Tag Archives: Identity politics

If Walls Don’t Work, Why Did Castles Have Them? by Paul Craig Roberts

A wall would definitely hinder efforts to turn the US into more of a multicultural paradise. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

Indeed, why the Great Wall of China, why Hadrian’s Wall, why the Constantinople wall, why were there walled cities, why the Israeli Wall that keeps Palestinians out of Palestine?

Walls do work, according to President Obama’s former Border Patrol Chief, Mark Morgan: https://patrioticviralnews.com/articles/former-border-patrol-chief-for-president-obama-says-walls-work/

During the Obama regime, US Senator Schumer and US Rep. Pelosi agreed with President Obama that Walls do work and supported building a wall. Why do they oppose a wall now? The answer, obvious on the surface, is that with the presstitutes lined up against The Wall, Democrats can use the issue against Trump. However, this answer is not as good as it looks. Polls show that Trump has a far higher approval rating than the presstitute media and that Americans want the wall. So the question becomes: why have the Democrats lined up against the American people by opposing a wall? Why do Democrats oppose Americans having their own country as a place where American citizens live? Why do Democrats want America to be up for grabs by everyone who can illegally cross the border?

The answer, I think, is not just the immigrant vote, but also that in the last decade Democrats have become firmly allied with the ideology of Identity Politics, which teaches that “whiteness” needs to be dismantled, that is, done away with. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/01/14/identity-politics-white-genocide/ To have a massive inflow of nonwhites is a way to “decenter whiteness.” I would wager that if the illigal immigrants were white Europeans, the Democrats would be all for building The Wall.

Continue reading

Advertisements

America Has No Peace Movement – Blame the ‘White Supremacists’, by Philip Giraldi

Politics make strange bedfellows, but many “progressives” who would oppose America’s idiotic foreign war policy won’t align with many conservatives who also oppose that policy, and vice versa. Identity politics trumps policy. From Philip Giraldi at strategic-culture.org:

The United States of America has no peace movement even though the country has been mired in unwinnable wars since 2001 and opinion polls suggest that there is only lukewarm support among the public for what is taking place in Afghanistan and Syria. This is in part due to the fact that today’s corporate media virtually functions as a branch of government, which some might refer to as the Ministry of Lies, and it is disinclined to report on just how dystopic American foreign and national security policy has become. This leaves the public in the dark and allows the continued worldwide blundering by the US military to fly under the radar.

The irony is that America’s last three presidents quite plausibly can be regarded as having their margins of victory attributed to a peace vote. George W. Bush promised a more moderate foreign policy in his 2000 campaign, Obama pledged to undo much of the harsh response to 9/11 promulgated by Bush, and Donald Trump was seen as the less warlike candidate when compared to Hillary Clinton. So the public wants less war but the politicians’ promises to deliver have been little more than campaign chatter, meaning that the United States continues to be locked into the same cycle of seeking change through force of arms.

Continue reading

Why Marxism Shifted from Economics to Culture, by Brian Balfour

Cultural Marxism, much in the news these days, is not some figment of right-wing imaginations, it’s the well-documented strategy of bona fide Marxists. From Brian Balfour at mises.org:

In his recent Reason magazine article, senior editor Brian Doherty assures readers that “cultural Marxism” is nothing but mere “paranoia” conjured up by the “conspiratorial right” to provide cover for their hate of “multiculturalism and gay rights and radical feminism.”

He openly mocks the idea that the unmistakable uptick in identity politics these last few decades has anything to do with “sinister machinations of commies striving to enslave us.”

One must be “mistaken” and “foolish,” according to Doherty, to believe that such concerted efforts to build coalitions based on racial, national and gender identities to replace the economic “class” identities of classical Marxism is anything more than “dubious conspiratorial theories.”

Doherty’s stance is especially puzzling, however, given the fact that socialist leaders have openly written about this strategy for decades.

Continue reading

How Identity Politics Is Changing Universities, by William L. Anderson

The weird political belief system that sees the world entirely in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity have virtually taken over the academy. From William L. Anderson at mises.org:

Ours is a politicized age from the college campus to the corporate boardroom, a situation in which things that once were personal now are utterly political. The hard left now controls not only higher education, but also much of scientific research upon which the future of humanity as we know it depends. What began in 1969 as the establishment of a single course in Women’s Studies at Cornell University and similar courses elsewhere in what then were called Black Studies has metastasized into a monster that almost completely dominates higher education in the United States and Canada. Today, it is rare to find a college or university that does not have majors and programs in Identity Studies.

This long march of feminists and racialists from near-obscurity to absolute-dominance is compared to the rise of Snopes family created by author William Faulkner in his 1940 novel, The Hamlet. In Faulkner’s book, the Snopeses move into the Mississippi community of Frenchman’s Bend and slowly take over nearly all aspects of life. Even though the locals seem to understand what is taking place, they are seemingly helpless because they heard the rumor that people that made a Snopes unhappy would have their barns burned to the ground.

