Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘racist’

Now the Savages Are Trying To Take Down One of Our Own – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on June 23, 2020


From the Tom Woods Letter:

How about this:

By far the most prolific living libertarian is Walter Block, who has written countless books and close to 600 scholarly articles — an accomplishment I am uncertain if any academic in any discipline could match today, or ever.

Walter has also co-authored over 100 scholarly articles with students. That’s unheard of. What an extraordinary advantage that gives Walter’s students over their peers — how many students of other professors can say they published an article in an academic journal while they were undergraduates?

Loyola University, New Orleans, where Walter teaches, must be beaming with pride, right?

Well, a group of students are currently circulating a petition to get Walter fired on the grounds that — you’ll never guess — he is a “racist” and a “sexist.”

(In response, a counter-petition has been started, demanding that Walter be given a raise.)

This is because, like Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell, Walter Block does not believe that “discrimination” is the universal, no-analysis-necessary explanation for the various disparities between blacks and whites, or men and women. And of course he is quite correct to take that position, since the “discrimination” view is ridiculous on its face to anyone familiar with the data. (Sowell’s overlooked book Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality? dismantles the “discrimination” school.)

They are also unhappy about what they mistakenly believe Walter told the New York Times about slavery. They think he said slavery “wasn’t so bad.” What he actually said was: the problem with slavery was its coercive nature; it doesn’t matter what the slaves’ caloric intake or per-capita living space was if they were coerced into being there.

Simple enough for a normal person to grasp, which means the New York Times pretended to misunderstand Walter, or at least make his views seem suspect and opaque.

So ridiculous was the Times‘ portrayal, in fact, that Walter sued them for libel. The Times settled out of court, so although we can’t know the terms of the settlement, it’s rather curious that columns by Walter — of all people — suddenly began appearing in its pages.

I’m taking that as being as close to an admission of guilt as most people are likely to get from the Times.

Let’s add to all this that Walter has repeatedly made clear that he believes that the descendants of slaves do have a right to reparations, though not indiscriminately from all Americans (he explained his position in an interview with me).

It seems virtually certain that the savages are unaware of this, particularly since knowing it would require them to read scholarly journals, which we may legitimately doubt they tend to do.

In light of all this, I think you’ll take mischievous delight in the letter I wrote to Loyola’s president in 2014, when the initial attack on Walter occurred:

Dear Dr. Wildes:

No doubt you have received quite a bit of correspondence by now about Walter Block. I won’t rehash the main points. You are familiar with them already.

I will say that I find it impossible to believe that you, an intelligent man, believe your own interpretation of Walter’s remarks to the New York Times. You note that Walter’s comment about slavery seems to run counter to libertarian principles. You don’t say! Might that be an indication that the Times, which despises what Walter stands for, has distorted his views?

A university president ought to support his faculty in a case like this, in which he knows full well that a professor has been grotesquely mischaracterized. If this were an accurate rendering of Walter’s views, why was he considering a libel suit?

Had Walter been a left-wing professor accused of Stalinism, would you have been so quick to denounce him? The question answers itself.

This is why it is impossible to believe that any of this has to do with Walter’s remarks. You are not a fool. You know Walter, and you know where he stands. He has never kept his views a secret. You owed him better, and you failed him.

Now it’s true, you did communicate to the university community that your views are the conventional and respectable ones, and that you are not to be confused with Walter Block. We got that.

Some of your faculty, whom you should have rebuked rather than implicitly congratulated, treated Walter with a similar lack of charity.

Since the substance of your (and their) claims have been dealt with elsewhere, let me raise some relevant considerations:

(1) How many professors at Loyola University can say students have enrolled for the express purpose of studying with them?

(2) How many professors at Loyola University can say they have co-authored scholarly articles with their students – not once or twice, but dozens of times?

(3) How many professors at Loyola University have a big enough audience that it would even matter if they urged students to attend Loyola, as Walter constantly does?

(4) How many professors at Loyola University have over 400 peer-reviewed articles?

(5) How many professors at Loyola University would anyone anywhere in the country lift a single finger for?

(6) Oh, and how many professors at Loyola University, who preposterously accused Walter of “sexism” for denying that “discrimination” could explain the male-female wage gap, dared to face Walter in open debate? (Their decision not to try to debate Walter is a fleeting sign of intelligence among them.)

Yes, yes, I got the message: your faculty is against slavery. What courage they must have had to summon in 2014 to unbosom to the world their opposition to slavery!

But I wonder: would people who ostentatiously announce their opposition to slavery in 2014 have had the courage to oppose it when it counted – say, in 1850? I have my doubts that people so desperate to assure the world of their conventional opinions and how appalled and offended they are by heretics, would have been the sort of people to buck conventional opinion at a time when two percent of the American electorate supported an abolitionist political party.

What I know for a fact is that Walter Block would have opposed it, lock, stock, and barrel.

That you simply repeated the New York Times’ characterization of Walter Block, without even conceding, as the Times did, that Walter believed slavery was wrong because it was involuntary – so your behavior was worse than that of the Times, which is no mean feat – is bewildering and appalling in a university president, or indeed in a human being.

Long after every name on that list of Walter’s faculty critics is gone and forgotten, the work of Walter Block will continue to educate new generations in the principles of liberty. No one will recall the pygmies who attacked him out of spite or envy.

