As "anti-statue-mania" continues to infest the minds of those tunnel-visioned by their ideological hobbling, we must consider the repercussions of expunging historical artifacts, and even ones with which we disagree.
Many proponents of expunging Confederate monuments have started to consider dismantling other monuments to people. One political opportunist masquerading as a "Bishop" in Chicago is demanding that the city rename and remove statues from Washington and Jackson Parks. These two men were presidents, yet the "Bishop" says celebrating them is racist because Washington owned slaves and Jackson facilitated the "Trail of Tears."
In the "Bishop's" mind, expunging these names and monuments will right a wrong. Evidently, for the "Bishop," out of sight is out of mind and that makes history irrelevant.
But history has a propensity to repeat itself. In fact, every great historian warns that if we stop learning from history, history will, indeed, repeat itself. That human beings are prone to gravitate toward tyrannical hierarchical governments (read: absolute power corrupts absolutely), without a constant reminder of history we are doomed to repeat the grave errors of generations and eras past.
The Jewish people, who bore the brunt of true fascist tyranny in Adolf Hitler's Nazi genocide against their people, have a saying they all embrace: "Never again." The point behind the saying is clear. It was originally used by Jewish resistance fighters in the Warsaw ghetto during World War II, and is interpreted to mean that the Nazi Holocaust; the extermination of over six million Jews, will never be permitted to recur.
To wit, the Jewish people did not expunge this history from their world, they embraced the history so that this atrocity is remembered and never allowed to metastasize into a threat to the Jewish people again.
Evidently, Black activists in the United States -- and those taking up their cause -- are clueless to the idea of a "teachable moment." They are removing symbols of history and, thus, removing a daily reminder of historical events, both celebratory and cautionary. They are killing a teachable moment and, therefore, dooming history to repeat itself.
Instead of pulling down or otherwise removing Confederate monuments -- and monuments to others that activists find offensive, they should be taking this opportunity in the spotlight to reaffirm the horrific past surrounding the controversial icons; they should be taking this opportunity to point at these monuments and explain to the youth of today the realities of history and the struggles to over come so that they, too, can say "never again."
By "snatching down" these historical monuments (and yes, I did paraphrase former-Chicago Alderwoman Dorothy Tillman), we are robbing our children of a teachable moment and threatening a repeat of history...and that is just stupid on every level.
Donald Trump did not defend neo-Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan in his rebuke of violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. Of course, you wouldn't know that from the incredibly disingenuous coverage of the event and the ensuing ideologically motivated blathering from the over-paid and increasingly irrelevant chattering class.
The truth of the matter is this. Trump denounce the violence in total that occurred in Charlottesville and that is, indeed, enough. He denounced violence, bigotry and racism as it was perpetrated by each and every person -- regardless of color, religion and/or ideology -- attending the event. That is the correct thing to do.
The victimhood class -- opportunistic ideologues, one and all, are blind to the absolute fact that one cannot view history through the lens of the modern era. The real-time situations of times gone by are impossible to fathom from a modern day vantage point. So too, we, today, are not privileged to the societal conversations of eras past.
To wit, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, George Washington and, later, even Robert E. Lee were all abolitionists; they wanted to end slavery understanding it to be an abomination. Jefferson even wrote abolition into the Declaration of Independence only to have to remove the measure lest the whole of independence be relegated to the trash can. Nevertheless, it was something that was sought after for these men until the days they died.
This reality -- this truth -- is lost on the activist masses, even while it is obscured by those fanning the flames of division. The only reason these people can be led down this untruthful path is because Progressives have expunged the need for US History education in our schools.
Another truth not being exposed is the disingenuous duplicity of the mainstream media. As they condemn the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who attended the rally in Charlottesville (they had a legal permit to march and assemble, by the by), they refuse to condemn -- equally and with the same gusto -- the non-permitted Antifa, Black Lives Matter and anarchist groups who descended on the rally in full battle gear. The very fact that they were wearing battle gear indicates they meant to do violence; their violence was premeditated..
As I wrote in a recent syndicated column:
"Disagreement is going to happen in a free society. It’s how members of that society engage in disagreements that define whether they are an advanced society or an adolescent society. Sadly...we are devolving from an emotional and intellectually advanced society (circa the Civil Rights movement) to an adolescent society where violence and censorship are deemed acceptable tools to employ in disagreements."
