Three waves
of massive extermination were conducted by Marxist regimes during the twentieth
century. The first was Stalin’s Bolshevik terror famine during which five
million Ukrainian farmers and their families perished in the early 1930s. It is
difficult to be precise with the number of Chinese killed by Mao during the
Great Leap Forward in the 1950s and 60s because the communist government of
China still limits access to the archives with the demographics. No one, however, disputes that the deaths topped
off in the tens of millions. In the
1970s Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge
slaughtered about a quarter of their fellow Cambodians.
The dead victims
in all three of these utopias in progress were selected by the “theorists” in
charge who planned and carried out the cleansing operations guided by an
ideology that had deciphered the progressive movement of history and identified
those, shall we say, “irredeemables” who were not part of the improvement plan.
All three architects of mass murder
(Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot), by the way, died in advanced years in their beds,
never to be held to account, Mao now slumbering away as a revered mummy in
his ornate mausoleum in Tiananmen square.
Underway for some time is another Leftist
planned extermination program. The 21st
century theorists like their 20th century predecessors are
Marxists. The Marxist foundational template
is the same – “Revolution”. Revolution
is shorthand for the way Marxist history is supposed to unfold – a smaller
number of designated oppressors (bad people) are overthrown by a larger number
of the discovered oppressed (good people). It is important to note that there
is no place for the oppressors once they are overthrown. These bad people, “bourgeoisie
scum,”
as Lenin called them, get what they
deserve, “liquidatation.”
There are important
differences, however, in the way this extermination is currently unfolding. First, while the Marxist template
(Revolution) remains the same, the place holders have been repositioned. Economic
classes (the oppressor, bourgeois capitalist versus the oppressed workers, the proletariat) have been replaced
by races (white European oppressors versus
non-white oppressed third world people).
Second, this revolution is a softer one.
The oppressors are not being violently overthrown, murdered in mass or
exiled. They are much more complicit in
their elimination, ultimately surrendering their heritage and obliterating
their identity, succumbing to a steady stream of propaganda that stresses their
collective guilt, losers in a Kulturkampf
where speech and behavior that are deemed “insensitive” to people of color
bring severe social sanctions and ostracization. “Hate
speech” is
a tool for the left to monopolize power and criminalize dissent.
The left now
is ramping up this soft revolution with their trifecta of the “white privilege”
indoctrination of our children in the schools and universities, the relentless insistence
on pervasive, ubiquitous racism in American history and society, and the
advocacy of open borders. These are all
of a single piece and the goal is not a colorblind, race-neutral society, free
of discrimination and ethnic hatred, but the reduction of white Europeans to
social and political irrelevancy, the elimination of their history and
self-identity, and the purging of “whiteness” which now carries the eternal
stain of racism and a permanent stigma of bigotry.
American history
has been reduced to a narrative largely focused on racial subjugation and
discrimination, so successful for several generations in defining the American
experience that room has been created for supplemental stories of exploitation
and oppression – sexism, homophobia, most recently Islamophobia – dramatically
inflating the legions of the oppressed, and defining with more precision the
identity of the oppressor, white males.
Students now
in schools and universities are increasingly being subjected to a program of
moral blackmail that leverages ethnic guilt. The teaching of “white
privilege”bears
a strong resemblance to the “self-criticism”
sessions of political reeducation during the Cultural Revolution in China. Thus, courtesy of the Southern Law Poverty
Center:
“White
skin privilege is not something that white people necessarily do, create or
enjoy on purpose. Unlike the more overt individual and institutional manifestations
of racism described above, white skin privilege is a transparent preference for
whiteness that saturates our society. White skin privilege serves
several functions. First, it provides white people with “perks” that we do not
earn and that people of color do not enjoy. Second, it creates real advantages
for us. White people are immune to a lot of challenges. Finally, white
privilege shapes the world in which we live — the way that we navigate and
interact with one another and with the world.” http://www.tolerance.org/article/racism-and-white-privilege
What
then might be a rational response be from a white person subjected to the
airing of a grievance of such magnitude? Since these sorts of tendentious deceptive
semantics are impossible to refute – “whiteness” being so slippery and malleable
an abstraction it can perform whatever subversive tasks are required of it –
the only rational response is not to take it seriously, the way one would
ignore an orating crackpot on a street corner.
But the targets for this ethnic demolition are captive children and young people
who do not understand what is at stake and are not quite up to fighting off
professional indoctrinators. Clearly, the whiteness of “white privilege” is no
less than an inherent, unalterable corruption, and whether or not any given
individual white person bows to the cudgel, the widespread importation of “white
privilege” teaching into the schools and universities as a social engineering
tool helps to manufacture feelings of the sort of collective guilt that sets up
future generations of “white folks” who can be more easily duped, manipulated
and willing to assist in their destruction.
“There
is an old saying that the victors of war get to write the history of the world.
White privilege works this way, too. Since white folks have been in control for
so long, we have determined what is valuable or interesting or useful in terms
of education. Greek and Roman mythology, Chaucer, and other canonized works
have been selected and revered through the ages as critical components of any
“solid liberal arts education.” http://www.tolerance.org/article/racism-and-white-privilege
You
cannot help but relish the candor expressed with this and wonder why any sane
white person would cooperate with such an obvious attempt at intimidation and extortion.