Thomas E. Woods, Jr., PhD



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Delingpole: ‘Churchill Was Racist’, Say BLM. Wait Till They Hear About the Guy He Beat…

Posted by M. C. on June 9, 2020

It amazes me that even intelligent people – including one or two politicians and commentators on the right who really should know better – are taking these disgusting Black Lives Matter/Antifa protests at face value, by applauding the demonstrators’ motives or even daringly admitting that they too feel sufficiently strongly about the evils of slavery to agree that the Colston statue should have been pulled down.

This violence has nothing to do with George Floyd; everything to do with the hard left’s relentless war on Western Civilisation. And thanks to the naivety, weakness and cowardice of the Establishment, the hard left is currently winning.


One this one we are ahead of the Brits for a change.

James Delingpole

Winston Churchill was a ‘racist’. Or so the Black Lives Matter graffiti says on the plinth of his statue in London’s Parliament Square which is bound to be pulled down by hard-left activists sooner or later because the police don’t seem to have that much of an appetite to save it.

Part of the problem is that the police — or at least their right-on superiors with their crappy sociology degrees from second rate universities and their Common Purpose leadership training certificates — no longer see it as their job to combat actual crime.

They now prefer to think of themselves more like glorified social workers, there to heal the wounds of a broken society by showing off their skateboarding skills at Extinction Rebellion protests and putting on makeup and rainbow lanyards to prance embarrassingly at Gay Pride festivals.

Typical of this new breed was the senior policeman we saw in Bristol, explaining why he hadn’t intervened when a bronze statue of Edward Colston, a slave trader but also one of the city’s main historic benefactors, was pulled down in broad daylight by a masked thugs.

“We made a decision. The right thing to do was to allow it to happen – because what we did not want is tension.”

But what could be more tense than a mob tearing down part of a city’s historical fabric with total impunity?

How is it a recipe for reducing tension if Bristol police are now signalling to the city’s law-abiding population that they now think it’s ‘the right thing to do’ not to intervene when criminal acts take place right under their noses?

Intervening to stop violent crime in flagrante always and inevitably involves ‘tension.’ So what the police officer — Superintendent Andy Bennett — appears to be saying here is that he no longer it considers it his job to do what most of us would consider actual policing.

Here is Superintendent Bennett caught in happier times:

And here is an unconfirmed report — from a retired Metropolitan Police officer — that rank-and-file police in Bristol wanted to intervene but were overruled by their woke superiors.

Another part of the problem is that the police have been brainwashed into imagining that the main threat to law and order and stability comes from the (largely mythical) far right — when it fact, for years, the far more significant threat comes from the hard left.

This is not, of course, a delusion unique to the police. It’s rife in academe, in the entertainment industry and across much of the mainstream media – especially in the shamelessly leftist broadcasters the BBC, Channel 4 and Sky News. This, in turn, is the result of decades of infiltration — Gramsci’s ‘Long March through the Institutions’ — by the radical left which has relentlessly pushed the propaganda message that Britain is ‘inward-looking, xenophobic and nostalgic for empire’. The left’s purpose is to ‘defame the nation and demoralise its citizens’.

Anyone who wants to understand the real motivation behind the rights should read this NaN by the irascible but occasionally on-point Pete North.

He writes:

A country that no longer believes in its founding values and has no sense of self-worth will cave into virtually any passing political fad. If the nation is attacked politically or militarily, you then have a public that will stand aside and allow it.

This is the oldest trick in the book. The Soviets knew it, the modern left knows it too. The communists played on the imperialism schtick then and now, while the modern left has long sought to associate nationalism of any kind with fascism and racism.

Anti-racism, then, is a veneer for leftists who oppose the very idea of the nation state.

North is rightly scathing about the Establishment’s complete failure to address the growing problem of this enemy within.

Successive centrist administrations have failed to stand up to an increasingly feral activist media and a worryingly censorious academic establishment. Safe spaces, trigger warnings, de-platforming etc is nothing to do with progressive values and everything to do with delegitimising even moderate voices of disagreement. That’s the truly terrifying authoritarianism in the West. It goes against the fundamental values it was built on… freedom of speech and association, and equality under the law.

Everything in the progressive agenda is aimed at dismantling nationhood, hence the creation of strains of victimhood according to gender and ethnicity.

Nor — again correctly — does he have much time for the gullible white middle-class kids willingly conspiring in their civilisation’s destruction.

The useful idiot white liberal youth who see themselves as righteous crusaders for the downtrodden minorities are doing the dirty work of communist agitators in what has become the largest global brainwashing operation of the 21st century.

Once you’ve grasped these points, the true significance of those hard-left activists’ assault on those statues becomes clear. By destroying — or trying to destroy — those statues, what they are really trying to destroy is Britain’s sense of history and, by extension, its cohesive national identity.

Sure, Winston Churchill said things about Islam and foreign races which probably wouldn’t pass muster at a contemporary Islington dinner party. But he did do one or two impressive things too, including helping to defeat Hitler.

Sure, Edward Colston profited from the slave trade but he also — as many rich men do to compensate for their guilt — donated lavishly to the port city of Bristol and helped lay the foundations for its prosperity and (at least till recently) its claim to greatness.

But the radical left doesn’t want you to know that history is nuanced and complex; all they want is to use it as an excuse for promoting guilt, division, self-hatred.

One of the reasons I have vowed never again to have any truck with the BBC is its relentless promotion of this left-wing propaganda message. I’ll never forget the episode of BBC Sunday Morning Live, a few years ago, when I had to go on to defend British history against an Islamist, a woke female historian and, of course, the presenter who shared their left-wing politics.