There have always been ignoramuses in society. They are the fringe, but a by-product of freedom itself. I classify the neo-Nazi and white supremacist activists in this category. But Antifa is a special kind of dangerous. They are tools of the hardcore ideological Left, employed to bring about the chaos and anarchy that has successfully brought about violent revolutions in lesser nations. They are, rightfully, classified as a domestic terror group.
We can argue about commemorating history, and I, personally, believe that any erasure of history -- offensive to some or not -- is abhorrent; it is the stuff of the Islamic State.. But violent censorship and coercion, the likes of what Antifa and the Left are executing, must be met definitively by law enforcement and the rule of law.
It is time to make examples of those who piss on our laws and those who risk their lives to enforce it. Then we need to return to educating our children on accurate US History, not the bullsh*t Progressives are shopping to us.
One of the tactics Progressives use in their win-at-all-cost war against freedom and sovereignty is redefinition. They are routinely redefining words and phrases so that they have more force to their ideological objectives. An excellent example of this comes to us in the subject of "racism."
Today, most on the Left believe that racism -- both the term and the act -- excludes the White demographic. If you are Black, Asian, American Indian, Indian, Hispanic, etc. you can be the victim of racism. If you are White you cannot.
Yet, the definition of racism is: "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."
That definition doesn't exclude the White demographic. It is clear. If you view a person in a derogatory manner because of the color of his/her skin you are practicing racism. If you are elevating your race over any or all others, you are practicing racism.
So, that understood, how is the Black Lives Matter cult not a racist organization? How is the modern day NAACP not a racist organization. And why isn't the Congressional Black Caucus considered a racist organization? Each of these organization either attempts to elevate the Black demographic, or marginalize the White demographic. That is the epitome of the definition of racism.
And what of the canard of "White privilege"? Does the advancement of that false narrative not attempt to portray one racial demographic as being above all others?
The reason these groups can get away with these acts is because Progressives, who control the media and the education system, have "massaged" the definition of racism.
ThoughtCo.com explains it thusly: "[I]n response to living in a racially stratified society, people of color sometimes complain about whites. Typically, such complaints serve as coping mechanisms to withstand racism rather than as anti-white bias. Even when minorities are actually prejudiced against whites, they lack the institutional power to adversely affect Whites' lives."
In a nutshell, Blacks (or any other non-White demographic, for that matter) can't be racist, and if they seem to be racist it's the fault of the White demographic's perception and past.
Where true racism is the practice of viewing your world through the lens of skin color -- any skin color, racism in the Progressive sphere is discriminatory against the White demographic simply for political and ideological purposes.
Another example of redefinition is Obamacare. Progressives and Democrats keep talking about the law being about healthcare when, in reality, it is only about health insurance coverage. Access to actual healthcare has become more difficult under the law with more need being created than service providers can supply. Yet, we are being led to believe the law is about healthcare.
Progressives, in everything they do, are deceptive, and when their deception doesn't do the trick, they change the definitions and the rules. This is why Progressivism is poison to a free and/or sovereign society.
Representing the American black demographic in Washington, DC, comes under the purview of the Congressional Black Caucus. They look at everything through the lens of race and promote anything that benefits black Americans above all else. So, it was disturbing to find that they spend lavishly on themselves as an entity.
The PAC associated with this race-based group (PACs are the money arms of any political group) has a mission statement that reads: "[to increase] the number of African Americans in the US Congress [and to] support non-Black candidates that champion our interests, and promote African American participation in the political process-with an emphasis on young voters."
Seems pretty clear cut. So why are these black elitists spending hundreds of thousands of dollars -- donated funds meant to further the black American cause -- on lavish upscale resorts and hotels, catering at exclusive restaurants, and on Broadway tickets. among many other non-political things?
How are any of those expenditures related to advancing the black American cause? Answer: they don't.
This spending is indicative of the Washington, DC, swamp mindset. This has nothing to do with "public service," and everything to do with living "high on the hog" off other people's money, a purely Socialist and Oligarchic thing to do.
So, next time you hear Maxine Waters or Jim Clayburn or any of the other CBC mouthpieces talking about the plight of the poor black Americans, remember how they spent money meant to further the cause of black Americans.
The fraud that is the former NAACP leader Rachel Dolezal, who was outed as White in 2015 but who continues to insist she “identifies” as black, is headed to South Africa to speak in favor of a non-racial society. Dolezal, recently changed her name to Nkechi Amare Diallo.
Much more necessary than Dolezal's inclusion in any conference on race would be her need for intense psychotherapy. Not only is she delusional about her race, she is a serial liar who has lived a fraud throughout her adult life. The last thing honest people need in a conversation about race is a fake Black woman lecturing them about race identity.
