journalist covering current affairs, politics and free speech issues. Recently published in The Sun and
Spiked Online. Follow him on Twitter
@guybirchall
24 Jun, 2020 07:35
Get short URL
A leading activist's remarks that all "statues, murals, and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother" represent
"gross white supremacy" shows that radical, racialised politics has no limit to its targets.
The problematic statues row has now taken a turn from political iconoclasm to literal iconoclasm with depictions of "white Jesus"
next on the hit list for some of Black Lives Matter's more hardcore proponents.
Activist Shaun King has called for all the statues,
murals, stained glass windows and paintings depicting the Messiah as having European features to come down because they are a
"gross form of White Supremacy."
To illustrate his point, King makes the perceptive observation that when Jesus, Mary and Joseph
went into hiding while Herod engaged in a spot of infanticide in 1 AD Judea, the family hid in Egypt, not Denmark, so they would
"
blend in.
"
This is exactly the sort of mission creep many people worried about when the whole statues issue started to pick up steam last
month. It began with slave owners, and one can see the argument there for taking them down, but it is worth noting that the statues
themselves were not erected for their services to the Transatlantic slave trade.
Then in America, they moved onto their national heroes, like Washington and Jefferson, again because they owned slaves. Again,
one can understand the argument that they shouldn't be venerated because of this fact, but they aren't praised for being slave owners
but for founding the United States of America.
Before we knew it, we were at Ulysses Grant, who lead the Union Armies in the Civil War to end slavery, but because he married
into a slave owning family, he too must be torn down. Defeating the Confederacy wasn't enough to save him. Then Theodore Roosevelt
was next on the list because of white supremacy, (although he wasn't the Roosevelt who actually interred Americans in camps based
on their race in World War II, that was FDR).
But even with the pace with which this movement has declared former icons persona non-grata, to jump from Teddy Roosevelt to Jesus
is extraordinary. Were Mr. King's demands to be met, and "all statues of the White European they claim to be Jesus" to come down,
that would amount to the destruction of some of the finest works of art in existence.
Michelangelo's Pieta, gone, Da Vinci's Last Supper, erased, Raphael's Transfiguration, wiped, Donatello's Crucifix, torn down,
and that would be just if we targeted artists who share their names with turtles who know karate. And the Sistine Chapel? Razed to
the ground, along with the smashing of the stained-glass windows of virtually every church and cathedral in Europe.
This erasure of history would make the destruction of the Reformation and the dissolution of the monasteries in 16th-century England
look like child's play.
The simple fact of the matter is that Jesus has, throughout history, been portrayed as looking like any number of races, and those
usually reflect the race of the artist. Black artists have portrayed him as having African features, Asian artists have done something
in their image, and so European artists obviously portrayed him as looking European. Which is kind of the point of Jesus: all his
followers are supposed to be able to see themselves in him. As a result of living in the Western world, that means, to Western eyes,
he has more often been portrayed as looking like a white European.
Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a
form of white supremacy. Always have been. In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where
they went?EGYPT!Not Denmark.Tear them down.
Yes. All murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and their white friends
should also come down. They are a gross form white supremacy. Created as tools of oppression. Racist propaganda. They should
all come down.
There is also the fact that for a large chunk of history, Europe is where Christianity blossomed. In the Middle East, where yes,
Jesus was born, a very different religion, with a very different view on depicting religious figures arose, which perhaps goes some
way to explaining the paucity of paintings of Christ in this part of the world. The fact that Jesus plays second fiddle to Mohammed
in Islam and is regarded as a false prophet in Judaism, might explain why there are fewer depictions of him in the immediate vicinity
of the Sea of Galilee.
One also has to have quite a conspiratorial mind to conclude that 'white supremacy' was top of the agenda for the likes of Da
Vinci and Raphael. Couldn't they just be artists painting and sculpting their interpretation of what Christ looked like? Could the
depictions of him as looking more European not just be down to those being the kind of people they hung around with?
I mean, if we're getting into the weeds about this, it's probably quite unlikely that the historical Jesus had a rippling six
pack and sinewy biceps as he is so often shown as having. Can art not just be appreciated as art without having the artist's motivation
impugned four, five or six centuries after the fact? Given that the Transatlantic slave trade didn't begin until the 17th century,
it seems baffling to tear down art made in the centuries before.
It also raises the question of how exactly is it acceptable to depict Jesus from now on then? Given that he was a Palestinian
Jew, it seems equally unlikely that he looked like the African man he was portrayed as in Madonna's
Like a Prayer
video,
as he would look like the dirty blonde haired European in Da Vinci's
The Last Supper
. (Gosh, it's painful equating these
two very different pieces of culture in the same sentence).
This may seem like a fringe issue that is never going to happen, and it could easily be dismissed as the ramblings of someone
on the extreme left.
"No one would seriously argue that the Pieta or the Last Supper should be torn down or painted over,"
some might say.
"Shaun King is just being ridiculous and provocative, and writing an article about his mad claims is just legitimising
them,"
they may add.
This may be true, but ask yourself – in 2010, how much money would you have put on statues of Washington and Jefferson being torn
down in America? What odds would you have got on the bookies of Churchill's statue having to be boarded up in London? I don't think
you'd have even put a quid on it.
There has to come a point where a civilisation just says "enough, stop," otherwise these movements pick up steam. Several American
states have shown themselves incapable of defending their founding fathers. With Christianity dwindling year by year in the West,
how long will we be able to make a defence for these priceless works of art if they too are decided to be contrary to the prevailing
ideology of the day?
Ugly civilisations torch their history, others learn from them. Let us not become the former, just because the other side is shouting
louder than we are.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and
do not necessarily represent those of RT.
What fun, what entertainment. And rare: One seldom sees the collapse of a landmark society
in a rush of wondrous idiocy. Would I could sell tickets. Don't look at it as a loss, but as a
show, an unwanted but grand amusement.
The coup de grace in our ripening decadence is the current uprising purportedly, though
implausibly, over racism. But never mind. The causes don't matter. The deal is done.
Still, it is interesting to recognize that the protesters are, perhaps deliberately,
confusing the incapacity of blacks with systemic racism. In truth, America has made the
greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift another. Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white
Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it found the use of IQ tests by employers
illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found "affirmative action," racial discrimination
against whites, legal (hardly oppression of blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress
passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the Voting Rights Act the next year. A white President
sent troops to Little Rock to enforce desegregation. There has been an enormous flow of charity
to blacks: Section Eight Housing, AFDC, Head Start, hiring quotas, set-asides, sharply lowered
standards in police and fire departments. We now have free breakfasts for black children, then
free lunches, in addition to outright welfare. In aggregate they resemble a distributed
guaranteed basic income. Which is interesting.
These measures sprang from the best of intentions. Most I think should continue. I for one
do not want to evict blacks from public housing or have their children go hungry. Yet none of
these programs has had its desired effect. The crucial academic gap has not closed, crime
remains horribly high, illegitimacy verges on universal. This is a great shame. Blacks are
decent enough people, likable if they don't hate you, and phenomenally talented. But it hasn't
worked.
Nothing has worked. There is no indication that anything will. The great black cities are in
something approaching custodial care.
You cannot solve a problem without knowing what it is. This we dare not know. Democracies,
however approximate, cannot deal with chronically underperforming minorities.
They cannot even try. Anything that might help is politically impossible, and anything
politically possible won't help.
So, after the riots:
Social division will worsen after the riots. Racial hostility from blacks will not
decrease because their conditions will not change. The rioters are getting their way now, and
rule, but at the price of sowing hatred. At best we will have many decades of ugly rancor. At
worst, we are winding the spring for another outburst.
Multiculturalism has not worked, quite apart from race, and will not. White Americans
are not one people. The poor communications and bad roads that once allowed them to live almost
separately no longer exist. In its writ-large form, trying to force West Virginia to accept the
culture of Massachusetts will produce only anger.
The likelihood of amity between races is proportional to their agreement on values important
to them. For example, the Chinese share (what once were) the white values of study, work,
courtesy, and obedience to the law. That they eat with chopsticks and celebrate New Year on the
wrong day doesn't matter.
However, again for example, a culture that believes in female genital mutilation and utter
subjection of women cannot live amicably with a culture that abhors these things. Black ghetto
culture and white are immiscible in so many fundamental values that they will not live well
together.
Some cultures can assimilate, for example East Asian and American white, Latino and American
white. But, in addition to sharply different cultures, too many blacks live in sprawling,
racially isolated urban centers with almost no contact with the outside world other than
television.
Censorship will intensify, not just of communications and office chitchat but of
books. Tom Sawyer will be pulled from bookshelves or -- Amazon being the continental
shelf -- or bowderlized to remove the Nigger Jim and Injun Joe The Nigger of the
Narcissus may survive because none of the blacks and few of the whites will ever have heard
of Conrad. At least for the foreseeable future, firings for anything imaginably redolent of
racism–saying "All lives matter," for example–will be snatched at in a mixture of
passive aggression and schadenfreude to result in firings. This is unlikely to have a happy
ending.
Schooling : Watching great universities become sandboxes for unpleasantly righteous
dimwitted brats galls, or does if one lets it. I don't. Most of the protesters seem recently to
have erupted from the drains of an educational system that has been in sharp decline for
decades They, including the intelligent among them, appear historically not just ignorant but
carefully misinformed, culturally pathetic, and intellectually laughable. (For example, a
protestress interviewed by a British reporter as to what she thought of Churchill said she
couldn't really say because she hadn't met him. How many in BLM can spell "Confederacy"? A
statue of Ulysses Grant was pulled down in the belief that he was a Confederate general. May
God preserve us.)
The, uh, redaction of culture will not stop with books. Classical music is too white, the
sciences too white, mathematics a tool of oppression (meaning that blacks cannot understand it)
and so on. We have created a nation of pampered and imbecile peasants.
Schooling will continue its plummet. Science departments probably will not be
abolished. However, because they are too white, schools will recruit hopelessly unqualified
black students and professors, standards will fall yet more, and mathematics will be played
down even in astrophysics (this is being done). Extirpating racism will replace scholarship,
already degraded by the retirement or death of those professors who knew what education meant.
This will inevitably result in lowered American technological competitiveness and prosperity.
There is no hope of preventing this.
The replacement of learned professors by aging detritus from the Sixties antagonistic
to scholarship is not surprising. America has had strong anti-intellectual undercurrent since
its inception. The degradation will not be noticed by the young as they have never lived in a
world different from their own, with Harry Potter and Toni Morrison thought to be literature. A
liberal education was once the mark of the cultivated, being deep in languages, literature,
philosophy, the sciences, history, mathematics,. Universities once had, at least among the
better students, a love of open minded curiosity, thought, and debate. No more. Future
historians will notice the shift, but those within it will not. We are left with a nation of
morons who will not know they are morons.
This too cannot be prevented. Jejune herdthink is now warmly espoused throughout the academy
with children in grade school being primed for it.
The most -- I dare not say "entertaining" for fear of lynching, but, well, perhaps
"interesting" reforms will be those of the police, whether abolition, defunding to shift money
to youth outreach and rehab (which don't work) or replacement of police by warm and caring
adults, will result in increased crime. We need not concern ourselves with whether and to what
extent the police have been culpable in which cases. The changes will come anyway.
An intriguing question is what the nonviolent, non-racist, warm and fuzzy pseudopolice will
do when they encounter violent criminals. Counsel them on social justice? I would love to
watch.
Our system of governments has proved itself weak, feckless, and unable to govern. The
chaotic response to the coronavirus is a prime example, there being no national policy and the
states being told to do as they see fit. The other major example was the inability or
unwillingness to prevent looting and arson.The widespread destruction was unopposed, protected
by the media, and celebrated by the many corporations that have fallen over themselves to
truckle to the unwashed and to give them money. If our rampaging anthropoids can loot once,
there is no reason to think they cannot do it again.
Many cities are routinely out of control, with seven hundred homicides in Chicago and three
hundred in Baltimore every year. Increasingly criminals are released without bail and small
crimes, such as evading subway fares, are ignored when committed by minorities. The hordes of
derelicts grow, the New York subways become a homeless shelter. These are not problems seen in
civilized countries. Which America no longer is, to the astonishment and amusement of the
world.
Perhaps this was to be expected. The American practice of choosing its leaders every two,
four, or six years by popularity contest worked, after a fashion anyway, in a sprawling
continental country in which government had very little local influence. In a world far more
complex, with little ability to plan when those in charge change with paralyzing rapidity, and
everything intensely regulated by people unfamiliar with problems, results are poor. America's
competition with large countries having intelligently authoritarian and stable governance will
prove a losing proposition proposition. The inevitable decline in standard of living, already
well underwater, will promote unrest. Here we go again.
We have done what Marx couldn't: Achieved communism, a true dictatorship of the proletariat,
of a rabble jacquerie of much noise and no wit, the rule of the unfit. It is a rule only of the
culture. The moneyed would not grant it power over anything else. Yet rule it is. We shall hear
much of the authenticity of the illiterate, the purity of ghetto urges, the wisdom of the
people, the need to lay low the pretensions of the mansion.
Yet the catastrophe has its consolations. It is amusing for those amused by the end of
empires. The Soviet Union spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat, but lived under the
dictatorship of a gray aristocracy. America speaks of the rule of the people, a horrible idea,
and seems to be getting there.
Think of it as the Cultural Revolution by suburban hobbyists. There are the same raging
untermenschen, the same desire to destroy anything they do not know, or cannot understand, or
be bothered to learn.
As a philosophic emollient one may reflect that all empires and civilizations must end, and
ours is. America will remain as a place, a military bastion, a large if declining economic
force. It will never again be, even by the low standards of humanity in such things, a
relatively free and vigorous society. The world will not again credit its charades of moral
leadership. The rot, the tens of thousands of derelict people living on the sidewalks, the
looting and fire setting, the censorship, are now visible to the entire earth. Oh well. It was
a good thing while it lasted.
Write Fred at [email protected] Put the letters pdq anywhere in the subject line to avoid
autodeletion. All read, not always answered due to volume.
Amazon review: "Essays on America, life, politics, and just about everything. The author
chronicles among other adventures an aging stripper in Austin, dressed in a paper-mache horse,
who had with her a cobra and a tarantula like a yak-hair pillow with legs and alternately
charmed and terrified a room full of cowboys sucking down Bud and . Fred was an apostle of the
long-haul thumb during the Sixties and saw many things. He tells of standing by the big roads
across the desert, rockin in the wind blast of the heavy rigs roaring by and the whine of tires
and dropping into an arroyo at night with a bottle of cheap red and watching the stars and
perhaps smoking things not approved by the government. He tells of..well, that's what the book
is for. Join him."
The American system worked decently enough when, and only when, a quarter of the adult
population was eligible to vote. That was when democracy was a thing and not "our" thing.
'America's competition with large countries having intelligently authoritarian and stable
governance will prove a losing proposition proposition.'
I might still generally agree with this, but our insane 'lockdown' policy in response to
an epidemic that posed no real serious threat was copied from the Chinese!!
As a result I felt upbeat enough to feel like ordering your 'Nekkid in Austin' paperback
from Amazon. $20 and change with tax. Hopefully at least some of that makes it into your
pocket.
Re: "In truth, America has made the greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift
another."
You say nothing about any other country on the planet. What the US has done without the
context of the rest of the world is somewhat empty. What about Canada? What about the UK?
There are countries outside of the US.
I see no mention of the black history of June Nineteenth or of Tulsa Black Wall Street. Is
that not consequential? It's a silent form of discrimination.
How many blacks can spell "confederacy." There is some implicit bias there. Did you think
about mentioning the lead content of public water in some inner cities and what affect that
might have on development of black children?
I'm not ever sure you fully understand the history of Ulysses S. Grant. You may not have
seen this earlier piece written from the UK.
They thought it was relevant because for those following the Black Lives Matter movement,
it's more than just about Black lives. There is an acronym floating around you also may not
be aware of. Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC). For further information see:
https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-bipoc.html
Sad to see America and the west in general turning out like this, what frustrates me is how
hard it is to get normal based white people to organize, the left can get nearly 100,000
people in several cities across America and Europe tearing down statues, shouting abuse at
western European culture and it's defenders and the right barely manages to get a couple of
thousand people to gather in central London while thousands of left anarchists were scrawling
graffiti on Churchill and other monuments. I know left wingers have the advantage of living
IN the major cities but most are still surrounded by millions of ordinary middle class people
who i am sure are aghast at what is happening. The fact that it is so hard for them to get of
their asses and drive 100-200km to meet one another is depressing.
Only Fred Reed could opine that the biggest threat facing higher ed is the dumbing down of
curricula.
There's a little flu going around that's going to remake all of higher ed, with the
prospect of hundreds of schools filing for bankruptcy or eliminating whole departments now
very real.
Reed's so out of touch with America that it's just laughable. But I can see why he doesn't
mention Covid, since Mexico is now in a full-blown pandemic, just as I predicted 2 months
ago. (How'd the "siesta and a cerveza" policy from AMLO work out?) The deaths are increasing,
curves aren't being flattened and the sick little buggers are scurrying like rats across the
border to get hooked up to gringo ventilators at our expense.
Evidence continues to mount that spikes in Covid cases in U.S. border states are due to
successive waves of infected people fleeing Mexico's dysfunctional and overwhelmed
hospitals to get American medical care. https://t.co/aifN8575IW
-- Center for Immigration Studies (@CIS_org) June 24,
2020
Yep, Mexicans seem to be causing the new wave of infections in Southwest border
states.
A two minute conversation with a typical American will quickly show you that their thoughts
never dwell on anything noble. Rather, their thoughts are adrift in emotional nonsense. We
have a vast underclass of 160 million immigrants from failed-3rd world countries and their US
born children, since 1965. The new Americans and our black underclass don't like white people
and the old America. We are now a nation of George Floyds, Homer Simpsons, and an obese
Walmart shoppers. There is nothing noble in America. It's not a pretty picture. Who cares if
it fails? There isn't anything worth saving.
This is funny. We are looking at what a deeply corrupt, predatory system of government (look
at the Dem-Woke-Rats) has achieved, the rule of the super-rich, which has achieved huge
levels of homelessness, a country that has zero hospitals, zero medics, except for the rich,
that is unique in that, and no education except for the rich, saddling the rest with deep
debts, this mad rule of the rich waging economic war against countries that outstandingly
look after their people, such as Cuba, a system wholly about predation and so with
astronomical military expenditure but that forcing the poor to pay for it -- and here we have
an article about the resulting anarchy, prattling on about side effects but ignoring the
cause.
And comments on the rule of the people versus the dictatorship of the proletariat! When
there is no such thing as a Congress critter who is not a millionaire but still must pander
to supermillionaires.
@Charlemagne Is
democracy even a good thing? Last summer I read "The End of Democracy" by a Belgian named
Christophe Buffin de Chosal, and I'm now convinced that it is not.
When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states, America has no
such thing. This makes its collapse incredibly more dangerous, all those nuclear weapons it
has, what is going to happen to them?
"Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it
found the use of IQ tests by employers illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found
"affirmative action," racial discrimination against whites, legal (hardly oppression of
blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the
Voting Rights Act the next year. "
Except that did not end segregation nor did it shift the imbalance of educational
resources as whites have been the most benefited population from these supposed investments.
There isn't a measure that whites have not managed to accrue the major benefits from.
And I think, I could down your list and demonstrate just how failed those supposed
remedies ave been applied to the black population of US citizens, if not for the redundancy
of effort.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
I am not sure how to respond to nonsense such as Section * housing as if section * housing
was a program unique to blacks. I would love o bemoan the ignorance of anyone who dis not
know General/President Grant was a Union officer and a intense advocate for equity, at least
for a while, when the person decrying their ignorance thinks that the Civil Rights era was
unique for black citizens.
One might expect some level of ignorance for Pres. Grant by the uneducated, but the level
of ignorance on display by the educated is only compounded by the fact that same individual
making the complaint wants to continue more immigrants, who are the second largest winners of
the civil rights changes but have managed o to convince people like Mr. Reed that
Cinco De Mayo should be celebrated as a US Holiday.
When Fred wades into Multiculturalism he speaks of FGM being incompatible with our values.
But, as most Americans do, he neglects the other half of the story. MGM, aka circumcision,
sanctioned by our backward society, is an equally barbaric crime.
Recently, I briefly touched on why I think the United States of America is done and dusted
after almost 244 years of existence. Fred Reed, who is so much more eloquent with words than
I, thinks so as well in A Country Not Salvageable!
IT IS INTERESTING AT THE OUTSET TO OBSERVE THAT THE MAIN REASON THE UNITED STATES FINDS
ITSELF IN AN IRREDEEMABLE DIVE IS BECAUSE IT IS IN THE DNA OF THEIR CITIZENS. YEP –
THAT'S RIGHT – THEIR DNA!
[MORE]
FOR MANY DECADES, IF NOT ALMOST 2 1/2 CENTURIES, THEY HAVE INCORPORATED RACISM, SEXISM,
BULLYING, WAR MONGERING AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IN THEIR DNA TO MENTION BUT A FEW. THE
ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM IS AS FOLLOWS:
After almost 244 years in existence, 221 of which have been spent at war, the United
States of America can no longer find a way to extricate itself from a situation which has
been many decades in the making. It has become painfully clear that the 3 branches of
government (executive, legislative and judicial) so proudly exhibited as effective and
meaningful checks and balances no longer works. The military/industrial complex, now joined
by the political/media complex, has made it impossible for anyone to Make America Great
Again!
No one can see the United States extricating themselves from this unbelievable mess
without dropping nuclear bombs on themselves and other nations around the world. Cutting off
one's nose to spite one's face is not a solution as they have discovered on many, many
occasions throughout their history. But there is one solution, and probably only one, which
could work given help from other nations.
As everyone knows, everywhere one looks and everything one looks at in America is in
serious difficulty – most of which will never be corrected without major and prolonged
surgery. Take a few examples only such as debt, education, infrastructure, immigration,
constant war mongering, racism, irreparable political divisions, a disappearing middle class,
sexism, wealth in fewer and fewer hands, debilitating unemployment, a dismal trade imbalance,
gun control along with associated deaths and injuries, a non performing and dishonest
judiciary, catering to one country in the Middle East, lobbying, a weakened electorate, an
out of control media, a dangerous religious fervor, a bullying approach to everything, prison
incarceration rates, non stop political campaigning, a rapidly falling life expectancy,
obesity due to fast foods along with a couch potato syndrome and a constant interference in
the affairs of other sovereign nations, little or no respect for the ravages of climate
change and dropping out of signed agreements and treaties. And this is to only name a very
few issues as they now have managed in addition to become the absolute laughingstock of the
world. A very dangerous and emotional one to be sure – but a laughingstock nevertheless
for which a few people now feel pity.
So let's cut to the chase even if it brings on yet another civil war. And this is where
the help of other nations will be most critical. It is time to employ some 'outside the box'
thinking which could bring benefit to the entire North American continent, let alone the
world. The citizens of the United States of America and the world have become frustrated at
the lack of progress on any and all of the issues in play – and there are a whack of
them.
Guess what? The reasons for the American Civil War (1861-1865) point the way to the
solution and eventual benefits to everyone concerned. As you undoubtedly recall, the reason
for the Civil War in the first place was the South's insistence on the continuation of
slavery with secession from the Union. That's right – the USA needs to be divided along
roughly the same lines demanded by the secessionists some 150 years ago! In other words, the
North made a serious error in not letting them secede and the entire country has been paying
for it ever since.
The proposal is a very simple one in reality. Take all of the what we will call the RED
states, which are really the most southerly ones, and give them to Mexico. The country could
be renamed RED-NEXICO as in rednecks and Mexico. Into this melting pot of death, destruction,
convoluted thinking, religious fervor, gun addicts, right wing societies (NRA, Born Again
Morons, white nationalists, etc.) pro-life ning nangs, Nascar addicted, arrogant, stupid and
the hopeless people of America, most of the unemployable, poorly educated folks, rapists,
paedophiles, violent criminals, most rednecks and other ne'er-do-wells will number about 300
million people when all is said and done. It is a perfect fit if one looks at what
constitutes the current country of Mexico (that is, soon-to-be RED-NEXICO) because they will
get back all of the territory they claimed was stolen by the U.S. from them and then some.
Almost all illegal immigrants speak Spanish as do the folks in the U.S. south and the
Mexicans. Throw in California which will soon fall into the Pacific Ocean in any event and we
have a us a convoy!
Now what should be done about the remaining northern states or what we will refer to the
green states? Quite simple really. Give them all to Canada and rename the country
CAN-AMERICA. With them go the wealthier states with better employment figures and
opportunities along with most of the top class universities which will go undergo a seismic
change over the next quarter century, no world wide income tax, a corporate tax on
profitability or flat tax which must be paid, no lobbyists, severe penalties for moving
manufacturing offshore, lower teen pregnancies, racism and sexism to be dealt with severely,
no sub prime mortgages, most of the fresh water, an abundance of hydro electric power,
sufficient oil and gas reserves to last well into the next century, minerals galore, oodles
of room, strict and honest banking regulations, bilingualism, much less violence, severe
firearm controls, more attention to global climate change and other similar world problems,
no Nascar, lower divorce rates, domestic violence and so on. Think about it for a moment. The
list of benefits are inexhaustible.
It is a win/win for both sides of the equation except for one vital but missing
ingredient. With it comes the most important caveat – all citizens in CAN-AMERICA will
have the right to vote in person or by post/internet in a national referendum which could
affect them. The political power will rest with the people and not the politicians, one of
the clearest failings of the United States form of republic.These referendum issues could
include, but are not necessarily limited to, a declaration of war, debt, immigration,
expulsion of criminals, complete gun control, mosques, military, industrial, political and
media complexes, trade, currency, prisons, joining and contributing to stem winding world
organizations, infrastructure repairs, a mandatory health system at lower cost and
effectiveness, reducing military expenditures by 90%, etc. etc. This will blunt political
power and politicians at every turn when they try to do anything – and they always will
– which is not in the best interests of the new country.
CAN-AMERICA can really make an impression on the rest of the world with +/- 250 million
people by taking a much more critical view of whether to belong to various groups or
organizations which have clearly outlived their usefulness. NATO, the United Nations, the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund immediately come to mind but there are many,
many others which increase the income tax burdens of people unnecessarily.
Many naysayers will insist that such a geographical and political division in North
America will not work but Europe is a showcase of how it does. In fact, many could foresee
the eventual fusion of CAN-AMERICA into a worldwide economic trading block of which it would
be a dominating member along with China, Russia, India, etc. On the political side, it will
see the demise of the two party system along with the republicans and democrats under their
new regimes.
Now for the clincher which is an updated version of the current U.S. president's call for
a wall dividing countries both south and north of the U.S. border. There will be a strip of
land measuring 100 kilometres wide separating RED-NEXICO and CAN-AMERICA. It will be electric
fenced to 10 metres on all sides and be patrolled electronically 24/7 and by drones. Dense
forests will be planted which, with proper husbandry, will flourish eventually to the benefit
of both countries. Anyone entering or caught within these 100 kms will be eliminated
immediately whether they come from CAN-AMERICA or RED-NEXICO. The cost of building,
maintaining and patrolling no woman or no man's land will be shared equally between the the
two countries. Any immigration from one country to another will have to go through official
channels as there will be no borders to cross except for the 100 kms which means no one would
make it. It would kill tourism between the new countries for many years but who really wants
to travel to RED-NEXICO in particular!
Unknown to many Americans who are living in the U.S. at the moment is the fact that many
of their fellow citizens are surrendering their American nationality in disgust. It has moved
from a trickle 25 years ago to where it has become a flood today. Most embassies are
inundated with requests – so much so that waiting periods of up to 2 years are not
uncommon and growing more expensive every year. Of course, anyone wanting to do so must have
another passport to fall back on as well.
This is a very abridged version of a much more detailed proposal but the drift is clear
– the United States is slipping quickly and inexorably into third world country and
'shit hole' country status to utilize the current president's description. In many opinions,
it is already there! Let's all jettison this cancer in the world so the rest of us can get on
with our lives!
EVEN IF THIS SEPARATION/SECESSION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED (AS IN FORCED DOWN THEIR THROATS),
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN BE SAVED IN THE
PROPOSED FORMAT GIVEN THE LIST OF ISSUES WHICH HAVE ACCUMULATED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II
75 YEARS AGO!!!
P.S. Any input which will enhance any aspect of this proposal which is more than a matter
of detail is sorely welcomed as implementation will be something requiring great skill!
Criticisms are also warmly encouraged as long as they are not simply more bleating about how
unfair it would be, how civil war will break out, how the 300 million guns will be used to
shoot their way out of this, how the political slop will stop it and so on. America is doomed
as it is now and saving the best parts is paramount.
IN THE WELL KNOWN LYRICS OF THE SCAR STRANGLED BANNER, IT USED TO BE KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF
THE BRAVE AND THE HOME OF THE FREE!" NOW IT IS KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF THE FAT AND THE HOME OF
THE FEARFUL!"
Recently, I briefly touched on why I think the United States of America is done and dusted
after almost 244 years of existence. Fred Reed, who is so much more eloquent with words than
I thinks so as well in A Country Not Salvageable!
IT IS INTERESTING AT THE OUTSET TO OBSERVE THAT THE MAIN REASON THE UNITED STATES FINDS
ITSELF IN AN IRREDEEMABLE DIVE IS BECAUSE IT IS IN THE DNA OF THEIR CITIZENS. YEP –
THAT'S RIGHT – THEIR DNA!
[MORE]
FOR MANY DECADES, IF NOT ALMOST 2 1/2 CENTURIES, THEY HAVE INCORPORATED RACISM, SEXISM,
BULLYING, WAR MONGERING AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IN THEIR DNA TO MENTION BUT A FEW. THE
ONLY WAY TO FIX THIS PROBLEM IS AS FOLLOWS:
After almost 244 years in existence, 221 of which have been spent at war, the United
States of America can no longer find a way to extricate itself from a situation which has
been many decades in the making. It has become painfully clear that the 3 branches of
government (executive, legislative and judicial) so proudly exhibited as effective and
meaningful checks and balances no longer works. The military/industrial complex, now joined
by the political/media complex, has made it impossible for anyone to Make America Great
Again!
No one can see the United States extricating themselves from this unbelievable mess
without dropping nuclear bombs on themselves and other nations around the world. Cutting off
one's nose to spite one's face is not a solution as they have discovered on many, many
occasions throughout their history. But there is one solution, and probably only one, which
could work given help from other nations.
As everyone knows, everywhere one looks and everything one looks at in America is in
serious difficulty – most of which will never be corrected without major and prolonged
surgery. Take a few examples only such as debt, education, infrastructure, immigration,
constant war mongering, racism, irreparable political divisions, a disappearing middle class,
sexism, wealth in fewer and fewer hands, debilitating unemployment, a dismal trade imbalance,
gun control along with associated deaths and injuries, a non performing and dishonest
judiciary, catering to one country in the Middle East, lobbying, a weakened electorate, an
out of control media, a dangerous religious fervor, a bullying approach to everything, prison
incarceration rates, non stop political campaigning, a rapidly falling life expectancy,
obesity due to fast foods along with a couch potato syndrome and a constant interference in
the affairs of other sovereign nations, little or no respect for the ravages of climate
change and dropping out of signed agreements and treaties. And this is to only name a very
few issues as they now have managed in addition to become the absolute laughingstock of the
world. A very dangerous and emotional one to be sure – but a laughingstock nevertheless
for which a few people now feel pity.