The only bit of British history that the Islamist seemed to know was an event called the Bengal famine. That’s because the Bengal famine is one of the radical left’s favourite historical talking points: apparently — so all good leftists and Islamists are taught — it shows Winston Churchill to have been an uncaring racist who, in 1943-44, deliberately allowed 1.5 million Bengalis to starve in an act of ‘genocide’.

This misreading of history involves an awful lot of cherry-picking. In fact, Churchill did his best to help the victims of what was initially a natural disaster (caused by a cyclone which destroyed the rice crop) exacerbated by local administrative incompetence, but there was a war on and it wasn’t easy: the Japanese occupied all the neighbouring countries which, hitherto, would have made up the shortfall; cargo shipping was in short supply and Japanese submarines made its journeys more perilous and uncertain.

Afterwards, I felt tainted by having participated in this charade. Britain has one of the world’s most extraordinary histories, which include some of Western civilisation’s greatest achievements. Yet here was the BBC promoting a chippy Islamist nobody who was perfectly frank about hating the country, and enabling his toxic views to be backed up by one of its battery of woke female historians who knew perfectly well that her job was to witter on about how important it was that British children should be taught about the more shameful episodes in their country’s past.

It amazes me that even intelligent people – including one or two politicians and commentators on the right who really should know better – are taking these disgusting Black Lives Matter/Antifa protests at face value, by applauding the demonstrators’ motives or even daringly admitting that they too feel sufficiently strongly about the evils of slavery to agree that the Colston statue should have been pulled down.

This violence has nothing to do with George Floyd; everything to do with the hard left’s relentless war on Western Civilisation. And thanks to the naivety, weakness and cowardice of the Establishment, the hard left is currently winning.


Be seeing you



The ISIS head chopper look. Cultural appropriation!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Guess What — It’s a Hustle – Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on June 6, 2020

No, this is a hustle, all right, perhaps the most obvious hustle in US history. It’s the Democratic Party’s last stratagem to get the monster of its own creation, Donald Trump, out of the White House.

James Howard Kinstler

Of course, George Floyd didn’t deserve to die with a cop’s knee on his neck and his face mashed into the pavement, but after yesterday’s first of what will be several funerals for the now revered former armed robber and convict, you’d think he was the second coming (and going) of George Washington. Uh, check that… Washington was a slave-owner and, by definition, a racist. Make that Julius Caesar — based on the way that the Rev. Al Sharpton was bellowing at funeral No.1 Thursday in Minneapolis. Say, what? Julius Caesar owned slaves too? How about Abe Lincoln then? Naw, just another white man? And a secret racist (so they say).

Racist, racist racist! America is racist! Racism is systemic! Racism flows in the hallowed blood of the American system, going back all the way to 1619! All white people are racist. Get down on your bellies and crawl like a snake and beg forgiveness for your natural-born, inalienable racism! Anyway, that’s reality according to The New York Times, America’s premier journal of racism studies.

To prove that America is hopelessly racist, the nation has been treated to, what — ? — seven, or is it now eight nights of looting and burning by young black people acting out every racist stereotype from the Ku Klux Klan official manual of racism. The rest of the news media bent over backwards to avoid deploring the mayhem in the streets, rather, to invert the very looting, burning, and rioting as proof positive that America is racist to the bone. Look what you made us do! Steal sneakers and Rolex watches! Shoot cops, including an old retired black cop (uh, my bad) and run over several more cops with cars! Destroy businesses large and small that have been shut down for three months by corona virus to make sure they won’t ever dare to resume their racist trade in things that white people like!

Has anyone detected a hustle in the past week’s dire proceedings? Well, how would you define a hustle? How about: an attempt to gain advantage by deceitful means. What! Are you saying there was something dishonest about the reaction from sea to shining sea to George Floyd’s murder in Minneapolis? I am. For example, the massive protest marches. Who exactly was disputing that the death of George Floyd was a miscarriage of justice? Nobody. Did the cops get away with it? No, they’re all getting indicted for murder or being accessories to a murder by standing around watching it and doing nothing to stop it.

No, this is a hustle, all right, perhaps the most obvious hustle in US history. It’s the Democratic Party’s last stratagem to get the monster of its own creation, Donald Trump, out of the White House. RussiaGate didn’t do it (in fact, it’s backfiring rather horribly now), ImpeachmentGate was a dud. Welcome to GeorgeFloydGate! I know it’s hard to imagine at this moment of maximum televised sanctimony, but this gambit is going to flop, too. A lot of voters have probably noticed that the wholesale looting and burning of US cities is not in the national interest. And that the people who do it don’t deserve special favors.

Of course, this is also a moment of maximum collective acute psychosis in America. The nation is pretty badly shook-up after three months of corona virus lockdown.  Millions watched their careers, incomes, businesses, and futures wash down the drain. Upsetting as the killing of George Floyd was, these losses are monumental in comparison. 99 percent of the people in America are scared shitless about where all this economic damage is taking the nation — even as they watch the stock markets go up and up and up. By the way, the past week of looting, burning, and rioting was especially fruitful for Wall Street. D’ya think that might eventually tick off a few taxpayers who understand that the stock-pumping is being accomplished by the Federal Reserve brokering more national debt in their name?