No dissimulation of raw, racial resentment, and not even the pretense of a
win-win outcome is suggested here – whites have been in control for too
long. It is time for them to capitulate
and come to know what subjugation really feels like. There is neither a moral
nor a self-interested reason to respond affirmatively to this.
White
privilege is the corollary of racism, ubiquitous, and so deeply entrenched in white-controlled
and white dominated America, so pervasive and in so many recondite forms, that
a white America without racism is virtually unthinkable. Here is how former
President Barack Obama explains it to a recent interlocutor.
Obama: What is also true is that the legacy of slavery,
Jim Crow, discrimination in almost every institution of our lives — you know,
that casts a long shadow. And that's still part of our DNA that's passed on.
We're not cured of it.
Maron: Racism.
Obama: Racism. We are not cured of it.
Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail
in 2016, not to be outdone by her former boss had this to add to the genetics
of Obama: “We
all have implicit biases. They are almost in the DNA going back probably
millennia. And what we need to do is be more honest about that and surface
them.” http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/20/hillary-tells-black-church-white-people-must-end-systemic-racism/#ixzz4bi9fezs7
How something can “almost” be in the DNA
is a bit puzzling, but don’t bother. It has been a problem for thousands of
years, so things will not change soon. In her 2016 Presidential campaign
Hillary Clinton in a brief moment of honesty before her LGBT followers slipped
out of her tightly regimented script and went full-Leninist to share her
feelings about the supporters of her rival, Donald Trump.
You know, to just be grossly
generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket
of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic
— you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted
them up…. Now, some of those folks --
they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.” http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/sep/11/context-hillary-clinton-basket-deplorables/
Yes, we know. The picture now should
be coming into a very sharp focus: whether they will admit it or not, these recalcitrant,
racist white folks, as any good contemporary Marxist will happily explain to
you, are the oppressor class. Do not expect them to happily renounce their
unearned and undeserved privilege they daily use imperceptibly to exploit and
discriminate against non-white people. As our former geneticist-in chief
informed us, discrimination derives from a racism that is embedded in our DNA
with no “cure” in sight.
Obama is being his usual disingenuous self when he says “our DNA” when he
really means the DNA of the oppressor-discriminators. What Marxism 101 teaches
is that the oppressor class never voluntarily
steps aside to make room for the oppressed:
Lenin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot overthrew them and then killed them.
What then to do about these DNA
infected, racist irredeemables, the oppressors who dismantled Jim Crow fifty
years ago, but who still, as Vice President Joe Bidden so elegantly put in back
in 2012, “They're
going to put y'all back in chains”? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/vp-biden-says-republicans-are-going-to-put-yall-back-in-chains/
The Stalinist, Maoist approach, so
last-century, is not necessary. Bring on part three, open borders, a final
solution, so to speak, that eliminates white privilege and the white racist
infrastructure that keeps it in place by flooding the country with third world
people in sufficient quantities to displace those“white folks”too long in
control. This has been going on in
California since the 1965 immigration law change, and the most populous state
is now sufficiently non-white as to give open-borders, Hillary Clinton most of
her two-plus million vote plurality in the last November election. If Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were to
have their way, in a few short years, the entire country would be “Cali-fornicated” and that “basket of
deplorables” would no longer
be a problem.
To get a glimpse of what the elimination
of white privilege in its final stages looks like and how to put the oppressors
out of business, African Marxist, Robert Mugabe, perhaps, best shows the
way. As Ilana Mercer illustrates in her
recent book, Into Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons
for America in Post-Apartheid South Africa, Mugabe in a few short decades
turned Rhodesia, the bread basket of Africa into a third world hell hole,
expelling and murdering the white farmers who produced the food and ultimately
the wealth. But Mugabe was an
illustrious member of the oppressed race, and even though he wrecked the
country and murdered thousands of people, black and white, he dismantled white
privilege. This made him into an
international star of sorts, a particular favorite at western universities such
as Edinburgh, U-Mass, and Michigan State University where he was bestowed with
tributes along with honorary degrees.
The revolutionary freedom fighter was spokesperson
and cherished idol of the anti-apartheid growth industry abroad. It took
decades and piles of dead bodies before Robert Mugabe lost luster in the eyes
of the American mainstream media. Mercer,
Ilana. Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South
Africa (p. 134). Bytech Services. Kindle Edition.
Michigan State University must have forgotten Mugabe's success in dismantling white privilege and in 2008 stripped him of the doctorate awarded eighteen years prior.
Michigan State University must have forgotten Mugabe's success in dismantling white privilege and in 2008 stripped him of the doctorate awarded eighteen years prior.
Michigan
State University trustees Friday stripped Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe of
an honorary law degree it gave him in 1990, citing a pattern of human rights
abuses and political repression. Mugabe led the successful struggle to overcome
White minority rule over what then was called Rhodesia. But he now faces wide
domestic and international opposition because of Zimbabwe’s economic collapse
and his crackdown on opponents. http://diverseeducation.com/article/11685/
The American people have just finished
eight years of being governed by a version of Robert Mugabe-Lite. Mrs. Mugabe
was anointed and waiting in the wings with, we can be quite sure, her plans for
that “basket of
deplorables,” her very own Untermenschen who are really not part of
America. Much to the chagrin of our sneering overlords, she
was upended by the Orange Man who may at least slow down our own miserable forced march to Zimbabwe.
-