Dolezal's delusion is endemic of a culture that has resisted the fact that there are different races, genders and cultures around the world. Like it or not, it is the natural order of things. Simply deciding that race, gender and culture don't matter isn't a brave thing to do, it isn't even revolutionary. It's a denial of reality; it's delusional.
There are realities in this world that simply must be accepted; race, gender and culture are three. Another reality that we need to start teaching our children again is that not everyone is a winner and not everything our children do is "oh so awesome." We cheat them from learning from their failures by instilling a false level of self-esteem.
Then you end up like Dolezal...
A glossary published by The University of California, Davis, insists that only whites can be racist. Published in an "LGBTQIA Resource Center Glossary," UC Davis defines "racism" as "the systematic subordination of marginalized racial groups...by members of the agent/dominant/privileged racial group who have relatively more social power (white)."
Of course, this is absurd, but it is a perfect example of how Progressives Left redefines words and phrases in the modern American lexicon in order to advance their intolerant, one-sided and totalitarian ideology. By redefining "racism" as only being able to be executed by "Whites" they have effectively targeted the White demographic in an effort to divide the country along racial lines. Remember, it is easier for so-called "revolutionaries" to advance their causes when they can divide a people and foment discontent amongst a people.
Racism is, in fact, the notion of identifying people by the color of their skin; of seeing people through a prism of skin color rather than as individual human beings. So, it is absolutely possible for a non-White to be racist. In fact, the entirety of the Black Lives Matter and New Black Panther movements are racist at their roots.
UCD injects the false-flag narrative of dominant privilege as a component of "racism." Even by that definition they are in error. By their definition the dominant Black culture in the many countries of Africa would be racist toward the White race, thus shattering their ideologically-based false narrative.
Obviously, the people who put this together are...wait for it...racist.
The racist group Black Lives Matter - which has exploded beyond American soil is declaring that a Left-wing Canadian politician "appropriated black culture" because she used one of Beyoncé's song lyrics in a political ad. Using lyrics from Beyoncé's song "Irreplaceable", Niki Ashton emphasized her promise to take an "unapologetic left turn" with her political party.
"To the left, to the left," the ad posted on Twitter read. "Like Beyonce says, to the left," she added above the ad.
I guess pretty soon BLM will be protesting that people of other races listen to music created by Blacks at all. Of course, this would deliver pop music back to the mainstream after having been kidnapped and held hostage by the rap culture.
As an aside, as my friend Greg Allen used to point out, rap is just one letter away from rape and another letter away from crap. But I digress...
The BLM has moved beyond being racist. Now they have become despotic in their racism. When someone cannot quote - and even give attribution to - an artist (and in Bouncy-Bouncy's case I use the tern very loosely) without being assailed as a poacher, the group making the claim must be declared off the rails.
Imagine if the British claimed people who quoted Shakespeare were "appropriating the British culture," of if Irish people claimed anyone who celebrated St. Patrick's Day was "appropriating the Irish culture." The claims themselves - including the BLM claim - are stupid beyond stupidity.
Then, maybe Beyoncé is "appropriating the White culture" because she straightens and dyes her hair blonde...
Christa Preston Agiro, an associate professor at Wright State University, spoke at Ohio University this month in a speech titled, "Recovering from Overwhelming Whiteness: Learning and Unlearning Rules about Race." The point of her talk was to discuss the many times during her life where she "unfortunately" benefited from "white privilege."
During her talk, Professor Agiro said,"We live in a world that legitimizes the white voice."
This race-baiting pseudo-apologist is either a disgrace to higher education or a blithering idiot. Either way, she is demonzing an entire race for a perceived injustice of generations past as if the current generation was intrinsic in the act.
All learned voices - be they from experience and practical application or honestly acquired book knowledge - are "legitimate." To float the hateful narrative that because of someone's race their voice can be de-legitimized - as Agiro is intimating - is racist at its root.
My generation (I grew up in the 1960s and 1970s) grew up being taught that one did not judge people based on skin color, religion, or gender, instead, we were taught to measure a person's character by their actions and the content of their character. I don't see race...but I can identify and assh*le from a thousand miles away and I identify the whole of the race-baiting class - including Prof. Agiro - as such.
It is "controversial" that some spectators wore USA red, white and blue colors at an Iowa state high school basketball tournament game last Wednesday, because one schools in the contest had a sizable refugee population.