Joe Biden’s campaign has announced that he will headline the next funeral in George Floyd’s hometown of Houston, the place where Mr. Floyd accomplished the home invasion and aggravated robbery of a woman in 2009 that sent him to state prison for five years. (He was turning his life around in Minneapolis where, ten days ago, he suffered a lapse of judgment while high on fentanyl and passed a counterfeit $20 bill in a corner store, leading to his arrest and unjust death.) I’m counting on Joe Biden to raise America’s awareness about systemic racism at that event — if he can remember where he is and what’s going on.

Also on Thursday this week, the Rev. Al Sharpton announced plans for a march on Washington in August, perhaps just before the Democratic convention in Milwaukee for maximum effect. You may be aware that Joe Biden has obliged himself (sort of) to put a woman-of-color on the ticket for vice-president. Though Stacey Abrams, the real governor of Georgia, seems like the inevitable choice, I have a better idea. Wouldn’t it be perfect to bring back Tawana Brawley for this historic role? She figured so decisively in establishing the Rev. Mr. Sharpton’s cred as leader in the long quest for social justice. She’s all growed-up now and ready to rock! Tawana Brawley, America turns its lonely eyes to you! #Tawana Brawley for veep! Spread the news far and wide!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Have we brewed a whirlwind? –

Posted by M. C. on March 5, 2020

Now assaulting a fragmenting Western World comes a pandemic whose consequences cannot be known.  Is there enough leadership to overcome the long-inflicted damages and to pull the people together and to reestablish community?  With the Democrats politically weaponizing the coronavirus against President Trump, it does not seem so.

The public sees inaction, disbelieves the feeble reasons given, and takes action to exhaust supplies of protective gear, storable foods, and everything else that disappears in a panic.

Take solice in the fact that government doing nothing is usually a good thing.

Paul Craig Roberts

Dear friends, it is March and time for my quarterly call for your donations.  I am here for you as long as you want me.  PCR

In the United States and throughout the Western World there is public distrust of public authorities and distrust among the public of one another.  Public authorities who do not like “conspiracy theories” do a lot to generate them.

We can see the public’s distrust of public authorities in the negligent response to the coronavirus.  The refusal of public authorities to stop incoming flights from infected countries has brought the dangerous virus into the Western World where inaction has so far prevailed.

Many virologists and other experts have criticized the inaction for seriously endangering the public.  I recently posted some of the expert statements made to public health authorities.  See:


Germany: .

The refusals of public officials to take protective steps partly reside in ideological positions.  In Europe it is the European Union’s commitment to open borders and one Europe.  Closing the borders goes against the ideology that nationalism is the problem.

In other instances, Canada for example, the Prime Minister apparently considers it “racist” to protect Canadians from incoming flights from Iran.  See: .

The public sees inaction, disbelieves the feeble reasons given, and takes action to exhaust supplies of protective gear, storable foods, and everything else that disappears in a panic.

As the inaction of public authorities is not understandable, all sorts of explanations arise.  For example: The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institute for Health (NIH) want the virus to spread, because the result will be bigger budgets;  the pharmaceutical companies (Big-Pharma) want the virus to spread, because it will bring them profits in mandatory vaccination whether it prevents or aids the spread of the virus;  governments want the virus to spread, because it allows them to impose martial law and abolish civil liberties;  elites are using the virus to reduce the world population;  governments are using the virus to reduce the strain of the elderly on health care systems and save money.  You can add to this list on your own.

One consequence of distrust of public authorities is lack of public cooperation in whatever response effort public authorities eventually mount.  Another consequence is that this lack of public cooperation justifies more coercion by government in order to deal with the threat.  Remember all of the violations of Constitutional protections made by the George W. Bush and Obama regimes in responst to 9/11 and the “terrorist threat.”  A big difference is that then there was no pandemic.

Distrust among the public of one another has been fomented by decades of feminist attacks on men and by decades of attacks on white people as “racists.”  These attacks have been institutionalized in the educational system.  They have been useful to feminist and “racial minorities” for advancement.  But they have atomized the population.  Where there was once community, no matter how unequal, there is the lack of community.

The “sexist” and “racist” offences are more taught than felt and are reaching the point of absurdity.  Every day someone finds a slur in a word that has been part of the language for centuries before the presence in the population of racial minorities. These manufactured “offences” are used to excoriate men and to fire them from jobs and deny them professional careers.

Guillaume Durocher points out that community is also being destroyed by the decline in national community. The core entities that produced national communities or countries are being flooded out by incoming multitudes of immigrants from different cultures and value systems. Many on the left show open contempt for nationhood and national solidarity.  Durocher explains the collapse of national community here: 

Now assaulting a fragmenting Western World comes a pandemic whose consequences cannot be known.  Is there enough leadership to overcome the long-inflicted damages and to pull the people together and to reestablish community?  With the Democrats politically weaponizing the coronavirus against President Trump, it does not seem so.

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Wisconsin School District Abandons ‘A-F’ Grading Scale to Prevent Stress

Posted by M. C. on February 13, 2020

…a guest speaker at American University told faculty members that it was racist to judge the quality of a student’s writing when grading a paper. The guest speaker, a professor in the University of Washington system, argued that traditional grading practices perpetuate “white supremacy.

Instead, students are graded on their ability to work in groups and tell stories.


Like the CIA, the government school system should be broken into a thousand pieces and scattered to the winds.

Where are the parents?

by Tom Ciccotta

A school district in Madison, Wisconsin, has made the controversial decision to abandon the common “A to F” grading system based in favor of a system that is “kinder” to students. Now, top students will be graded as “exceeding” while failing students will be “emerging.”

