You’re supposed to pray for an asteroid, not pick a favourite.
Some are starting to get the idea that maybe identity politics has gone too far.
Many people are looking at this as the paragraph of the column.
Such logic extends a disturbing trend in left-of-center public thinking: identity epistemology, or knowing-through-being, somewhere along the line became identity ethics, or morality-through-being. Accordingly, whiteness and wrongness have become interchangeable — the high ground is now accessible only by way of “allyship,” which is to say silence and total repentance.
For me though, this one is the scary part:
He referred to the all-encompassing sense of white power so many liberals now also attribute to whiteness as a profound opportunity. “This is the photographic negative of a white supremacist,” he told me gleefully. “This is why I’m actually very confident, because maybe those leftists will be the easiest ones to flip.”
We’ve seen symptoms of this bipolar behaviour with Antifa; tolerance via a studded club to the head. I don’t want to see the more numerous totalitarian socialists begin a “if you can’t beat them, join them” migration towards the totalitarian fascists because society/Democrats/liberals are ‘betraying’ them.
Creating tension, envy, and conflict between classes and peoples has always been one of the main weapons in the arsenal that radical and even moderate left uses in its fight to control the different countries.
The moronic race mongers, SJW and leftists of all stripes have spent the last few decades desegregating us into groups based on skin color. And they wonder why whites are suddenly developing their own identity, their own concept of what it means to be white? F*ck ’em. I want to watch their world burn down around them.
How many of those America-hating, white-hating, NFL clowns have white wives and live in white neighborhoods. The race baiting is nothing but BS. I grew up white, crapping in an outhouse at 40 below – that’s where I earned my white privilege.
They’ve sorted people into various tribes, declared that one of those tribes is evil, horrible, not worthy of participating in society, of being incarcerated simply for belonging to that tribe, even of not being worthy of living. The only problem is that particular tribe comprises the largest single demographic subset of the entire population, white people.
Why should they be surprised that we white people start associating with one another, and begin to shun association with those who want us dead and gone.
These are the fruits of the “multiculturalism” project that was always about creating tribes out of a reasonably homogeneous society.
I was reading an article the other day that attempted to explain where the left had taken a wrong turn. The author talked about three classes of rights: universal human rights, group identity rights and individual rights. Somewhere along the way the left abandoned the ideals of universal human rights and individual rights to focus solely on group rights. Group rights seeks only to create division and resentment while universal human rights and individual rights promotes unity.
The microagression fetish is a prime example of the difference between universal human rights and individual rights proponents vs. group identity rights. Think of these phrases the identitarians see as microagressions: “America is the land of opportunity”, “everyone in this society can succeed, if they work hard enough.”, ‘I believe the most qualified candidate should get the job”, “There is only one race, the human race.”, all lives matter.” Libertarians, classical liberals and even the humanists and liberal left of the previous generation would not see these phrases as aggressive or racist, they’d more likely promote them as human and individual rights. The modern left does because their motive appears to be preventing people from seeing themselves as an individual who has the ability to succeed on their own merit. The left forces everyone into groups and then manipulates the language to create resentments and anger on both sides. Identitarians intentionally create conflict via artificial definitions of oppression.
It’s up to the left to do the necessary course correction and abandon group identity thinking and return to promoting universal human rights and individual rights. If not, they’ll lose.
Totalitarian socialism and totalitarian fascism are two sides of the same the coin. The two ideologies share more in common than what separates them. Fascists name their enemies upfront while for Socialists the enemy is whoever they say it is at the time. It is not inconceivable that the two sides could align for a short time against a common enemy. Of course, they would start fighting each other in fairly short order.
The race for supreme VICTIMHOOD, is one only fools and bandits may enter.
Remember Laurel&Hardly?
“Look what you MADE me do?
Nice game if you can hold it together,however the fee paying host eventually gets real sick of the leeches.
I now watch with great amusement as the semifinalists viciously compete for victim of the year.
The savagery will increase as the value of the prize steadily diminishes.
Now that the white working male is the supreme oppressor, we too can insist on “protection” of our illusionary rights.
As taxpaying workers are now a minority in so many regions.
‘I was reading an article the other day that attempted to explain where the left had taken a wrong turn.’
Link, pls? Interested in reading the article. TIA.
The National Socialist German Worker’s Party? Sounds a lot like the NDP to me.