In campus politics, the activists did not threaten to burn only the barns but rather the entire college campus. Anyone in higher education that might allegedly say or write something that offends someone in a politically-protected group is likely to be the focus of the infamous Twitter Mob, and even a distinguished career and something as prestigious as a Nobel Prize offers no cover, as Tim Hunt found out. For that matter, truth itself is no defense, as we found out in the infamous Duke Lacrosse Case. All that matters is identity politics, and the Duke case demonstrates just how powerful – and destructive – such politics have become.

In March 2006 at Duke University, a black stripper falsely claimed that three members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team beat and raped her at a team party where she performed, and the Duke campus exploded in anger as the story spread throughout the country, dominating newscasts and the Internet. Shortly after the accusations surfaced, 88 Duke faculty members signed an advertisement in the Duke Chronicle, a student newspaper, condemning the lacrosse players and thanking demonstrators for not waiting to see if the charges were credible.

To continue reading: How Identity Politics Is Changing Universities

Counter-#Resistance? by James Howard Kunstler

The Democrats were the party of slavery during the Civil War (Lincoln was the first Republican president), the party of Jim Crow and the Klu Klux Klan in the Solid South afterwards, and Democratic Southern congressmen stifled civil rights legislation for decades. So why do blacks think the Democrats have done them any favors since Civil Rights legislation finally passed in the 1960s (with far more Republican support than Democratic) and why do blacks continue to  vote more than 90 percent for Democrats? From James Howard Kunstler at kunstler.com:

Who hit Kanye with that white privilege stick? The rapper / fashion maven / theologian / Kardashian arm candyman sent chills through the Twitterverse when he declared himself, somewhat elliptically, off-the-bus of the Progressive #Resistance movement and an admirer of the Golden One in the Oval Office. This came in his endorsement of YouTube blogger Candace Owen, who happens to not be down with the cause of the national victim lottery. Both Kanye and Candace have apparently crossed some boundary into a Twilight Zone of independent thought. Many probably wonder how they are able to get out of bed in the morning without instructions from Don Lemon.

Speaking as a white cis-hetero mammal, I’m not quite as dazzled by the president, but it’s a relief to see, at last, some small rebellion against the American Stasi who have turned the public arena into a giant holding pen for identity offenders — though it is but one corner of the triad-of-hysteria that also includes the Hate Russia campaign and the crusade against men. This nonsense has been going on long enough, while the country hurtles heedlessly into a long emergency of economic disarray.

Next in line after Kanye and Candace, a popular Twitter critter name of Chance the Rapper endorsed Kanye endorsing Candace, more or less, by tweeting “black people don’t have to be Democrats.” The horror this thought aroused! Slavery, these days, it turns out, has a lot of appeal — maybe not so much for laboring in the canefields under the noonday sun as for serving juleps in the DNC plantation house. It happened that Kanye’s mom was a college professor, Chance’s dad was an aide to Chicago Mayor Daley (Jr.), and later worked in Mr. Obama’s Department of Labor. Candace describes her childhood home in Stamford, CT, as “very poor,” but she rose far-and-fast out of college to become an executive on Wall Street in her twenties. What they seem to have in common is being tainted with bourgeois values, horror again!

To continue reading: Counter-#Resistance? 

Diversity Politics Vs. White People: Who Will Win?, by Paul Craig Roberts

This is a good survey for anyone with the interest (and the stomach) to deep dive into “identity politics.” From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

Identity Politics is the ideology of the liberal/progressive/left and the Democratic Party. Identity Politics teaches hatred of white people, all white people. An article last November in the student newspaper at Texas State University declared that white DNA is an abomination.

Americans, assuming that they are aware of this hostile statement toward white people, dismiss it as student silliness. They do not understand that it is the logical conclusion of the reigning ideology in America today. Naomi Klein, for example, writing in the current issue of Sierra, takes for granted the explanations of Identity Politics when she writes that the stakes in the 2016 election were enormously high for “those targeted by racist attacks as Trump fanned the flames of rising white nationalism . . . to the prospect of women losing the right to decide whether or not to become mothers, to the reality of sexual assault being normalized and trivialized at the highest reaches of power.”

Formerly, the liberal/progressive/left and the Democratic Party stood for the working class. In those days societal conflict was understood in class terms, and the capitalist was seen as the exploiter. Today the conflict is identity driven, with the white heterosexual male placed in the role as the exploiter of blacks, homosexuals and women.

The idea that power resides in the white heterosexual male is obviously erroneous. Imagine if the Texas college student had written that black DNA is an abomination or homosexual DNA is an abomination. The article would not have been published. But it is perfectly OK to denigrate whites. Indeed, white males have no protection against abuse, because they are not protected by quotas, political correctness, and hate speech prohibitions.

Whites are easily discriminated against, as the recent firing of James Damore by Google illustrates. Damore simply stated a scientific fact that males and females have different traits that suit them to different jobs. But this is a fact that is inconsistent with Identity Politics. Just as Trofim Lysenko managed to destroy Soviet genetics by denying facts, Identity Politics is destroying American society by denying facts. http://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/disastrous-effects-lysenkoism-soviet-agriculture Ideologies are only interested in facts that confirm the ideology. When no such facts exist, ideologues make up the facts.

To continue reading: Diversity Politics Vs. White People: Who Will Win?