According to a report by the College Fix, the Madison Metropolitan School District has announced that they are doing away with the traditional “A-F” grading system in favor of a new system that is gentle on students.

The report, which was written by Christian Schneider, a parent in the school district, claims that the district has introduced four new categories to replace the traditional grading scale. Schneider noticed that his second-grade daughter’s report card featured words like “exceeding” and “emerging” instead of letter grades.

“Exceeding” – Student consistently exceeds grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Meeting” – Student consistently meets grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Developing” – Student is developing understanding and is approaching grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

“Emerging” – Student begins to show initial understanding of grade-level expectations for the end of the year.

Schneider points out that the new grading system doesn’t apply directly to a student’s performance in each subject. Instead, students are graded on their ability to work in groups and tell stories.

The two scales don’t match up largely because the new grades assigned don’t address a specific class or subject – they deal mostly with behavior. The “Exceeding-Emerging” scale applies to 40 different classifications. Instead of being graded on “math” or “science,” my daughter is being graded on “Tells a story or describes an experience,” “cooperates with partners and in groups,” and “understands and identifies stages in the life cycle of insects.”

Breitbart News reported in January 2019 that a guest speaker at American University told faculty members that it was racist to judge the quality of a student’s writing when grading a paper. The guest speaker, a professor in the University of Washington system, argued that traditional grading practices perpetuate “white supremacy.”

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

‘Racist’ Trump Supporters Should Lose Their Vote, Says NBC. Guess Who Decides They’re ‘Racist’? — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on January 30, 2020

Yet nowhere in any of Trump’s numerous campaign utterances or even Tweets has he ever singled out America’s White population as the intended sole beneficiary of his plans to remake the U.S. economy. In fact, just the opposite.

Robert Bridge


Once again, the mainstream media is pushing the repugnant race card, suggesting that Trump supporters are a bunch of knuckle-dragging xenophobes whose only reason for wanting a wall on the Mexican border is because they suffer an aversion to people with different skin color than them.

What exactly do White Americans – who opened the floodgates to immigration in 1965 – need to do these days to prove they are not natural born racists? Cancel their monthly subscription to Town and Country? Stop walking their dogs, which are, of course, four-legged vehicles of “racial segregation,” or stop attending their evening yoga class, the unsuspecting breeding grounds for white supremacists? Somehow I suspect that even if White people took to burning effigies of Ku Klux Klan members on their manicured front lawns that would not even put a stop to the ugly rumors. Let’s just face it, the only thing that will finally stop the slanderous slurs is if all White Americans publicly denounce their support of the biggest race-hater of them all, Donald J. Trump. And should they refuse the itinerant Liberal Inquisition will be only too happy to do it for them.

Just ask Noah Berlatsky, occasional columnist for MSNBC, whose latest piece was crowned with the zinger of a headline, ‘Trump voters motivated by racism may be violating the Constitution. Can they be stopped?’ Nice leading question there, but the premise that precedes it, that Trump voters are “motivated by racism,” is just one more election-season deceit.

Berlatsky’s article opens with the conclusion that Donald Trump “ran an openly racist campaign for president,” and that his popular rallying slogan “Make America Great Again” is actually code that can be translated into “America was greater when white people’s power was more sweeping and more secure.” Yet nowhere in any of Trump’s numerous campaign utterances or even Tweets has he ever singled out America’s White population as the intended sole beneficiary of his plans to remake the U.S. economy. In fact, just the opposite. As Trump has made it his goal to return some of the shine to America’s industrial Rustbelt, threatening companies with penalties and public scorn if they relocate their production operations overseas, the unemployment rate among Blacks now stands at 5.9%, down from 7.5% at the start of his presidency. At the same time, the employment rate among Hispanics is at historic highs.

At this point, the Democrats will invariably mention Trump’s promise to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexican border, a promise that arguably won the real estate developer the White House in 2016. Yet Trump, the Democrats argue, is an unrepentant racist because he admitted to an unsavory truth that even Hispanics living in America agree with: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best…They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Trump was not arguing, of course, that all Mexicans are rapists or criminals. He was arguing that of the many who do make it across the border a disproportionate number do fit the description.

At this point, it needs to be asked why the Democrats deign to show so much care and compassion for those illegals breaching America’s border on a daily basis, at the very same time Democratic strongholds, like California and New York, are already bursting at the seams with tent cities and grinding poverty. Suffice it to consider a comment by a British tourist to San Francisco, the one-time crown gem of the increasingly tarnished, Democratic-controlled Golden State: “I can’t understand how anyone can live in a place where their everyday trip to get groceries or go to work includes a multitude of beggars asking for spare change or a meal.”

Considering that the Democrats can’t even take care of their own burgeoning problems in their primary constituencies, what is the real motivation behind their proposals to open the U.S. border and abolish U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)? After all, these are the very same people who screamed ‘not in my backyard!’ when Trump threatened to send all apprehended illegals to the so-called ‘sanctuary cities’. Nancy Pelosi skirted the periphery of racism when she called the idea “disrespectful.”

Would their sham benevolence have anything to do with securing more Democratic voters, or guaranteeing that the Republican Party eventually goes the way of the dinosaurs? Was New York Governor Andrew Cuomo motivated by pure compassion when he signed legislation granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, who may now cast a ‘legal’ vote under New York’s notoriously loose voting laws? Now Democrats are demanding the elimination Voter ID rules, declaring them racist against minorities. This is one of the ways Berlatsky proposes to end so-called “racist voting” now purportedly contaminating U.S. politics.