That’s a very interesting article. I doubt Spencer’s fantasy comes true and if does I think it goes the way of the Nazi-USSR alliance. Also these folks are doing it wrong. You’re supposed to seize power and then purge out the moderates. With the firing sequence all screwed up it seems this rocket is going to explode on the launch pad.
Took a while to find it again but here it is:
https://areomagazine.com/2017/02/15/the-problem-with-intersectional-feminism/amp/
The author focusas mostly on intersectional feminism but I think it is a wider problem with progressives/liberals.
” That “mainstream” form of liberalism is now commonly known as “universal liberalism”, “classical liberalism” or sometimes “Enlightenment liberalism” because it focused on universal human rights, but also on the individual’s freedom to pursue their own path. To Crenshaw, this form of liberalism neglected categories like race and gender around which were built structures of power which needed to be addressed, and failed to consider the way in which multiple layers of identity could complicate the problem.
This is a valid observation. We interact with society on three main levels; as a member of the human race with common needs and drives; as a member of one of numerous categories including gender, race, nationality, culture or religion; and as an individual with our own distinct interests and abilities. Universal liberalism focused on the first and third: universal human rights which would then free individuals to follow their own paths. Intersectionality focuses almost entirely on the second: group identity. ”
@UnMe
“That’s a very interesting article…….You’re supposed to seize power and then purge out the moderates.”
LOL, yea good luck with that. You can’t even win a blog thread argument.
Woosh. That was the sound of the point going over your low sloping forehead.
The words you just wrote have been reverberating in my mind for 50 years. Yet we are the ones that fall for the sales pitch.
Many years ago, a Catholic Bishop phoned me up and asked if I would take him duck hunting. I had a one ton truck with 18 inch wheels, ideal truck for rough use. He had a Buick Century. I only knew him as most parishioners did, as my bishop.
He was a good person, very humble. I’ve never heard a bad word uttered about him. In our two day hunt, He told me that the toughest part of his job was having to live a life of having to display a false image of himself. The dress, having people bow to him, etc., etc,. This was 1966, when millions of mallards feasted on damp durum swaths, and Catholic parishioners worshipped the Bishop.
He described the church much the same as a government, and it was a form of government at one time. He spoke of the hierarchy that was completely opposite to Christ’s teachings and philosophy. He also spoke of reform. Keeping in mind that I was a young farmer, and not a philosopher.
He later wrote me a lengthy letter thanking me for my hospitality and kindness. When I asked him a while later what he liked best about the hunt, ”Firing your Remington shotgun, (he owned a Winchester) and driving that old International truck.” He was born on a farm in SE Manitoba, near the ND border.
And while we’re on the topic of hierarchy, here’s an interesting story.
https://ca.yahoo.com/style/queens-favourite-breakfast-surprisingly-humble-110719397.html
Woosh. That was the sound of the point going over YOUR small pointy head.
Red fascism is a simple, clear, concept.
No need to go anywhere beyond a description of simple realities when stumbling across the footprints of its Marxist practitioners.
*
“unme charges… Woosh. That was the sound of the
point going over your low sloping forehead.”
nope, unme… that was the sound of you calling paul a
sub-human cretin. never a concentration camp around
when you really need one, huh?
*
Congratulations! My heart is always warmed when a black man is forced to join the “liberal white guilt club” … becoming a millionaire, and gentrifying your (formerly) sketchy neighborhoods … FORCES liberals of all colors to either … embrace the “Capitalist, colonialist, racist, genderist, genocidist” society that made them RICH … or moan about how “guilty” they feel for PROFITING from American culture and society.
See! It’s not only NFL, NBA, and rappers who PROFIT by being born in America (or defecting from Caribbean and communist nations).
May the ghost of Peter Lorre haunt your nights (and days).
I love that! I will look for opportunities to use that same expression.
Those excerpts are not even coherent.
Importing black slaves into America was the biggest mistake the early plantion owners ever made. Not because they were slaves and slavery is immoral, mind you-the first slaves were white. No, it was because they are black and they don’t belong with whites. The legacy of slavery isn’t the crime upon blacks, that debt has been repaid tenfold. The legacy of slavery is the never ending hounding of whites for free stuff and the never ending violence perpetrated against whites by violent blacks. That is how our civillisation ha been punished because a very small number of whites decided to engage in a long established slave market.
It never fails to surprise me how many do not appear to note that skin colour is not the problem, culture is.
If culture were the problem, its failure would mean it had to change, and there is far less graft in a successful culture.
But parasites require graft, so that notion is forbidden. Therefore, skin color must be the problem.