So let's cut to the chase even if it brings on yet another civil war. And this is where
the help of other nations will be most critical. It is time to employ some 'outside the box'
thinking which could bring benefit to the entire North American continent, let alone the
world. The citizens of the United States of America and the world have become frustrated at
the lack of progress on any and all of the issues in play – and there are a whack of
them.
Guess what? The reasons for the American Civil War (1861-1865) point the way to the
solution and eventual benefits to everyone concerned. As you undoubtedly recall, the reason
for the Civil War in the first place was the South's insistence on the continuation of
slavery with secession from the Union. That's right – the USA needs to be divided along
roughly the same lines demanded by the secessionists some 150 years ago! In other words, the
North made a serious error in not letting them secede and the entire country has been paying
for it ever since.
The proposal is a very simple one in reality. Take all of the what we will call the RED
states, which are really the most southerly ones, and give them to Mexico. The country could
be renamed RED-NEXICO as in rednecks and Mexico. Into this melting pot of death, destruction,
convoluted thinking, religious fervor, gun addicts, right wing societies (NRA, Born Again
Morons, white nationalists, etc.) pro-life ning nangs, Nascar addicted, arrogant, stupid and
the hopeless people of America, most of the unemployable, poorly educated folks, rapists,
paedophiles, violent criminals, most rednecks and other ne'er-do-wells will number about 300
million people when all is said and done. It is a perfect fit if one looks at what
constitutes the current country of Mexico (that is, soon-to-be RED-NEXICO) because they will
get back all of the territory they claimed was stolen by the U.S. from them and then some.
Almost all illegal immigrants speak Spanish as do the folks in the U.S. south and the
Mexicans. Throw in California which will soon fall into the Pacific Ocean in any event and we
have a us a convoy!
Now what should be done about the remaining northern states or what we will refer to the
green states? Quite simple really. Give them all to Canada and rename the country
CAN-AMERICA. With them go the wealthier states with better employment figures and
opportunities along with most of the top class universities which will go undergo a seismic
change over the next quarter century, no world wide income tax, a corporate tax on
profitability or flat tax which must be paid, no lobbyists, severe penalties for moving
manufacturing offshore, lower teen pregnancies, racism and sexism to be dealt with severely,
no sub prime mortgages, most of the fresh water, an abundance of hydro electric power,
sufficient oil and gas reserves to last well into the next century, minerals galore, oodles
of room, strict and honest banking regulations, bilingualism, much less violence, severe
firearm controls, more attention to global climate change and other similar world problems,
no Nascar, lower divorce rates, domestic violence and so on. Think about it for a moment. The
list of benefits are inexhaustible.
It is a win/win for both sides of the equation except for one vital but missing
ingredient. With it comes the most important caveat – all citizens in CAN-AMERICA will
have the right to vote in person or by post/internet in a national referendum which could
affect them. The political power will rest with the people and not the politicians, one of
the clearest failings of the United States form of republic.These referendum issues could
include, but are not necessarily limited to, a declaration of war, debt, immigration,
expulsion of criminals, complete gun control, mosques, military, industrial, political and
media complexes, trade, currency, prisons, joining and contributing to stem winding world
organizations, infrastructure repairs, a mandatory health system at lower cost and
effectiveness, reducing military expenditures by 90%, etc. etc. This will blunt political
power and politicians at every turn when they try to do anything – and they always will
– which is not in the best interests of the new country.
CAN-AMERICA can really make an impression on the rest of the world with +/- 250 million
people by taking a much more critical view of whether to belong to various groups or
organizations which have clearly outlived their usefulness. NATO, the United Nations, the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund immediately come to mind but there are many,
many others which increase the income tax burdens of people unnecessarily.
Many naysayers will insist that such a geographical and political division in North
America will not work but Europe is a showcase of how it does. In fact, many could foresee
the eventual fusion of CAN-AMERICA into a worldwide economic trading block of which it would
be a dominating member along with China, Russia, India, etc. On the political side, it will
see the demise of the two party system along with the republicans and democrats under their
new regimes.
Now for the clincher which is an updated version of the current U.S. president's call for
a wall dividing countries both south and north of the U.S. border. There will be a strip of
land measuring 100 kilometres wide separating RED-NEXICO and CAN-AMERICA. It will be electric
fenced to 10 metres on all sides and be patrolled electronically 24/7 and by drones. Dense
forests will be planted which, with proper husbandry, will flourish eventually to the benefit
of both countries. Anyone entering or caught within these 100 kms will be eliminated
immediately whether they come from CAN-AMERICA or RED-NEXICO. The cost of building,
maintaining and patrolling no woman or no man's land will be shared equally between the the
two countries. Any immigration from one country to another will have to go through official
channels as there will be no borders to cross except for the 100 kms which means no one would
make it. It would kill tourism between the new countries for many years but who really wants
to travel to RED-NEXICO in particular!
Unknown to many Americans who are living in the U.S. at the moment is the fact that many
of their fellow citizens are surrendering their American nationality in disgust. It has moved
from a trickle 25 years ago to where it has become a flood today. Most embassies are
inundated with requests – so much so that waiting periods of up to 2 years are not
uncommon and growing more expensive every year. Of course, anyone wanting to do so must have
another passport to fall back on as well.
This is a very abridged version of a much more detailed proposal but the drift is clear
– the United States is slipping quickly and inexorably into third world country and
'shit hole' country status to utilize the current president's description. In many opinions,
it is already there! Let's all jettison this cancer in the world so the rest of us can get on
with our lives!
EVEN IF THIS SEPARATION/SECESSION SHOULD BE ACCEPTED (AS IN FORCED DOWN THEIR THROATS),
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN BE SAVED IN THE
PROPOSED FORMAT GIVEN THE LIST OF ISSUES WHICH HAVE ACCUMULATED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II
75 YEARS AGO!!!
P.S. Any input which will enhance any aspect of this proposal which is more than a matter
of detail is sorely welcomed as implementation will be something requiring great skill!
Criticisms are also warmly encouraged as long as they are not simply more bleating about how
unfair it would be, how civil war will break out, how the 300 million guns will be used to
shoot their way out of this, how the political slop will stop it and so on. America is doomed
as it is now and saving the best parts is paramount.
IN THE WELL KNOWN LYRICS OF THE SCAR STRANGLED BANNER, IT USED TO BE KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF
THE BRAVE AND THE HOME OF THE FREE!" NOW IT IS KNOWN AS "THE LAND OF THE FAT AND THE HOME OF
THE FEARFUL!"
@john cronk Fred's
right, it's too late, but two things spelled our country's doom: colleges became factories
for feminist propaganda which discouraging bright women from marrying and having children
while they were young and fertile; then welfare was used as a tool to outsource childbearing
and rearing to the poor. What could go wrong? Stir the pot for 75 years, voila! the evening
news.
@ASimpleHistory Of
course its hopeless just read what you posted that's the drivile that got us where we
are,Canada's history with the Native Tribe are worse then worse, as the schools use the young
native girls for their own pleasure.If blacks can't spell simple words then they are only to
blame for they don't want to learn, for they learned how to play the blame game and the rest
is history .
@Gordon K. Shumway
Maybe, but why is little Willie tampered with for no reason. And without the owner's consent.
Now don't come back with penile hygiene, penile cancer and other yesterday arguments.
Countries with soap and water can keep little Willie clean and cancer free without chopping
off its skin. Circumcision is an American tradition just as FMG is of others. Let us call a
spade a spade.
@Daemon Be kinder
to our women. Circumcision is not on the level of female genital mutilation. Losing some skin
is not comparable to losing the sexual sense organ. Just another SJW trying to impose their
values on others.
It is also true that the things we take completely for granted – harnessed electricity,
clean potable running water, OTC medicines (to name a few) – will become less common,
then rare, then un-heard-of. The people we see rioting cannot build, create, or maintain,
they can only destroy. But we cannot KNOW the future. As absurd as it may seem (and its very
absurdity makes me think it's possible), what if the Old World comes to the rescue, so to
speak, of the New? Yeah I know, we're much more likely to be colonized by China, but still
@Gordon K. Shumway
I am against FGM, but how do you know African women don't enjoy sex? I read few days ago in
the Cosmopolitan magazine that the g-spot doesn't exist. It concludes that intimacy is what
makes women happy. Also it's not clear who enjoys sex more: the circumsized man or the
uncircumcised.
@LCBozo Being
against circumcision doesn't mean I'm automatically for FGM, you know. And no, considering
90% of the nerve endings are "inside" the part of the foreskin removed (and removed for the
EXPLICIT purpose of denying pleasure from intercourse) – it is exactly the same as FGM.
And watch the video, the host debunks the supposed "health benefits" of cutting off a
natural piece of your body. It's literally bronze age blood sacrifice for the modern era.
if these people are so hostile to supremacism, why aren't they attacking Israeli
consulates, protesting ADL & AIPAC, burning Israeli flags, and denouncing the Zionist
'genocide' of Palestinians?
Why aren't they denouncing Trump, Pelosi, Schumer, and others for their support of
supremacist state of Israel?
I hear that this is an attack by the 'left'. If so, why is this 'left' so silent about the
plight of Palestinians and other victims of US imperialism that is directed by Jews?
It's not about the Left. It's about punks and hoodlums serving as Janissary to Jewish
Supremacist Power.
@follyofwar It's
mad, totally mad, to call the American system of government a democracy. The rule of the
super-rich is not the rule of the people, only the rule over the people.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
Few democracies actually reflect the will of the voting public in the way they they are
administered. The power elite runs the show.
Human society is inherently hierarchical, unless we revert to the hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
@neutral Not to
worry. Most likely, very few of the US nukes are still operational. However, we lack the
testing capacity to determine which are still functional and which are duds. Deterrence is
based on fear, uncertainty and doubt.
@Charlemagne Agree
that universal suffrage voting is crazy-town. Women, on average, are not evolved for
protecting the frontiers, and vote with emotion. There are always exceptions of course.
Minority races tend to vote as a block.
Mosley seems to have come up with a solution that is lost to history:
Basically, voters vote on subjects they are qualified for. Corporate state does not mean
corporatocracy, which is what we have now in the U.S.
Governments are elected on the strength of their appeal to passion or to sentiment. Once
in office they promptly resign their effective power in favour of the great interests within
the State, but yet superior to the State, who exercise their power in secret. The
increasingly technical nature of all problems in an economic age has made it difficult or
impossible to explain the real issues to the electorate as a whole. The division between
daily politics and the reality of Government has become ever greater.
The technician has become ever more enchained by the passion, the prejudice and the folly
of uninstructed politics. By such a system as we advocate, the technician, who is the
architect of our industrial future, is freed for his task. He is given the mandate for that
task by the informed franchise of his colleagues in his own industry. A vote so cast will be
the result of experience and information. Is not this in fact rationalised democracy? Is not
this system preferable to the solemn humbug of present elections, which assumes that the
most technical problems of modern government, ranging from currency management to the
evolution of a scientific protective system, can be settled by a few days' loose discussion
in the turmoil of a General Election?
The ordinary man would greatly resent such treatment of the facts of his daily industry
and life. If someone strolled into an engineering shop and, after five minutes' cursory
examination of an intricate process which the engineer had studied all his life, proceeded to
tell him how to do it, the engineer would quickly tell the intruder he was a presumptuous
ass . Yet these are the methods which our present electoral system applies to that most
intricate and technical of processes, the government of a civilised State.
Rationalised democracy, as well as rationalised industry, has become an imperative
necessity. The Corporate State provides the only known solution to the problem. Our
electoral system has become a farce, worse even than in the days of bribed elections and
pocket boroughs. As it is organised at present, our system of government lacks the calibre to
carry us out of trade depression and set Britain again on top of the world.
In its writ-large form, trying to force West Virginia to accept the culture of
Massachusetts will produce only anger.
Who the hell is suggesting that? A tour of the radio dial would show that the
influence goes the other way. Where are the Arthur Fiedlers and Leroy Andersons when we need
them?
Good column Fred, but blacks are "phenomenally talented" is an interesting statement. Aside
from some basic talent with song & dance and athletics blacks are in general dismal.
I'll give them this: they know suffering mostly self-inflicted. It's a tragic situation
for them and us.
@SteveK9
I must disagree with the concept that the US lockdown was "copied from the Chinese".
While in no way do I support the current thoughts gaining popularity that "democracy
doesn't work" (works well enough in sane places like Japan, Korea, Slovakia, and such), this
precise example–the handling of the novel coronavirus–showed Beijing in a quite
OK light.
(The complaints how "they should have sounded the alarm half an hour earlier this would
have changed everything are only voiced by place that were too moronic to react properly in
time, unlike all of East Asia, which did)
What China did is lockdown ONE city (Wuhan), and sever connections between various other
cities and counties, in order to check the spread. And thus, they checked the spread. In 90%
places there was even never no "mandatory social distancing" or "mandatory mask wearing",
what people did they did because they felt they should, through grassroot peer pressure.
The whole Eastern Asian approach, China included, was:
1) Clamp down instantly on hot spots
2) Sever connections between suspect counties
3) After 1-2 viral cycles open up again
What the US and UK did was first go with the "nothing to see here" model, and then go into
"incompetent overreacting mode" when it was already far too late. This is NOT "the Chinese
model" that we saw.
But we're importing all the spiffy Latinos that Fred loves so much. We should be getting
better!
These headlines are hyperbole. America isn't going to "collapse". It still has far more
power than any other country. I don't know what will happen in the future and the state of
White Americans is a problem. But the country isn't going anywhere.
"""Our system of governments has proved itself weak, feckless, and unable to govern. The
chaotic response to the coronavirus is a prime example, there being no national policy and
the states being told to do as they see fit. """"
What's wrong with that? The FF took states rights for granted. That's why they wrote the
tenth amendment and that's why the federal constitution says the federal govt cannot by
itself amend its constitution. Only the states can.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
""It's mad, totally mad, to call the American system of government a democracy. The rule of
the super-rich is not the rule of the people, only the rule over the people.""
Democracy is dead not because of the rich but because of the Supreme Court. Those 9
unelected old goats appointed for life have granted themselves final say on every issue in
america. They write the laws even though the constitution says "All legislative powers herein
granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states."
The world will not again credit its charades of moral leadership. The rot, the tens of
thousands of derelict people living on the sidewalks, the looting and fire setting, the
censorship, are now visible to the entire earth. Oh well. It was a good thing while it
lasted.
The biggest contrast between the US and successful societies seems to involve the concept
of citizens rights and obligations.
If Americans had a strong concept of citizenship it could guide them through many
difficult issues. For example the world's longest running democracy (Switzerland) puts a
heavy list obligations on its citizens, such as military service, active regular
participation in local meetings/ issue based elections, and makes it clear to them that they
are a part of a historical society with no opt outs.
Americans have few or no obligations towards their founding history. They aren't required
to study it, respect it, or see themselves as part of it – in fact, to contribute in
any way at all. Rather, the Jewish media encourages them to demean it, and they are defined
as "consumers" (something that feeds and shops) rather than citizens.
Agreed that the US continues on its fast downward track, and it will involve more serious
financial and social crises.
On a basic level, US society is hopelessly uncompetitive with places like modern China
(great unified national projects in education, industry, infrastructure and national
development) while it papers over the cracks with debt, and pushes its ZioGlob SJW
agenda.
Yes, there may be no future for this society in white European terms. But it can still be a
magnificent place for people of color. The African population is expected to swell to more
than 45 billion in the coming years. Why not open up this unoccupied land and these existent
cities to these populations? There is a similar population spike ahead in Mexico and areas of
central and South America. These individuals are skilled farmers and they can make the U.S.
flourish with new crops.
If these new immigrants can build on the wonderful democratic ideals of the disappearing
white population, we may see a terrific future for mankind, also womankind.
The author seems to think the actions of rabble arise spontaneously. But they are just chess
pieces in a campaign to destroy the traditional Christian America. Money c0ntrols our
politics by owning the media and in effect the political parties and academe. The flow and
flux of opinions is in the hands of very bright people who unfortunately hate us.
What fun, what entertainment. And rare: One seldom sees the collapse of a landmark
society
Imagine thinking you're not standing in line to the slaughter.
I wonder if you'll still be thinking this once BLM militarizes. And they will, just look
at the sort of "donations" they are getting from the fortune 500. BLM is bigger than both
parties, and they are gearing up for a 1917. That means red terrors, the abolished police
replaced by NKVD style outfits that will abduct, torture, and murder the people you love, it
means mass executions,
The writing's on the wall; the anti-white hate speech, 1619, the statues being toppled,
the kneeling and appeasing, the more demands, the more fanaticism, the more hatred in this
racial rendition of marxism the proletariat are non-whites and the bourgeoisie are whites.
Watch out. There will be ZERO mercy if you're white. No matter how much you kneel, it will
never be enough.
It's not hard to imagine; a second wave of clownvirus to scare white people into
lockdowns, a chinese cyber attack to black out everything, then suddenly a red terror of
crazed and armed BLM mobs universally activated to slaughter the white sitting ducks in an
Esther style genocide which the jewish media will absolutely love. Interestingly this covid
hoax was launched around Purim.
"America speaks of the rule of the people, a horrible idea, and seems to be getting
there."
Do not think anyone can know
Their speech is restricted so we cannot know what they think
Their freedom to associate is restricted so they cannot organize with those of a like
mind
Their freedom to live as they will is restricted by federal legislation and nine
judges
They are forced to pay for others bad decisions and to bail them out
They are robbed of their money to be told how they can spend it and with whom
The rule of a free people would cause others to rise to the level of those who do best to
out do them if they were free to do so. It is the lack of freedom to do so, not that a people
being free does not make the best rule
Worldwide the depths of ignorance amongst the dark races is mind blowing. In South Africa
after 25 years of black rule which includes the control of state run schools and their
curricula, an acceptable pass rate is now 30%! Knowing 3 out of every 10 things is
acceptable. I mentioned to one of the anthropoids the other day about the excesses of the
Ottoman empire in Eastern Europe and Greece to be told "I don't care what Otto did", there is
literally no hope. The barbarians are in the city.
countries that outstandingly look after their people, such as Cuba
I can say from extensive first hand experience and the testimonials of family, friends,
etc. that not one country in Latin America looks after its people.
@Daemon Well, you
still replied to a comment opening, in our time of violently, unworthily, cultural legal and
social female privilege, with "Be kinder to our women."
Putting the foot down would work. I think the hand outs are at least partly responsible for
the uselessness of the blacks. Enabling is a pretty dangerous thing when done over 8 decades.
Take away the gravy train, it just might force them out of their stupor.
But who knows. It might also push all blacks into open revolt.
I think George Carlin described this the best "the owners aren't interested in people
capable of critical thinking – it's not in their interest. They only want obedient
workers "
The problem in America is not black people, it's white people. Take a look at current pop
culture which is basically homos and race-mixing 24/7. Take a look at the issues that worry
Americans (nooses and bathrooms for transexuals). Look at American celebrities, the
Kartrashians. Look at whom they want to vote, Senile Joe Biden or Trashy Trump (which is the
less bad alternative). Look at all the morbidly obese people moving around in scooters to buy
even more sodas and fast food.
It's not about the Left. It's about punks and hoodlums serving as Janissary to Jewish
Supremacist Power.
Exactly!
And Fearless Freddie knows it. Of course when Fred sees this pointed out to him he
pretends not to notice -- like with so many others, it's much safer for him to go after the
puppets, not the (((puppet-masters))).
(Although Janissaries were highly respected elite troops -- not exactly what we see
here.)
I keep thinking of an old cartoon by Leunig showing a family visiting the museum of lost
manners. The boy is interested in a diorama of a man giving up his chair for a lady. I feel
the same could happen to all of the toppled statues, the only difference is that they will
end up in a museum for lost causes. Every weekend families will visit and sadly reminisce of
a past lost.
@Charlemagne
Universal suffrage is a problem, turning into a popularity contest where only the rich can
compete, but it's that, that it's so easily corrupted, and is, that's the problem.
With election by lot there would have been no world wars.
When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states
Soviet Union did not "fall back into nation states", because no such states even existed
before USSR. Soviet Union disintegrated in line with its administrative division, the
equivalent would be America's 50 states going their separate way.
The author forgot about Flynt and other such cities. Also, is it the dictatorship of the
proletariat bombing other nations, notably Arab nations, not quite black, yet close, into
oblivion.
Very interesting article, thanks.
However it has one great deceit aand deficit.
quote
'The Soviet Union spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat, but lived under the
dictatorship of a gray aristocracy.'
No Fred.
It was not a 'gray' aristocracy.
It was a Jewish one.
The jews created and controlled the USSR for years.
Murdering millions of actual Russians.
Read Solzhenitsyn .
Imprisoning them, torturing them and enslaving them.
The falling of the Berlin wall freed the Russian people more than anyone else, it can be
argued.
It kept the Russians IN – in one almighty Jewish controlled prison.
But even then – a druncken corrupt Yeltsin was placed in charge – a USA/Jewish
puppet.
And the takaway plunder of Russia and its people began – obscene plunder which Putin is
reclaiming as he can.
Many jews then fled.
Not only Fred, did you miss the Jewish connection with Russia – you have managed to
ignore the Jewish connections with BLM and the current racial turmoil.
You seem to have a poor opinion of minorities fair enough – most of us would agree with
what you write.
But you are very coy about the minority with all its financial power and dual citizenships
behind the USSR, and the corruption and breaking of western nations today.
Why?
Um!
Excuse me, I feel the need for a quibble:
" a true dictatorship of the proletariat,". The rioters etc are not the "proletariat", they
are the "Lumpen-proletariat". The Proletariat are working people. They usually have families,
mortgages, car payments. They struggle with health insurance. They may even dream of their
kids going to college. The ultimate challenge with these people is to encourage them towards
class consciousness -- which means roughly, a consciousness of their own interests as a
group.
The "Lumpen-proletariat" are basically social riff-raff. They are the odds & sods. They
tend to live outside or unevenly connected to the "everyday" world. They may not be "bad"
people. Indeed, they may be "respectable". However, they will rarely have a consciousness of
social & political realities, even as they apply to themselves.
@Oliver Elkington
We cannot organize as every time we do the SPLC labels anything white as racist and in comes
the corrupt federally bums of in cognition to throw whites in prison. The writer is correct,
We Are Doomed.
But you are very coy about the minority with all its financial power and dual
citizenships behind the USSR, and the corruption and breaking of western nations today.
Why?
Because behind Fred's leather-jacket-Brando-Wild-One alter-ego, he's just plain
scared.
@SteveK9 The
Chinese response toCovidwas not insane, it was rational.
Having experienced several suspicious plagues among their food animals in recent months,
the Chinese feared they were facing bio-warfare, and made the only rational response. With
recent flareups, they probably fear they're facing phase 2 – and they probably are.
America, on the other hand, destroyed its economy to preserve the banks – setting
fire to the house to keep the furniture warm. And now the rabble, fantastically talented at
burning things, are burning the furniture.
@bluedog Canada is
gone. No glue. Started downhill about the same time as the U.S. – in the 70's/80's.
Yes, they treated the natives terribly, but from what I read at Unz and elsewhere, the
natives did their fair share of raiding and slaving. Such is man, unfortunately.
@Gordon K. Shumway
Unfortunately, the American people are the only people so stupid as to have opened their
doors wide to an influx of immigrants to the point they'll soon become a minority in their
own country. What used to be our core culture is fast disappearing. English is no longer the
lingua franca, but we are now a bi-lingual English and Spanish speaking country. Say bye-bye
America and go back to sleep. It's over, thanks to our "leaders'–an unbroken line of
dumbshit, sellouts!
@Felix Keverich
Russia and the Baltic states existed before, the stans had some clearly identifiable ethnic
groups they belonged to. I don't want to go into the usual impenetrable and pointless debates
about Belarus and Ukraine, but for most part the states that came out of the Soviet Union
were more natural nation states that came out of the Africa post colonialism, the US states
are not close to anything like nation states from the USSR.
@Oliver Elkington
I think it is simply all down to levels of comfort on both sides. For the left, they are
protesting and rioting because the state supports them. There will be no consequences and
ultimately they can return back to their lives as the smoke clears problem free. For the
right, they too are also comfortable and do not want to lose this comfort over fighting back
for what is right. Instead they'd rather 'protest' on the internet. It will take dwindling
levels of comfort to get the right to truly start organising.
@Oliver Elkington
A few years ago some locals in my community had organized a family picnic for residents to
come and celebrate a day of European heritage. All were invited to celebrate, there were
certainly no color restrictions or anything of the sort. This area is heavily Italian,
Polish, Irish and Welsh, all descendants of immigrants who came over to work in the coal
mines. We're talking a day of middle-aged people enjoying ethnic European foods and games for
the kids, tomato casseroles, pierogis and kielbasa.
Then all the Jewish gestapo groups suddenly appeared, denounced it as a day of white
supremacy, SPLC of course weighed in against it, the local politicians caved to the pressure
and finally saw that the park permit for the picnic was pulled. At the time, I found all the
negative reactions to this picnic hard to believe.
But here we are now, denied the right to peaceful assembly while anti-white forces have
full freedom to promote hatred, physical violence, looting and arson.
I don't know what will happen in the future and the state of White Americans is a
problem. But the country isn't going anywhere.
The US is circling the drain. The last I heard over a billion dollars was donated openly
to BLM by big corporations as a reward for instigating riots and looting across the country.
The rulers aren't even bothering to pretend to care about the future of the US.
@Freda Lipshitz
Brilliant, Freda! I found myself laughing out loud on reading your Red-Nexico.
You are right. Good idea. Let the South secede.
Except, why shoul they fuse with Mexico? They could be independent of both.
The basic American problem is the rule of the rich, which is predatory rule, and the gift
America gives them, a tiny few, is vast wealth all in one country. If that wealth was divided
up, part in the Confederacy as an independent country, part in New England as an independent
country, part CA and a few of the nearby states ditto, part WA ditto ditto, Hawaii shunted
off, independent, flyover states picking the nearest of those others to join, the rule of the
rich would be over! Prey on what?
Think. The rule of the super-rich over Cuba? It that why Cuba has free health care? Free
education? No-one in debt? Though under beastly US sanctions for decades?
Split the US up into a few medium-sized countries and SO many problems would be
solved.
Is democracy even a good thing? Last summer I read "The End of Democracy" by a Belgian
named Christophe Buffin de Chosal, and I'm now convinced that it is not.
You need *some* method to get rid of failed politicians that doesn't involve large amounts
of physical destruction.
@IvyMike Racism is
not the problem, Mike. I always appreciate a writer that states the truth, and Mr. Reed has
done a bang-up job in stating the truth about the situation here. (It's the other 95% of his
columns in which he has lots of truth but always some piece of his stupidity thrown in, that
make me comment so much in the threads thereunder.)
About the only minor detail I disagree with in this one is that, even though it's true
that having a complete democracy* with anyone being able to vote HAS been a bad thing, that's
not the Communism. The proto-Commies are the antifa idiots pulling down the statues. The
world has seen this before just over a century ago in Russia, over 70 years ago in China,
etc. Many of us either don't know any history or don't want to open our eyes to recognize
this.
No, they haven't read Marx and Engles, and no, they don't have Mao's little red books.
Just the same, it's the exact same mentality of wanting to tear down traditional society
completely that makes these antifa the modern Commies. Don't get me wrong, they'll be
bulldozed into ditches later by the ones in charge just the same, if this effort is completed
in America, but they don't know that yet. Useful idiots abound right now.
.
* The country was originally organized as a Constitutional Republic, NOT a democracy.
The Zionist Plan or Deep State Plan or NWO Plan { take your pick } is working 100%. The
populace is confused and programmed, and the "NWO Plan " has gotten filthy filthy Rich ,
while leaving the people so dumbed down – that they are blaming one another or some
puppet government people for all the shit going down. The Plan started over 100 yrs ago and
we can look back and see it – 1913 Federal Reserve, Politicians in their back pocket,
WWI , WW II, CIA founded, 1965 Open and Unlimited immigration , JFK and others assassinated,
the Wars, 9/11, . We know who is even doing it – but Nobody is left to Stop Them. The
Top people in the Federal Gov. and the State Govs. are mostly – all in – it can
only runs its course – now. Just like a Virus,
@Red Pill Angel
True, RPA, and what Fred somewhat described, but with not much detail, is that this is part
of the Long March through the institutions that has been going on since the middle 1960s. The
marchers reached their destination, total control, probably 10 years ago.
The European-American is still the majority, so if America falls, whose fault is it?
European-Americans are the majority in a government whose top priorities are themselves,
corporations and a foreign apartheid government. European-Americans have the majority vote
and continually vote for parties and representatives who seem to have little interest in
American prosperity.
European-Americans are the ones who idly stood by in silence within the herd and watched as
their government facilitated Jim Crow, welfare and targeted mass incarceration against the
Black African-American community, and then not understand why there is inequality
Apparently, too many European-Americans don't read history or are not interested in American
heritage, because they don't seem to understand the importance of the first and second
amendments, and that whosoever targets to eliminate these rights is an enemy.
Talk about IQ. Many European-Americans actually believe the propaganda of the Covid-19 hoax
or that erasing one of the most important events in American history will resolve the media
hyped racial tension.
And there are many European-Americans who do not seem to understand that the medical response
to the "epidemic", and the policing against rioting is the responsibility of the State, not
the federal government.
Why is it, that so many European-Americans do not understand that the United States is a
democracy based upon freedom, moral principles and common sense, not a Marxist communist
ideology.
If America fails, it is because too many Europeans don't think and act like they're
Americans.
@ASimpleHistory
Those water systems that only send the lead contamination to our helpless black wards? Must
be in the hundreds. Special valves and pipes yo!
Examples please.
Fred supplies examples of a flood of good will and mawkish stupidity showered on the
diversity and you counter with some penny ante hiccup in the scheme of things to sustain the
fantasy of "In it `Orrid?"
American Africans butt crackers and our precious progressive pansies will soon enough sift
through the rubble and garbage of an amazing experiment and never understand the truth of the
saying that the best is the enemy of the good. Or that a bird in hand is worth two in the
Bush. Thinking white!
Fred you're back in rare form! The irony that the country that has done the most to uplift
the white mans burden, is also the most racist seems well Words can't describe.
The more blacks get, the more racist we are. Time to toss em off the gravy train. Then at
least if we are to be called racist, we are'nt pissing dollar after dollar down the
river!
How bout we try leaving then to their own devices, since you know, blacks are the greatest
builders of civilizations in the history of man kind.
Fred you have accurately and succinctly put into words what pisses sane whites off the most,
the more we give, the bigger the black middle finger at us gets.
@Bragadocious If
someone is sick with Covid, that usually entails a breathing problem. I don't see how people
with breathing difficulties are going to march through the desert for days to show up at a US
emergency room.