It’s no secret that Hispanic Americans traditionally vote Democratic, and if that tendency were to change tomorrow you can bet that Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi would be camped out daily at the Mexican border, demanding the necessary funds to finish the project.

In the final analysis, the Democrat’s groundless assertion that Trump supporters are kneejerk racists disintegrates when it is remembered that up to 10 million former Obama supporters – many of them White – switched allegiances to the Trump camp in the 2016 presidential election. Are we really expected to believe that all of those Americans suddenly became hardcore racists with the arrival of the evil ‘orange man’ and his pledge to build a wall? That sounds highly unlikely. The far more logical explanation for this massive change in political sentiment is that Trump’s plan to remedy America’s dangerously porous borders, thereby enhancing the security of all Americans, regardless of skin color, was a welcomed idea across the board.

Nevertheless, the real danger is that the Democrats, entranced by the cult of political correctness and an out-of-control cancel culture, will attempt by some extreme measures to identify and ban so-called ‘racist Trump supporters’ who are just regular Americans looking for a leader who will provide them with a well-guarded country that protects the rights of all its citizens regardless of skin color. Banning undesirable Trump voters from the ballet box may eventually become as easy as censoring right-leaning Twitter users.

Clearly, the Democrats learned absolutely nothing from the mistake of branding Trump supports “deplorables” – to quote Hillary Clinton – and have only worsened their present position by calling these same voters, many of them former Obama supporters, “racist.” Such a gross simplification and misunderstanding of the current American political realities goes far at explaining why the Democrats stand very little chance of beating Trump at the ballot box.


© 2010 – 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal

Be seeing you






Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Logic Is a Tool of the Patriarchy – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 25, 2020

Politicians aren’t that meaningful. They aren’t to be taken seriously. They are a form of sardonic entertainment that allow us to feel better about the inordinate amount of the workday we must slave away just to afford the taxes the government levies on us.

Mental illness is the involuntary parting with reality. This social justice style of argumentation is the voluntary parting with reality. They are two peas in the same pod.


If you have ever had a conversation with a social justice warrior, you may be well aware that a confusing occurrence tends to take place.

For all your effort to use reason and evidence to truly understand the position that the person holds, it’s incredibly difficult to get even a semblance of either reason or evidence out of the social justice warrior in response.

It’s a fool’s errand. The best that can be expected is often a collection of slogans practically chanted in a daisy chain in increasing volume and intensity as the conversation progresses.

The more you invite the social justice warrior to use reason and evidence, the more you are informed you are “splitting hairs” or “going around in circles.”

If the slogans fail, and the claimed faux pas of splitting hairs does not deter you, terms of derision may start to flow.

Bigot or nazi or racist may be used to describe situations that are not bigoted, national socialist, or racist. However, if you protest the misapplication of such a serious term, the social justice warrior may attempt to explain the application through the use of circular logic, or with another onslaught of slogans. It is evident that these names do not actually fit this situation. They are merely ugly words meant to silence you. At this point where name-calling emerges for the sake of bullying a person, the conversation has grown abusive, and no respectable person would feel comfortable either doing the name-calling or being a recipient of the name-calling.

The conversation quickly grows very tiring as a great deal of energy is expelled and very little reason is utilized. The volume of voices may grow elevated. There is great emotion. And sure everyone is invested in their personal opinions to some degree, everyone has topics they are passionate about, but intellectual discussion between two adults is the time to open the spigot on reason and evidence and to tighten that other spigot that prevents an uncontrolled outpouring of emotion.

Culturally, these seemingly thoughtless outpourings of emotion are increasingly encouraged in our era.

In fact, some will go so far as to call logic, “a tool of the patriarchy.” That’s right. The mental faculty that has helped humans to better our world, through millions and billions of applications a day for millennia, is to be dismissed as a mere tool of the patriarchy. What a trendy and carelessly callous insult to lob at such an awesome human capacity. One of the key distinctions between man and beast is to be dismissed because those who are poorly trained in using their executive function and limiting their emotional outpouring feel triggered by its use. To follow in their wishes is to bring us closer to beast as individuals and as a society.

Mental illness is the involuntary parting with reality. This social justice style of argumentation is the voluntary parting with reality. They are two peas in the same pod.

And that’s a scary thing. If given the power to do away with reason and evidence, the social justice warrior will do just that. In intentionally insular silos of social interaction – through social media, academia, daily life, and often even the workplace – these ideas receive nearly no challenge by reasonable people. It’s just not worth the pain of being yelled at (or worse) by someone who is either crazy and or willfully acting crazy. Counter to logic and meritocratic notions, the unreasonable silence the reasonable.

The illogical application of law makes this situation all the more likely to occur. And in the name of tranquility, treading on touchy ground is unwelcome. Heaven forbid someone may even go so far as to burst into tears, at which point it grows evident to any onlooker that this stickler for reason and evidence is surely a savage brute worthy of derision. Not only legal pressure, but also social pressure encourages the reasonable to bite their tongues.

It is not by choice, it is only by happenstance that a social justice warrior faces reason and evidence. The rest of society grows up hearing the social justice lines parroted in school, in entertainment, in media, likely even in church. Often the only controversial views welcomed in such environments are social justice views. The astute thinker, constantly inundated with these views both seeks out and is confronted with a host of additional views naturally, and must learn to reason through that conflict. The discomfort of conflict and the ability to self-soothe enough to persevere in the midst of conflict are required to grow the faculty for logic.

