Tag Archives: cultural marxism

Spinning Roanoke

Some of our moral and intellectual superiors are trying to convince us the underlying cause of the execution of two Roanoke journalists is an abstract thing called “gun violence.” Others argue it’s bigger than that – it’s actually an unfortunate example of “workplace violence”:

UC Haas School of Business professor Jo-Ellen Pozner says one possible key to addressing workplace violence is to find ways to address employees’ mental health and wellness.

“It seems clear that there was an emotional, mental health issue going on here and that’s I think the key to figuring out how to deal with these things in the workplace,” Pozner said, “I think there’s a public policy question there that we need to address in a larger level, that’s less about workplace violence and more about the violence in our society today.”

This isn’t just nonsense, but dangerous nonsense. Vester Flanagan hated Whites, and was convinced Whites conspired to hold him back and demean him out of racial hate. He was so obsessed with his delusions of racial persecution that anything could set him off, as one ex-coworker commented:

‘We would say stuff like, “The reporter’s out in the field.” And he would look at us and say, “What are you saying, cotton fields? That’s racist”.’

‘We’d be like, “What?’ We all know what that means, but he took it as cotton fields, and therefore we’re all racists.’

Fair added: ‘This guy was a nightmare. ‘Management’s worst nightmare.’

I’ll bet there are thousands more just like him. People like Flanagan constantly hear warnings that Whites are holding them back and oppressing them. That’s the drumbeat you hear from the Social Justice Warriors, antifa thugs, newspaper editors, and race hustlers. According to these prophets of doom, even Whites who appear helpful and supportive are still responsible for something called “institutional racism” that silently and secretly prevents Blacks from getting ahead. White success, on the other hand, is assured by another malevolent and unseen force called “White privilege.” So Vester Flanagan only struck back at those who exerted their mysterious and detrimental power over him.

The gatekeepers of approved thought who bloviated that the Charleston murders were caused by a memorial to Southern war dead are now scrambling to assure us it wasn’t anything THEY said that fueled Vester Flanagan’s hatred of Whites.

Media Bias? What Media Bias?

Socialist Bernie Sanders drew a crowd of 28,000 in Portland last week, while Donald Trump’s rally in Alabama last Friday brought in 30,000 cheering supporters. But check out the headlines from the lapdog media:

New York Times: Donald Trump Fails to Fill Alabama Stadium

MSNBC: Bernie Sanders shatters 2016 turnout record with 28,000 crowd

No bias in those headlines. Remember, journalists are professionals, so we can believe whatever they say.

Why the Confederacy Lives

The very existence of opposition gnaws at radical leftists. They particularly despise Southerners because the South’s resilient culture is a major impediment to their agenda. Culture is an organic and tireless organizing force, and therefore a threat to far-left schemes that would dismantle society and put the left in charge. Just look at how traditional culture overthrew the Soviet bloc in the 1990s, and how it’s challenging overgrown governments around the world today.

So it’s no surprise to see yet another slam against the South by the tag team of Euan Hague, Heidi Beirich, and Ed Sebesta. Their latest hit piece, entitled “Why the Confederacy Lives,” neatly and blindly dismisses Southern heritage, the rise of self-government, and growing distrust of social reengineering as — drum roll, please — racist.

What, again?

Yes, again. It’s an entirely predictable article. As Hague and company see it, there is no reason for distrusting big government other than blind, irrational racial hatred. Here’s just one example they cite:

In more public venues, the SCV’s dog-whistle politics come into play. Casting an eye over recent events in Ferguson and elsewhere, although never explicitly stating this, SCV deputy commander-in-chief Thomas V. Strain Jr. recently decried the “young men with no guidance attacking law-abiding citizens and law enforcement officers,” officers who, when they “remedy the situation and protect the innocent … are called murderers.”