There are still plenty of nice peaceful places to live in America. Most of the idiocy we're
witnessing is in the the large urban areas. We lose sight of the geographical immensity of
the US. Even in Southern California, where I live, there are huge sparsely populated areas,
and even more in the north. The first amendment was supposed to allow for freedom of
association, (as interpreted by the Supreme Court) and that includes who we live with and
amongst, in private life. So much for that.
I see the problem more as a political organization issue. The U.S. moved away from a
republic to an empire, and bled the country of resources to maintain that empire to
enormously enrich the few. When the ability to plunder resources diminished, the ruling class
switched to counterfeiting money on a grand scale to steal the wages of labor of the poor
here, and abroad.
So it's a twofold problem. One is the collapse of the global empire, both by resistance of
others (namely China and Russia), overreach, unaffordability, and incompetence. The other is
the social, economic, and cultural collapse at home, caused by years of political, economic
and social engineering, and outright theft by the ruling class.
In the real world (nature) entropy is a bitch. The reality is all our terms for society
are the humanities terms for thermodynamics. Complex systems require a lot of energy and
design to keep intact, let lone expand. The bigger the system the more required, and the more
fragile it gets – particularly when run exclusively from the center. Running an empire
from Washington in the modern world is about as complex as can be imagined. Far more than
Rome had to deal with, and look what happened there.
To me the solution, is a redesign of America's political organization. Forget the empire
and Republic, they're done. Design an organization similar to Switzerland, which is probably
the only true confederation on the planet. Let's return political power back to the states,
eliminate or drastically reduce the powers of the center (ie. Washington), and let the people
in each state decide how they wish to be governed there, and not by Washington. We might find
that there are states that don't want to belong to any larger political unit. Fine. Smaller
is better anyway. Let the pieces fall and let's see what combinations come out of it.
@Grahamsno(G64)
Proof?.
Claiming they went to the moon fifty years ago .
And now they have to buy tickets on Russian rockets .
Something has seriously deteriorated in the US space race.
Of course – a 'claim' is meaningless when you have Kubrick standing by.
Look what can be done with a few sets of boxcutters LOL
" In truth, America has made the greatest effort ever essayed by one race to uplift another.
Reflect: In 1954 an entirely white Supreme Court unanimously ended segregation. Later it
found the use of IQ tests by employers illegal because blacks scored poorly, then found
"affirmative action," racial discrimination against whites, legal (hardly oppression of
blacks, this). An overwhelmingly white Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964, the
Voting Rights Act the next year." etc etc
Fred, has it ever occurred to you that this was all PLANNED, that it was all ON PURPOSE?
Who in their right mind would sign a mass immigration bill? US, or World, Government would.
Why? Social unrest. Cultural genocide. Divide and conquer. Chaos amongst the rabble.
And the rabble, as we clearly can see now, truly are rabble–unintelligent, thuggish,
and all that. Many of their grandparents, if not all, were measured in speech and action,
humble and perhaps even quite intelligent. No more. Now a great indicator of lack of if not
intelligence then common sense–and true intelligence embraces common sense–is the
modern university graduate.
As I've said for years, Beware the white female masters or doctorate holder!
But Fred, surely you can figure out that all these things don't just happen. Lay your cards
on the table, dude.
@Ann Nonny Mouse
Gov't shouldn't even attempt to look after its citizens.
It's when gov't becomes a social welfare scheme that things go awry. The average citizen
is supposed to be able to stand on his own two feet and compete in a free market. Gov't is
supposed to protect that free market from interference. What we have today is gov't
suffocating the free market and fostering dependency by the millions of stupid voters they
pander after.
Cut off the welfare, 'free stuff' social programs, and get back to basics to change
course, but at this stage that's impossible. The solution is to get rid of the entire Fed Gov
to make the real cancers in the society evaporate. Get rid of the Pelosi's, Schumer's,
Trump's, the Federal Reserve, laws that actually cause discrimination, etc, etc,etc.
Allow the states to become countries and start 50 experiments on how to govern. I predict
that the conservative entities will rapidly fare best and the liberal holes will depopulate
via voting with their feet. Within 2 years, some areas will be humming along nicely while the
rest will have to reexamine their ridiculous policies when infinite funny money is no longer
available to create the fantasy world they wanted to live within.
@Smithsonian_2
"The way to get rid of corruption in high places is to get rid of high places." – Frank
Chodorov
As long as there's some asshat 'ruler' there will be corruption and eventual total decay
as the US is now experiencing. I, for one, need no 'leader'. Anarchism!
Fred, what is it about you? You write an article about the decline of America but the
Americans posting comments on your article are talking about circumcision, foreskin donors
and 'Willie-tampering'. That has to be your fault, something you are doing. It cannot be
attributed to the pathetic imbecility of most Americans even though you point out that the
dumbing-down of education will result in the pathetic imbecility of most Americans, so that
means . . . Oh, forget it. You win, I lose.
This is an aside but, if I may masquerade for a moment as a pathetically-imbecilic
American, I would note that god (or even, God) made an agreement with some of my people that
in return for unlimited but undefined blessings (other than a glass of milk and honey which
tastes like hell if you want to know the truth) they would circumcise all the males so he
could recognise his "children". This 'raises' questions. I would have thought even a minor
god (much less a God) could recognise his children without earthly assistance, especially
that kind of assistance and, unless the people are all naked, how would he know? Would he
say, "Unzip your pants so I can assess your degree of faithfulness?" I once had a girlfriend
who was so inclined, but never a god (much less a God).
I know I risk divine retribution for daring to ask, but what the hell would a god have in
his mind that he would choose THIS method of identifying his faithful? If I were a god
(forget about God here), and wanted a way to recognise my followers, I'm not sure that
'Willie-tampering' would be my ID of choice. A tramp stamp might be okay for the girls, but
for boys I think I might suggest something simple and more publicly-entertaining like
castration with piano-wire and a runaway horse. But let's not lose the main point which is
that any god who chooses to identify his (American and other) faithful by the contents of
their pants, is somebody I want to stay far away from. As with Hillary Clinton, and for much
the same reasons.
If America does fall who is gonna be Israel's henchman? Who's gonna keep stirring the Mid
East pot and the world with wars? And who's gonna protect poor Israel from their proclaimed
"nemesis" Iran?
I can't believe they would let the US self-destruct (actually cause the US to collapse)
because that would leave Israel all alone to defend itself.
@ASimpleHistory
Because middle-Americans don't travel and regard a country on the border of Michigan as a
foreign country, many posters have no clue about Canada. I grew up 40 miles from Ontario and
know it well.
Natives in Northern Canada are so dangerous that you would not want to walk around a small
Northern Ontario town. Going into a bar would be like going into a South Chicago project.
Natives in Canada don't have access to firearms or you would have 700 shootings a year. The
Canadian bush is actually more dangerous than Canadian cities. They're no different than
Aztecs in Phoenix, really.
Canada also has underclasses the US doesn't have. The idea of being mugged by an East
Indian in America would seem absurd. In Brampton it is not uncommon.
[MORE]
Worse yet, Canadian syndicates-like the IRA once was-are linked to political terrorism. Tamil
Tigers and Sikh Separatists flooded Canada in the seventies and eighties and used drug
dealing to fund their movements back home-which created a horrendous problem with middleman
money laundering.
Chinese have assumed control of Vancouver. They've flooded the streets with heroin from
China and East Vancouver has the highest rate of AIDS in North America.
Because most Americans don't travel to UK I'll run down the situation there. Pakistanis
are ruthless and their gangs as bad as Bloods or Crips. Guns and grenade launchers and M-14's
are common in UK and unlike the US, British criminals are more likely to shoot a police
officer.
The idea that there are no guns in Canada or UK is a joke. The cities of Toronto and
London are full of gun-toting ethnic cartels. Albanians and Russian pimping syndicates are
armed to the teeth in UK with firearms which would make a Crip green with envy.
Crime in London and Canada is more multicultural. In the US, blacks and Mexicans rule the
streets. No other gang can get into street level crime. In Canada and UK there are dozens of
street-level gangs of thugs battling it out for drug sales territory, while the Albanians
handle the high-class pimping.
I don't know why, but Pakistanis in America just cannot get into the grooming game. Maybe
its police response time. Tahir hangs around a middle school in the US and the cops are there
in 30 seconds. Or possibly little white girls in the US are culturally programmed to like the
black Alpha pimp-stud and some greasy Pakistani doesn't appeal.
Similarly, gypsies in the US go straight because on the street the blacks would simply
rape the begging little gypsy girls downtown to death. Or they would be shot.
Another aspect is prison. US prisons are so appalling that about 30 years ago the classic
white offenders-cat burglars, chop shop operators, bank robbers-simply stopped committing
crime because of the sexual torture by blacks in prison. Any probation officer will tell you
this.
In Australia, the Italian syndicates in Melbourne are actually more violent and brazen
than in New Jersey. In the US, the Italians are no longer really into violent crime. They're
into white-collar crime. Down Under, some of the Italians still are.
But the bottom-line is that UK blacks are Afro-Caribbean and West African. While it has
been noted that many of the Jamaicans are bad and riots have occurred, there is not the
density of black crime of the US inner-cities in UK. Its bad, of course, but mostly in
London.
Its been theorized that US blacks interactions with macho Irish and Scottish sheepherders
in the US South somehow made them more culturally worse than Africans, but this is only a
theory.
Similarly, Canada has also always had Afro-Caribbean crime. Haitians and Jamaicans brought
pimping and AIDS to Canada.
It was not actually the small number of US blacks who immigrated to Canada who brought the
scourges of pimping and crime but actually the Afro-Caribbeans.
Stryker knows the streets of the world. I've been on all of them.
Interestingly, Spain is a nice country. Much is made of its purported Arab influence, but
it seemed like France to me. Nothing like the Cholos of Phoenix.
Anyhow, for American posters who are so unworldly that they have not been to Canada that
is the rundown.
"When the Soviet Union ended it could fall back into various nation states, America has no
such thing. This makes its collapse incredibly more dangerous . . ."
Yes, although not primarily due to the left-over nuclear missiles. There is something much
more fundamental here. You touched on it, but I'm not sure how well you appreciate your
insight.
The issue is this: If France dissolves, the French people are still French. If America
dissolves, Americans are nothing.
So why saying generally right things about toppling of statures this billionaire wants
reparations. As any billionaire is a potential criminal who obtained his wealth at the expense of
common people what share of his wealth he will contribute?
And slavery in the USA was not the unique exception in the world in XIX century. Arab
countries get rid of slavery only in XX century and no completely. It was reinstalled in Libya
recently thanks to the USA topping of the regime of Colonel Gaddafi .
It's
not going to give a kid whose parents can't afford college, money to go to college. It's not
going to close the labor gap and it's not going to take people off welfare or food stamps
."
It's tantamount to rearranging deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means
nothing.
Johnson took a similarly dim view of removing shows like " The Dukes of Hazzard " or
films like " Gone with the Wind " from circulation and firing professors for saying "
all lives matter " instead of " black lives matter ," suggesting these moves are
" an attempt by white Americans to assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel
good " and don't help black people at all.
" Black people laugh at white people who do this ," the BET founder said, pointing
out that black viewers likely made up a significant portion of the viewing audiences of the
canceled shows because " they watch more TV ."
Calling performative apologetics from white celebrities on social media " the silliest
expression of white privilege that exists in this country ," Johnson suggested privileged
white people instead ask black people what they want and listen to their responses. "
Embrace being white and do the right thing, and then you don't have to worry about being sad
because you're white! "
" White Americans seem to think that if they just do sort of emotionally or drastic
things that black people are going to say 'Oh my god, white people love us because they took
down a statue of Stonewall Jackson' ," Johnson said before repurposing a famous quote from
the now-verboten Gone with the Wind: " Frankly, black people don't give a damn.
"
Johnson, who became America's first black billionaire in 2001, has plenty of ideas about
what black people want. He recently called for a $14 trillion reparations package for
descendants of slaves, which works out to about $358,000 for every black American, and believes
such a massive financial boost – not self-flagellating demonstrations from privileged
white people – is what most black people would like to see emerge from the current
climate of racial reckoning.
" Now is the time to go big ," he declared earlier this month, floating the massive
number as protests and riots raged across the US following the police killing of George Floyd.
But while a few of the Democratic presidential candidates had paid lip service to making
reparations part of their platforms early in the race, presumptive nominee Joe Biden has not
climbed aboard that bandwagon – yet.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
At the start of French Revolution, Bertrand Barère declared, "The revolutions of a
barbarous people destroy all monuments, and the very trace of the arts seems to be effaced. The
revolutions of an enlightened people conserve the fine arts, and embellish them [ ]"
Soon after, though, thousands of French statues were wrecked, and many heads tumbled into
baskets. Barère, "The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants."
The Anacreon of the Guillotine was lucky to escape with his own noggin.
Again, the defeated must watch impotently as their heroes are decapitated or come crashing
down. At least they still have their own necks, for the moment, at least.
Washington, Jefferson, Grant and Francis Scott Key have been toppled, and even a likeness of
Cervantes had red paint splashed on its eyes. "BASTARD" was scrawled on its pedestal. The woke
vandal didn't know that here was no conquistador or slave owner, but a slave of five years, not
to mention a seminal writer in the Western canon.
Ah, but "seminal," "Western" and "canon" are evil words now, you see, so maybe he did know,
for this is, at bottom, an assault on every pillar, brick, cornice and baseboard of Western
civilization. Burn it all down, for it is uniquely racist, sexist, genocidal and transphobic. I
mean, for thousands of years, evil whites absolutely resisted the installation of all-gender
shit holes.
Shut up already, and listen to Susan Sontag, "If America is the culmination of Western white
civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something
terribly wrong with Western white civilization. This is a painful truth; few of us want to go
that far . The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary
government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine
ballets, et al, don't redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The
white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone -- its ideologies
and inventions -- which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has
upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life
itself."
Later, Sontag regretted offending cancer patients with her poor choice of metaphor.
It's essential that we be exorcised from "dead white men." I remember when this idiotic term
started to circulate. I had just dropped out of art school. While drinking Rolling Rock in
smoky McGlinchey's
in Philadelphia, I told another art fag that he should know his art history, for how can you do
anything if you have no idea what's been achieved? Leering, this cipher smugly growled,
"They're just dead white men, man!"
In 2015, I taught for a semester at Leipzig University, so nearly each day, I'd walk by a
hideous building that crudely approximated the destroyed Paulinerkirche. Built in 1231, this
church survived all the vicissitudes, upheavals and wars down the centuries, only to be
dynamited by Communists in 1968. So what if Martin Luther had officiated there, and Bach was a
musical director? Of course, its rich history only made it more delicious to blow up, for
iconoclasm is the orgasm of "progressives," and that's why I've never identified as one.
There's one Leipzig neighborhood, Connewitz, that's famous across Germany as the center of
progressive politics, most notably the antifa movement, and guess what? It is thoroughly
defaced
with graffiti
that are often anti-cop
or anti-Germany
. During clashes with police that Connewitzers instigate, shop windows are gleefully broken not
just at multinationals, but mom-and-pops, because, you know, once you go berserk, it's hard to
stop. Reflecting on this in 2015, I knew it would only escalate and spread beyond Germany, and
it has. Seeing photos of Seattle's Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, I immediately thought of
Connewitz
.
When I wrote recently about the need for liberated zones, I meant, first of, the defense of
your own communities, as happened in Philadelphia's Fishtown and Italian Market, where locals
banded together to block an invasion of vandals and looters.
Here in South Korea, local monuments and mores are safe. Here in Busan, there's a huge
statue honoring General Jeong Bal, who was killed by Japanese invaders in 1592. Losing with
dignity is worthy of remembrance, though some contend he actually ran away. Historical debates
are healthy.
More interesting to me are five sculptures of war refugees by Lee Hyun-woo, near the 40-Step
Stairway. It was a shanty town during the Korean War, when Busan was a temporary capital after
Seoul was overrun by Chinese and North Korean troops.
Depicted without hokiness, these are admirably realistic figures of a mother breastfeeding
her baby while her naked son stood by, crying; two girls carrying
water , one with a shoulder pole and the other with a jar on her head; two boys covering
their ears as a man makes popcorn with a bomb-like
contraption; a fedora-wearing accordionist
, sitting on a bench; and two exhausted porters at
rest . As public sculptures, they're perfect, for they're gracefully inserted into the
environment as they dignify local history. Informative and fortifying, these bronze ghosts
mingle with contemporary Koreans.
Across a Japanese-built bridge not far away, there's a statue of Hyeon
In . You can sit on a stone bench next to the smiling, suited singer, and hear his songs
eternally broadcast from a bible-sized speaker.
In 1949, he made every man, woman, child and dog sob with his rendition of "Seoul's Night
Music." "Walking through Chungmuro under a spring rain / Tears flowing down the window panes."
Oh, stop, stop! You're murdering me! I can't take it! A true legend.
As a refugee in Busan, Hyeon In wrote "Be Strong, Guem-soon." It's a message to his sister
to stay strong until they meet again.
ORDER IT NOW
There is a street
dedicated to the painter Lee Jung-soeb
. He's known for gestural paintings of bulls, and playful drawings of boys hugging fish
and crabs pinching penises
. Educated in Tokyo, his brief career started just after World War II and lasted through the
Korean War.
Living all over, he starved, suffered from schizophrenia, drank too much and died in 1956 of
hepatitis, at age 40 and alone, in a Red Cross Hospital. His wife and kids had been sent to
Tokyo to escape the fighting. Although peripheral to art history, Jung-soeb matters to Koreans,
and that's enough. Meaning is local
, above all.
Honoring their own culture and history, South Koreans also appreciate the finest from
elsewhere. There are upcoming concerts of Saint
Saen , Brahms, Beethoven and Vaughan
Williams .
Rather bizarrely, Jin Ramen has a Joan Miro edition, and this made no sense to me until I
noticed the Miroesque zigzags, wiggly lines and goofy shapes floating on its bright yellow
packaging .
The objective is not to present convincing facsimiles of great paintings, but merely to
pique interest for further investigation. It's similar to a street being named after a writer,
painter, composer or scientist, as happens quite routinely in Paris, for example, but almost
never seen in America, a country with a long, aggressive streak of anti-intellectualism.
We're no longer talking about joe sixpacks sneering at pretentious bullshit, however. Thanks
to Howard Stern, Jerry Springer, Rush Limbaugh, Honey Boo Boo, gangsta rap and antifa, etc.,
there is now a pandemic of cocksure loutishness, with frequent eruptions into violent
barbarism. Ironically, the most militant driver of American anti-intellectualism is the
academy, for nowhere else has thinking ceased more completely.
If we're in a revolution, it's one of enlightened barbarism, or woke savagery, carefully
engineered down the decades. Yo massas enjoy the spectacle of y'all clawing at each other.
At Unz, there is a recent article by the Nation of Islam Research Group, "How Farrakhan
Solved the Crime and Drug Problem And How the Jews Attacked
Him ." Whatever its flaws or biases, it is a fascinating expose of how Jews sabotaged an
effort of blacks to help themselves. Immediately, I thought of the Jewish campaign against
Craig Nelse
n, who, against all odds, is desperately trying to save the most troubled, and even suicidal,
white youths.
Ordinary people don't have any extraordinary vision, yet they shape the nation with their
votes. They see the world with a jumble of inane emotional thought. The arts, sciences and
philosophy mean nothing to them. Their thoughts are adrift in emotional nonsense, like our
nation.
"... He pointed out that knocking over a statue will not "close the wealth gap," "give a kid whose parent's can't afford a college money to go to college," "close the labor gap between what white workers are paid and what black workers are paid" or "take people off welfare or food stamps." ..."
"... Johnson said that whites who seek to "assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel good" would be much more reluctant to support payments for blacks. ..."
"... Referring to actions such as "changing names, toppling statues, [and] firing professors because they said all lives matter," Johnson explained that "it just shows to me that white America is continually ... incapable of recognizing that black people have their own ideas and thought about what's in their best interests." ..."
"... "Give us the belief that you respect our opinion. You go out and do something and destroy something, fire somebody because you think it hurts us. Why don't you ask us first if it hurts us before you go and say 'Oh, I gotta do something for the negroes to make them feel better.' Well ask us if we want you to do that to make us feel better," he said. ..."
"... Johnson likened white people's actions attempting to make black people "feel good" to "rearranging the deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means nothing," he said. ..."
BET founder Robert Johnson during a Wednesday interview with Fox News
described people toppling statues as "borderline anarchists" and pushed back against the idea
that black people support such behavior, suggesting instead that they "laugh" at those who
knock down the statues.
"You know black people, in my opinion, black people laugh at white people who do this, the
same way we laugh at white people who say we got to take off the TV shows," he said
mentioning the "Dukes of Hazard," a decades-old television program that has come under fire
for featuring a car emblazoned with a Confederate flag graphic.
He pointed out that knocking over a statue will not "close the wealth gap," "give a kid
whose parent's can't afford a college money to go to college," "close the labor gap between
what white workers are paid and what black workers are paid" or "take people off welfare or
food stamps."
Johnson said that whites who seek to "assuage guilt by doing things that make them feel
good" would be much more reluctant to support payments for blacks.
Referring to actions such as "changing names, toppling statues, [and] firing professors
because they said all lives matter," Johnson explained that "it just shows to me that white
America is continually ... incapable of recognizing that black people have their own ideas and
thought about what's in their best interests."
He suggested that black people should be consulted before people take actions like tearing
down statues or firing someone for a comment they have made.
"Give us the belief that you respect our opinion. You go out and do something and destroy
something, fire somebody because you think it hurts us. Why don't you ask us first if it
hurts us before you go and say 'Oh, I gotta do something for the negroes to make them feel
better.' Well ask us if we want you to do that to make us feel better," he said.
Johnson likened white people's actions attempting to make black people "feel good" to
"rearranging the deck chairs on a racial Titanic. It absolutely means nothing," he said.
Johnson's comments come as debates rage across the country in the aftermath of the death of
George Floyd -- in some cases protestors have defaced and toppled statues. President Trump has
come out against changing the names of military installations named after Confederate
leaders.
Actually both nationalists and BLM are noted fighters with icons of the past. Especially
during "color revolutions"
They want their own version of history and can't accept any alternatives. That confirm the
saying that that history is the future overturned into the past.
Notable quotes:
"... And all over Britain, statues of forgotten politicians, merchants, generals, and admirals (and now the blue plaques that commemorate them) are being investigated, to see if they in some way celebrate a wicked past. Even the looming sculpture of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square has been first scrawled on by protestors (who also defaced a nearby monument to Abraham Lincoln) and then hidden in a box by Greater London's feeble authorities ..."
"... This is a good indication of the state of modern Britain, teetering on the edge of a cultural revolution so severe that its greatest modern figure has lost his power as a unifying force and memory ..."
"... IdPol is tolerated and even promoted because it does not make any substantive changes. It does not affect economic relations, much less take money out of rich people's pockets. ..."
Pulling statues down or calling for the removal of "problematic" portraits isn't motivated
by a desire to forget the past, Michel Foucault argued. It is a way of returning to it and
reigniting its conflicts . Blake Smith
in The Washington Examiner : "
What we are in the habit of calling 'identity politics,' and particularly political
movements based on (somewhat contradictory) appeals to racial solidarity and anti-racism,
depend on a 'certain way of making historical knowledge work within political struggle.' So
argued Foucault in Society Must Be Defended , a 1976 book based on a lecture series
about 'political historicism.'
Many on the American Right hold Foucault, along with his French postmodernist
contemporaries, partly responsible for the emergence of identity politics. It would be more
accurate to say that Foucault was one of the first, and sharpest, analysts of the way
identity-based political movements appeal to history and ignite what he called 'race war.' . .
.
Hiding their crimes with myths, the oppressors have made the oppressed forget who they are
and what they have suffered. But the signs of that historical violence are all around us -- in
statues, place names, and everyday language. Purging the culture of these signs is not so much
an ethical demand that the past conform to present values as it is a way of plunging the
present back into past conflicts, which the oppressed now stand a chance of winning."
Peter Hitchens makes a similar point in a short piece on iconoclasm in England in First Things :
"It is the Rhodes statue that is controversial. But this is no longer really about Rhodes.
In the last few days it has been under police guard. Not long ago a large demonstration,
wholly ignoring supposed rules about avoiding viral infection, gathered beneath it while
shouting about decolonization, as if Britain still had an empire. Perhaps they wish it was
so. People need enemies, and dismantled empires are nothing like as good for this purpose as
living, breathing ones . . .
And all over Britain, statues of forgotten politicians, merchants, generals, and
admirals (and now the blue plaques that commemorate them) are being investigated, to see if
they in some way celebrate a wicked past. Even the looming sculpture of Winston Churchill in
Parliament Square has been first scrawled on by protestors (who also defaced a nearby monument
to Abraham Lincoln) and then hidden in a box by Greater London's feeble authorities .
This is a good indication of the state of modern Britain, teetering on the edge of a
cultural revolution so severe that its greatest modern figure has lost his power as a unifying
force and memory ."
I don't know about France, but here it seems to be about normalizing a new process. Gangs
of thugs are being allowed and even encouraged to go into certain neighborhoods to
intimidate and attack those who live there, to break, burn, and deface other people's
property with impunity.
It combines Orwell's "two minute hate" with the kind of behavior we condemned when it
was done by the Ku Klux Klan.
If renaming parks and boulevards and appointing blue ribbon commissions were enough to fix
anything, you'd think that everything would be fixed by now.
IdPol is tolerated and even promoted because it does not make any substantive
changes. It does not affect economic relations, much less take money out of rich people's
pockets.
So many movements get sidetracked by purely symbolic actions on the one hand - "Let's
rename every avenue in Harlem, and 125th Street, too!" (the black New York city councilman
behind those resolutions was a joke in the local black activist community) - and corporate
and elite funding whitewashed through foundations and NGO's on the other. In the 70's,
affirmative action was used to build up and buy off the black middle class while working
class jobs for blacks were gradually disappearing, and today it's Diversity, Inc. jobs.
The Establishment is very good at buying off some, co-opting others, assassinating a
few, and marginalizing the rest, or at least waiting for them to get tired of kicking
against the pricks. Judging from its track record at surviving this long, the Establishment
also is very good at figuring out who gets which treatment.
Its how the activists of the Civil Rights Movement, many of whom once did genuinely
brave, even heroic things, were gradually co-opted into corrupt operators of political
machines. It's how fire-eating campus radicals were neutered into tenure-seekers and meek
supporters of "changing the system from within".
For that matter, the history of the Tea Party is also instructive.
Hey, this is America. Not Europe. In Europe at least it's about "ideas". In America it's
about------------MONEY!! And celebrity.
Only in America can a race hustler/shakedown artist (and part time FBI informant) like
Al Sharpton get a permanent gig on a major so-called "news network?" Only in America can a
real estate developer and "reality TV host" become president. Not that the office means
anything anymore (except to the Chattering Class) but, that's another story.
"Do Germans honor their ancestors who fought for the cause of the Nazis. No, they do not."
Where do you get "Nazis" from? Confederates weren't "Nazis".
Most of these statues are of Americans who saw more service in the US Army than the
Confederate one. Most weren't fighting to preserve slavery. The typical southern soldier
didn't even own any slaves. They were fighting an invasion, they did it bravely and
honorably. We're proud of them, and we built statues to their memories, in part as proxies
for the hundreds of thousands of southern soldiers and others who died during the worst war
in our history.
Every Christmas Eve, I light a candle on the grave of my grandmother's grandfather, who
fought for the Confederacy in the Battle of Port Hudson, and elsewhere. He owned no slaves.
He was fighting an invasion, as you say. I am glad that the South lost, because their cause
was unjust. But I honor the bravery of my ancestor.
What you do on Christmas Eve is your own business. That’s not the same as a monument
to stonewall Jackson erected in 1921 during the raise of the KKK or monuments erected in
the 50’s. Clearly lots of people who are southerners don’t like those statues,
particularly all those black people. They never liked them and wouldn’t have agreed
to erecting them if they had a say at the time of construction. Many of these statues are
now in majority black cities like the ones taken down in New Orleans. Those black people
are under no obligation to honor any confederate in the public spaces they occupy. From
what I’ve read, it sound like they always viewed it as a slap in the face.
"Race war" is a misnomer. Yes, there are plenty of black people in some of the mobs, but
regarding "iconoclasm", the videos of the monument vandals show mostly what look like rich,
overweight white kids from Scarsdale or the Upper West Side, probably using mommy's credit
card to fund their window-smashing, statue-toppling, and building-burning expeditions. The
toll of their destruction and violence is terrible, but I can't believe it's really that
hard to catch and imprison them.
Why are they still running amok? When will the authorities act to protect and defend the
people and property of their cities and states?
The people who are angry about the pulling down and desecration of Confederate statues are
the same people who cheered when statues of Lenin and other Soviet dignitaries were pulled
down and desecrated when the USSR fell or when statues of Saddam Hussein fell during the
Iraq War II. Hypocritical much??
"... Some argued that complex historical figures require an honest judgment. "History is grey and while we should be thankful for Churchill's leadership during WW2 – he was far from perfect, and to many downright awful," ..."
People were left "speechless" after a photoshopped image of a statue of British wartime
leader Winston Churchill emerged online. The monument was vandalized during protests against
racism and police brutality last week. The statue outside the British Parliament building was
boarded up for protection against vandalism. Now an image has been circulating on social media
showing the words "Don't open, racist inside" written on the boards covering the
monument.
-- You're not meant to think the
statue thing is real (@rdouglasjohnson) June 12,
2020
While commenters online were quick to point out that the phrase was digitally added to the
original photo, there has been growing outrage over the treatment of the statue by protesters.
While some view Churchill as a symbol of colonialism, many regard him as one of the greatest
British statesmen, who led the nation to victory in WWII. "I'm speechless," one Twitter
user said, commenting on the photoshopped image. "This man is one of the reasons Britain and
most of Europe didn't end up under Nazi control, and this is how y'all thank him," another
wrote
.
Some argued that complex historical figures require an honest judgment. "History is grey
and while we should be thankful for Churchill's leadership during WW2 – he was far from
perfect, and to many downright awful," a person wrote online.
Officials also
defended the statue. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that boarding it up was "absurd and
shameful," while Home Secretary Priti Patel called for the coverings to be removed. "We
should free Churchill, a hero of our nation, who fought against fascism and racism in this
country and Europe," she said.
Police in various American cities especially on the East and West coasts have stood down while fanatical mobs of
leftists unilaterally determine which public monuments and statues should be toppled, destroyed, and
in
some cases beheaded
--
as
in
the
recent "beheading" of a Christopher Columbus statue at a public park in Boston
.
It didn't take long for the woke mobs to
target
statues of the founding fathers and American Constitutional framers
in the past days.
In Portland
over
the weekend
, a large bronze Thomas Jefferson statue that was a central feature of Jefferson High School campus was
pulled down after Black Lives Matter protests there.
Like others across the nation, the Jefferson statue was further defaced with the words "slave owner" and "George Floyd"
spray-painted across the base.
But given that increasingly even Abraham Lincoln statues are being targeted, it reveals that neither the Confederacy nor
early colonial and American slaveholders are the targets, but all symbols of US history itself.
They make no distinction between Confederate and Union, abolitionist and pro-slavery, 15th-century figures and 20th.
They don't care when a monument was erected, who built it, or why.
They have not come to debate or persuade
their fellow citizens to relocate these statues to museums or private property.
They
believe the debate is over and that they have won.
Their target is not the Confederacy. It is the United States.
They mean to destroy symbols of American
history writ large, because to them all of American history is racist and genocidal. Their goal is not to cleanse a
nation they love of monuments to Confederate traitors who tried to secede, but to cleanse their consciences of ever
having loved such an evil and irredeemably racist country in the first place.
Rioters in Philly deface a statue of Matthias Baldwin, an early abolitionist who fought against
slavery 30 years before it ended.
Even leading abolitionist figures from history are targeted
,
astoundingly
:
That is why you see mobs defacing statues of abolitionists like Matthias Baldwin and Union war heroes like Adm. David
Farragut and Gen. George Thomas.
That is why the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier of the American Revolution in
Philadelphia
was
vandalized
this past weekend with the words "committed genocide." That is why statues of Christopher Columbus
were torn down or beheaded in three cities last week.
A
"peaceful"
protest took place
at Central Park in Whittier on Sunday, or so we are told. It appears that initially the statue
was safe, but by the end of it the Quaker abolitionist considered key in the 19th century movement for equal
rights wasn't spared by the 'woke' mob.
John Greenleaf, whose statue now sits damaged and vandalized, including with the spray-painted letters "BLM", was among
the
most prominent literary voices leading the fight to end slavery even decades before Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation
in 1863
.
If even memorials to famous abolitionists won't be spared, what will?
* * *
Many commentators have noticed that the statue-destroying leftist mobs in both the US and UK have something in common
with a certain Mideast terror group...
Before and after
: the 6th century Bamiyan Buddhas of Afghanistan were destroyed by the Taliban using dynamite in
2001.
Someone Else
,
16 minutes ago
The
President has always been a respected figurehead no matter who he was. There were many times in my 62
years that the guy I didn't support became President. But he WAS President. And he was treated with
respect and dignity.
You
can't look at a newspaper today without seeing a headline like "President Lies About Russia". "Fact
Checkers" call him a liar in real time before he can even finish a speech. The press openly mocks him
and holds him in contempt on every issue. It seems that the only "media outlet" that universally
endorses the President is fringical "Info Wars" and for it they are banned from Facebook and Twitter.
If
we can't show our current elected President the respect he deserves for simply BEING our elected
President - why are we surprised to discover people attack statues?
Refuse-Resist
,
7 minutes ago
He may be one of the only Americans in the entire edifice.
stuvian
,
22 minutes ago
peak stupidity has arrived
Someone Else
,
34 minutes ago
The mistake is in thinking that these riots are principled. This is not about slavery. This is about
destroying stuff.
They don't want reparations out of a sense of fairness. They want reparations out of a sense of monetary
gain, whatever the reason.
They don't attack Apple stores and Nike stores to strike out against evil corporatists. They do it
because they want free shoes, apparel and Mac Book Pros.
The
poor want to destroy the rich and to take their stuff. Don't look for anything noble or righteous
there. It doesn't exist.
Goodsport 1945
,
1 hour ago
This is not a movement about slavery or oppression. The intent is to destroy our nation. There will
never be a one world government until living standards in the US are brought down to that of the rest of
the world.
The
Globalists, Liberals, Socialists and Communists who fund, encourage and protect these criminals have
become the biggest threat to our freedom since the War of Independence.
Someday this will all become apparent to the majority, but by then it might be too late to avoid a civil
war.
Refuse-Resist
,
1 hour ago
YES. We must stand together for our children and grandchildren.
Failure to do so will end them up in a North American version of South Africa.
iadr
,
1 hour ago
IDK.
Statues have always seemed kind of icky to me.
They purport to honor the ideas/ideals of someone, but I can't see how that's true. It requires an
absurd and patently obviously immature association with the corporal form of someone to represent their
ideas. It was, and is, a dumb idea.
But
I don't think more than a few percent of "activists" currently can reason in the way of this analysis, or
even have the self knowledge to discern where their hate of power symbols arises from (an incredibly
complex topic).
So
there are statues and they are up. I'd leave them up, but I'm not really tied to the idea by more than
the thinnest thread.
If
we "win" in the long term.... do we, in 50 years leave up the statue of Rev Al Sharpton? do we leave up a
statue of some cross dressing idiot because it means something to some people? Do we leave up a statue of
some defender/symbol of financialization- a Ray Dalio or a Ken Griffin? Someone who represents the
concentration and corruption of power in the .1% in this era?, or another era (eg. Rockefeller)?
Of
current statuary, I know enough philosophy/sociology/history/ethics to rank by worthiness - in
my
value system
, of long term defence. Conversely I see how many of the "famous" of the past are
simply sociopaths who got lucky,
who
spotted their era's version of a cheat code
.
I
think the reactionary articles on the statue topic are way beneath the standard we have here at ZH, and
are tabloidish.
I
think the vandals should stop, yes. And that they are shallower *by far* than the people who put up the
statues, but also and lastly: that maybe there's a third way besides prostrating one's self in defence of
some flawed character from a wholly different era.
ItsAllBollocks
,
1 hour ago
They're not destroying your statues, they're destroying your history.
The crazy part is you're letting them.
The question is, why?
Scipio Africanuz
,
3 hours ago
As
averred, there'll always be saboteurs and provocateurs amongst any mass protest, it's a feature, not a
bug and why?
To
discredit the peaceful protesters is why.. In
this case however, you have sabotage and provocation combined with illiteracy to create a volatile mix..
It's easy to observe that vandalizing anti-slavery advocates, is either illiteracy, sabotage, or
provocation..
The
interesting thing however, is the energetic attempts to tar all the protesters as anti-white or anyi-America..
What's going on, are attempts by political forces to discredit the grievances of legitimate protesters,
and it's quite transparent too..
Unfortunately, since quite a lot of Americans no longer engage in critical thinking, they'll fail to ask
the obvious questions such as who benefits from vandalizing anti-slavery monuments..
Or
even that of Jefferson, from whom protesters draw the legitimacy of their protests..
Anyhow, the folks sowing the chaos on both sides, are going down hard, they've passed their best before
dates of utility..
Now, they're simply parasites..
Cheers...
Sick Monkey
,
3 hours ago
This is why we need law enforcement. Cull the parasites. We do it with predators when their numbers
climb and start attacking innocents. The alternative is chaos. Can't invest in a society that lets
predators roam free.
djez
,
2 hours ago
"Unfortunately, since quite a lot of Americans no longer engage in critical thinking, they'll fail to
ask the obvious questions such as who benefits from vandalizing anti-slavery monuments.."
Well said. I have just been explaining the meaning of critical thinking to my 13 year old daughter and
recommended she apply it the next time one of her teachers raises the BLM subject, rather than going
along with what she is being told that racism is a huge problem. It's not. We just had a black
president. The issue is not racism, it's the image that social media has developed that everybody else
is having a great time and long loads of assets. You sit there reading all day that everybody else has
a "lovely lunch with the girls" and dripping in Cartier or "rolling with my bitches in my Mercedes"
and you will crack up at why your life is so $hit.
So I say again, if they read books instead of Facebook the world would be a better place.
I have to disagree. Small minorities taking it upon themselves to topple and destroy statues is not democracy. You may conflate
the image of the toppled statue with a popular revolt but that is because we've never seen as disarmed and atomised population
as we have reached now who have as yet not begun a backlash against the unending mission creep we see in this movement.
In some cases, like in towns and cities that have developed significant black majority populations, the removal of confederate
monuments that was blocked by the state from happening democratically may have a case.
But the statues in Britain and elsewhere in Europe are often much older in general and not controversial. They are often prominent
parts of the public space that are well-loved. A statue's meaning can change with time and right now these statues are increasingly
being targeted not because they irredeemably cause offense but because they are tied to ethnic enemies of the core of these protests.
The Columbus statues are a good example. The one in Virginia was initially opposed in 1925 by Virginians of old stock Anglo
settler ancestry and prominently by a politician who turned out to be tied to the KKK, causing the situation to become a national
one in the US leading to pressure that lead to the statue being erected. To all parties involved this wasn't really a statue of
Columbus, it was an ethnic totem. Almost 100 years later and the context of the statue being an ethnic totem for Italian-Americans
is not visible to the protestors, to them it's a totem of white America and European colonisation. The context of the statue being
originally placed as an ethnic marker in opposition with America's existing identity (A kind of activism very similar to what
they're doing) was invisible to them. Who was right? Were the Anglos in the 1920s right? Were the Italian immigrants right? Were
the local Native American groups right? Were the BLM protestors right?
In 1925, Frank Realmuto (a Richmond barber) organized a campaign to donate a statue of Christopher Columbus to Richmond's
Monument Avenue; this campaign was supported by Richmond's approximately 1,000 Italian-American residents. In May 1925, the
Richmond City Council rejected a proposal to donate land for the statue alongside Monument Avenue on the basis that Columbus
was both a foreigner and a Catholic; most of the council members believed that putting Columbus near monuments to revered Confederate
figures would be inappropriate. This decision was widely criticized in newspaper editorials published across the United States,
especially when it came to light that an opponent of the statue who spoke at the meeting was a member of a coalition that included
the Ku Klux Klan. In June 1925, a committee of the Richmond city council decided to allocate land near Byrd Park for the statue.
Fundraising began in February 1926 while Ferruccio Legnaioli, an Italian immigrant to Richmond, was selected to design the
statue. Ground was broken in June 1926.
For decades, members Richmond's Italian-American community gathered near the statue on the eve of Columbus Day to celebrate
Columbus and their culture. During the 2010s, the statue was repeatedly vandalized; these vandalizations coincided with increased
opposition to Columbus Day and efforts to recognize indigenous peoples. On June 9, 2020, the statue was torn down, spray-painted,
set on fire, and thrown into a nearby lake by individuals protesting the May 2020 killing of George Floyd.
The destruction of these statues is basically a form of ethnic provocation and is not conductive to any kind of social solidarity
that Johnathan supports. So far I've seen zero mentions of Palestine in all the hubbub about racism. Indeed, with all the noise
about identity politics which often prominently includes Muslims and arabs and even a surprising number of people of Palestinian
descent in the US, I don't see any mention of Palestinians.
Churchill wasn't a very sympathetic man, yet the statue of him isn't about that. He is a personification of WW2 and Britain.
People who fully know all about his deficiencies and crimes walk past and feel fine or even a little comforted because it's not
a statue celebrating those things or perhaps even really the man himself but the idea of him. And that is partly why the protestors
want to destroy it. Nobody is really offended by it because nobody really thinks about those aspects of his character, not even
the protestors. I fear the protestors are attacking it because of what it does represent.
But it goes further because this is centering an effective non-English perspective about the English perspective. You can't
understand the notion of 'decolonisation' of London otherwise.
Ultimately the destruction of these statues feels very similar to the destruction of place names and monuments by the Israelis
after 1948. All of this is the greatest bonfire of social solidarity the West has ever seen and all it will lead to more victories
for oligarchy and neoliberalism. All of it will beat people down and make them hunker down.
Just the title – tearing down statues, is the same as burning books, or burying scholars.
History is history – deal with it or STFU. Honestly, debate is about considering what has been, what is now, and what will
or could be in the future. Without having signs to what has been, knowing what is now is difficult. And knowing how to forge the
future, is a lost cause.
Brits built statues to Churchill – he was a genocidal, forgerist, drunk maniac. Germans built statues to Hitler – he was an
aggressor, perhaps genocidal (to the Slavs). Russians built monument to Lenin – he wasn't genocidal, just indifferent to murdering
some decent fraction of any people's to get his goal.
But those people, whether in understanding, or in failure of understanding, built statues to them. Both serve as lessons –
either as a lesson to the power of propaganda, or herd behaviour. Even without those two, statues to moral decay shine a light
on that condition.
'the fool is not the one who doesn't know, but the one that does not want to know' – someone else (if anyone knows! )
Now that I've read it – it is as if the author believes that only positive lessons, pats on the back, can serve as lessons to
the individual or society.
In my experience however, error is what offers both progress. Or suffering – if the lesson from the error is not learnt.
Success is heady. Statues of heroes and heroes only bring pride, a deadly emotion. We must remember the faults of humanity,
and what better way than through the errors of our predecessors? Christians put up statues to slavers, rapists, murderers. Is
this not enough for reflection? Can't we stand around a statue of Churchil, and debate power by considering he wished to drop
10 million Anthrax bombs on Northern Germany in a drunken stupor? How would this be possible without the statues?
The author is a babe, an infant – that in shuttering his eyes with his hands, believes all the danger and evil disappears from
the experience that is in front of him.
It seems Bristol's political class today are little more responsive to the popular will than they were 200 years ago.
Bristol's political class today is full of minorities, including the mayor who is a negro, all of them much hated for their
corruption, incompetence, and favouritism to their own minorities. Bristolians love their trees, but minorities don't seem to
like leafy suburbs, so they have all the trees cut down. If they had cared a hoot about Colston's statue, they could have had
it moved to a museum any time they wished.
The people who threw Colston in the docks appear to be largely white children, probably at Bristol University, which has become
a cancer growing on the city, a vast and ravenous corporation buying up property using tuition fees from the wealthy ruling classes
of other countries. Their act of vandalism was motivated by empty and ignorant slogans, impatience with actual democracy, and
a total intolerance of opinion which differs from their own. Also by a pathetic urge to mimic what's going on in the US.
This lawlessness and its encouragement by the minority power holders will have been noted by hitherto law-abiding people. Nobody
should be surprised if the next figure to go into the docks is Bristol's black mayor, accompanied by some brown councillors.
"Tearing Down Statues Isn't Vandalism. It's at the Heart of the Democratic Tradition"
Hey Jonathan Cook:
Sure!
Let's tear down ALL statues glossing over historical crimes & hypocrisy -- prioritizing the most notorious hagiography of all
-- the ubiquitous idolatry of "Holocaust" industry shysters.
@Beavertales I have read several claims, seemingly credible, that George Soros funds BLM and supports their violent rioting.
It is also documented, rebellious Jewish sources, that the Jews collectively hate non-Jews and and are at war with, seek to subvert,
the societies in which they, the Jews, live. It happened historically, e.g. the Cyrene uprising in the 2nd century AD whose largely
successful objective was widespread massacres of Gentiles. There seems reason to believe organized subversions of society, BLM,
LGTQXYZ and more have that connection.
We have here the current article by the Le Pen woman pointing out that permanent victimhood is behind BLM and the like. But
that, being eternal victims and so eternally hating, is notoriously Jewish.
The Holocaust museums everywhere are central to that victimhood and it is not permitted to examine the truth of the Holocaust,
though some have dared and say it's largely devoid of credibility.
So yes, you are right. One of the answers to the current turmoil plus the other things you mention, USS Liberty etc., is that
the Holocaust museum in Washington should be stormed by Americans.
Disclaimer: I am not an American.
But the time is long overdue for fair and balanced and open and loud reaction to the eternal Jewish war against society.
Those who allow the tearing-down are projecting their own mindset of rationality and
compromise onto those doing the tearing-down. They are assuming that that the statue-removers
will be placated.
But exactly the opposite is true; they will be not placated, but rather, encouraged to
escalate to the next kind of tear-down. Among those making the error is Mr. Trump, a
dealmaker, who will think he has made a deal; that this is a "deal" situation. The statues
are just the tip of the iceberg.
"... Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine she'll be -- and the more she'll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy dunce-caps on the same occasion. ..."
"... By nature, the human woman is a peacock. We like to be noticed. The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty. The sluts among us don't. On social media, women outstrip men in the narcissistic and exhibitionist departments. In TV ads, American women, fat, thin, young and old, are grinding their bottoms, spreading their legs, showing the contours of their crotches, and dancing as though possessed (or like primates on heat), abandoning any semblance of femininity and gentility, all the while laughing like hyenas and hollering hokum like, "I Own It." ..."
"... men are punished when they react normally to women behaving badly ..."
"... So endemic is distaff degeneracy these days that "protesters" routinely disrobe or perform lewd acts with objects in public. Vladimir Putin is a great man if only for arresting a demented band of performance artists, Pussy Riot, for desecrating a Russian church. ..."
"... If men flashed for freedom; they'd be arrested, jailed and placed on the National Sex Offender Registry. ..."
"... haute couture, ..."
"... Feminism promises women empowerment. However, there is a pornographic side to the promise. There are legions of women trying to give the world a hard-on for attention, money, status, etc. When the world reacts, as in the story, they say, "Don't touch me what do you think I am?" ..."
"... What's the big difference between Weinstein and former president Bill Clinton except that one was the frickin president of the US? Clinton used his various positions throughout the years to intimidate women, from the days of using Arkansas state troopers to act as procurers for him to later using federal agencies to harass them into shutting up. His wife Hillary, the almost-president, ran interference for him in muzzling the various women who might have spilled the beans. The Clintons postured themselves as champions of women's rights even as the reality of this sleazy couple was really tawdry. Weinstein was just a studio boss with money and film roles to dispense to a never-ending line of wannabe actresses. He fits right in with the Clintons as part of the Hollywood celebrity and glitz crowd and Hillary would never have called him a "deplorable". Yet even now there's many people who are Clinton fans and supporters even as they hypocritically play this game of 'get the fat guy'. The Clintons are a hundred times worse. ..."
"... You do not need philosophy to explain a love for money. Whether the profiteering Kardashians or the profiteering Madonna (and a legion of her imitators), these women did the indecent, lewd, into-your-face pornographic performances for financial gains. They have been denigrating themselves (and other women, by association) for money. They wanted the money. By any means. ..."
"... That the US government has extolled the deeply amoral Pussy Riot scum tells a lot about the moral crisis in the US, including the unending and very expensive wars of aggression run by the country that has no money for a single-payer medical system. ..."
"... Yes, the culture today is far, far more crass and degenerate than say, in the 50s, when Leave it to Beaver played on America's TVs, and Norman Rockwell and all that. But what has happened to our culture? Has the race into the sewer been a consequence of loose women of America (England, etc..) driving the decline? Or, are the causes a more a top down affair? IOW resulting from the big-money producers and all those men who run Hollywood? ..."
"... women, as indeed many men, are given to fashions and peer pressure. If the prevailing culture is one of modesty and self-respect, the women's behavior will reflect that. The American women of the 1950s were of more or less the same stock of women as the gutter skanks Ilana rightfully laments today, but did women drive this downward trend, or did (a few) men? ..."
"... One thing that has been noticed, are the striking similarities between American culture today and that of Weimar, Germany. Weimar was notoriously corrupt, with sexual degeneracy and prostitution rampant. Berlin was described as a giant brothel, where the desperate German youth were exploited and debased. ..."
"... the relentless, drum-beating agenda to destroy Western values. To eviscerate the culture of 1950s America (with virtues like honor and temperance) once and for all, and replace it with a septic tank value system, where self-respect is replaced with self-loathing. Where dignity and femininity is replace with twerking with your tongue out. Where Hollywood starlets howl about how "nasty" they are, as if being a skank is a moral badge of feminine honor. ..."
"... I am nearly 60 years old. And jokes and stories about "hollywood casting couches" and how pretty young women got roles in productions have been around longer than I have. To me, this whole story is just filed under more "fake news". No, I don't doubt the stories. I don't doubt that harvey was not a good man. But, its all basically propaganda. Harvey supported a political opponent of the people now attacking him 24.7 all over the right-wing media, so now these stories that are older than I am are suddenly headline news and the big lead on right-wing sites all over the internet. ..."
I'd like to better understand the conservative media's orgy over Harvey Weinstein, the
disgraced and disgraceful Hollywood film producer and studio executive who used his power over
decades to have his way with starlets.
To listen to conservative talkers, the women affronted or assaulted by Weinstein were all
Shakespearean talent in the making -- female clones of Richard Burton (he had no match among
women) -- who made the pilgrimage to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Hollywood Hills, for the purpose
of realizing their talent, never knowing it was a meat market. Watching the women who make up
the dual-perspective panels "discussing" the Weinstein saga, it's hard to tell conservative
from liberal.
"Conservative" women now complain as bitterly as their liberal counterparts about
"objectification."
However, the female form has always been revered; been the object of sexual longing, clothed
and nude. The reason the female figure is so crudely objectified nowadays has a great deal to
do with women themselves. By virtue of their conduct, women no longer inspire reverence as the
fairer sex, and as epitomes of loveliness. For they are crasser, vainer, more eager to expose
all voluntarily than any male. Except for Anthony Weiner, the name of an engorged
organism indigenous to D.C., who was is in the habit of exposing himself as often as the
Kardashians do.
The latter clan is a bevy of catty exhibitionists, controlled by a mercenary, ball-busting
matriarch called Kris Kardashian. Kris is madam to America's First Family of Celebrity
Pornographers. (To launch a career with a highly stylized, self-directed sex tape is no longer
even condemned.) Lots of little girls, with parental approval, look up to the Kardashians.
From Kim, distaff America learns to couch a preoccupation with pornographic selfies in the
therapeutic idiom. Kardashian flaunts her ass elephantiasis with pure self-love. Yet millions
of her admirers depict her obscene posturing online as an attempt to come to terms with her
body. "Be a little easier on myself," counsels Kim as she directs her camera to the nether
reaches of her carefully posed, deformed derriere. While acting dirty and self-adoring,
Kardashian delivers as close to a social jeremiad on self-esteem as her kind can muster.
Genius!
Liberalism and libertinism are intertwined. The more liberal a woman, the more libertine
she'll be -- and the more she'll liberate herself to be coarse, immodest, vulgar and plain
repulsive. Think of the menopausal Ashley Judd rapping lewdly about her (alleged) menstrual
fluids at an anti-Trump rally. Think of all those liberal, liberated grannies adorning pussy
dunce-caps on the same occasion.
By nature, the human woman is a peacock. We like to be noticed. The conservative among us
prefer the allure of modesty. The sluts among us don't. On social media, women outstrip men in
the narcissistic and exhibitionist departments. In TV ads, American women, fat, thin, young and
old, are grinding their bottoms, spreading their legs, showing the contours of their crotches,
and dancing as though possessed (or like primates on heat), abandoning any semblance of
femininity and gentility, all the while laughing like hyenas and hollering hokum like, "I Own
It."
The phrase a "bum's rush" means "throw the bum out!" When it comes to Allison Williams,
daughter of NBC icon Brian Williams, a bum's rush takes on new meaning. Thanks in no small
measure to her famous father, the young woman has become a sitcom star. And Ms. Williams has
worked extra-hard to hone all aspects of an actress's instrument (the body). Alison has carried
forth enthusiastically about a groundbreaking scene dedicated to exploring "ass motorboating"
or
"booty-eating ," on HBO's "Girls."
The lewder, more pornographic, and less talented at their craft popular icons become -- the
louder the Left lauds their artistically dodgy output. (The "Right" just keeps moving Left.)
"Singer" Miley Cyrus was mocked before she began twerking tush, thrusting pelvis and twirling
tongue. Only then had she arrived as an artist, in the eyes of "critics" on the Left. The power
of the average pop artist and her products, Miley's included, lies in the pornography that is
her "art," in her hackneyed political posturing, and in the fantastic technology that is
Auto-Tune (without which
all the sound you'd hear these "singers" emit would be a bedroom whisper).
Liberal women, the majority, go about seriously and studiously cultivating their degeneracy.
If "Raising Skirts to Celebrate the Diversity of Vaginas" sounds foul, wait for
the accompanying images. These show feral creatures (women, presumably), skirts hoisted,
gobs agape, some squatting like farmhands in an outhouse, all yelling about their orifices.
Do you know of a comparable man's movement? If anything, men are punished when they
react normally to women behaving badly .
Female soldiers got naked and uploaded explicit images of themselves to an online portal.
The normals -- male soldiers -- shared the images and were promptly punished
for so doing. And the conservative side of that ubiquitous, dueling-perspectives political
panel approved of the punishment meted to the men.
So endemic is distaff degeneracy these days that "protesters" routinely disrobe or perform
lewd acts with objects in public. Vladimir Putin is a great man if only for arresting a
demented band of performance artists, Pussy Riot, for desecrating a Russian church.
If men flashed for freedom; they'd be arrested, jailed and placed on the National Sex
Offender Registry.
Talk about the empress being in the buff, I almost forgot to attach an image of this
celebrity, bare-bottomed on the
red-carpet. Rose McGowan is hardly unique. Many a star will arrive at these events barely
clothed. (Here are 38 more near-naked
Red-Carpet appearances .)
Expect a feminist lecture about a woman's right to pretend her bare bottom is haute
couture, rather than ho couture, and expecting the Harveys of the world to behave
like choir boys around her. Fine.
Being British, BBC News anchors are not nearly as dour about the Harvey hysteria as the
American anchors. A female presenter began a Sweinstein segment by saying men claim the
coverage of the scandal is excessive; women say the opposite. "That's why we're covering it,"
quipped her witty male sidekick. She roared with laughter. That's my girl!
Look, Harvey is a lowlife. But Hollywood hos are not as the sanctimonious Sean Hannity
portrays them: "naive, innocent young things," dreams shattered.
Thank you, Ilana, for pointing out the hypocrisy of women behaving like sluts who object to
men reacting to them signaling the world that they are sluts. Is the real issue that
actresses in Hollywood will only take off their clothes for hard cash and Harvey was not
offering hard cash but only nebulous hints at future roles in his productions? This is
important when surveying the careers of many of the actresses jumping on the bandwagon to
destroy Harvey Weinstein. We know they have and will take off their clothes for
the right price.
This is captured in the story of a man offering a woman a million dollars to go to bed
with him. She agrees. Then, he changes the offer to one dollar. The woman objects! "What do
you think I am a prostitute." The man answers, "We know what you are. We're negotiating the
price."
Feminism promises women empowerment. However, there is a pornographic side to the promise.
There are legions of women trying to give the world a hard-on for attention, money, status,
etc. When the world reacts, as in the story, they say, "Don't touch me what do you think I
am?"
So, it's about power and control, something dear to the hearts of feminists. "You can want
me but you can't have me (until you meet my price)." Men have a word for these women. We call
them "prick teasers". It is a dispute over price, and it makes men very, very angry to react
to the signals and then be ridiculed for reacting to the signals.
Cuckservatives are hardcore woman-worshipping feminists first and foremost. They will put aside any other objective when the prospect of groveling to women presents
itself.
Miley Cyrus may have been an exhibitionist earlier in her career, but no scare quotes
belong around "singer" when describing her. She can sing. See below.
Must as I hate a lot of liberal ideology, I would disagree with the argument that
left-liberal woman are more libertine than mainstream conservative women. Social class,
personality and intelligence have a much bigger bearing on female (and male) sexual behaviour
than political ideology. And there is no evidence than liberal women tend to be more sexually
explicit in their appearance than non-liberal women. The make up is thicker, the women are
louder, and the skirts are shorter on Fox News rather than CNN.
Liberal women like Ashley Judd making vulgar comments to annoy religious conservatives
doesn't really count. Playing up for the camera isn't necessarily an indication of real life
behaviour.
Thank you for saying what you said about more equitably apportioning the blame among males
and females. Fortunately or unfortunately only a woman such as you can say such things in our
PC world. In our unfair world this is the best that is possible and for this you deserve our
thanks.
Clueless 'feminists' ignore Muslim treatment of women while they protest for women's dignity,
yet they say that Miley Cyrus is advancing women's dignity.
Women are legally stoned in Muslim countries and gays & lesbians are legally executed
for being gay / lesbian in Muslim countries. And HILLARY took millions in 'donations' from
those countries.
The Clearest Problem With Modern Feminism
Muslim Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), where are the 'feminists'?
In the grand times of Hollywood, before the War, an open secret was that all aspiring
starlets had to pass through the couch of a personage known by the nickname of Ben Cinema or
Kalkeinstein, (described as "horrible and more! ugly, old and dirty, lumbering and stupid, a
real piece of garbage, in his person and in his surroundings a real vomiting forth from the
ghetto").
History repeats itself
Well I think there's a causality issue here. Weinstein & co pick on them when they're
mostly very young; they become degenerate later. There is an element of truth, but the really
obscene behaviour is a feature of established veterans.
Great article. Also funny: "ho couture" well, I liked it.
Couple points:
Worth remembering that often Weinstein selected women with NO power/influence; ie those way
beneath Kardashians etc. This is not to contest Illana's points about female celebrities
exploiting their sexuality, merely to note that Weinstein really was a slithering
predator.
Also worth noting that, although dreckification of female (actually, all) sexuality goes
beyond simple commerce, there has been a rough parallel between unleashed Capitalism
(neoliberalism) & unleashed sexuality. Of course, it's "old hat" that "sex sells"
however, now increasing degrees of pornography are accepted, indeed celebrated as
"liberated", artistic etc.
Illana is completly correct when she refers to the rank hypocracy re: male female sexuality.
definitely "not equal" (unless male sexuality is considered under the heading of "gay" etc)
How can Hollywood proclaim to always be for women and their rights, shouting they are at the
front of protecting women when the movie factories in that town have portrayed many a lead
actress as a prostitute?
This isn't something recent, women as prostitutes in films goes back decades. How can degrading women by showing them as money-craving whores be in any way defending
women?
For thousands of years the terms Prostitute and Actress were interchangeable. Sure Harve is a
douche bag but he's far from the only one. They knew what they were in for and were duly
compensated.
It's not that hard to deflect unwanted male attention or to downplay your looks. When I hear
a woman complain of sexual harassment, I suspect she is most likely a trouble maker and
desperate for attention. There are likely exceptions, but this tends to be my first reaction.
It's rarely the prettiest women who complain of sexual harassment.
I know plenty of liberal women who are not crude nor overtly sexual. I guess they just ignore
that facet of the left.
When I was in grad school, there were some women grad students who exchanged sexual favors
for the possibility of career advancement. Sometimes the women initiated the swap. Sometimes
the more well-connected male (or female) faculty member or administrator initiated the swap.
Some women (and possibly men) who were propositioned declined.
Query: If you said yes and got your payoff and if those who said no didn't get an
equivalent payoff and if, by virtue of the payoff, you succeeded while those who declined the
exchange didn't succeed, do you owe them anything? Morally.
Many who are posting #metoo on social media seem to feel that their membership in the
victim class entitles them to receive benefits in exchange for sexual favors and then to
recover, in attitudes of righteousness, the consideration they paid for those benefits:
shaming, intimidating and threatening, under potential penalty of false or ambiguoous
accusation, those who might seek to call them on their hypocrisy.
And let's not turn a blind eye to the feminized male enablers who seek women's approval by
lauding this instance of having one's cake and eating it too.
Lest I be susceptible to laches (the legal term for clean hands that do the dirty work,) I
was never tempted and, perhaps for that reason, recall the lady who died and sought admission
to the pearly gates.
"May I have some evidence of your virtue," Saint Peter said as he riffled through her
dossier.
"Indeed. I never succumbed to temptation," the lady proudly asserted.
"But were you ever tempted?"
"No," she said, fearing to lie to Saint Peter.
"Well, madam, if you've never been tempted, you get no credit for not having succumbed to
it."
Excellent article, Ms. Mercer. And thanks for the puncture holes delivered to Conservative
Inc. (Hannity etal). As to the, er, "ladies" who prowl about Hollywood and are now crying wolf, "what goes
around comes around."
What's the big difference between Weinstein and former president Bill Clinton except that one
was the frickin president of the US? Clinton used his various positions throughout the years
to intimidate women, from the days of using Arkansas state troopers to act as procurers for
him to later using federal agencies to harass them into shutting up. His wife Hillary, the
almost-president, ran interference for him in muzzling the various women who might have
spilled the beans. The Clintons postured themselves as champions of women's rights even as
the reality of this sleazy couple was really tawdry. Weinstein was just a studio boss with
money and film roles to dispense to a never-ending line of wannabe actresses. He fits right
in with the Clintons as part of the Hollywood celebrity and glitz crowd and Hillary would
never have called him a "deplorable". Yet even now there's many people who are Clinton fans
and supporters even as they hypocritically play this game of 'get the fat guy'. The Clintons
are a hundred times worse.
You do not need philosophy to explain a love for money. Whether the profiteering
Kardashians or the profiteering Madonna (and a legion of her imitators), these women did the
indecent, lewd, into-your-face pornographic performances for financial gains. They have been
denigrating themselves (and other women, by association) for money. They wanted the money. By
any means.
That the US government has extolled the deeply amoral Pussy Riot scum tells a lot about the
moral crisis in the US, including the unending and very expensive wars of aggression run by
the country that has no money for a single-payer medical system.
The pink pussies that demonstrated against Donald and for Hilary, used to be offended when
reminded about Libyan tragedy ("we came, we saw, he died, ha, ha, ha ") and about the
hundreds of thousands of human beings (including thousands and thousands children)
slaughtered there on the Obama/Clinton watch. Did we have the pink pussies demonstrating
against Obama's seven wars? – No. The pink pussies needed some brainwashing before
suddenly going into a public activism phase with silly hats on their empty heads. Are pussy
hats demonstrating against the impending wars of the US with Iran and Korea? – No.
Nobody gave an order for and provided money for organizing the parades. These "progressive"
female activists are ridiculous.
By the way, is Dershowitz cleared re his visits to Lolita Island where real underage
victims were held for the pleasure of powerful sex predators?
I love reading Ilana Mercer's politically incorrect take on events and her brilliant use of
language.. Seeing how far US society has descended since I was growing up in the
1960′s, I'm glad to be a married, monogamous senior citizen. We certainly had our
problems then, with the Vietnam War at the top of the list, but at least the women were not
covered in disgusting tattoos and man-hating feminism was still in its infancy.
I still don't get all the fuss about this. The wannabe starlets knew the price of fame and
fortune (or if not, found out quickly), and were willing to pay it. It is just straight up
prostitution. Seems to me the only ones with a claim are the ones who paid the price and
didn't get the part.
Sergey, you posted here an example of femininity of Senchina – a value long destroyed
by feminism in the West–as opposed to sexuality, which is the fad. It is the same as
comparing real love and real intimacy to raw sex, or porn. For former one needs a real woman,
for the latter a slut will suffice.
The scandal, as I have portrayed it, was the leftist hypocrisy in their political attacks
against Trump. All Trump did was describe a woman's nature around powerful men. They
volunteer themselves. Weinstein was far more coercive and they said nothing all these years.
Women were victimized by this , but not the ones we know. It was the women who didn't advance
their careers by any means who were victims. Perhaps that is one reason why women do not draw
so much at the box office. We do not get to enjoy the talent that got them there.
Yes, the culture today is far, far more crass and degenerate than say, in the 50s, when Leave
it to Beaver played on America's TVs, and Norman Rockwell and all that.
But what has happened to our culture? Has the race into the sewer been a consequence of loose women of America (England, etc..)
driving the decline? Or, are the causes a more a top down affair? IOW resulting from the big-money producers
and all those men who run Hollywood?
women, as indeed many men, are given to fashions and peer pressure. If the prevailing
culture is one of modesty and self-respect, the women's behavior will reflect that. The
American women of the 1950s were of more or less the same stock of women as the gutter skanks
Ilana rightfully laments today, but did women drive this downward trend, or did (a
few) men?
One thing that has been noticed, are the striking similarities between American culture
today and that of Weimar, Germany. Weimar was notoriously corrupt, with sexual degeneracy and
prostitution rampant. Berlin was described as a giant brothel, where the desperate German
youth were exploited and debased.
Perhaps it was the fault of those young Germans who, while likely starving from the wrath
and rapine of the allies, (who deliberately looted the German economy dry). Or perhaps it was
more the fault of the wealthy and powerful non-German men, who preyed on these young, often
desperate women (and girls and boys). But the parallels are unmistakable.
which is why people are posting propaganda cartoons from back then, because the images are
eerily familiar to what seems to be going on today, no?
how can you not think of Harvey Weinstein when you see those cartoons?
Perhaps Ilana is right, and the blame starts and ends with the women. But then I think of
all those Mickey Mouse Club girls who turned into skanks,
[I won't post the pictures, but you can find them..]
and I notice that they were raised in Hollywood, like Miley Cyrus, who seemed to be
groomed specifically as an all American type of innocent Hanna Montana who then morphs
straight into the gutter skank we all wince at- for all those preteen American girls to
emulate. Just like Madonna was a generation before.
I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a
deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?
Women have been sexually exploiting Men for a living for 5 million years. Women's price for
sex has always been that men provision them. There is nothing wrong with this. It helped
shaped both human physical and cultural evolution and we might have gone extinct without it.
The thing that interests me is, why now. The casting couch has been a stereotype all of my
life. Why the piling on at this time?
The fuss is about glamour Hollywood whores trying to teach others non-stop what is good
and right. Obviously they do all this form the supposition that prostitution is good and
liberating. You know, lowest common denominator? Most of them are also dumb as fvcks and this
goes not only to wo..sluts there, to the so called men too. Look at Clooneys and other Damons
of that cabal. They should concentrate on doing what they allegedly do best–pretend to
be other people. Most of them have no serious analytical skills to start with. Hey, at least
Brad Pitt is in this just for fvcking chicks at the height of their hotness–at least it
is honest.
I first began to totally ignore the MSM's comments on Putin when he had the degeneracy of the
"Pussy Riot" in a Russian Church forcefully stopped. It was great to see the Cossacks beat
the beejebans out of those morally offensive hooligans trying to illegally impose George
Soro's world view on others.
Every woman could have said No to Mr. "Sweinstein". Bros before hos are the name of the game
not only in Hollywood. The hypocrites should not lament. It takes two to tango!
"I confess it seems to me that the skankification of America's young women is part of a
deliberate agenda coming straight out of Hollywood. No?"
Here you go.
From: 'The Spirit Of Militarism', by Nahum Goldmann.
Goldmann was the founder & president of the World Jewish Congress:
"The historical mission of our world revolution is to rearrange a new culture of
humanity to replace the previous social system. This conversion and re-organization of
global society requires two essential steps: firstly, the destruction of the old
established order, secondly, design and imposition of the new order. The first stage
requires elimination of all frontier borders, nationhood and culture, public policy ethical
barriers and social definitions, only then can the destroyed old system elements be
replaced by the imposed system elements of our new order.
The first task of our world revolution is Destruction. All social strata and social
formations created by traditional society must be annihilated, individual men and women
must be uprooted from their ancestral environment, torn out of their native milieus, no
tradition of any type shall be permitted to remain as sacrosanct, traditional social norms
must only be viewed as a disease to be eradicated, the ruling dictum of the new order is;
nothing is good so everything must be criticized and abolished, everything that was, must
be gone."
The casting couch has been a stereotype all of my life. Why the piling on at this
time?
perhaps because of The Trumpening
perhaps now that Trump is in DC, there are forces at work that have bristled under the
excruciatingly dishonest levels of hypocrisy coming out of the leftisphere.
accusing Trump of being disrespectful to women, as they rape women and girls wholesale,
and the entire leftist power structure always looks the other way, so long as the rapist is a
leftist himself, and will use his power for the leftist agenda.
so these serial predators like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein all get a pass from the
feminists and liberal, progressives, so long as they assist with The Agenda to destroy
Western Civilization, (and the people who created it ; ).
As long as Bill Clinton hails the day when whites will be a minority in this country, (to the
cheers of liberal college students), he can rape women all day long. He can sexually harass,
as the most powerful man in the world, powerless girls in the White House, and all to a
thunderous silence from the entire leftist, progressive (hypocritical / hatred-consumed)
power structure. Because he works towards their agenda. [the same agenda, BTW - that
destroyed S. Africa and Rhodesia]
But for a man like Trump, who seems to have raised daughters who respect themselves, and
seem to conduct themselves with a certain dignity- that isn't what's important. What's
important is what is always important
THE AGENDA
the relentless, drum-beating agenda to destroy Western values. To eviscerate the culture
of 1950s America (with virtues like honor and temperance) once and for all, and replace it
with a septic tank value system, where self-respect is replaced with self-loathing. Where
dignity and femininity is replace with twerking with your tongue out. Where Hollywood
starlets howl about how "nasty" they are, as if being a skank is a moral badge of feminine
honor.
That's what's going on here. We're in the trenches of the cold culture war, turned hot
culture war.
They wanted to destroy Trump and the deplorables with shrieking about how Trump was
disrespectful to women. But now the cover of the giant septic tank known as Hollywood has
been lifted off, for all the world to gasp at the slithering creatures and whiff the terrible
stench.
I wonder if it's a kind of payback time for Hillary and her army of morally preening orcs,
feasting on the flesh of young women, and smacking their liver lips with anticipation of the
next young shiksa to walk though that hotel room door.
I only hope we get an investigation into Pizzagate next, with perhaps a nice expose' of
Jeffrey Epstein's Child Rape Island, and all those liberal, progressive morally preening men
who take so many trips there.
this might just be all a sign of the great Trumpening
Let's be fair here. Women strut their 'stuff' same as men but in a different way. A man will
buy a very expensive car or some other display of wealth or power to attract a female and
females respond to these displays by highlighting their sexual desirability and availability.
We are animals seeking mates after all and males have to demonstrate their dominance in
nature before the female will mate with the male. Thus a Harvey Weinstein could no more have
sex with an Ashley Judd than a derelict laying on the sidewalk absent some display of power
and wealth that interested Judd.
The other side of this coin is that a woman cannot compel a man to have sex with her no
matter how much money or power she has. Men do not sexually respond to a physically repulsive
female and he cannot 'fake' an orgasm. This is why I do not believe in criminally
prosecuting, e.g., a female school teacher for having sex with a 16 year old student. Fire
her for improper conduct but jail her? Come on the boy was willing if he had sex with
her!
It's like the old joke:
Will you have sex with me for a million dollars?
OK.
What about one dollar?
What kind of girl do you think I am?
We've already established what kind of girl you are. We're just negotiating.
Excellent piece, showcasing your good sense as always. I yield to no man in my hyper
enthusiasm for the undraped female form but to cynically "launch a career with a highly
stylized, self-directed sex tape" incites my scorn, not lust. I have been fed up for years
when perusing the morning headlines seeing articles about the latest, most egregious examples
of Hollyweird bimbos showing up at events more or less naked. I've long since ceased looking
or caring; they just annoy me.
Putting all one's assets on constant public display destroys
the allure and mystery that is woman and does not empower them, it makes them the "pieces of
meat" that they've been screaming about for close on a century, especially for the last 50
odd years. Women have made quite the cottage industry of whining that guys don't understand
them, "don't get it" but refuse to acknowledge the obverse. By tripping the lights fantastic
with their fun bits exposed they appear to the primal great white shark which is the male sex
drive as easily gotten chum; and like the Assyrian of old, we fall upon and devour them, in a
manner of speaking. A rather old adage said "If it ain't for sale, don't advertise it". As
for Harvey, the fascination of the hogs at the slop trough is that the revolting pig~man
didn't just want to have sex with these women, but to have them observe his disgusting
degeneracy. The Cities of the Pains had nothing on us.
I am nearly 60 years old. And jokes and stories about "hollywood casting couches" and how
pretty young women got roles in productions have been around longer than I have. To me, this whole story is just filed under more "fake news". No, I don't doubt the
stories. I don't doubt that harvey was not a good man. But, its all basically propaganda.
Harvey supported a political opponent of the people now attacking him 24.7 all over the
right-wing media, so now these stories that are older than I am are suddenly headline news
and the big lead on right-wing sites all over the internet.
These stories have even bumped the stories about which NFL players should be lined up in
front of a firing squad and shot for not maintain the proper posture during the sacred
National Anthem here in the Land of the Free.
So, to me, this just more Fake News. Its propaganda and political attack using weaponized
'news'. And I don't care. If I had a daughter going to Hollywood, I'd give her the same
warnings about scum-bags in the movie business and the casting couch that have been given out
for a century now. Nothing new here.
Strange -- it seems that Harvey had the only casting couch in Tinsel Town. Hollywood is wall
to wall Jews – yet NO new Jew names are being exposed by all those brave women.
Only Gentile names.
Hmm??? What could be going on? Stonewalling maybe – total fear absolutely! Say it isn't so.
p.s. Maybe Weinstein, Woody Allen, Polansky, and Weiner are the only sex obsessed
Jews?
As I understand it, movies is a very high stakes business, and you cannot get cast in a
role by being alone with an obviously-horny-as-a-jackrabbit producer and submitting to sex
acts or harassment. It doesn't guarantee anything, and they all knew it.
Casting happens though getting an agent, who sends you to an audition, where there are
other people around and the acts performed are of an acting nature. The only
professional film actor I know cited Ellen Barkin's acting as superlative. Barkin studied
acting for ten years before landing her first audition.
I try to restrict devoting any of the precious time I have left on Earth to such matters. I
made an exception for the Mercer column, which is spot on. 99% of the time, I merely see the
unavoidable headlines and continue surfing for something worth the time to read or watch.
My one take-away from l'affaire Weinstein is this: I am enormously enjoying the
internecine, riotous and indiscriminate feeding frenzy it has generated. Like Heinlein's
Igli, the Left is consuming itself.
Their existence is only to provide sexual pleasure to these perverts, and they like it;
however, when something goes wrong, they howl and cry, 'he raped me!" Reminds me when I was
at a military base, and a friend of mine found his girlfriend screwing another guy, she
claimed, well, rape! How appropriate. the poor guy was court martial-ed, and done with!
I am 1000X more attractive and in far better shape that Harvey Fatstein. Yet he has
tapped far better poon than I can ever hope to tap.
You should have gone into show biz. If you're what you claim to be, you've have tapped
more poon than Justin Timberlake and John Mayer combined. And it would have all been
consensual, so no worry about lawsuits.
Alden's response to you is perfectly correct. But you'd have a good point if you talked
about MGM.
Ms. Mercer is not defending Weinstein but attacking the women who allowed this to go on
for decades. I declare a half-hearted "boycott" against Hollywood every time something like
this happens; alas, this is rendered without force by the fact that I refuse to pay modern
ticket prices for what is likely utter trash anyway.
I tend to assume by default that Hollywood producers (Jewish or otherwise) pressure actresses
to have sex, so even if Weinstein was particularly egregious, I wonder what he really did to
ignite this shit-storm. He obviously pissed off the wrong person(s).
Sergey, realistically, most women–especially the lumbering, low skill, know-nothing
women of America–cannot possibly match the woman you put before us in the video
above.
They can't measure up and they know it. So instead of dieting, exercising, taking voice
lessons or even mastering humble talents like cooking and sewing they take the cowards way
out and denigrate her. They will revile her as an unliberated woman who depends on male
affirmation for her self esteem, an unwitting tool of the Patriarchy.
While they, themselves? They don't need to charm no stinking men. They themselves depend
on their cohort of disagreeable feminists for their "self esteem".
"The conservative among us prefer the allure of modesty." I'm a fan of 1970s-1980s Bollywood,
with its casts of heart-stoppingly beautiful women, like Hema Malini and Sridevi, who
performed in modest attire, and were all the more lovely for it. I can't bear to watch
today's Bollywood product, featuring writhing undressed wenches indistinguishable from
western gangsta ho's. Decades ago, Indian film assimilation from western pop culture often
yielded bizarre but charmingly cute mash-ups, but now they've mimicked the very worst of what
we have. Or maybe now we have only cultural garbage left for them to adapt.
On Sunday night, Social Justice Warriors in Baltimore filmed themselves desecrating and damaging
a 225-year-old monument to Christopher Columbus -- this, in the name of racial and economic justice:
Late last week,
someone desecrated a statue of St. Junipero Serra in Mission Hills, Calif. The Franciscan priest
is hated by Social Justice Warriors for his work in establishing mission churches in the 18th century.
The group is seeking the removal of 13 statues in the city, including the equestrian monument
to Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square. That monument, which commemorates Jackson's victory at the
Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, has been a particular target of the group because Jackson
owned slaves and, as president, was responsible for violently forcing Native Americans off their
land in what came to be known as the Trail of Tears.
The group also wants the city to rename dozens of streets, buildings and institutions. In all,
there are more than 100 symbols it wants removed or renamed.
Andrew Schneck, 25, who was released from probation early last year after being convicted in
2015 of storing explosives, was charged in a criminal complaint filed in federal court, Acting
U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez said in a statement Monday.
Schneck was arrested Saturday night after a Houston park ranger spotted him kneeling in bushes
in front of the Dowling monument in the park, Martinez said.
When confronted Saturday night in the park, he tried to drink some of the liquid explosives
but spit it out, officials said.
The ranger then asked if he planned to harm the statue, and he said he did because he did not
"like that guy," according to a sworn statement submitted in federal court by an FBI agent investigating
the case.
This attachment is less surprising when we consider that sports fans typically use their fandom
as a means of telling themselves who they are. Sports fandom has become, to borrow a term from
the philosopher Michel Foucault, a practice of subjectivization -- a phenomenon in which individuals
subject themselves to a set of behavioral regulations, and by doing so, acquire a sense of their
own identities.
Just as a practicing Christian may create and obtain new forms of self-knowledge through confession,
prayer and the observance of Lent, a sports fan can come to understand himself as a particular
sort of person -- a Southerner, for example, or a "real man" -- by adhering to certain rituals,
like reading the sports page and watching ESPN every day to gather more and more knowledge about
his team, by talking with other fans about that team in the right ways (and proving that he knows
more than them), by learning and participating in the songs, chants, dress, tailgate rituals,
game-day traditions and home décor choices of its fans.
The extraordinary reach of football into fans' lives makes perfect sense when we see it for
what it is: the most popular mechanism in contemporary America for cultivating a sense of self
that is rooted in a community. In a world of uncertainty, fragmentation and isolation, sports
fandom offers us clear winners and losers, connection to family and community -- and at its best,
the assurance that we are really No. 1.
Yet this "we" of fandom ought to give us pause -- perhaps just as much as the scandals, the
violence and the exploitation that surround the game.
Lord Nelson, one of England's greatest heroes. My God.
Whether or not any or most of these people will succeed in their goal is not my concern here.
Rather, I'm interested in what this new period of iconoclasm tells us about where we are as a society,
and where we may be going.
Iconoclasm often accompanies radical, even violent, change in a society. The word comes from the
Greek meaning "image-smashers," and was first used to describe a turbulent period in the Byzantine
empire in which the
Emperor attempted to ban the use of religious icons as idolatrous. He failed, as you can see
by visiting an Orthodox church today. But the word stuck because it was useful.
Whether religious or political (e.g., French revolutionaries, militants in China's Cultural Revolution),
real iconoclasts are violent. The damage Reformation-era iconoclasm did to religious art in Europe
was incalculable.
For example, in England:
Even now there is denial about the scale of the erasing of our medieval past. The Tate estimates
we lost 90% of our religious art. It was probably even more than that. The destruction was on
a scale that far outstrips the modern efforts of Islamist extremists. And it was not only art
we lost, but also books and music.
We think of Henry VIII and the destruction of the monasteries, but that was not the end of
the destruction, it marked the beginning. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, hailed
the reign of his son, the boy king Edward VI, as that of a new Josiah, destroyer of idols. After
his coronation an orgy of iconoclasm was launched. In churches rood screens, tombs with their
prayers for the dead, and stain glass windows, were smashed. The Elizabethan antiquarian John
Stow complained, some of this Christian Taliban "judged every image to be an idol", so that not
only religious art, but even the secular thirteenth century carvings of kings in Ludgate were
broken.
And:
The civil war, and the further destruction it brought, took place two generations after England
had gone through what has been described as a "cultural revolution designed to obliterate England's
memory of who and what she had been". There was not much of that past left. In our cultural history
the Reformation is nearly always depicted as a force that opened up England from a closed minded
past. But it was our knowledge of that past that was closed and if one future opened to us, we
will never know what might have been, not least in art.
That's often what iconoclasm tries to do: erase cultural memory. The zealotry with which iconoclasts
go after their targets has to do with their conviction that the image, and what it stands for, is
so offensive that it cannot be tolerated, nor can its defenders be reasoned with. They can only be
conquered by force.
In the case of our present iconoclasts, what they are attacking are aspects of what leftist academic
critics "whiteness" . It is
understandable why black Americans and others would object to monuments commemorating Confederate
figures (though it is worth asking why all of a sudden removing these objects became an urgent imperative
at this particular time). But those statues are the low-hanging fruit. As the New Orleans protesters
signal, any American figure who had anything to do with slavery is on the hit list. Donald Trump
was not wrong to wonder if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are going to be next.
Both men were compromised
by slaveholding.
The argument in favor of eliminating Confederate statues but not those of the slaveholding Founders
is that we honor the latter in spite of their owning slaves, but the former have monuments
built to them because they fought to preserve slavery. That's a reasonable position to take,
but it assumes that reason is driving this iconoclasm. Why is Columbus under siege, both in his monuments
and in his holiday (e.g., the Oberlin, Ohio, city council just voted to replace Columbus Day with
Indigenous People's Day)? Why are vandals going after St. Junipero Serra and St. Joan of Arc?
Because they represent European culture and civilization, which entails Christianity. Because,
in the minds of the iconoclasts, they represent whiteness.
This morning I picked up a book from my shelves that I haven't looked at since it came out in
2004: the late political scientist Samuel Huntington's Who
Are We? The Challenges To America's National Identity. It was startling to read Huntington
in light of recent events, including most of all the Trump election. It was even more startling --
and deeply dismaying -- to read Huntington and consider that the odious white nationalists might
have a clearer understanding of what's going on now than respectable people. Let me explain.
Huntington, who taught at Harvard, writes that the country has been losing a sense of coherent
identity for some time now. It's not that Americans were a homogeneous people, but rather that its
Anglo-Protestant founding culture was able to assimilate immigrants. This has partly to do with strong
belief in the "American Creed," a commonly held set of assumptions about what the nation stood for:
liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism, populism,
limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came out of Protestant
England and its reception of the Enlightenment.
On assimilation, the glaring exception, of course, were the descendants of the unwilling immigrants
among us: those of African slaves, for whom the American Creed did not apply. Nevertheless:
American national identity peaked politically with the rallying of Americans to their country
and its cause in World War II. It peaked symbolically with President Kennedy's 1961 summons: 'Ask
not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country.'
Starting in the 1960s, writes Huntington, "deconstructionists" of national identity encouraged
"individuals were defined by their group membership, not common nationality." Pushing identity politics
was a time-tested strategy for colonialist regimes, for the sake of dividing and conquering subject
peoples. But the governments of nation-states instead focused on uniting their disparate peoples.
(Indeed, the Civil Rights Movement was about compelling the white majority to extend the promises
of the Constitution and the Creed to black Americans -- in other words, to fully unite them to the
whole.)
Huntington says that this did not start from below, but was imposed from the top, by American
political, legal, and cultural elites. He writes, "These efforts by a nation's leaders to deconstruct
the nation they governed were, quite possibly, without precedent in human history."
By 1992, the liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. warned that all this had become "a cult,
and today it treatens to become a counter-revolution against the original theory of American as 'one
people,' a common culture, a single nation." Huntington continues, talking about how the promises
of the Civil Rights movement were turned on their head by racial preferences:
This replacement of individual rights by group rights and of color-blind law by color-conscious
law was never approved by the American people and received only intermittent, passive, and partial
acceptance by American legislators. "What is extraordinary about this change," the distinguished
sociologist Daniel Bell commented, "is that, without public debate, an entirely new principle
of rights has been introduced into the polity." "Group rights and equality of condition," Belz
agrees, "were introduced into public opinion as a new public philosophy that distinguishes among
individuals on racial and ethnic grounds and that ultimately denies the existence of a common
good."
The implications of this view were cogently stated by the Thernstroms: "Racial classifications
deliver the message that skin color matters -- profoundly. They suggest that whites and blacks
are not the same, that race and ethnicity are the qualities that really matter. They imply that
individuals are defined by blood -- not by character, social class, religious sentiments, age,
or education. But categories appropriate to a caste system are a poor basis on which to build
that community of equal citizens upon which democratic government depends."
If you want to talk about racializing American society, it didn't start with Richard Spencer and
his crew. Led by elites, America has been balkanizing along racial and ethnic lines since the late
1960s. Multiculturalism, that 1990s buzzword, led to colleges emphasizing ethnic studies and non-Western
courses, and devaluing those in Western civilization. Huntington, quoting Schlesinger Jr:
"The mood is one of divesting Americans of the sinful European inheritance and seeking redemptive
infusions from non-Western cultures." At the turn of the century, none of fifty top American colleges
and universities required a course in American history.
He who controls a culture's memory controls the culture. Huntington says that if a nation "is
a remembered as well as an imagined community, people who are losing that memory are becoming something
less than a nation."
One of the most remarkable things about Huntington's narrative is how this disuniting of America
was led by elites, despite resistance from the population. Look, from the vantage point of a nation
led by President Donald Trump, at this passage from Huntington's 2004 book. The political scientist
is talking about the simple demographic and political fact that whites, especially white males, are
losing power and place in US society:
It should not be difficult to see that "rebellion" and the reasons for it. It would, indeed,
be extraordinary and possibly unprecedented in human history if the profound demographic changes
occurring in America did not generate reactions of various sorts. one very plausible reaction
would be the emergence of exclusivist sociopolitical movements composed largely but not only of
white males, primarily working-class and middle-class, protesting and attempting to stop or reverse
these changes and what they believe, accurately or not, to be the diminution of their social and
economic status, their loss of jobs to immigrants and foreign countries, the perversion of their
culture, the displacement of their language, and the erosion or even evaporation of the historical
identity of their country. Such movements would be both racially and culturally inspired and could
be anti-Hispanic, anti-black, and anti-immigration. They would be the heir to the many comparable
exclusivist racial and anti-foreign movements that helped define American identity in the past.
Huntington points out that should they emerge, "the new white nationalists" (the term is political
scientist Carol Swain's) will not be like the fringe extremists. They don't advocate white supremacy,
but rather "racial self-determination and self-preservation." They will reject national identity,
and locate culture in race. They don't want white culture replaced by black or brown culture.
Furthermore, whites attracted to these ideas will be those sick and tired of preferential treatment
policies that violate the American Creed and disadvantage them. They will, Huntington predicts (remember,
he wrote this in 2004), be stirred up by the loss of jobs and widening income inequality due to globalization.
And they will hate the media for using what they consider to be bias against them. Finally, immigration
may make them feel that they have their backs against the wall.
Because of several sociological factors, Huntington says that middle class and lower middle class
whites have come to see themselves as victims. He quotes another political scientist who says these
whites feel that they have no real culture or identity, so they are embracing victimization.
Whites, in sum, will start to act like any other ethnic or racial group in America. I have to
confess that reading Huntington makes me question the (yes, liberal) media narrative on this new
battlefront in the culture wars. Broadly speaking, the media construe the conflict as racist whites
reacting to minority progress. No doubt there's truth to that, but that is not the whole truth, or
even most of the truth. What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal
reaction of a particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe
that they are losing ground. In this sense, when white grievance and protest is presented by the
media as solely a manifestation of racism, it allows others to justify dismissing those
grievances and consider themselves morally responsible for doing so.
The makings of serious white nativist movements and of intensified racial conflict exist in
America. Carol Swain probably overdramatizes the possibility, but her eloquent warning deserves
serious though. We are witnessing, she says, "the simultaneous convergence of a host of powerful
social forces." These include "changing demographics, the continued existence of racial preference
policies, the rising expectations of ethnic minorities, the continued existence of liberal immigration
policies, growing concerns about job losses associated with globalization, the demands for multiculturalism,
and the Internet's ability to enable like-minded individuals to identify with each other and to
share mutual concerns and strategies for impacting the political system." These factors can only
serve "to nourish white racial consciousness and white nationalism, the next logical stage for
identity politics in America. As a result, America is "increasingly at risk of large-scale racial
conflict unprecedented in our nation's history."
Huntington also talks about the bottoming out of public trust in government and institutions.
It's been declining since 1960s. Today,
only the military,
police, and small business are the only institutions in whom trust has been stable or grown.
Think about what that means. Aside from small business people, by far the most trusted institutions
in society are those armed and charged with defending it from foreign enemies and maintaining internal
order. If that doesn't tell you something about how our society is coming undone, you are ineducable.
Huntington puts a troubling question to his readers:
Because of the Creed, "many Americans came to believe that America could be multiracial, multiethnic,
and lack any cultural core, and yet still be a coherent nation with its identity defined solely
by the Creed. Is this, however, really the case? Can a nation be defined only by a political ideology?
Several considerations suggest the answer is no. A creed alone does not a nation make."
He says that historically, American identity has involved four key components: Race, Ethnicity,
Culture (especially language and religion), and Ideology. Race and ethnicity as a defining core of
nation is long gone. Culture is "under siege" (even more so today than when Huntington wrote his
book). All that's left is ideology -- that is, the Creed. Writes Huntington: "For the Creed to become
the sole source of national identity would be a sharp break from the past."
He points out that the only other examples we have of creedal nations are the communist countries.
This is not an encouraging thought. After the ideology failed and the coercive power of the state
collapsed, those countries more or less came apart along ethnic lines. China is the great exception,
but it held together, he says, because of the widely shared Han Chinese identity.
Huntington concludes that because the American Creed emerged from Anglo-Protestant culture, it
probably won't survive its demise.
Finally, the Harvard political scientist predicted that the rise in US religious consciousness
in the 1980s and 1990s would would increase. He was quite wrong about that, as we now know. At end
of book, Huntington cites research showing that globally, "those countries that are more religious
tend to be more nationalist." I suppose this would help explain white Evangelical support for Donald
Trump. As regular readers know, I am averse to nationalism mixing with the Christian religion, because
it can easily lead to Christians making an idol of the state. That said, the data Huntington cites
would lead one to predict that the decline of Christianity in the US will also hasten the unraveling
of the social and cultural fabric.