The social justice warrior is often done the disservice of being insulated from opposing views to the point where reality is painfully intrusive when it comes about.

This aversion to the intrusion of reality has made it natural for college professors to preface material with “trigger warnings,” in the event that someone in the room is not mature enough to handle a conflicting viewpoint without bursting out in great, seemingly uncontrollable, displays of emotion. Even with a trigger warning, an academic risks disciplinary action if the conflicting viewpoint is seen as too intrusive. This style of material from thinkers was once referred to as “thought-provoking” and was an important part of the reason for taking the time and effort to attend university.

A notable aversion to the intrusion of reality took place with the so-called emergence of Trump Derangement Syndrome in an outburst running up to, but most notably following the November 9, 2016 presidential elections. This has amounted to a multi-year tantrum in response to an election. Yes, an election. A measly election.

Thousands take place a year. Politicians aren’t that meaningful. They aren’t to be taken seriously. They are a form of sardonic entertainment that allow us to feel better about the inordinate amount of the workday we must slave away just to afford the taxes the government levies on us.

Unless you are the losing candidate, if an election means that much to you, there is something seriously wrong with you. And even the candidate probably didn’t belong in the election if they are still triggered years later. Toughen up snowflake. It’s an election.

But to say so, is to be patriarchal. To abhor involuntary crazy and voluntary crazy alike and to pursue health and wellness is to be patriarchal. To praise the successes of humanity through the ages and to want less of the failures is to be patriarchal. To desire to use emotion for all the things it is good for, and to desire to use logic for all the things it is good for, and to implement them together as a well-adjusted healthy person is to be patriarchal. To demand those same high standards is to be patriarchal.

And that is othering. And racist. And literally what only someone who is literally a fascist, literal nazi, literal bigot would do. Literally.

Be seeing you

How to Be a Social Justice Warrior – Actual Anarchy


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Democrats Seek To Outlaw Suburban, Single-Family House Zoning, Calling It Racist And Bad For The Environment | The Daily Caller

Posted by M. C. on December 26, 2019

Gun control, housing control…Virginia is going to hell in a hand basket.

Urban life may be more efficient, unfortunately so is control. Surveillance is more effective.No car cities are part of the plan-you can only go where public transport and Big Brother makes sure he knows where and when you go there. He will make sure he knows the where and when of everything.

Nope. Can’t go there or do that. You already used this months allocation.


Luke Rosiak

  • Virginia House Del. Ibraheem Samirah introduced a bill that would override local zoning officials to permit multi-family housing in every neighborhood, changing the character of quiet suburbs.
  • Oregon passed a similar bill, following moves by cities such as Minneapolis; Austin, Texas; and Seattle.
  • Proponents say urban lifestyles are better for the environment and that suburbs are bastions of racial segregation.

Democrats in Virginia may override local zoning to bring high-density housing, including public housing, to every neighborhood statewide — whether residents want it or not.

The measure could quickly transform the suburban lifestyle enjoyed by millions, permitting duplexes to be built on suburban lots in neighborhoods previously consisting of quiet streets and open green spaces. Proponents of “upzoning” say the changes are necessary because suburbs are bastions of segregation and elitism, as well as bad for the environment.

The move, which aims to provide “affordable housing,” might be fiercely opposed by local officials throughout the state, who have deliberately created and preserved neighborhoods with particular character — some dense and walkable, others semi-rural and private — to accommodate people’s various preferences.

But Democrats tout a state-level law’s ability to replace “not in my backyard” with “yes, in your backyard.”

House Delegate Ibraheem Samirah, a Democrat, introduced six housing measures Dec. 19, coinciding with Democrats’ takeover of the state legislature in November.

“Single-family housing zones would become two-zoned,” Samirah told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Areas that would be impacted most would be the suburbs that have not done their part in helping out.”

“The real issues are the areas in between very dense areas which are single-family zoned. Those are the areas that the state is having significant trouble dealing with. They’re living in a bubble,” he said.

He said suburbs were “mostly white and wealthy” and that their local officials — who have historically been in charge of zoning — were ignoring the desires of poor people, who did not have time to lobby them to increase suburban density.

In response to a question about whether people who bought homes in spacious suburbs have valid reasons, not based on discrimination, for preferring to live that way — including a love for nature and desire to preserve woods and streams — he said: “Caring about nature is very important, but the more dense a neighborhood is, the more energy efficient it is.”

He said if local officials seek to change requirements like setbacks to make it impossible to build dense housing in areas zoned to preserve a nature feel, “if they make setbacks to block duplexes, there’d have to be a lawsuit to resolve whether those zoning provisions were necessary.”…

Be seeing you

Rent Control – Atlas of Public Management

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

UK: National Health Service to Deny Treatment for ‘Racist or Sexist Language, Gestures, Behaviour’

Posted by M. C. on November 4, 2019

More PC insanity from the UK.

The NHS – equal health care for all – only some are less equal than others.

I wonder if the NHS would treat Pakistani child groomers.

by Jack Montgomery

A National Health Service (NHS) trust has announced that it will withdraw treatment from patients it deems to be racist or sexist.

The North Bristol NHS Trust announced that patients will be subject a “sports-style disciplinary yellow card and then final red card in which treatment would be withdrawn as soon as is safe” on its official website.