Of course, it’s not just “neo-Confederates,” as Hague & Co. call their various targets, who now realize that government welfare and other programs have undermined traditional family formation and unleashed a mostly black underclass of rootless, anti-social young people. Just last month, Nicholas Kristof, hardly a pro-Southern pundit, said this of failed federal programs that have done more harm than good:

Fifty years ago this month, Democrats made a historic mistake.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan, at the time a federal official, wrote a famous report in March 1965 on family breakdown among African-Americans. He argued presciently and powerfully that the rise of single-parent households would make poverty more intractable.

“The fundamental problem,” Moynihan wrote, is family breakdown. In a follow-up, he explained: “From the wild Irish slums of the 19th-century Eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history: a community that allows large numbers of young men to grow up in broken families … never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos.”

Liberals brutally denounced Moynihan as a racist.

Kristof concluded that tossing the word “racist” at every study of black dysfunction is counter-productive:

Growing up with just one biological parent reduces the chance that a child will graduate from high school by 40 percent, according to an essay by Sara McLanahan of Princeton and Christopher Jencks of Harvard. They point to the likely mechanism: “A father’s absence increases antisocial behavior, such as aggression, rule-breaking, delinquency and illegal drug use.” These effects are greater on boys than on girls.

Read the Hague hit piece and you’ll see no mention of how the resurgence of smaller, more responsive political units are in direct response to the horrendous history of big governments. Post-Lincoln America has a bloody record of launching wars of aggression, and will continue its policy of perpetual war as long as it exists. The central government in DC is the greatest threat to our safety and liberty. That’s not hype — that’s fact. Yet, Hague sees what he calls “Confederate ideology” as the real problem.

If you’re looking for dangerous ideologies, look no further than Mr. Hague himself. He’s a Marxist, an adherent of the most anti-human, murderous ideology the world has ever seen. Hague’s Marxist allegiance is documented here and at the World Socialist Web Site.

This isn’t the first time the SPLC has played footsie with Marxists. And seeing as how communism has re-branded itself as “anti-racism,” it probably won’t be the last.

Thanks to Gail for the heads-up!

In Response to Savrola: Why Challenging PC Orthodoxy is Essential

Our old critic Savrola is back. His reply, which I reproduce in part below, was directed at waltercht, but I’ll give my answer.

More whining from you, I see.

What is your program to deal with the blacks? Oh, no program you say? Just more whining? You’re going to whine about blacks until you’re laid to rest aren’t you?,,,

…What laws do you want to pass or remove based on that fact, you senile cretin?

The question “What is your program to deal with the blacks?” answers itself. There can never be and will never be a “program” specifically to “deal with blacks,” because such a thing would be politically untenable, and if it is anything other than neutral policies likely immoral. (Neutral not with regard to impact, but by design. That they will not be neutral in impact is presumed.)

But before you can have a race neutral plan to deal with problems disproportionately caused by blacks, you have to change the conversation. Changing the conversation is step one, because no political action will follow until it is no longer considered a thought crime to address the situation without conforming entirely to the current group think.

First, and this is the most non-race neutral part, we need to be honest about the National Question. We need to be honest that America is specifically a former British colonial country and not a universal proposition nation. Therefore, efforts to subvert our specific status through mass immigration should cease. Legal immigration should be halted except for very rare cases like spouses that Americans married abroad. Current visa should be allowed to expire and people expected to return to their country of origin when they do. Illegal immigration should be dealt with. We should get rid of birthright citizenship which was not the intent of the 14th Amendment anyway.

Regarding blacks specifically, this is where I think some White Nationalist go astray. The vast majority of blacks who are here in the US today are here because we brought their ancestors here against their will. There are some recent immigrant Africans and Haitians, for example, but they are the vast minority, and Nigerian immigrants, for example, tend to do pretty well for themselves. Haitians not as much. So if we have a black problem in this country it is because we created it. With that admission on our part, it would be nice to hear American blacks in return admit that they are glad they are here and would much rather be here than in Africa where they would be had their ancestors not been brought here.