Valley High School's colors are black and orange, but many in the stands had decided to wear the traditional colors of the USA. This led fans of Des Moines North High School to take issue with supporters of Valley High for their choice of attire. "A lot of people were very upset about it," North sophomore DeNasja Spencer said. "[T]hey should have switched that because everyone knows North is a more diverse school."
So, let me get this straight. Refugees are welcomed into the United States from countries where they had to flee for their lives and suddenly people wearing red,white and blue are offensive to them? Or is it that the busy-body Left, who are always offended by people having pride in the United States, are declaring for the refugees that they are offended?
If I were a refugee and was accepted into the United States as a sanctuary from the murderous chaos in my country I would celebrate my host country, not be offended by it. So, this stinks of Progressives creating an issue for ideological purposes. No one should have apologized to anyone.
Oh, and by the way, no one has a constitutional right not to be offended. It's time those of the soft ideological underbelly realize that some of us don't give a damn whether they are offended or not!
The FBI has arrested a writer for several popular Liberal/Progressive blogs in an investigation into the dozens of bomb threats against Jewish community centers nationwide. They say the man made some of the threats in the name of an ex girlfriend as a way to exact revenge on her.
Juan Thompson, 31, of St. Louis, MO, has been charged with cyberstalking and making at least eight separate bomb threats against Jewish organizations. Thompson formally worked for Glenn Greenwald’s The Intercept and has written for the popular Progressive blogs like Daily Kos.
Now, the usual suspects of the Progressive Left (and no doubt the self-deprecating Jewish faction in our nation) will lay heavy on the narrative that Thompson was "mentally ill" and/or "misguided" therefore painting him a victim. The reality is he is a racist and a terrorist, and he should be tried on felony charges to that effect.
While the political Left creates informational chaos about Atty. Gen. Sessions based on no evidence of wrong-doing at all, they will twist themselves into rhetorical knots to distance this act of racism and terrorism from applying to the argument that Black Americans can be racists, too.
The false-narrative of racism only applying to White Americans will live on unless the Trump Administration makes an example of this idiot.
An investigation into newly elected DNC Chairman, Tom Perez, reveals he holds radically racist and extreme views according to A Review of the Operations of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division conducted by the Office of the Inspector General Oversight and Review Division in March of 2013. Perez told investigators that white people were not entitled to protection under the Voting Rights Act.
The DoJ document cited evidences: "CRT AAG Perez stated that interpreting Section 5’s retrogressive-effects standard to not cover White citizens was consistent with the Division’s longstanding practice, as well as case law interpreting the provision and the intent behind its enactment..."
Wow, if the sanitized version of what I would like to say about this racist piece of trash. The only question now is this. When will the tolerant people of the Left remove him as chairman of the Democrat National Committee? They fanatically state that Donald Trump is not fit to hold office - some, like Rep. Maxine Waters (P-CA), saying he should be impeached - so how can they allow someone who is racist against the majority demographic in our country to lead their political party?
Racism is racism and the definition of racism, per Merriam-Webster: "a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination...hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."
How is saying one group - group defined by the color of someone's skin - be protected under the law while another is not? That is the very definition of discrimination and unequal justice under the law, ergo, Perez is an admitted and unabashed racist.
So, can we safely conclude that the Democrats, by virtue of their election of this racist, are the party of racists?
An upcoming Evergreen College event, titled, "A is for Anti-Bias," is a workshop to help teach parents how to head off discriminatory, sexist, misogynistic and gender-normative behavior in toddlers. The workshop, for parents of children aged 3-6, is taught by a grad student who, according to the event page, is "engaged in education initiatives focused on inclusion and equity." The event itself is sponsored by an organization called, "Teaching for Change," dedicated to a national conversation about toddler biases.
Oh...my...God! Fist, anyone thinking they want to attend this indoctrination event should be investigated by Children & Family Services to see what other kind of child abuse they are inflicting on their child/children. Second, those producing this intellectual bovine feces should be charged with aiding and abetting child abuse.
Seriously, toddlers know that they want the toy the other child has, that they want all the food that's bad for them and that, when tired and cranky, they don't want anything. They want Mommy and Daddy when they are scared and they know, intrinsically, that playing is their job.
The idea that toddlers can be racist, misogynistic, or any other kind of "phobic" is the stuff of the mindset of the insane. Additionally, "parents" who allow their toddlers to claim gender identity crisis, well, that's more about the parent than the toddler, now isn't it?