If Christianity, with its universalist values, is declining, then something will take its place.
Something will fill the vacuum it leaves. We should not at all be surprised if this turns out to
be a heightened, even militant, racial consciousness. This is the logical outcome of identity politics.
This is what I mean by constantly saying that Social Justice Warriors of the Left have no idea
what kind of demons they are summoning from the Right. And American elites of all kinds have no idea
what they are doing by pushing the "diversity is our strength" lie. We are seeing from this side
of the Atlantic how the resolute refusal of the European political and cultural establishments to
take the radical challenge from mass immigration seriously is opening up a big space for the radical
right to flourish. It's going to happen here too, for somewhat different reasons, ones I've explored
in this blog post.
Taboo and sacredness are among the most important words needed to understand Charlottesville
and its aftermath. Taboo refers to things that are forbidden for religious or supernatural reasons.
All traditional societies have such prohibitions -- things you must not do, touch, or eat, not
because they are bad for you directly, but because doing so is an abomination, which may bring
divine retribution. But every society also makes some things sacred, rallying around a few deeply
revered values, people, or places, which bind all members together and make them willing to sacrifice
for the common good. The past week brought violent conflict over symbols and values held sacred
-- and saw President Trump commit an act of sacrilege by violating one of our society's strongest
taboos.
More:
That torchlight march, and the main rally the next day, gave the country the shocking spectacle
of fellow Americans chanting "Jews will not replace us" while making Nazi salutes and anti-black
slurs. It was a rejection -- a desecration -- of the story shared by most Americans in which we
are not a nation based on "blood and soil," we are a nation of immigrants who accepted the American
creed. That creed includes the idea that "all men are created equal." Americans know that we do
not yet live up to our aspirations, but publicly accepting the premises of the nation's founding
documents is a requirement for political leadership in America. To deny those premises is blasphemy,
and so white supremacism, the KKK, and neo-Nazis are by definition blasphemous.
By the way he handled the Charlottesville violence (appearing to equivocate):
In that moment, Trump committed the gravest act of sacrilege of his presidency. In that moment,
the president rendered himself untouchable by all who share the belief that Nazis and the KKK
are not just bad -- they are taboo.
I'm not so sure about that. The
new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows broad disapproval of the way Trump handled Charlottesville,
but strong approval of it among Republicans. If you go
deep into the poll , you'll see that 83 percent of Americans believe it is unacceptable to hold
white supremacist views. That would appear to validate Haidt's thesis. Happily, white supremacy remains
a taboo.
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo. That
is no small number of Americans. Whether you believe they are right or wrong in that assessment is
not the point. The point is that on an issue of intense feeling -- a feeling that Haidt correctly
likens to religious conviction -- there is no broad agreement on what constitutes violating that
taboo. My sense is that among elites -- including Republican elites -- there is shared conviction
that Trump touched the third rail. But that sense is not shared by the broad mass of GOP voters any
more than the Republican elite's 2016 disgust by candidate Donald Trump was.
Along those lines, I would love to see polling on the extent to which whites (Southern and otherwise)
see attacks on Confederate monuments as an attack on white supremacy, and the extent to which they
see these attacks as assaults on them . Again, notice the ABC/Post poll, which
shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans reject white supremacy. The
PBS/Marist poll from last week showed that only 27 percent of all Americans believe that Confederate
monuments should be taken down. The racial breakdown is: whites 25%; blacks 40%; Latinos 24%.
It is reasonable to assume that a nation in which over 80 percent of the people believe white
supremacy is unacceptable, but only 27 percent believe the Confederate statues should come down,
is not a nation that sees those statues as symbols of white supremacy. So what do they symbolize?
And who do they symbolize? The answer is important.
In light of Samuel Huntington's book, it seems to me that the culture war has shifted into a dangerous
phase, accelerated by both Donald Trump and progressive militants, who feed off each other. Our unity
is fragile -- more fragile than people think. This is not the time to be iconoclastic towards cultural
symbols. The fact that we are seeing iconoclasm emerge, and that it is not only unchallenged, but
actually encouraged by liberal elites, is a bad sign for the future. Remember how we started this
post: with a recognition that iconoclasm usually accompanies or precedes actual violence.
The disassembling of the American Creed has been a 50-year project of American elites, but we
are all going to reap the whirlwind. You cannot destroy symbols of people's identity without calling
forth rage.
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts, were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. ..."
"... A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind. ..."
"... All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian. ..."
"... What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions. Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2017, A3). Further add 10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time. ..."
"... The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy. Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst of all, increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace. ..."
"... Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President, and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it. ..."
"... Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not, heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it. ..."
"... "...this quest can be life-time employment." This quote explains much of this ..."
"... All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis: the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial equality. ..."
"... I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc. ..."
Decades from now experts will surly debate today's Summer of Monumental Hysteria. After all, by
all objective criteria -- assuming, of course, that anything can be objective if it involves race
-- it should not have happened. How many Americans really can correctly identify Robert E. Lee, let
along Roger B. Taney? (According to one recent
survey , half the American public did not know when the Civil War happened.) Do racially sensitive
African Americans even notice the names on these statutes or plaques when they encountered them?
Why now since most of these offense-giving inanimate objects have existed for decades?
Most critically, is there any evidence to suggest that the very existence of a park or a school
horning a Confederate dignitary has adversely affected anybody, regardless of race in the slightest
way? Do black children enrolled in
J.E.B. Stewart Middle
School under-perform academically compared to those attending the
Malcolm
X Academy ? Does the Jefferson Memorial emit a dangerous racial version of
Radon ? Can visitors be "protected" by having a warning: Be advised that Jefferson once owned
slaves so proceed at one's own risk." Tellingly, nobody is even interested in an evidence-based argument
regarding this toxicity. "Everybody knows" that anything about the Confederacy is hateful and all
hatefulness has to be exorcised from American life since hate, like asbestos and tobacco, is bad.
At least leftish professors don't have to invent "studies" to make this point.
Some explanations for this sudden and unexpected hysteria immediately come to mind. There are
countless
organizations skilled at turning almost any event into a fund-raiser while those obsessed with
bashing President Trump will find any excuse to condemn him. And let's not forget all those who enjoy
cheap moral highs by marching against hate and bigotry even if the source of the "hate" is a coffee
mug decorated with the stars and bars.
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis:
the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving racial
equality. In a nutshell, for at least a half-century, perhaps longer, America has struggled
with its "race problem" and while proposed solutions exceed dozens, and expenditures in the trillions,
progress has been scant. In fact, on at least some indicators, for example, illegitimacy and crime,
race-related matters where better off in the 1950s. Not even electing a black President has cured
America's race strife despite all the assurances that Obama would be a "post-racial" President that
would, once and for all, bring everybody together. What we have gotten for all our efforts is Black
Lives Matter and yet even more black condemnation of whites.
This accumulated frustration can be likened to a situation where a patient with a grim prognosis
grows ever more desperate as one standard treatment after the next fails to reverse the illness.
These frantic patients often gravitate to quacks despite the low odds of a cure. Nevertheless, the
very act of visiting a faith healer or drinking a magical herbal concoction outshines passivity.
And who knows, the world abounds with testimonials to quack cures and "doing something" calms the
despair.
Think of the Monumental Madness as social engineering quackery -- it probably will accomplish
little if anything but it feels better than doing nothing. What encourages this desperate quest for
today's "miracle" is that so many past solutions, at least according to all the learned experts,
were "guaranteed" to perform as advertised and all failed. Recall when the surefire cure
was improved education -- ending segregation, equalizing school expenditures, hiring more black teachers
and administrators, altering textbooks to make it more relevant to black youngsters, intensive pre-school
(Head Start, Sesame Street) and, more recently, eradicating unconscious teacher bias and no longer
disproportionately disciplining blacks. We've had Bush's
No Child Left Behind
and Obama's Race to
the Top and countless other expensive remedies.
A similar guaranteed cure was political empowerment, that is, the Department of Justice would
ensure that blacks would live in cities run by black elected officials and self-government would
cure everything from crime to joblessness. The upshot, of course, have been urban disasters like
Detroit and Selma, AL. And let's not forget tough anti-discrimination laws that would ban employers
from using racist job descriptions, and affirmative action programs that would temporarily give a
leg up to those who began the race a few steps behind.
All and all, genuine successes are rare, typically only cosmetic, and if there were a Museum
of Failed Cures for America's Racial Problems, it would be the size of Washington's Smithsonian.
In other words, by the summer of 2017, the frustration over repeated failures plus the lack of
any more "guaranteed" solutions on the agenda had created a perfect setting for quackery. Now, as
with all serious but likely intractable problems, the marketplace supplies something to meet these
needs, and to continue our parallel with those suffering from incurable cancer, taking down statutes
of Confederate soldiers or re-naming buildings is the equivalent of using
Laetrile among countless
other bogus cures . Yes, there is no scientific evidence that past crusade against "hate" has
even helped African Americans, but given the sorry record of past efforts, why not give it a try?
Hard to resist anything that feels so good.
What has permitted this quackery to explode is that Confederate statutes and similar hateful
objects are everywhere and the cost of exorcizing the evil spirits is trivial vis-a-vis past solutions.
Just compare the difficulties of purging racism from a police department with scrutinizing at a city
map to find streets named after slave-owners and demanding that they be re-named. The especially
good news is that this quest can be life-time employment. In 2016 the Southern Poverty Law Center
estimates that there were some 700 Confederate statutes and monuments on public property and who
knows how many schools, streets and cemetery markers similarly radiate hate ( Wall Street Journal,
August 22, 2017, A3). Further add
10 Army bases names after Confederate generals. So much hate, so little time.
This is vigilante justice and everyone, regardless of training or brains, can anoint themselves
as soldiers to overcome racial inequality and win a Participation Trophy. Be a hero; just find a
statute of Stonewall Jackson hidden in storage room.
The cost of this hysteria far exceeds upsetting those who cherish the Confederate legacy.
Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name: racial
equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more
Noble Lies and, worst of all,
increasingly totalitarian measures that accomplish nothing other than needlessly expand government
power. But then again, perhaps this is what today's madness is all about -- far easier to rave and
rant about Robert E. Lee than confront a very unpleasant reality. By that standard, tearing down
statutes and re-naming schools is a great investment for those intent on keeping the racial peace.
When will BLM and other radicals demand a statue to honor John Brown? Of all the characters
in our history, he should be their hero, but he was white! The US Navy even named a ship after
the battle where US Marines (led by Robert E. Lee) crushed his violent attempt to end slavery,
and executed Brown.
Occam's Razor suggests a simpler explanation: After the election of a black President,
and the election of a white President, who is doing nothing to roll back racial favoritism for
blacks, blacks now feel that they can move to a highly visible form of white dispossession. They
feel they're on top and they want to rub whitey's nose in it.
Next step will be explicit white-to-black transfers under the guise of "reparations for slavery."
Yet again the public debate will carefully dodge that Truth That Dare Not Speak Its Name:
racial equality is impossible, and its quest can only generate yet more Noble Lies and, worst
Racial equality is off topic here. Racial hatred worldwide and at home is caused by competition
between groups having gone deeply personal. The onset of this malaise is, more often than not,
heritage from a Colonial past. Very stubborn to address because of it personal aspect, it still
can be lessened by reducing ongoing factors which inflame it.
All correct, I'm sure, but let me add a less obvious but ultimately more important hypothesis:
the sudden hysteria is a result of decades of pent up exasperation over failure at achieving
racial equality.
I think this is exactly it. It's like when a married couple gets into a big argument over
some little thing around the house – it's always really about something else. And it's never an
isolated incident – it's always an accumulation of resentment, not feeling appreciated, etc.
Blacks wouldn't feel so slighted by a Confederate monument if they weren't already feeling
so disrespected, that they are seen as inferior, they have all the menial jobs and live in the
worst neighborhoods, that white people don't want to be around them, etc.
But white people working ever harder to be extra nice to blacks won't work either, and the
niceness will just be seen as condescending and patronizing, because it is. The problem is that
white people end up being humiliating to blacks just be existing. The races are different, and
the contrast is plain to see everywhere all the time.
Granted it's primarily white liberals more than blacks who are the instigators of tearing down
these monuments. But that's just because white liberals feel bad for blacks given the realities,
and also enjoy seeing themselves in the role of the heroes.
The problem is that everyone has bought into the mid-20th-century Franz Boas anthropology hoax
that there are no genetic differences between the races. The truth is getting out though, I think
it's happening right now – this might really be it. The establishment is obviously scared, hence
the increasing attempts at censorship.
Acknowledgement of this truth actually provides a way to understand and be more sympathetic
to the Confederates and the segregationists and other white people throughout history. They weren't
evil – they thought the races were different, and they were right, and they were struggling with
what to do about it.
This doesn't mean we need to agree with their conclusions – let's not bring back slavery. But
I think we all need to start thinking seriously about what comes next once the truth is acknowledged
and how to treat blacks as fairly as possible.
I'm hopeful that the solution will be just to stick to equality of individual opportunity and
accept the unequal group outcomes, while trying to make society better for people on the low end
of the IQ bell curve regardless of race. And if I'm feeling extra optimistic, maybe acknowledging
the truth will actually dial down the hostility, because we won't have to be thrashing around
looking for scapegoats all the time to blame for the differences.
One of the side-effects of these periodic moral panics that sweep through
American society --
Trayvon ,
Ferguson , Charlottesville -- is that they unmask people -- bring
out their inner nature.
Well, two weeks ago on the podcast
I said some kind words , or at least not un -kind words, about
TV talking head Charles Krauthammer. I said that while I'd written him off for
years as a, quote, "cucky neocon Israel-first GOP establishment front man,"
more recently I've been warming to him because of the mostly sensible things
he's said on Tucker Carlson's show.
Well, I'm biting my tongue. Last Tuesday on Fox News Krauthammer reverted
to cucky type, acting scandalized that Trump dared suggest there is anything
wrong with masked anarchists throwing rocks at citizens lawfully demonstrating.
Fortunately Laura Ingraham was there to counter him. I have,
as I have often noted , a very soft spot for Ms. Ingraham. Not to be shy
about it, I would walk over hot coals for her, leap the ice floes of a swollen
river for her, wrestle alligators for her.
So OK, I yield. I got Krauthammer right the first time: cucky neocon
shill.
"Shill"? A shill is a bogus competitor employed by a casino to promote
interest in the blackjack tables. Krauthammer isn't a shill.
He's had a certain political trajectory over the years: from mainline
Democrat to dissenting Democrat to mainline Republican (a trajectory traversed
over the period running from about 1979 to 1995). There is no indication
he's ever advocated anything but what he thinks or that he favors the party
he's not formally affiliated with; his antagonism to Trump is an indicator
of the crevasse which separates starboard opinion journalists from starboard
voters.
A real shill would be someone employed by the media to play a Republican.
The WaPoo hired David Weigel to do this, but the act wasn't credible after
his private correspondence was published in the Journ-O-List scandal.
Tyler Cowen, whose public writings suggest he's consumed with anxiety
about status considerations in faculty settings, might be seen as a manifestation
of libertarian pseudo-opposition on the George Mason payroll (since he never
critiques any progtrasn sacred cows). Bruce Bartlett, the Republican whose
signature is attacking other Republicans, might be considered a shill or
a poseur depending on who is paying his bills.
And, of course, 'neocon' is a nonsense term.
Krauthammer is a Canadian-reared scion of a very prosperous family. He's
lived pretty much all his life in New York, Montreal, Boston, and Washington.
His brother spent his adult life in Los Angeles. His son lives in the Bay
Area, his niece and her husband in Washington.
Between them, his parents lived in a half-dozen countries during the
course of their lives before landing in Quebec. He does not have any natural
affinity for the Trump constituency.
The best he can do is to attempt to appreciate it, and at that he is
very hit-and-miss.
"... Many of the memo's assertions were risible, such as the idea that women are not coders because they are less intrigued by "things" than men are. ..."
"... Assertions in that category are not "risible" unless you have a strong ideological determination to find them so. The claim that men have one less rib than women could fairly be called "risible" since it is so easily disproved. Damore's claim, as stated, is of a different kind. ..."
"... To the best of my knowledge, it has not been disproved: but even if it has been, it's still not "risible," as the disproving would have involved painstaking research and lengthy debates in scholarly journals. To persons not current with all that specialized research, it is a thing that might be true . ..."
"... Google is 80% male in its most technical departments. This hiring "anomaly" cannot be blamed on the young Damore, as I doubt he has any say in hiring matters. Brin, Page and Schmidt built up the company in its present form. ..."
"... Should Larry Page be so foolish as to write the sneering epistle suggested by the Economist, he would then have a hard time explaining Google's demographic makeup as he would have thrown away many of his best arguments. ..."
If all this sneering and gloating were not sufficiently emetic, this issue gives over
four full pages to grinding a boot heel into the face of James Damore, the programmer fired
by Google on August 7th for his internal company memo on sex differentials in suitability for software
work.
This was actually The Economist's second attempt to break this particular butterfly on
the wheel. Their previous edition (August 12th-18th) had run
a 600-word editorial and
a 1,000-word article in the Business Section both arguing that Google should not have
fired Damore but that his arguments about women and men displaying different interests were wrong,
wrong, wrong .
From the editorial:
An unbiased eye would light on social factors rather than innate differences as the reason
why only a fifth of computer engineers are women It would have been better for Larry Page, Google's
co-founder and the boss of Alphabet, its holding company, to write a ringing, detailed rebuttal
of Mr Damore's argument.
From the article:
Many of the memo's assertions were risible, such as the idea that women are not coders
because they are less intrigued by "things" than men are.
This is just ideological enforcement. Why is it more "unbiased" to presume social factors than
to presume innate differences? It's not more unbiased; it's just more CultMarx-compliant.
And why is that latter assertion "
risible " ("causing or
capable of causing laughter; laughable; ludicrous ")? It's not preposterous; it's in the category
of things that might or might not be true. Whether it is true or not can be determined by
careful empirical enquiry.
Assertions in that category are not "risible" unless you have a strong ideological determination
to find them so. The claim that men have one less rib than women could fairly be called "risible"
since it is so easily disproved. Damore's claim, as stated, is of a different kind.
To the best of my knowledge, it has not been disproved: but even if it has been, it's still
not "risible," as the disproving would have involved painstaking research and lengthy debates in
scholarly journals. To persons not current with all that specialized research, it is a thing that
might be true .
Well,
the four-page heel-grinding in this current issue is an attempt to write the "ringing, detailed
rebuttal of Mr Damore's argument" that The Economist recommended to Larry Page in last week's
editorial. It is a jeering, sneering specimen of equalist triumphalism.
Your interpretation is wrong. Your memo was a great example of what's called "motivated reasoning"!seeking
out only the information that supports what you already believe.
Uh: pot, kettle?
It was derogatory to women in our industry and elsewhere. Despite your stated support for diversity
and fairness, it demonstrated profound prejudice.
You should be free of ideological prejudices,
pure of
heart , as we are!
Your chain of reasoning had so many missing links that it hardly mattered what your argument
was based on. We try to hire people who are willing to follow where the facts lead, whatever their
preconceptions. In your case we clearly made a mistake.
So then wouldn't it be right to fire him?
You don't seem to understand what makes a great software engineer You clearly don't understand
our company, and so fail to understand what we are trying to do when we hire.
See previous.
I shouldn't have had to write this: I'm busy and a little effort on your part would have made
it unnecessary. But I know I have it easy. Women in our industry have to cope with this sort of
nonsense all the time.
Yours,
Larry
My impression is that Damore put considerable effort into his memo. And again, while some of his
assertions could be wrong, they are not missing-rib-level "nonsense."
But then, who's this James Damore pest, anyway? How many billion is he worth? Feugh!
Google is 80% male in its most technical departments. This hiring "anomaly" cannot be blamed
on the young Damore, as I doubt he has any say in hiring matters. Brin, Page and Schmidt built
up the company in its present form.
Should Larry Page be so foolish as to write the sneering epistle suggested by the Economist,
he would then have a hard time explaining Google's demographic makeup as he would have thrown
away many of his best arguments.
I share Joe Levantine's sorrow over the demise of this once great weekly. What a shame.
At the planned rightist march in Berkeley today, very few conservatives
or alt-righters showed up, but antifa did. From the LA
Times :
Some anti-facists protesters, known as antifa, pounced when Joey Gibson, founder of the
right-wing group Patriot Prayer, showed up with his crew. The protesters beat one man with a
shield and another person wearing an American flag.
Some of the antifa protesters also threatened to break the cameras of anyone who filmed
them, including journalists. One reporter tweeted that he had been pepper sprayed in one
scuffle.
Moderate counter protesters were upset with the violence. "We need to get antifa out of
here," said Jack Harris, who helped break up a fight.
Andrew Noruk, who was wearing a T-shirt denouncing both the Republican and Democratic
parties when two young women came up to him and started yelling at him.
"You're a Nazi," they shouted, leaving Noruk, who said he came out to protest Trump
supporters, confused.
Noruk denounced the fights breaking out near the park, claiming antifa and black bloc
anarchists have given Trump's supporters exactly what they wanted: footage of violence
perpetrated against the presidents supporters in a historically liberal city.
"We can't keep producing this audio visual propaganda," he said. "It is recruiting for the
right."
Damn right it is. Why do the police allow this? Why are they not arresting antifa and
throwing the book at them? This is outrageous, the way the Berkeley police behaved. From the
Sacramento Bee :
Black-clad anarchists on Sunday stormed into what had been a largely peaceful Berkeley
protest against hate and attacked at least five people, including the leader of a politically
conservative group who canceled an event a day earlier in San Francisco amid fears of
violence.
The group of more than 100 hooded protesters, with shields emblazoned with the words "no
hate" and waving a flag identifying themselves as anarchists, busted through police lines,
avoiding security checks by officers to take away possible weapons. Then the anarchists
blended with a crowd of 2,000 largely peaceful protesters who turned up to demonstrate in a
"Rally Against Hate" opposed to a much smaller gathering of right-wing protesters.
Berkeley police chief Andrew Greenwood defended how police handled the protest, saying
they made a strategic decision to let the anarchists enter to avoid more violence.
Greenwood said "the potential use of force became very problematic" given the thousands of
peaceful protesters in the park. Once anarchists arrived, it was clear there would not be
dueling protests between left and right so he ordered his officers out of the park and
allowed the anarchists to march in.
More:
Police pulled one supporter of President Donald Trump out of the park over a wall by his
shirt as a crowd of about two dozen counter-demonstrators surrounded him and chanted "Nazi go
home" and pushed him toward the edge of the park. At least two people were detained by
officers for wearing bandannas covering their faces.
Anti-rally protesters chanted slogans "No Trump. No KKK. No fascist USA" and carried signs
that said: "Berkeley Stands United Against Hate."
So an American man cannot peacefully state his support for the President of the United
States without a mob of bullies surrounding him and physically coercing him?
Berkeley does not stand united against hate. Berkeley hates. Keep it up, leftists. You are
doing the work of your enemies. Here's a short clip showing an antifa mob attacking a teenage
boy Trump supporter and his father in Berkeley today, plus a short interview with them after
the event. Warning: there's an f-bomb in the first few seconds of the crowd footage:
"... I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as well as you'd expect. ..."
"... "It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has never been done before." ..."
"... The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance. Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still ended up in a precarious situation? ..."
"... In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and money outside of the country as quickly as possible. ..."
"... Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder." ..."
"... Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War, bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese. ..."
"... I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap -- The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra ..."
"... The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced, and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly 50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991. ..."
"... "Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement by more cohesive cultures." ..."
"... That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the "Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the ephemeral finance and information economy. ..."
"... Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not some stupid monument." ..."
"... I still can't get over it. Joan of Arc?!!! ..."
"... Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches? ..."
"... If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction. ..."
But it is plain that most Republicans do not believe Trump violated that taboo.
That is because Hugh Hewitt stated that Trump has the right enemies. And for conservatives
they have standing behind Trump since he pursued Birtherism against the enemy.
I was reflecting on this last night and had an epiphany regarding Trump's "good people on
both sides" statement last week.
For over a week now I've been baffled by the president's remark. What "good" person
thinks, "Hey, the KKK and the Nazis are having a rally this weekend. Sounds like my kind of
party!"? But now I'm glad he said it.
What I mean is this: if you watch the videos, you'll notice a large percentage of the
participants in the Charlottesville rally were young white men, probably in their early 20's.
At this age, people are spending a lot of time trying on identities and figuring out what
they believe. This means occasionally doing foolish and embarrassing things.
Trump has basically given these guys an escape path. "Hey, I'm not really a Nazi or a
Klukker. I'm a good person who's concerned about the danger of erasing our collective
history, of throwing the baby out with the racist bathwater."
I know some will snark at that, but consider the alternative, more or less embraced by
everybody else. Howling, "racist" and throwing stones, both rhetorical and literal, only
serves to further radicalize these guys, driving them into the welcoming arms of the national
socialists. (Note the similarities between the profiles for a young white supremacist and a
domestic Islamic terrorist!) "They will hate me no matter what I do at this point," is not
where we want people to be.
I have no idea whether this was the president's intention or even on his radar at the
time, but if you back people into a corner without a path of escape, they will get desperate,
which is to say, radical and violent. "Good people," as distinct from "racist Nazis", is an
opportunity to step back from the abyss.
I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime. The
forces separating us are stronger than those keeping us together, and they are not likely to
be tamed with the weapons currently in our culture's arsenal (i.e., rote recitation of
"Diversity is Strength").
As another commenter wryly noted, I happen to possess every quality
despised by the SJWs (white, heterosexual, Christian, happily married, with four children and
a dog), and their actions/words are increasingly convincing me and my family that they'd
prefer not to share the same country as me.
That's fine; I'm happy to expend what little time
and talent I have devising a way to peacefully (again, I repeat, PEACEFULLY) separate from
those who think my very existence (aka "whiteness") is somehow a threat to their lives. At an
earlier, more naïve point in my life, I thought that we, as a country, would get through
this and start regarding each other according to the content of our character rather than the
color of our skin. Alas, it seems that there is no interest in that type of social
arrangement any longer, so I'm happy to help broker a two-state solution.
"They wouldn't stop. To them, it's a possibility to destroy things they hate and feel self
righteous at the same time. Or, and to get media cheering. Why would they miss a chance like
this?"
It's a chance to use violence to force visible, lasting change in our shared space. To
force their will on us, by violence or the threat of violence. A piece of the world that the
rest of us loved or accepted or at least tolerated is smashed or removed because that's what
they want. The rest of us are supposed to shut up and accept what they have done.
This won't last long. When it swings back in the other direction, as it inevitably will,
many of those now watching in silent rage will cheer for the thugs who come to smash their
faces in.
I once worked with someone who always had to be Winning™, and as soon as you managed to
meet one set of demands a new set popped up – just for the sake of having something to
win. Because *having won* didn't matter, it was the act of winning that mattered. I think the
activist left is in the hands of this sort of person, and it's going to work out about as
well as you'd expect.
"It's always struck me as strange that no one reflects that the
desire of the Left, to create a true multi-ethnic, multi-cultural democratic society, has
never been done before."
That society will function is taken as a given, it seems to me. And it does, if one has
enough money. But if not, there's a breakdown. And that's something I often see – some
of the work I do involves economic and community development in poor communities. There isn't
much to work with, and the language of the Left isn't particularly conducive to strengthening
communities. Generally it is about freedoms from and rights, and rarely if ever – can't
think of a recent example, actually – is it about obligation and responsibilities other
than those for one's own expression and fulfillment.
I'd like to say the Right has stepped into the void, but for the most part they have not,
they are just as insistent on freedoms from and a kind of a moral adjudication by the market,
where struggling communities deserve to die. Dreher and a few others often write about the
importance of community and the unappreciated difficulty of maintaining a civil society, but
as a general rule what they write is misunderstood as an appeal to nostalgia or racism or
both. Which is to say that reflecting on what makes a "multi-ethnic, multi-cultural
democratic society" work is so far off the radar screen for most people that they are unable
to identify a discussion about it.
Which is to say it strikes me as strange also. And then generally, Mr. Dreher, the problem
I have with Huntington is that his keen perceptiveness easily clothes itself with an aura of
prophesy. I don't attribute that to him, it's a thing I do on my own. But it's something I
have to avoid in order to do the work I do. I can imagine numerous futures, and a part of the
struggle for me is maintaining the facility of imagining one that inspires. So I repeat to
myself – It need not be this way.
What we're seeing might be thought of as the entirely predictable and normal reaction of a
particular group within a pluralistic society, when members of that group come to believe
that they are losing ground.
In terms of history, I wish historians would state the Post WW2 Boom (1948 –
1973) was the historical oddity where we saw high increase in working class wages. And any
reading of US history especially before WW1, the white race definition did not include the
latest European immigrants. (Irish, German, East European and Jewish.) In many ways modern US
is closer to American history than post war years.
Although Civil Rights was primarily led by African-Americans, there were a significant
other minorities that benefited in the long run.
In terms of minority economic gains, the area of the economy where the minority gains
have been the most is Tech and we have seen a huge conservative dislike of tech the last 3
– 5 years.
In terms of economy, over the last 15 years the primarily hit more rural WWC towns. So
it must be something and Trump ran on the Clintons free trade agreement and anti-immigrants
to win the election. (I found it strange that it was not Koch Brothers or Apple fault but did
not understand it until after the election.)
Again it is hard to predict the future as there still things vastly better today than a
generation ago. Literally nobody in 1992 stated that the US was on a verge of a historic drop
in crime.
But there is room for all of us white people to extol what is great, and there was a LOT
of great in our ancestors, while strictly denying and removing anything which seems to
highlight profound injustices in the eyes of non-whites. I am now on-board. It's the
christian thing to do. Let's retain all that is Christian about our ancestors, and let go all
of the cultural blindness, willful or not, that resulted in slavery.
I often disagree with Seven sleepers, but this is right on.
I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we
very seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter. That's OK I
guess, I think we're all white or Asian here (not African American, I mean) but I am struck
by our very consistent blindness on this topic.
Let us suppose for a minute that your Southern, Confederate ancestor was not riding about
on a horse. Let us suppose that he was a field hand in the slave quarters, that he had been
regularly beaten (this practice has been attested to by numerous documents from the old
South), his wife had been taken by the son of the plantation owner, one of "his" children was
suspiciously light of skin, and several of his children had been sold away from him. These
things were not rare and unusual. This was the order of the day.
So now how do you feel about this "Heritage"?
Oh well, that's OK, right? The people who have good reason to feel this way are a
minority. We need not trouble ourselves too much about them. And our Christian obligation to
take care of our brothers and sisters, to love them in fact, to consider their feelings as
well as our own .what happened to that?
"So, putting together ideas from the Clarence Thomas blog and some of Huntington and Swain's
ideas here, I posit: Liberals believe in legal/economic collectivism and cultural
individualism, while conservatives believe in legal/economic individualism and cultural
collectivism. I'm sure somebody on this blog can demolish that hypothesis."
No, it's generally correct but it needs tweaking. The conservatives you describe are not
really conservatives, they're right-liberals. Patrick Deneen is the guy to read on this.
Also, I'm not sure these "conservatives" want cultural collectivism as much as they want
the freedom to reject the tyranny of left's cultural individualism. As J.W. Corrington put it
(regarding a different issue), submitting to the unalterable vicissitudes of history is one
thing. Being expected to genuflect to them is quite another. (paraphrase from memory).
Or to paraphase Fitzjames Stephen, you may not be able to resist being carried away by the
flood, but that doesn't mean you have to sing 'Hallelujah' to the river god while being swept
along.
Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down the
entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the
conventional Republicans and the Democrats."
Is there really that much difference? We certainly have enough of the latter group on
these threads.
(And Joan of Arc? Really? Makes me think we've just got a plain anarchist who wants to
tear down all statues, period. He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC
Public library next.)
"equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result),"
I am able to recognize that those two things are lies. No African-American is going to
think they are equal under the law when the police are killing them. And no thinking American
believes they have had the same equality of opportunity as Donald Trump.
The problem is the falseness of the American Creed. For minorities and there empathizers
it should be discarded. For conservative whites, it creates a terrible cognitive dissonance.
Why have they done all the right things: got an education, worked hard, married and still
ended up in a precarious situation?
If we wanted to be a great nation, we should have adopted policies to create lots of
working class jobs and filled them with Black men, so that they could support homes and
families. But we didn't, instead we gave tepid support to stupidities like affirmative
action. Something the white majority never supported.
In the meantime, the globalist, rich libertarians embedded its false ideology of "equality
of opportunity" in working class whites, while simultaneously moving there factories and
money outside of the country as quickly as possible.
And none of this is too late to fix. The country just needs the right leadership. And it
won't come from Trump, the GOP, or the Democrats.
"Let's just put it more plainly: Trump violated another important taboo pretty much every
week of his campaign. Yet Republicans still elected him. They should be ashamed of
themselves."
Honestly at this point the only Republican response to statements like this is "we tried
thousands of times to get the "lesser of two evils in a two party system" point across to
you. NOT necessarily lesser to you with whatever values you may have, but lesser to US. If
you STILL are going to try this idiotic attempt at shaming, you can go f**** yourself."
Sorry Rod but that's about the thousandth time that's come up here with these people.
Take 'Em Down NOLA movement is demanding, among *many* other things, that Tulane
University change its name because Paul Tulane, whose land donation made the university
possible, owned slaves.
OK. Let's parse that one. One alt-right response to taking down statues of confederate
generals was "Where is it going to stop? Shall we take down statues of Washington and
Jefferson too?" And then, like many poorly-conceived self-fulfilling prophecies, infantile
disordered voices came out saying, yes, indeed we must.
In between a rational voice from a man who supported taking down confederate monuments
affirmed "There is a huge difference between celebrating a flawed man, and celebrating a
man's flaws."
Mr. Tulane has a university named after him because he donated the land for the
university, not because he owned slaves. Braxton Bragg has statues put up because he fought
against the United States of American in defense of slavery. Obvious difference. I think it
might be worthwhile to discuss renaming Fort Bragg -- its an outrage that soldiers in the army
that defeated the confederacy receive basic training at a post named after one of the
generals they defeated. I'm sure my great-great-grandfather who served in the 11th Tennessee
Cavalry, United States Army, would agree.
Can we dispense with Social "Justice" Warrior? Just as a matter of accurate
labeling/description?
Sure. I prefer the Leninist term, "infantile disorder."
By Jove, Melbourne was right–Cicero, Plato, Aristotle and all those gentlemen
were 'pro-slavery'.
Well, that aside, I think they're all greatly over-rated. Surely someone in antiquity said
things more agreeable to my seldom humble self, but his writings had not the random good
fortune to be preserved for late European antiquarians to pore over.
dd: Did you miss the ellipses at the end of my sentence?
And yes, Seven Sleepers is right on target today. There is nobody so crass I can't agree
with him now and then. Even Clarence Thomas gets a few things right. If Seven Sleepers is
Italian, he is also correct that originally his ancestors were not accepted as "white" at
all.
"I am also noticing that not only do we not hear from black Americans on this board, we very
seldom are moved to take any account of their opinions on this matter."
From what I recall Baptiste and Eliminist (I think I spelled that wrong) are black. Dancer
Girl is black, and all of them have weighed in on this.
From a footnote about a statue Joyce mentions in "The Dead": In 1701 an equestrian statue [of
William III] was erected in front of Trinity College. From then on, it was systematically
defaced, daubed, smeared, wrecked, rebuilt, protected, and finally, in 1929 blown up, as an
emblem of oppression." Irish Pat Buchanan would probably be proud of his ancestors!
I'm from Memphis, as was Nathan Bedford Forrest. I admire Forrest as a military
iconoclast, but I must say I had to laugh at the picture of the statue of Forrest mounted on
horse with some prankster's KKK hood draped on his head.
Q. "So what do they symbolize? And who do they symbolize? The answer is important."
A. Whatever I say.
Art is cathartic; hopefully, it begets catharsis, if the artist or sculptor did their job.
In the eye of the beholder it may appear as a "ministering angel" or a "demon" or may be
"just some bloke riding horseback I didn't notice nor did I even care and could care less now
because I have no connection to history or interest in it."
Imagine we had an educated collective of sovereign individuals who participated in
government and kept a watchful eye we'd be in great shape with or without religion or deism.
But, we don't. And because of this, the "American Creed" as you callit, is lost; none of
those items or those you left out exists, none of it exists, absolutely zero.
Carl Bernstein recently said in an interview that obstructing free press is the first step
toward tyranny. The Union can thank Lincoln (the tyrant) and Sherman (the tyrant's bloody
hand).
Sherman to his Adjutant:
"For my part, I believe that this war is the result of false political doctrine, for which we
are all as a people responsible, viz., that any and every people have a right to
self-government; and I would give all a chance to reflect, and, when in error, to
recant."
And
"I am willing to bear in patience that political nonsense of slave rights, State rights,
freedom of conscience, freedom of press, and such other trash, as have deluded the Southern
people into war, anarchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or
any people."
"Monuments referring to "Savage" Indians defending their homeland are pretty damn offensive,
when you think about it."
====
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the
inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an
undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
The right committed an act of vandalism against America that infinitely dwarfs any vandalism
against old statuary. In a rejection of everything good and decent in America, they selected
and then elected Donald Trump. The insult and tragedy of this act only worsens with each
passing day.
And, even as Trump is actively desecrating and dismantling America's binding ideals with
the eager support of most of the right, I'm supposed to fret about how the left is
provoking them?!? That's so absurd it borders on obscene.
It's like a giant bully has me pinned on my back and is punching me relentlessly in the
face (pausing occasionally to spit in it) and Rod is watching all this from among the
gathered crowd and hollering that I just need to stop fighting back. What I need is the good
people among the crowd to get this guy off of me before it's too late!
Trump's ongoing possession of power that he is terrifyingly unfit to wield and
responsibility he is tragically unable to comprehend is a relentless and unbearable
provocation and we all know who did it and who continues to support it. The left has almost
infinitely more cause to feel aggrieved and nobody should be surprised that they latch onto
whatever avenues of protest they stumble upon.
I say none of this to justify anybody's extreme actions, only to illustrate that the blame
game cuts both ways and it cuts deeper when deployed against the right. People could knock
down every last statue in America and it wouldn't do as much deep and lasting harm to our
nation as Trump has already done and nobody knows how much worse it will get or how far the
right will enable the unfolding catastrophe that they chose.
"Huh. Iconoclasts on the left, and on the right we've got the people who want to tear down
the entire political system and who are loudly applauding Trump because he "sticks it to the
conventional Republicans and the Democrats." "
Thing is, Mr. grumpy realist, the Confederate statues didn't lie us into the Iraq War,
bail out the Wall Street banksters, fail to stop millions of illegals from coming here, or
outsource American jobs to Indians and Chinese.
If the Confederate statues had done those things you might have a point. But they just sat
there as they always have, not doing too much of anything, really, mostly just looking grand
or sorrowful or heroic or dignified or such like.
Unlike the political establishment, which has been painting a giant DayGlo target on its
capacious and diseased hind quarters for a long time.
I oppose vandalism of statues. Full stop. If we are going to waste time on more culture war
nonsense it should be conducted legally. But since everyone loves arguing about this crap --
The Wikipedia article on Serra seems fair and balanced, to coin a phrase.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun%C3%ADpero_Serra
And it is tendentious in the extreme to say people oppose Serra because he erected
missions, unless you explain why the critics think that was a bad thing. They think it was
bad for a couple of reasons. First, they oppose the spread of Christianity by force. There
was coercion involved and massiv cruelty. Serra seems to have fallen somewhere in the middle,
endorsing some violence but opposing the more extreme versions of it.
Modern secular lefties also oppose the spread of Christianity because they see it as
inherently wrong or oppressive for Westerners to try to convert native people. In practice it
usually was coercive and monstrous in the way it was done and it is hard to separate the
actual practice of missionary activity back then from the religion which inspired the
coercion. As a Christian I think it is right to try to convert people, but if it is done via
coercion than how is it any different from the more coercive versions of Islam?
This was nearly 300 years ago. Do we really have to have another culture war about
religiously inspired conquest and violence that happened 300 years ago?
Don't know if it's the nature of the moment or the nature of this blog, but it's almost
always the whitey righty types that predict an imminent apocalypse, never those the occupy
the space between the center and, say, BadReligion. The Paranoid Style, i'd say, unless
they're all right.
"Sure, I'm paranoid but am I paranoid ENOUGH?"
Rod -- " I agree that I'm in a squishy place, being against taking down monuments in
principle, but also agreeing that it's very hard to defend them successfully as 'heritage not
hate,' which is the point of Ryan Booth's that I was agreeing with. I must agree, though,
that the iconoclastic post-Charlottesville reaction of the Left has hardened my opinion
against taking down the statues."
Please don't go down that road. This happens to be one of those issues where there really
is some reasonable middle ground that people of good will can occupy without necessarily
being in complete agreement. For instance, you can make a good case for taking down Lee and
leaving up Jefferson or you could leave Lee up but include plaques detailing his flaws or
explaining the historical circumstances in which the statues were erected. There are other
reasonable positions one could argue for on the merits.
But don't start down the path of saying that you want to side with one bunch of extremists
because there is another bunch of extremists over there that won't like you no matter what
you do. This is how we allow extremists dictate our politics. In the worst case scenario, it
is how we have civil wars.
I don't usually use the word extremist in this derogatory way because on some issues one
extreme is correct. But this isn't one of those issues. The extremists on both sides are
wrong and we shouldn't let ourselves be manipulated by them.
"He'll probably go after the lions at the entrance of the NYC Public library next.)"
Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will indeed
have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the trans-Atlantic
slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning Jewish Secretary
of State.
By this formulation Rod, the tearing down of statues dedicated to the heroes of Communism in
Eastern Europe and Russia was iconoclasm as well. I sense that it is iconoclasm of which you
approve though
The Confedercy killed more Americans than any foreign enemy the Republic has ever faced,
and yet public statues and monuments to this vile treason, most of which were raised nearly
50 years after the war ended to commerate the (temporary) triumph of the Confederate ideology
of White Supremacy, are somehow different and more noble than statues of Dzhersinsky and
Lenin? Who committed crimes of the same vulgar type as the Confederate leaders (why is
Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? It's because Longstreet fought to defend black
rights after the war, and Beauregard was creole). Now, like Communists, some good people
fought for the Confederacy for good reasons (home and family in the case of your Confederate
ancestor, bread and freedom in the Russian revolution. Read about some of the brutality from
the Whites in the Russian Civil War. It will make your skin crawl.) So let the common
soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors who led them. Just as they
tore down the statues of Dzhrsinsky, Lenin, and Marx after 1991.
The difference between Nelson's Column and the statues of Lee et al, was that Nelson
fought to save Britain from foreign conquest. Lee and co. fought to defend white supremacy
and slavery. Just read what they wrote about it themselves. Anybody who can't see that is a
dope.
The taboo that was broken has less to do with not denouncing Nazis or political violence
(things that were denounced), it's not doing it in the precise way demanded by the media.
It's a denial that the media has the moral status that it claims to define the narrative and
to elicit specific responses that support the narrative.
They don't get as mad when Trump subverts the narrative with a lie as when he does so with
something that approaches the truth.
Tearing down statues that symbolize what you don't believe in is usually a crime of vandalism
punishable by law, so normally that takes care of that. But of course symbols make handy
targets during disputes and rivalries, even though, to maintain the peace, the law has to
hold.
Confederate statues are a separate matter, not because tearing them down unlawfully is OK
!
You can still be prosecuted for vandalism if you do that -- but because their very existence
threatens what we as a nation hold in common. Most were, in fact, put up as a symbol of
dissent from our national creed, specifically the part that holds "all men are created
equal." For most Americans, the Confederacy itself symbolizes that position of dissent, but
the vast majority of these statues aren't mere leftovers from that bygone historical era;most
were actually erected in the late 19th or early 20th century as symbols of the Jim Crow era
when the Ku Klux Klan was at its peak and its basic philosophy of re-asserting white
supremacy was riding high. Some others went up in the 1960s when they symbolized the South's
opposition to the black civil rights movement. It's certainly easy for me to see why state
legislatures and city councils are being asked to remove them now when white supremacists are
rallying in public yet again.
The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and
another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both
towns are American, you have reconciliation.
That is what is being destroyed. The nation's wounds that took so long to bind are being
ripped open.
I wonder how many Belfasts and Beruits we can endure, because it's coming.
Nothing good will come from removing monuments, anymore than anything good came from removing
Mosques from Bosnia.
There is no line here. The Founders all owned slaves, the Constitution based on a division
of powers and federalism was written by evil slave-owning white men to pursue their economic
interests, and the Bill of Rights was written by Jefferson the slave owner. Everything is up
for grabs.
The Left is turning into the Westboro Baptist Church, but targeting monuments not funerals
(yet).
Re: No, the progressive assault on Confederate statues is an assault on history, memory, and
myth
History lives on in books, museums, and national monuments and parks of a historical sort.
We are not assaulting any of those. And indeed where statues have been removed by the legal
actions of civil magistrates the intent is to move them to sorts of places where history is
explicitly remembered. So if this is "an assault on history" it's an utterly incompetent
one.
As for myths, well, there are good myths and bad myths. No one, I hope, would suggest we
keep alive the wicked old calumnies (myths in their own day) of Jews poisoning wells or
sacrificing Christian children. The myth of white supremacy is of a similar sort, and it
needs to be buried at a crossroads with a stake through its heart.
The Southern states meanwhile have a 400 year old history, reckoning from Jamestown (longer
of course if we take Native Americans into account). There's much in that to celebrate. Why
obsess about the least felicitous few years out of that history?
"why is Longstreet not marked by statue or Beauregard? "
You know, Hound of Ulster, when you get your talking points from CNN you ought to
independently check them. Here's a Longstreet memorial, Gainsville.(bad orientation)
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/368028600772640099
Historical iconoclasm is actually a wondrous thing, highly advanced, anticipating by
millennia the universe of problems associated with present-day, technologically mediated,
iconophilia, including the transcendent, generation-defining problem of Internet pornography
and related dynamic image-induced mesmerizations, where the possessed image ends up gradually
possessing the unguarded possessor and entrapping him/her in the "prison house" whose very
walls are the projections of unguarded sight.
The phantasmata channeled by the fathomless
'mirror', volatilized and dynamized by an incomprehensible and untrustworthy demiurge, are
anticipated by the hyper-real "demon-possessed" anthropomorphic statues of antiquity, not to
mention the actually existing automata of that age: combining the dual extraneous potential
(i.e. enchantments) of representation-enhancing technologies and the primitive, unreflective,
libidinal human urge. As Plato wrote: "This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear
Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the
fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be
the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at
your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or
false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and
is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of
all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible
world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the
power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his
eye fixed.
I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you.
Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to this beatific vision are
unwilling to descend to human affairs; for their souls are ever hastening into the upper
world where they desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory may
be trusted.
Yes, very natural.
And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplations to the evil
state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and
before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in
courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of images of justice, and
is endeavouring to meet the conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute
justice?
Anything but surprising, he replied.
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two
kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the
light, which is true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who
remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready
to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and
is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day
is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of
being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes
from below into the light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which greets
him who returns from above out of the light into the den."
"Huntington's book sounds helpful but the work that continues to be even more prescient is
Christopher Lasch's "The Revolt of the Elites," describing a ruling class that has severed
its ties to its own cultural order as well as to the less powerful and privileged members of
it. The result is incomprehension of reaction they provoke and chaos. In the short run, this
may increase their illusion of control and power but the long run spells doom and replacement
by more cohesive cultures."
That's exactly the book I was thinking of in this post. He also talks about how when the
"Managerial Elites" replaced the "Wasps" as the ruling class they replaced the sense of
responsibility and Noblesse Oblige the Wasps had for the country w/ disregard, selfishness
and greed by the managerial meritocracy. Gone is the manufacturing economy replaced by the
ephemeral finance and information economy.
"liberty, equality under the law, equality of opportunity (if not of result), individualism,
populism, limited government, and free-market economics. These ideas, Huntington said, came
out of Protestant England and its reception of the Enlightenment"
Bull. Neither England, nor Enlightment.
Voltaire and his "enlighted" ilk were sycophants of the absolute monarchies of the Prussian
militarist Frederic II,forerunner of the modern totalitarian state and imperialist Catherine
II, whom they idealized.
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth destroyed primarily by Prussia, resorting even to
counterfeiting of the Polish currency, was the font of the values Huntington finds
foundational, far ahead of England.
Statutes of Cienia enacted around the time of Magna Carta, and of essentially the same
nature, were actually implemented whereas MC for a very long time remained a dead letter.
Neminem Captivabimus preceded Habeas Corpus by 143 years. Citizens with full political rights
were 5-6 times more numerous in Poland than in England of France.
Religious freedom was unparalleled, people flocked to Poland from all over the continent
running from persecutions. It was known as the country without stakes. Free markets were on
the par with England. Government was by far more limited in Poland than in any other
country.
No objective historian can claim that English freedoms could come close to that.
The English have been veritable the masters of Imperial propaganda down to the current
cult of the Queen.
Historical record of English tyranny, persecution and exploitation is glaring.
It would serve Americans, especially conservatives, well, to be more discerning when it comes
to their ideological heritage as formed by Protestant England. The Puritans running from
English persecution were persecutors themselves.
Poland and Venice are worthy of conservative reflection searching for inspiration.
Unfortunately, they do not. They were mostly erected by "Redeemers" or later incarnations
of triumphalist white supremacists (the real thing, not some unfortunate soul who gets tagged
in a 21st century virtual replay), at a time when the northern and western elites didn't care
any more, and anyone of African descent was being brutally disfranchised.
Many schools were REnamed for confederate generals as part of "massive resistance" to the
final push against Jim Crow.
That is what those statues, by and large, represent. That is why a fair number of people
want them to come down.
God hates Confederates and Antebellum American Presidents.
God has not given me any personal revelation on the subject, but from all the Christian
education I've had, God is merciful to sinners and seeks to bring all into reconciliation
with Him. He does, however, hate slavery and efforts to make war to perpetuate it. He may not
have looked kindly on the annexation of Mexican territory either, but Santa Ana was no
saint.
So let the common soldiers be commenrated, but tear down the statues of the traitors
who led them.
That would be reasonable, but it may be a little late to do it right. We need more
attention to novels like Cold Mountain, and of course to the Jones County Scouts.
Well, given that the NY Public Library lions symbolize the Lion of Judah, they will
indeed have to go. They are an obvious, obnoxious allusion to the Jewish role in the
trans-Atlantic slave trade and of course to Judah Benjamin, the Confederacy's slave-owning
Jewish Secretary of State.
Explain that to all the black churches dedicated to the Lion of Judah, considered, rightly
or wrongly, to be a reference to Jesus Christ. (Separately, I note that Lion of Judah was one
of the titles of the kings of Ethiopia).
I am well aware that the Sacred Declaration says "Savage" in reference to Indians.
Just because it's in a key founding document doesn't make it less offensive.
Nor does it mean we have to rip it up.
We don't have to accept or reject everything in a document (or anything, for that matter)
to find value. A thing, or a person, can have overwhellming good, but also some ugly
stains.
I think it would be the height of folly to reject the Declaration because it wasn't
inerrant and also folly to dogmatically accept it all as unvarnished good merely because
Jefferson wrote it.
It's like when the Constitutiin was read in toto in Congress a few years back. Some
Republicans didn't want the (now defunct) parts about slaves read; others wanted it read,
warts and all to do otherwise they would consider "whitewashing".
And no, none of them suggested burning the Constitution, or saying we must have slavery
because the original Constitution provided for it.
The line is public opinion. Large numbers of people are on board with ditching the Rebs
and race baiters. Large numbers of people are not on board with dumping the Founders. The
recent failure of the ACA repeal-and-replace effort should be an object lesson of how public
opinion really can prevent unpopular public actions from occurring, even when pushed by
powerful and wealthy people– and in this case only a fringe gang of radicals would be
pushing for what you fear.
Re: The Founders all owned slaves
All of them? Every last signer of the Declaration* and Constitution? Every officer with
rank or colonel or better in the Continental Army?
Please document this!
"The Statues represent reconciliation. When one town can have a statue of a Union hero and
another town can have a statue of a Confederate hero while still acknowledging that both
towns are American, you have reconciliation."
Remarkable. It's as if reaching reconciliation requires pretending that neither town
contains folks who are not white. Yes we are, in a sense, finally trying to begin to deal with reconciling some old history.
News flash though, it ain't about blue and gray uniforms
Interesting interview with Andrew Young on NPR this morning ("Civil Rights Activist Argues to
Keep Confederate Monuments"): "A minority cannot be provoking a racist majority that is still
underemployed, undereducated, and dying faster than we are. The issue is life and death, not
some stupid monument."
http://www.npr.org/2017/08/23/545435024/civil-rights-activist-argues-to-keep-confederate-monuments
A bit of an aside, but since ya'll are more knowledgeable than me Do you know if there are
any statues in the South to white southerners who opposed slavery?
Slavery is something like original sin, as it pertains to the founding of this country. It is
a blot that stains all the good things that came out of the revolution. Clearly, the ideals
that the Founders promoted were not practiced very well in the beginning. And for too long,
their failure to live up to the ideals they espoused was white washed away (pun intended) by
the way the white majority looked at history. Granted, the Founders were handicapped by
growing up in a different world, one that was less enlightened on matters involving race and
sex than the one we live in today. Progress does not happen as one instantaneous cultural
step change, but rather as a more fitful series of stops and starts. Of course, that isn't
adequate as an excuse for those who were on the receiving end of injustices.
Obviously, some people think that one of the outcomes of the Civil war, the freeing of
slaves, which occurred at a rather high cost of lives and treasure, would have gone a long
way to atoning for that original sin. But the follow through was clearly lacking, with racial
resentments and overt discrimination lingering on until now. Despite our long history as a
Christian nation, not enough of the mostly Christian and white majority was able to grasp
that all men, not just white men, were presumably created in God's image.
So what shall we do about this?
Right now, those on the left seem to be indulging themselves emotionally by engaging in a
frenzied purification of history, via the attack on historical personages and statues. In
some ways, this strikes me as lazy, as it isn't clear that any of this will improve lives in
struggling black communities, or solve the gang violence problems in Chicago, and other urban
areas, or enable damaged young black men to have any kind of meaningful lives, regardless of
who is to blame for the damage that they have suffered. In the same way, I don't see that
white identity politics, the adoption by whites of the same aggrieved victim mentality, will
help them advance in any meaningful way. Trump's promises to return things to the way they
were are just tempting fantasies. There are no do overs in history. All sides need to check
themselves and then focus on moving forward in the best way possible. That, unfortunately,
seems to go against human nature. Vendetta is much more attractive in the short run.
Maybe we can make a decision based on artistic merit? I mean, a lot of these statues are
mass-produced pieces of sentimental kitch that make me remember the excesses of oratory
during the 1890s. Is it really all that terrible if we turn them into something else? Or
should we just say: "if it's a statue of some guy on a horse and has moss on it, we'll leave
it alone" and impose a statuary equivalent to the legal doctrine of laches?
Actually, I think getting to the point of being totally indifferent to the statues would
be the most appropriate of all. After all, they are nothing more than huge hunks of metal
that pigeons like to sit on.
Aaron C. I am 35 years old, and I believe the country will tear itself apart in my lifetime.
Trouble with separatist scenarios in the US is that they're basically unworkable, if you
think at the practical level. Most people have multiple identities, and they will start
resisting when purists like SJWs try to enforce their will. Besides, in the real-world
identities are fluid, not fixed. Neo-Marxists are focusing on race because it's one of the
most stable component of human identity. They already failed with class war, where workers
decided that they have other identities. And in the real world, most people in the US may
already be non-white by the old 1/16th rule, and their numbers are going up daily. As for the
Left and Right divide, people are moving from one side to the next, sometimes several times
in a lifetime. Should they be forced to move *physically* too, to reach an ideologically pure
state? And how to even think about dividing the country economically? Militarily? It would be
a complete disaster, worse than any Yugoslavia.
I think it is much, much more likely that we will remain a single country. But what is
really scary is deterioration of the public discourse, the endless 'f . you!!' as a sole
argument in the debates. The outbursts of physical violence. The pretense that there are
*good* SOBs because they are on *our* side – looking at you, liberal media!
We may end up as, I hate to say, spiders in the can, destroying each other instead of
improving our country. Think about it: where do we want to be in 30 or 50 years? There is a
tremendous *potential* for science and technology for improving our lives, eliminating hard
and tedious work, reducing human pain and suffering, cleaning the environment. But instead of
looking forward and thinking how to improve, we're focused on zero-sum game of endless
reopening of the old wounds.
John Adams is on record saying with pride "I have never owned a Negro or any other slave."
McCullough's biography records that a young enslaved woman was once given to the family as a
gift, but was promptly emancipated -- which is probably a better deal for her than refusing
the gift and leaving her enslaved.
If the sum total of all indicators within the context of group, racial identity and the
possible demise of an anglo/protestant cultural heritage is true, then violent conflict looms
on the horizon and possibly in the near foreseeable future. Yes, it will not be a fight for
racial(i.e. white)supremacy but an at-all-costs battle to avoid extinction.
In Tampa, the Confederate monument now being challenged was erected c. 1912. Sure enough,
someone checked the newspaper for that day and the dedication was by a white politician
vowing that the South would never submit to being ruled by an "inferior" race.
This "war against statues" look like borrowed directly from Ukrainian Maydan, which was a
100% authentic color revolution. Conflict escalation is a major tool in staging a color
revolution.
War with statues is pretty harmless for oligarchy, but does sharply divide the people into
two camps. It much easier to remove statues, than raise wages.
The key mechanism here is that it allow escalation, necessary for color revolution to succeed
-- as some as violence occurred it doe not matter who was right and who was wrong, of if both
parties engaged in violence were wrong.
The hysteria unfolding regarding events in Charlottesville reminds me of the anti-Russia
madness that has made front page news ever since Hillary Clinton discovered that she had lost
the presidential election to Vladimir Putin. The media train is again rushing headlong into a
terra incognita with its only goal being to bring down President Donald Trump by
riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist revulsion. The establishment press is essentially
enforcing its own code of ethics, insisting that just because what the mainstream
characterizes as morally repugnant "Nazi-scum" and white nationalists exist they are
ultimately fully responsible for any violence that is required to defeat them and disrupt
their activities. For the ubiquitous talking heads like Wolf Blitzer and Rachel Maddow to
believe otherwise is to posit moral equivalency between the good guys and bad guys, something
that cannot be tolerated.
As far as I can determine, almost no one knows much about the specific agendas of the
various parties that were involved in last week's fracas in Charlottesville. My own viewpoint
extends only as far as a strong belief that the deconstruction of this nation through the
elimination of select historical monuments is wrong, particularly when said monuments
commemorate people who fought and died for their country. As I am a Vietnam-era army veteran
I would concede that my judgment in that regard is somewhat skewed.
That aside, there are several other issues that should be of general interest that have
been largely obscured by the violence that erupted and the media interpretation of the event
to fit in with its own preferred narrative.
First and foremost is the free speech issue which is being conveniently ignored by a media
and political class intent on punishing the white nationalist protesters no matter what
rights have to be trampled along the way. As far as I can determine, the primary objective of
the Unite-the-Right gathering was to protest against removing a statue, so one has to at
least assume that some demonstrators were there in good faith based on that issue. And surely
many of the counter-demonstrators were there to protest peacefully against some of the
admittedly extremist groups marching under the Unite umbrella.
"The likelihood that there were paid FBI informants on both sides of the conflict leads
me to believe that the federal government knows exactly what took place on August 12th in
Charlottesville, but perhaps no one has either the guts or requisite integrity to be honest
about it as it might be embarrassing all around. What if it turns out that the politically
more acceptable counter-demonstrators deliberately provoked the violence and were allowed
to get away with it?"
Gee you think?
Well there won't be any embarrassment because a) the Imperial media will never cover
such a story and if it leaked out anyway; b) The Empire is inherently incapable of being
embarrassed about anything.
Based on eyewitness accounts and video footage of what took place in Charlottesville,
these facts have emerged: antifa agitators came to Charlottesville impose street justice on
their 'Nazi' opponents and shut down the lawful and peaceful assembly of a conservative
minority.
This is not the first time that antifa activists have unleashed premeditated violence
upon their political adversaries.
Antifa thugs (and their political enablers) are on a dark mission: to deny the
constitutional guarantees of free speech, public assembly and free association to
racially-conscious whites. This is a totalitarian agenda.
Further, the mainstream media–using biased analysis and inflammatory
reporting–is enabling this pernicious pattern of antifa violence to spread.
Today, Americans are taught to celebrate the 'Jewish Community', the 'gay community',
the 'black community', the 'Hispanic community'.
But never the 'white community'. That is not allowed. Never–even though
Euro-Americans are the heart and soul of our extraordinary, English-speaking
civilization.
Fact: white advocacy is not 'white supremacy'.
Yet our mainstream media declares it so.
This deception does real harm. Whites are divided. Ashamed.
White children are increasingly isolated and estranged from their own roots and
community. Political self-loathing and downward mobility have become common among
whites.
White cohesion has been declared racist and uniquely evil. This may be good news for
ambitious and envious blacks, gays, Hispanics and Jews. But whites are in decline.
This worldview is partly the product of double standards. These double-standard are
underhanded.
Antifa extremism is being used by the Liberal establishment to crush if not eradicate
white memory and white continuity.
Please sign and circulate the petition to declare antifa a terrorist organization.
Another excellent essay. Mr. Giraldi, I would appreciate knowing what you think about
one particular aspect of the stagecraft.
Having watched a few (not all, especially as some have been squelched) of the videos
assembled under the parallel Cleburne article, my impression is that these so-called
Uniters of The Right may have selected the forum because they, like the Establishment
generally, desired a violent altercation.
The Friday night torchlight parade as filmed by Vice seems almost scripted, provocative
"reality TV" to stoke fear and loathing among the American manipullati. Men who look like
Haven Monohan's frat brothers chanting "Blood And Soil" (really?!), in perfect formation
behind a drum major who looks like a Viking Hell's Angel, all left undisturbed by
observers. Are these even the same people sent packing on Saturday from the park and down
the street to be abused by hundreds of counter-protestors, as seen in the Goldy video?
Gee, look at the positive side, at least if your part of the MIC or a TBTF Wall Street
Casino. The riots helped box Trump in on the Afghanistan war thing, as he now declares
we'll stay there, bombing the rubble for years to come.
That Afghan opium will keep flowing and the hundreds of billions laundered by those Wall
Street gangsters will also continue to flow.
When the hate-filled Senator Graham admires Trump's Afghan war speech, you know the
nation is in trouble.
"The media train is again rushing headlong into a terra incognita with its only goal
being to bring down President Donald Trump by riding a wave of anti-right wing extremist
revulsion".
What a load of main stream media BS!
The media is owned by the same Wall Street Zionist filth that own Trump.
This idea that Trump is an "American Firster", worked during the election, but has been
seen for the lie it truly is now.
Trump has filled his cabinet with Wall Street Zionists, continued sales of weapons to
terrorist states, has INCREASED our presence in Isreal's wars, and has continued to
antagonize Russia, while TOTALLY IGNORING MASS LATINO IMMIGRATION.
Just like with Obama, the media is playing a role as "anti-Trump", to give Trump cover
for being another Zionist puppet. When Obama was in office the ZioMedia called him the
"most liberal President", even as he took away our rights, bailed out Wall Street and sold
arms to third world despots.
Americans need to GROW UP, stop thinking the world is so black and white and see how we
are being played for fools. Zionists rule Washington, and certainly Trump. Peter Thiel and
Adleson are Trump's biggest financial supporters, are we supposed to believe THEY ARE
AMERICA FIRSTERS, please, they hate America, they are Zionists.
@Anonymous
Nobody died at Columbine. Boston Marathon 9/11 passengers, etc.
Its time Americans wake up to reclaim the nation.
Staging this kind of event is child's play for the CIA. For them, its part of the
standard regime change profile.
Mind control technology delivers activist to the place in the space to commit overt
....acts and to take in true patsy form the untraceable source of the blame for conflict of
ideas to be escalated to mayhem.
Conflict escalation [Ce} was a major tool for the Leninist plan to bring the Czar of Russia
down in February, 1917 Such Ce and it has been successfully applied in the political space
of many nations to bring down well like national leaders. Ce Chaos is the name of the game!
Chaos is one of the dispersant that can be added to separate the people of a nation from
the peace afforded to them by their political structures. Chaos unleashes abusive power the
law and order prevent. Those hidden behind the scenes have a plan..but it cannot be
implemented if the political and cultural structures of the target society remains strong
and its principles upheld . To weaken structure: opposing interest are pitted against each
other to disturb the peace and to create chaos. As the structural integrity of the target
political and cultural system begin to weaken the plan is put into action.
The nations people's support for the structure is generally strong enough to keep the
political and cultural structure in place(i.e.the people continue to adhere to the law and
order accustomed to their national society). What destroys that structure is chaos! Chaos
works because it weakens the leadership. What chaos does is to allow behind the scene
take-overs, it allows to enrage the uninformed public so, that the public itself encourages
legislatures to enact the kind of Draconian rules that self-generate chaos (i.e. limits on
free speech, curfews, and intrusions by governments of law and use of force). My fellow
Americans find themselves once again victims of a mirage staged by those who intended
chaos to be generated , the tools of the chaos generating teams were used to stir to a
frenzy, those who were sincere as to a heart-felt. I quote the article "radical groups ..
came together to demonstrate on both sides?" just as was done in 1917 Russia!
OUTCOME: chaos disperses the people caught inside of media controlled political space.. I
said to a cop a few yrs ago "Boston Marathon was a false flag" he said "Does it even
matter?"
True it doesn't matter, it is taken as real and the objective is realized anyway.
Trump didn't call out Charlottesville as a false flag, he folded to the deep state and
extended the war in Afghanistan.
"It is important to bear in mind that there is great danger in selectively endorsing
politically correct Free Speech. If either the left or right is successful and we lose our
First Amendment rights through "hate speech" legislation or other forms of state censorship
such as have been introduced in Europe it is safe to say that we will have lost our
republic."
I hate to break it to this writer but the train has already left the station, and some
time ago. The left HAS been successful beyond "endorsing politically correct Free Speech".
They now with little resistance enforce the ever expanding PC speech codes because they own
the enforcement apparatus, i.e., the MSM, the courts, the propaganda outlets that make the
shaming machinery of popular culture so efficient. They have us self-censoring. Go to any
university campus and see how far free speech takes you. At your workplace just casually
mention a politically incorrect fact, like black-on-white homicide statistics, and see
where your career goes. Technically, yes, state censorship is not yet in place, but the
left doesn't really need it that much. Plus the censorious SJWs are just one or two Supreme
Court (Democrat appointed) justices in the near future, who will mop things up by upholding
"hate speech" legislation that will criminalize speech that includes facts that hurt the
feelings of "marginalized" people -- delayed for a bit by Trump's surprise upending of
Hillary Hugo Chavez Clinton.
The left wants more than state censorship. They see the destruction of European (white)
civilization.
Philip, thanks. My local newspaper, an intelligent and literate independent, came out
against neo-Nazis today. I suspect the editor was pressured into it, because the phenomenon
of neo-Nazism as a meaningful political movement doesn't exist in my area. Neo-Nazism
doesn't exist as a meaningful political phenomenon in the United States.
Chrissake–I'm venting here–does anyone else here see an obvious parallel
between the actual historical Nazis opportunistically grasping for power after the
Reichstag fire, and the Left grasping at opportunities to efface the memory of prominent
Southerners using the trivial Charlottesville fracas as a pretext? What's that old saw: he
who accuses, excuses. The real Nazis seem to me the other guys–the Left.
@Alfa158 Yeah,
maybe some. But, almost all of this was done by corrupt, lying folks in Virginia state and
local. The Virginia governor and the (J tribe) Charlottesville VA mayor openly worked to
deny the UnitetheRight their legal right to demonstrate in Lee Park/Emancipation Park and
the local police and state national guard force the UnitetheRight Demonstrates to exit the
park to be attacked by massed mobs of Antifa/BlackLivesMatter mobs. This was deliberate. So
it wasn't all some Federal conspiracy in the Trump administration.
These college towns like Charlottesville VA or Durham (Duke) N.C. have been taken over
politically and in the faculty by hard core Leftists, anti Whites – the wealthy
alumni of these once solid Conservative Southern colleges generally doesn't care as long as
the basketball teams do well and the College rankings stay high (rankings done by Harvard
and Yale type academics).
I know the score as I went to the former Southern Conservatives University of Vanderbilt
University in Nashville TN. Vanderbilt now has a J tribe Chancellor Nicholas Zeppos who was
a former Leftist Law professor at the University of Wisconsin Madison – the same
college town that now has an openly Castro Communist mayor who just ripped out Confederate
grave stones outside of Madison.
Has anyone noticed that the so-called "white supremacists" were holding brand new,
recently unfolded flags and were wearing brand new, recently unfolded k kk regalia?
It is no secret that a jewish-owned company "Crowds On Demand" was advertising for
(left-wing) protesters for Charlottesville on craigslist.
Sorta tells you something
The "Unite the Right" promoter Kessler was an 0′bama operative
The whole thing was orchestrated in order to further demonize whites
Yes, this is confusing. One day Vladimir is coming to get us he is hiding under our beds
and infecting our computer systems. Disregard. The next day it is the Alt-Right hiding
under our beds and infecting our water supply.
It appears that the MSM and Progressive movement, no matter how well organized, are a
"one-trick pony". They can only posture one hysterical The End is Nigh meme at a
time for public consumption. This in itself should raise suspicions that these are all
pre-staged political carnivals theaters of the absurd. The question, Who is organizing and
paying for these carnivals and to what end?
To Phillip Giraldi,
You had me laughing with some of your writings. For instance, "When Hillary Clinton
discovered she had lost the election to Vladimir Putin." HA!
Also, Your style of asking questions and then giving only some of the possible answers made
me do some thinking I wouldn't have done otherwise. I hope You continue with this great
style in the future.
@Sam Shama I
don't think the Antifa protesters were "allowed" in the square.
They had no permit.
They weren't "allowed" to be anywhere around there and should have been made to disperse
and go somewhere else, with force if necessary (I mean to be made to go somewhere else to
hold their protest).
The police do this all the time.
"Cage" protesters to avoid problems they foresee.
So, WFT, C'ville Police???
McAuliffe definitely had a hand in this "standing down."
"... Knowing that the Antifa thugs were there with cans filled with cement, baseball bats and even improvised flame throwers why would the police stand down? ..."
"... One answer is because the Democrats wanted a riot to lay at President Trump's feet ..."
"... Angry White Dude ..."
"... The Establishment Strikes Back ..."
"... why was this not done in Virginia? ..."
"... The billionaires of America control our media so control the masses. So called "leftists" should be conducting antiwar marches, or marches for higher wages and single payer healthcare. However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers fighting amongst each other. It was good to see Charles Barkley speak out and say black people never noticed confederate statues and don't care about them. ..."
"... This game begins when billionaires have someone propose removing confederate statues, then encourage groups of whites to protest, pay for a permit, and publicize the event. They have their paid agitators show up to hand out confederate and Nazi flags, give the Hitler salute, and start fights. They also organize leftist groups to have counter-demonstrations and send their black clad agitators to incite violence. Finally, they direct their media to provide massive coverage so that workers are distracted while they continue to loot the world. ..."
"... The System has won. The establishment got the anti-estblishmnet extreme right and the anti-establishment extreme left fight each other. It can't be any better. ..."
"... Antifa is a replay of the 1960s riots and Revolution . But there's a big difference: in the 60s the FBI and police fought the revolutionaries. Now they side with the revolutionaries ..."
"... I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism. ..."
"... The USA is now in the grip of oligarch-fostered mass hysteria, giving a large segment of the population – its AntiFa, 'left-libs', poor minorities etc – a thrill of momentary power over other human beings, to substitute for what they are being denied in their lives ..."
"... It is just like Mao's 1966 'Cultural Revolution', or poor Muslims led today to bray for the hanging of 'blasphemers' The oligarchs play on how common people will take the 'path of least resistance' to what makes them feel more powerful against vulnerable targets easy to hand, whom the plebs can feel 'safe' in attacking in the USA & the West generally, that is now of course the oligarch-run 'cultural Marxism' agenda against alleged 'bigots, racists' etc superbly distracting from how common people are being violated in a crony-corrupt economy ..."
"... Again, I see the statue controversy as manufactured distraction. ..."
"... But how many Americans who still rely on MSM are aware that the car reportedly driven by Fields struck another, which in turn struck a third, which then struck people in the street? If Heyer was hit by that third car – assuming this video is legitimate – then much of what is being reported via Establishment outlets is inarguably false. ..."
Knowing that the Antifa thugs were there with cans filled with cement, baseball bats
and even improvised flame throwers why would the police stand down?
One answer is because the Democrats wanted a riot to lay at President Trump's
feet
I would add that the Treason Lobby
wanted a pretext to launch the next stage of their internet purge against the Right, which
clearly was long planned.
Angry White Dude 's astute writer RedStaterNYC states plainly in
The
Establishment Strikes Back August 16 2017 what I think is no more than the truth
the Charlottesville chaos was obviously a setup designed specifically to corner the white
men into violent confrontation with the Establishment's hired goons, "Antifa". Then, they
would use that violence as a pretext to both suppress the rights to peaceable assembly by the
white men, and then plaster the mayhem all over the airwaves to smear them as a group of
unhinged, violent, "domestic terrorists".
The Establishment's muscle, the VA police, did their job, and then their propaganda
arm–the MSM–went right to work hysterically demanding Trump demonize the white
men
He points to the aftermath:
Since suppressing white men's right to peaceable assembly, they have now gone to fully
suppressing their rights to speech and association.
All of the prominent alt-right sites have been taken offline. We are now on day three or
four without most of them. They're just gone. And this is despite having DDOS-protection
services in place and very smart guys on the SA side of things.
Clearly, we aren't dealing with Antifa script-kiddies, but state actors who are behind
this effort to snuff this insurgent pro-white group of young men out of existence before TPTB
lose any more power to them
Expect this to go federal in short order
They are clearly scared, they clearly aren't taking any chances any more and they clearly
aren't going to be stopped by appeals to conscience.
This concurs remarkably closely with our "Charlottesville Survivor"s conclusion:
The American government, at every level, is waging a campaign of extermination against its
own people. If you protest against it, law enforcement tries to get you killed. And if you
survive that, journalists try to get you fired.
Thanks to
the self-control of the Unite The Right people, Charlottesville might well have passed off
without giving the Pogrom leaders the big incident they needed
... ... ...
Two long videos
here and here
give vivid impressions of lethal menace of the Antifa mob in Charlottesville. A week later the
Boston authorities easily
minimized violence by keeping the Antifa and their prey strictly apart. This highlights the
key question: why was this not done in Virginia?
It was because the Left's response to to the MAGA is MAAG (Make America A Gulag). And they
needed a pretext.
(No doubt I have missed useful material. Please send it in.)
The billionaires of America control our media so control the masses. So called "leftists"
should be conducting antiwar marches, or marches for higher wages and single payer
healthcare. However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep
workers fighting amongst each other. It was good to see Charles Barkley speak out and say
black people never noticed confederate statues and don't care about them.
This game begins when billionaires have someone propose removing confederate statues, then
encourage groups of whites to protest, pay for a permit, and publicize the event. They have
their paid agitators show up to hand out confederate and Nazi flags, give the Hitler salute,
and start fights. They also organize leftist groups to have counter-demonstrations and send
their black clad agitators to incite violence. Finally, they direct their media to provide
massive coverage so that workers are distracted while they continue to loot the world.
Readers may be confused why "single payer" is an important issue. Our bizarre healthcare
systems cost twice as much as other modern nations and produces below average results. The
great Jimmy Dore clarifies in this video clip.
The System has won. The establishment got the anti-estblishmnet extreme right and the anti-establishment
extreme left fight each other. It can't be any better.
It is the simplest thing to set up known by police forces around the world since the 19
century.
You want to play politics you need to learn and do your homework. Start with the class
"Agent provocateurs 101."
The entire Charlottesville event was a staged event, a classic strategy of provocation
operation which is going to be used as psywar pushing for national imposition of martial law
and the deep state coup against Trump and the remnants of the Republic.
Read on.
The facts about Charlottesville that the Zionist dominated MSM do not allow:
and:Proof of staging, see video:
different cars, different driver than alleged driver Fields, photo shopped 'flying people'
& crash backgrounds, lot's more.
It's not difficult, just open your eyes.
Seen from the other side of the Atlantic the conflict seems to be over identity, who is
the real American ?
American here, in the sense hated by those in S America, of USA citizen.
When I visited the USA, and met USA citizens, the real Americans obviously were those whose
ancestors arrived on the Mayflower, and/or signed the Declaration of Independence.
Of course the ancestors of the real Americans fought on the right, that is, winning, side of
the Civil War.
These real Americans thus are of NW European, preferably British descent, they are not
Irish or catholic, and they are white.
Immigration numerically changed the USA, catholics hardly arrive any more from Europe, but
they do arrive from the South and Middle America's, speaking spanish.
Muslim immigrant also get a stronger position in USA society, their advantage is that they do
speak english.
Maybe it is this advantage that made Chaim Saban do anything to prevent that a USA Muslim
Senator became chairman of the USA democratic party, Saban also did not want Bernie Sanders,
Sanders seems to be not enough pro Israel.
So what we see now is Cold Civil War, between the voters of Trump and Deep State, and
between the 'real Americans' and those who 'just' have the USA nationality, but are not seen
by the Mayflower/ Declaration Americans as real Americans.
What confuses these two cold civil wars further are religious issues, about homosexuality,
abortion, euthanasia.
The present Dutch political problem of families with three or more parents does not even seem
to have reached the other side of the Atlantic.
I'm thinking of going to the Crissy field San Francisco demo next Saturday. It's on
federal land, the Presidio. The city of San Francisco is trying to get the Feds to revoke the
permit.
"Natural conservative" high IQ Mayor Ed Lee and the rest of the Chinese politicians are
really pushing to get the permit revoked.
So much for the natural alliance of hardworking high IQ Whites and Asians hoped for by the
conservatives who run websites imagining a future in which Whites and Asians unite against
anti White liberals.
The pro White group doing the protest is
"Patriot Prayer". I don't know much about them. But patriot? I hate America as much as George
Foxman and George Soros do. Prayer? I don't believe in God and the Christian churches are as
anti White as the government.
If it's permitted the national park rangers will be in charge of security. Generally,
neither city nor state police come on federal land.
Antifa is a replay of the 1960s riots and Revolution . But there's a big difference: in
the 60s the FBI and police fought the revolutionaries. Now they side with the
revolutionaries
"(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in a few
days.)"
At least three apparently already have been. I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all
in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service
by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism.
This reminds me of the Travon Martin situation. All the main stream media came out big
time against Zimmerman. The incident with the Dodge Challenger is the same, just to pat. I
look for an unraveling to take place when it comes to the trial.
The USA is now in the grip of oligarch-fostered mass hysteria, giving a large segment of
the population – its AntiFa, 'left-libs', poor minorities etc – a thrill of
momentary power over other human beings, to substitute for what they are being denied in
their lives
It is just like Mao's 1966 'Cultural Revolution', or poor Muslims led today to bray for
the hanging of 'blasphemers' The oligarchs play on how common people will take the 'path of
least resistance' to what makes them feel more powerful against vulnerable targets easy to
hand, whom the plebs can feel 'safe' in attacking in the USA & the West generally, that
is now of course the oligarch-run 'cultural Marxism' agenda against alleged 'bigots, racists'
etc superbly distracting from how common people are being violated in a crony-corrupt
economy
Long ago, Albert Jay Nock (1870-1945), suggested that 3 things explain much of human
social behaviour:
The law of dimishing returns
That the inferior will tend to drive out & overwhelm that of higher quality
The path of least resistance
Oligarch media has put this whole AntiFa etc purge insanity on a platter, & offered it
to any miscreant who would like to power-trip over some now-vulnerable victims, formerly
'powerful' but now able to be cut down. But like any mania, this will in time burn itself out as its absurdity becomes more
obvious, probably more on the time-scale of the Cultural Marxism Maoist excesses, which Mao
himself declared 'over' in 1969 after just 3 years
What may be a more permanent legacy, tho, is the USA mass censorship that has begun,
parallel to the Chinese & to some degree also Russian internet web forum de-platforming
Big Powers Agree, control those interwebz!
I have another comment awaiting moderation, but have now watched the last (Faith Goldy)
video which appears to have captured in real time the automobile horror.
Again, I see the statue controversy as manufactured distraction.
But how many Americans
who still rely on MSM are aware that the car reportedly driven by Fields struck another,
which in turn struck a third, which then struck people in the street? If Heyer was hit by
that third car – assuming this video is legitimate – then much of what is being
reported via Establishment outlets is inarguably false.
Richard Spencer has to start throwing the "Nazi" charge back at the Antifa, the Clintons
and Obama. Point out that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton gave the direct order to organize
and fund a Neo-Nazi Coup in the Ukraine that caused the death of 15-20 Conservative Russian
Christians in the Eastern Ukraine .
Then Point out the fact that Hillary Clinton created Al QUEDA and ISIS ..
Then point out that the Antifa voted for the WAR CRIMINAL NeoNazi enablers Barack Obama
and Hillary Clinton
Spencer must be unrelenting and obsessive on these points .every day every minute denounce
Obama and the Clintons as indictable WAR CRIMINALS!!
Conspiracy theory: the Deep State is behind this and they are preparing for a coup.
Think about it.
1. In 1930s Germany, the old order collapses. The Nazi party is on the verge of splitting
apart then one faction purges the other, leaving only one left.
2. The other day, Secretary of Defense Mattis was in Silicon Valley – traveling to
Google. His excuse was something like "not wanting soldiers to be disadvantaged by
technologies on the battlefield." Does anyone buy that? Does that even make sense?
3. Youtube "adpocalypse" happens. Google uses this as an excuse to curb dissenting
political opinions. They announce that they will be shadow-banning content they disapprove of
even if it does not violate their terms of service. Many videos, and entire channels, are
mysteriously demonitized without explanation. Notoriously left-wing anti-free speech
organizations including the SPLC and the ADL, along with several foreign government NGO
fronts, are providing the information to Youtube on what channels/videos to ban.
Other Social Media follow suite: Facebook, Twitter, etc.
4. Then a potential false flag happens (Charlottesville = Reichstag fire).
Which UTR groups came "combat ready" and which did not? It would be instructive to know
why some did and some did not. Were some groups better informed?
Richard Spencer point out that the black racist organization BLM .it's leadership .made
many trips to the Obama Whitehouse where they plotted with Valerie Jarrett to racially harras
White Americans across the US .Point out the role of BLM in the post-Ferguson race riots and
the murder of White Police Officers across the US .Also point out that the SPLC was-is openly
endorsing the black racial identity politics of BLM and their enabler Valerie Jarette
However, the billionaires manipulate them to march against non-issues to keep workers
fighting amongst each other.
The verity of that concept is so glaringly obvious that it's a pity it has to be stated so
clearly.
If one really looks at the causes of WW2, that concept applies as well. Note that it was a
mass slaughtering of Christians vs Christians to a great degree. Since they haven't been able
to stir up enough hate against Muslims, I guess they'll just make up any excuse to stir the
pot. It's all against all and through it all the banksters keep rubbing their greasy grubby
hands and raking in the moolah.
Linh Dinh, in another excellent article stated it thus
Slitting each other's throat, we can't even see that our common enemy is the
American Israel Empire, or what the Saker calls the AngloZionists. (Emphasis mine.)
- Linh Dinh, Siurana, Charlottesville and Barcelona
I'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean? Who is part
of it? Who isn't? Who decides whether someone is "in" or "out"? Clearly, the word "nation" is
not being used in the European sense.
The primary question is, what are the psychopaths that are losing control of us, trying to
hide with these created distractions? It must be so horrific as to boggle the mind, as these
distractions have become ever more violent, insane, and inhuman
Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed
fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best.
The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern.
I'll admit it. I'm racist. I hate the entire human race.
Today, I'd like to point a hateful middle finger at the demagogue Israel as it actively
engineers zionist-nazism within and zionist-communism beyond, its borders.
Their deceptive false flags abound, including 9/11 and Charlottesville Virginia.
Couldn't help but think of the self-serving Israel and their "friendship" with the U.S.,
while watching this particular video.
The Alt Right position on the economy:Our goal is for the Historic Native Born White
American Working Class to control-the means of production Google Microsoft the internet
belongs to OUR PEOPLE!!!
@Michael Kenny Whose out? Greater China's GENELINE in California Greater India's GENELINE
in California .Greater Korea's GENELINE in California .anyone serving in the IDF Muslim
Michigan .and this is just for starters
The nonwhite majority Democratic Party Voting Bloc in California is biological warfare
against The Historic Native Born White American Working Class
Socialist Labor Leaders Denis Kearney and Samuel Gompers had the right idea in 1888 .
I'm intrigued by the expression "historic American nation". What does it mean?
"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what
I choose it to mean -- "
Alice in Wonderland
[During the war]words had to change their ordinary meaning and to take that which was
now given them.
Reckless audacity came to be considered the courage of a loyal ally; prudent hesitation,
specious cowardice; moderation was held to be a cloak for unmanliness; ability to see all
sides of a question, inaptness to act on any.
- Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, Chap X, ~400 BC
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"
! Samuel Adams, Letter to John Pitts, January 21, 1776
@Judge Dredd Hilarious.
You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily debunked
lies, Jew supremacist hatred of white gentiles, and their redneck Zionist control.
Science, rational thought, & logic simply demolish the 'holocaust' storyline.
And that's why there are Thought Crime Laws that imprison those who engage in free speech
about it.
Truth is hate to those that hate the truth.
[MORE]
There were the 'Nazis' with the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' and
there were the 'Nazis' without the mythological '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers'.
The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
And who is it that demands massive immigration into Europe and the US, but demands that
non-Jew immigration be prevented into "that shitty little country"?
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."
@jacques sheete h/t to you for spotlighting Linh Dinh's concise statement of who the
adversary is.
The "Jews will not replace us" chants were jarring -- they made me cringe and made my
well-mannered Sunday-go-to-church self feel embarrassed.
But a revolution is not a tea party.
And the reality of Charlottesville is that Jews -- more appropriately, the Anglozionists -- are replacing Charlottesville's old-line, Jefferson-loving culture and elites.
Charlottesville and the DC-to-Charlottesville corridor has experienced a major increase in
federal government institutions, including outfits that monitor geospatial satellites. This
in turn draws private sector entrepreneurs in highly specialized highly-educated data and
intelligence gathering fields to the area: these are fields Israelis/Jews have traditionally
been very interested in.
If Blacks, in Charlottesville or anywhere else think that changeover will make Black lives
better, they should check their reality meters.
RobinG chides me for saying so, but imo it is also appropriate to have "Nazis" represented
in the UTR coalition. I say this because, as many of us here know, any alternative narrative
of the wars in Europe that does not comply with the Jewish narrative is censored. Therefore,
the full story has never been told; our children are taught lies, about themselves first and
foremost. The full and honest history of the era of the world wars -- the Anglozionist wars -- needs to be told.
In addition, those who study the means by which the three groups that Lindbergh cited -- the British, FDR, and Jews -- ginned up hatred of Germany/Hitler/Nazis, beginning from the
very earliest days of the 'Hitler counter-revolution,' recognize that almost exactly the same
pattern is being played out today.
The fact that the same behaviors that eventuated in war in Europe and in an alleged
holocaust of Jews is being repeated today, almost step-for-step, apparently with the same
goals -- to gin up war to perpetuate Anglozionist dominance, implies either that
a. the first holocaust did not occur as claimed; or
b. Anglozionists are so bent on killing masses of goyim that they are willing to -- or
eager to cull their own ranks as well, and are setting up the conditions for another
holocaust; or
c. that Anglozionists are so stupid that they think the same behaviors will produce a
different outcome.
Left IS the estabilishment, open your goddamn eyes.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
In the '30s, after the establishment quit bashing Commies, it became all the rage, indeed
fashionable, to support them and the establishment backed the Reds to the hilt.
Once their usefulness expired, it was back to bashing "Commies" again.
These things shift and the establishment backs what it thinks will do its bidding best.
The reason(s) they keep flip-flopping is(are) usually not too hard to discern. David Horowitz
and Ron and Allis Radosh are the poster children for this sort of opportunistic,
playing-both-sides switcheroo.
@anonymous "(Look at them quickly: the way things are going they will all be shut down in
a few days.)"
At least three apparently already have been.
I view the statue stuff as the summer replacement for transgender bathroom hysteria, all
in the service of division and distraction. However, Ron Unz is doing people a great service
by courageously publishing this proof of the corruption and suppression of journalism. I
agree confederate statutes are the next artificial cause after transgender bathrooms. I
wonder what the next cause will be? Probably something cooked up at Soros central. I predict
the 2018 elections will be a sweep for the Republicans. The radical democrat candidates will
repel everyone but lunatic radicals. The non White and moderate democrats will stay home. The
normal sane people will elect republicans. And the republicans will as always betray the
Whites who vote for them.
"You largely rely on two sources for your "facts". Both notorious for their easily
debunked lies"
Those "sources" are themselves sourced by dozens of other sources. Wikipedia has also been
found by recent studies to be about as accurate as most professional sources of information.
In any case, it's the point that matters, not the details. Ironically, you didn't bother to
counter anything he said. All you did was attack the messenger.
@Reveal I'm not a southerner but I used to read occidental dissent a lot. They often had
confederate flag demonstrations. The demos were all peaceful, just a few Whites with the
confederate battle flag, no police, no counter demonstaters, just a peaceful little
demonstration of the confederate heritage . They also had larger demonstrations against the
chicken and meat packing plants that hire nothing but illegal Hispanics. Good for them.
@WHAT Why are you so shortsighted? I am afraid that when the time comes you might be the
first to be manipulated and used as a useful idiot just as the left is being used right know.
Let's suppose you and your buddies on the right will learn that we are going to attack, say
Venezuela, because, say they sunk our ship. How many from the right, i.e. your buddies will
show with flags and start flag waving and how many on the right will be protesting the war?
Are you sure you and your buddies will be on the right side? The identity politics was
exactly invented to keep the left going after issues that in larger scheme of things are
irrelevant to the establishment. This is to sow the discord only. It is a perfect distractor
from all kinds of stuff that is wrong in this pathetic country of pathetic people. Do not be
like the stupid carp in the park pond that always takes a bait and goes through infinite
number of catch and release cycles.
@Wally Seriously, could you explain this "redneck Zionist" thing you keep banging on
about? Zionists, i.e., Jews, are notoriously urban in their habits and culture. Thus,
"redneck" would seem to be oxymoronic.
@jilles dykstra Jilles
You know nothing about America. The American Civil War was fought on both sides by people of
the same British and NW European background. Further, there was no "right" side, you fool.
Slavery had existed all over the USA and New Englanders brought the slaves here, not
Southerners. Slavery was just one cause of the war.
As for South Americans resenting the term "American", tough. We are not called USA citizens.
We are Americans. We won that name on the battlefield 40 years before the Latin Americans
ceased being Spanish subjects.
My advice to you is to study our history before you open your mouth.
Whatever "proof" this author may provide, one truth remains crystal clear, for those who
can see all apologists for the klanscum, and other assorted naziscum, are simply
soulless zombies. You know, sort of.
On a somewhat related note, I hear most of them zombies, are fervent pagan polytheist
human worshippers and that too a presumed white human. After all, "heaven forbid" worshipping
a "coloured" man, yeah?
A batshit deluded faith well suited for the likes of them.
@SolontoCroesus " RobinG chides me for saying so , but imo it is also appropriate
to have "Nazis" represented in the UTR coalition."
Umm, no.
First, 'chide' is not accurate. I razzed you for suggesting that I should accost my
neighbor in the same (aggressive, accusatory) manner that you routinely confront Sam
Shama.
Second, I've said nothing about 'appropriateness' of Nazi representation. My only stated
position is agreement with ACLU. (And, less directly, that the whole debacle was manipulated,
color revolution style. N.B., I said manipulated, not fake.)
Third, this misattribution of words and thoughts to me, does nothing for your status as an
analyst. Sorry.
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
A statue for Frederick Douglass, a former slave who became a prominent civil rights advocate, has been torn down from its pedestal in Rochester, New York. The damage to the monument is reportedly too significant to repair.
'No exceptions!' Trump orders the arrest of anyone vandalizing monuments, warns they face up to 10 years in prison
CHAZ protesters reinforce barricades & form human chains as Seattle mayor vows to dismantle anarchic encampment (PHOTOS, VIDEO)