So because of our history, blacks are a part of the citizenry and there can and will be no legal “program” to deal with “blacks.” What there should be is a program to make the government race neutral and allow complete freedom of association at the private level. We also need to get rid of the welfare state which incentivizes poor lifestyle choices and get rid of the excesses of democracy which authorizes the welfare state.

At the government level, there should be no raced based spoils system. No affirmative action. No racial set asides. No lower test scores allowed for minorities to get into public colleges or pass the Sgt’s exam for example. Etc. Everyone should be allowed to sink or swim on their own merit. High performing blacks have firmly ensconced themselves in the American middle class, but a lot of that is based on civil service employment and other governmental employment.

On the public side, laws against discrimination should be abolished. Discriminating in favor of someone or against someone is a common occurrence in everyday life, is a manifestation of human nature, and is often a very reasonable thing to do and not malicious. Is the fact that most of the workers at a Mexican restaurant are Mexican, even when they are not family of the owner, a coincidence? Laws against discrimination target not discrimination in general, which is ubiquitous and neither possible nor desirable to stamp out, but politically targeted discrimination. This leads to a presumption of guilt, so to speak, when someone from the majority group interacts with someone from a designated minority group. For example, the expectation that x % of your workforce should be black if blacks make up x% of the local population. Opponents of Civil Rights laws said this would happen when they were passes, and supporters of Civil Rights laws assured them it wouldn’t. They lied.

Welfare programs that make it possible for people to not work for long periods of time, such as food stamps and disability, should be phased out. Not working should not be an option. Until they are phased out, they should be work based. All but the most physically and mentally disabled should have to show up and do some sort of work to get a welfare benefit.

I don’t believe in public education, but if we have public schools kids should be tested at a certain age to determine their mental capabilities and placed in tracks accordingly, instead of all kids placed in a one-size-fits-all college prep track. This is done extensively in European and Asian countries already. Kids should be able to move up or own tracks depending on performance. There should be a college prep diploma and various tech diplomas that prepare grads for actual careers.

The fact is that blacks did much better on measures like out-of-wedlock births and employment, before civil rights laws. This is partially a reflection of the greater public morality at the time that stigmatized out of wedlock birth and emphasized a strong work ethic. We need to reinvigorate this public morality instead of tear it down. And it is partially a result of governmental policies that have diminished the consequences of poor lifestyle choices.

Apart from political action, whites need to build their own communities, hopefully church based, so they can better weather the storm assuming the above measures don’t happen and our society continues on its current course.

So, how is any of this going to happen if we don’t change the cultural atmosphere and make it OK to speak honestly about racial issues. Changing the conversation comes first, except for my last paragraph above which can proceed on its own. Even though I took a shot at White Nationalists and called for explicitly race neutral policies, my proposals would elicit howls of indignation from the keepers of PC Orthodoxy.

Personally, I think being forced to publicly discuss racial differences is rude. Talking about who is superior at this and who is inferior at that is unseemly, in the same way that the old rich used to be taught not to flaunt their wealth or point out someone else’s lack of it. Differences in ability or wealth just were. But the conversation is being forced because the PC side insists upon an ideologically based equality that is contrary to reality. The conversation will become more civil when the PC side stops insisting that what is not true is true.

Is there one man with a spine in Raleigh?

Apparently not. In response to a federal judge’s diktat imposing same-sex “marriage,” thereby overturning the will of the people of the state, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory, speaking at the Charlotte Motor Speedway on Saturday, issued this Official Grovel:

“It’s my job to enforce the constitution of North Carolina, and the constitution of the United States for that matter. My administration will be ready to execute the law, as the courts have told us to do. Some rulings go your way, some don’t, and that is the beautiful thing about our democracy.”

Yes, Pat, it’s a beautiful thing indeed. The above picture should remind folks what they’re pledging loyalty to when they parrot the Pledge of Allegiance.