The policy would cover not just “Threatening and offensive language” but also “Racist or sexist language, gestures or behaviour” more generally, as well as “malicious allegations” — a rather troubling caveat, given the NHS has in the past been entangled in large-scale malpractice scandals which hospitals and staff have initially denied.

“We have staff from many different backgrounds, from all over the world, and we pride ourselves on our commitment to equality which is a fundamental value of the NHS,” commented Andrea Young, Chief Executive for North Bristol NHS Trust.

“We’re sending a strong signal that any racism or discrimination is completely unacceptable – we want staff to challenge and report it and we want everyone to know that it will have consequences.”

How low the bar for deeming behaviour discriminatory and sufficiently “offensive” to withdraw treatment is not spelled out in explicit terms.

For example, in late 2017 an NHS patient who requested a female nurse to carry out a cervical smear complained when the hospital sent a person with “an obviously male appearance… close-cropped hair, a male facial appearance and voice, large number of tattoos and facial stubble” who insisted “My gender is not male. I’m a transsexual”

Another NHS trust for the area, the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, has previously been criticised for ordering the removal of the British flag from security staff stab vests after someone complained that the country’s national banner was “offensive”.

Be seeing you

25+ Best Memes About Overworked | Overworked Memes

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Biden Goes All in on the Race Issue – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 9, 2019


Those who believed America’s racial divide would begin to close with the civil rights acts of the 1960s and the election of a black president in this century appear to have been overly optimistic.

The race divide seems deeper and wider than at any time in our lifetimes. Most of the aspiring leaders of the Democratic Party have apparently concluded that branding the president a “racist” and “white supremacist” is the strategy to pursue to win the nomination and the White House.

Here is Joe Biden, speaking in Iowa as President Donald Trump was visiting the wounded communities of Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas: “This president has fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation. … The energetic embrace of this president by the darkest hearts and the most hate-filled minds in this country says it all.

“We have a problem with this rising tide of … white supremacy in America. And we have a president who encourages and emboldens it.”

What had Trump done to invite such a charge?

The key piece of evidence linking Trump to the mass murderer of El Paso, is a single phrase out of a 2,000-word screed posted on social media, allegedly by the gunman minutes before carrying out his atrocity.

Patrick Crusius said he was striking this blow against the “Hispanic invasion of Texas.” And Donald Trump has often used that term, invasion, to describe the crisis on the border.

Yet the word “invasion” to label what is happening on America’s Southern border long predated Trump, and, moreover, is both an accurate and valid description.

Consider. There are, by most estimates, at least 11 million migrants in the United States illegally, the equivalent of the entire population of Cuba. Lately, migrants have been crossing the Mexican border at a rate of 100,000 a month. If one had to choose a word to describe graphically what is going on, would it not be invasion?

What a panicked establishment, and its stable of candidates, is doing is transparent. By declaring “invasion” — a legitimate description of what is transpiring on the Southern border — to be inherently racist, it is conceding the word has power and is an effective weapon in the political arsenal of those the establishment seeks to censor, stigmatize and silence.

Trump’s adversaries want to stop him from using his most powerful and compelling arguments and images, the ones that enabled him to win the presidency and oust them from power. The left is now using “white supremacy” as its new hate term, because “racist” has all but lost its sting from overuse.

But Biden’s raising of the race issue is going to come back and bite him.

Said Joe in Iowa: “Our president has more in common with George Wallace than George Washington.”

Yet, that greatest of the Founding Fathers, George Washington, whom Biden invoked as his beau ideal of a leader, was a slave owner and demonstrably more of a white supremacist than Trump.

And Biden is likely to be reminded of this by Sen. Cory Booker, his rival for the crucial black vote in the primaries, who, as Joe was speaking in Iowa, was at Emanuel AME Zion church in Charleston, South Carolina, tearing into the founding generation of Washington, Jefferson and Madison:

“Bigotry was written into our founding documents,” said Booker. “White supremacy has always been a problem in our American story.”

“Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny — these tactics aren’t a new perversion,” Booker went on. “They’ve been ingrained in our politics since our foundation.”

Are American voters supposed to respond warmly to this?

Biden’s words in Iowa — “We have a president who has aligned himself with the darkest forces in this nation” — appear to be a lift from Robert Kennedy’s attack on LBJ when Bobby announced for president just days after Lyndon Johnson was badly wounded in the 1968 New Hampshire primary.

Said Bobby of the father of the Civil Right Act of 1964: “Our national leadership is calling upon the darker impulses of the American spirit.”

LBJ and his associates, Bobby went on, “have removed themselves from the American tradition, from the enduring and generous impulses that are the soul of this nation.”

“We are fighting for the soul of America,” echoed Biden in Iowa.

As for Wallace, whom Biden disparages, he was a segregationist, much like Biden’s patron, Sen. Jim Eastland of Mississippi, who called Joe “son,” and Strom Thurmond, whom Biden eulogized and who conducted the longest filibuster in history — against the 1957 Civil Rights Act.

In George Wallace’s salad days, Joe sang a different tune, telling the Philadelphia Inquirer on Oct. 12, 1975:

“I think the Democratic Party could stand a liberal George Wallace — someone who’s not afraid to stand up and offend people, someone who wouldn’t pander but would say what the American people know in their gut is right.”

Perhaps Joe can become such a fearless leader in 2020.

Be seeing you

Hollywood Who's Who Marched With King in '63 ...

My President. Charleton Heston. Marching with King.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »