By Suthenboy
A divided people are more easily conquered. The Imperialist European powers were well aware of this and commonly drew borders in their overseas colonies to encompass competing indigenous peoples so that those groups would fight with each other and not the conquering Europeans. Additionally they gained political capital by putting themselves in the position of arbiters of the disputes and alleviators of grievances for those indigenous people. The political left in the modern United States is also well aware of this strategy.
Their most powerful weapon today is identity politics and the trump card in that deck is racial identity. They actively and deliberately fan the flames of racial animus and stoke grievances among minority populations. By playing the part of arbiters and alleviators they gain loyal voter support of minorities and by cobbling together a number of those minorities seek to gain a majority. They use the threat of labeling one a racist as a gag for those that disagree with them. The problem of course is that it is injurious to our society and culture to set a common people against themselves. Fortunately it appears to be a failing strategy of late yet they are doubling down on it.
They have targeted every minority but the primary recipients have been Blacks. Until recently Black Americans were the largest minority in the United States. Constant reminders of the history of slavery, of real and imagined grievances, and relegating them to second-class citizenry have divided our country politically along racial lines. Over time and with great effort many of the rifts between Black America and the rest of the country had largely healed but they are intent on re-opening those wounds. Their post-racial America looks more like the mid-nineteenth century than the early twenty first.
My own children belong to groups of friends that include mixed couples and members of all races, including a number of Blacks. In their direct experience those rifts don’t exist, but ask them about it and they can tell you all about the ignus fatuus that animates their politics.
The left has actively and deliberately perpetrated resentment among the races for their own political gain successfully for decades. Many of them focus exclusively on that goal and profit handsomely from it. In order to do this they necessarily must cast away the very foundation of liberty – self-ownership. Self-ownership does not tolerate the assignment of collective guilt – that some are guilty of the sins of others. Personal responsibility is an anathema to those pushing to redistribute wealth from the descendants of slave holders to the descendants of slaves. No members of either group are victims or perpetrators and one of those groups barely exists at all.
Their assignment of guilt is built on the absurd assertion that one is guilty of acts they neither performed or had any hand in deciding. The inevitable conclusion of the assertion that whites are guilty by mere virtue of their skin color, something they can cannot decide or change, refutes the agency of a large portion of the human race. Simply put it is the very dehumanizing bigotry that gave rise to slavery in the first place.
How then to remedy this? What would be enough? If mere whiteness is guilt then nothing will ever be enough because we cannot change the past nor can anyone change their skin color. The repugnant answer to that question can only be total theft and extermination. Their answer is not to end oppression but to have the oppressed and oppressors exchange places. The morality of our society would decay to the primitive.
The most grotesque aspect of this strategy is that the very premises of it are smoke. Racial differences are will-o-the wisps and focusing on them distracts us from solving real problems. It deprives all of us of the benefits of solidarity with our fellow countrymen. It wastes vast amounts of human potential. It creates unnecessary strife and poverty.
The first step in solving this problem is to identify the problem. What if it turns out the problem is not a problem at all. That in a calculated way the left has manufactured straw giants and murky definitions which is a much bigger problem than race or class?
See that Black dude over there? We have a common humanity. He isn’t a Black dude. His name is John and he is my countryman. So I ask you what does race mean?
I’m going to go read your first part then I will be back to this one. *zoots off*
So…bacon moves by “zooting”?
Zoot and scoot. Like I’m greased.
Oh my…
Zoot’s off
Zut! Trying again
Funny enough, one of the things that Star Trek’s the Federation gets absolutely right is that their constitution absolves any person from the actions or crimes of their ancestors.
If you’re making a Constitution 2.0 that’s not bad.
Yeah that is a great point.
I didn’t think I would find a will-o-the-wisp reference out of a Piers Anthony novel. Rock on. Good read. On part 1: didn’t the Aztecs, Inca and Mayan civilizations practice slavery in the Americas?
*Aztec and Incan
and wholesale human sacrifice.
Fun fact – it only takes about seventeen seconds to remove a heart with a flint knife by going up under the front of the ribcage,
*okay, the incans were not as zealous as the Aztecs in this regard, but to be fair, who was?
Aztec is not the proper name to refer to the inhabitants of Central Mexico that were conquered by Cortez and his merry men. It’s Mexica, not Aztec.
And? I can’t pronounce most Nahuatl words and phrases, so I’m going with the accepted English terminology
I’m not trying to be the history and culture police. That’s HM’s job. But it’s not really the accepted English term. It’s just wrong. Someone started using that term, I think it was a couple centuries after the Spanish conquest and it just stuck. Still, it’s completely wrong from a historical standpoint.
Thats not what I call them.
Meh, it’s generally a useful indicator for layman’s discussions and provides a way to differentiate between post-Spanish Mexico and pre-Spanish Mexica. It’s ‘wrong’ in the same way that we use the Roman names for tribes and nations that called themselves something different, or modern English names for nations instead of their own languages’.
In a sort of calling native north Americans Indians sort of way, yes. Or calling modern day Americans Englishmen sort of way.
Hyperion, what do you call the residents of the Netherlands?
what do you call the residents of the Netherlands?
Dyke fingerers?
Eurotards? I don’t play favorite with those commies cross the pond.
Wait, so you’re willing to quibble about the terms for 15th century city-state alliances, but Europe is just made up of Eurotards?
I…but…what…*head explodes*
Americans of Aboriginal Ancestry. AAA
Formative Aboriginal Generations.
Oh, First Nations!
The Carribe?
All indigenous NA tribes practiced slavery albeit in a somewhat different way than the over cited American slavery of the US. Often captives were made to do the difficult work, treated as kind of second class family members and life probably wasn’t all that unbearable. At least until the food got short. Then instead of cleaning the soup pot they filled it.
Some of them also practiced human sacrifice. Then the Spanish came and taught them how to be civilized by burning them at the stake.
Go back and read the Greek classics. They talk about sacrifice in there too. They sacrificed bulls and had a ceremony. Then a couple of paragraphs later they mention in passing that they ate the bull themselves. I was implying that the Injuns here did the same thing. The sacrifice was just the ritual. The purpose was protein acquisition.
That is the source of the creepy communion in christian churches. Cannibalism evolves ( in most societies) from butchery to partial consumption to symbolism. Reading about the Injuns in the area where I live (my house sits on a hill overlooking a bayou and there obviously was a village here) I found out they were some of the most notorious cannibals in NA. When the Europeans first arrived they found them to be unrelenting hunters of men who killed and ate everyone that wasn’t one of them. The pressure to end the practice came first from the Europeans and then all the other tribes around that were sick of that shit. So they started just cutting people and drinking blood in a ceremony, then it changed to sucking blood through the skin (massive hickies) and finally to substituting actual food in their ceremonies. Unfortunately for them they would backslide now and then and everyone got fed up. The surrounding tribes ended up exterminating them.
Greeks and Romans did, however, separate animal sacrifice from human sacrifice for religious purposes. In fact, rejection of human sacrifice was one of the things Romans used as an example of their civilized behaviour in comparison to Germanic or Gallic tribes.
And yet, I don’t find sacrificing virgins to the Sun god to be any less barbaric than burning witches.
I don’t really see the connection there Hyperion, considering the Romans didn’t burn witches. And there’s a lot more nuance to European witch burnings than you let on. Charlemagne, for example, condemned attacks on so-called ‘witches’ and thought people who believed in witchcraft were idiots. Witch burnings were not a central component of Christian worship, they tended to be idiotic purges in response to immediate circumstances rather than a cultural constant, which sacrifice in Mexica was.
What about the Spanish Inquisition?
See idiotic purges. The Spanish Inquisition largely existed to persecute and root out hidden Muslims and Jews after the Reconquista, where they saw those groups as planning to overthrow them again. It’s a church organization, sure, but it’s political in nature. Same thing with a lot of the early modern witch burnings, they were based on paranoia and attempts to root out existing pagan influences in peasant communities (if you’ve ever knocked on wood you know it didn’t work).
Fair enough, but it’s still just as barbaric, regardless of whether it was done for religious or political purposes.
“What about the Spanish Inquisition?”
To be fair no one really saw that one coming.
I wouldn’t be so quick to drag communion into the cannibalism discussion. Pretty sure Christianity had its roots in Judaism, and so far as I can tell, human flesh wasn’t in the kosher diet.
Judaism, like pagan religions all around, contained a great deal of animal sacrifice tradition. Jesus is directly referencing those rituals in the Last Supper dialogue, so it is essentially a ‘human sacrifice’. As is the crucifixion itself.
My nephew texted me a poster in his college that read ‘if you don’t have to think about it, it’s a privilege’. It’s a virus and if gains the right about of critical mass it can be destructive. Hopefully not to the point mentioned in the piece but close to it. This stuff should have been nipped in the bud and scholars, academics, the media, and weasel politicians all failed by enabling it.
It’s a way of blaming one’s personal shortcomings on “society” in order to avoid responsibility for it. It is always somebody else’s fault. A common theme among Marxists.
It’s not MY fault I spent enough to buy a luxury car on a useless education, society just doesn’t appreciate what I chose to offer it. It needs to change, not me. Also, somebody else need to pay for my student debt because that wasn’t my fault.
It’s the ‘someone else needs’ that is the problem. To socialists and their brain dead minions, it’s government that is picking up the tab. But we all know it’s tax payers, the people who were actually responsible and have generated all the labor and skill to make a functional society, who will pay the price.
I remember having a conversation with some acquaintances about whether the government should bail out college students who are in debt and obviously I was against that idea. One of them retorted that I have this views because I don’t know how it feels to accumulate debt from college loans, which I very quickly told them how much I owe from college.
I chose to go to a private Catholic university in Chicago when I could have went to any of the city colleges for 2 years and transferred to one of the state schools in Illinois. No one should be on the hook for my decisions. That’s something we need to teach people especially people in their late teens to their early 20. We need to teach them that you make choices in life and whether the results are good or bad, you have to deal with the consequences of those choices. Blaming others for your choices is fruitless.
Article recently reported that according to some poll (disclaimer about poll accuracy) about half of college students believe their debt will be forgiven eventually. Despite the reality that very few student loan debts are forgiven.
So, bad enough we have incentives for getting into debt in the first place, but the students are so poorly educated about their loans that they live in some fantasy land where it doesn’t matter how much debt they run up, some (government) fairy will pay it for them.
In all fairness do you think a truely free market would offer boat loads of cash to naive 17 18yr olds? Without gov involvement they wouldnt have had the opportunitytheybe enabled to make a long term bad decision. Not to say im a proponent of a bailout but i do think a semi-libertarian case could be made for it. Or at least a libertarian as a bailout could get
Tough shit for 2 reasons.
1) When I was in school, it was made very clear to me how much I was going to borrow and a constant concern was how to pay for this stuff when I was done. It impacted my choice of majors and kept me more focused on having to finish and get a good job to pay for this stuff rather than just muck around aimlessly.
2) People don’t learn from bail outs. If a bunch of people get fucked over hard, though, it can impose fiscal discipline that can last a couple of generations. “Oh no, don’t take one of those NINJA loans. Uncle Frank did that back in 2007 and lost everything” or “Son, you need to learn from my mistakes. Those student loans are going to be a burden if you don’t get a job that can pay them down.”
I agree. But what if it hadnt been made so clear to you. What if the only point pounded into your head was “go to college or you wont ever make shit” and thats about as far as it went. Obviously not every 18yr old is on equal ground when it comes to sense, and public schools do such a great job preparing tomorrows leaders. Surely you have at least a little sympathy for those who were, dare i say, taken advantage of.
‘Boat loads of cash’ are not the only way to achieve a university education however. Military service provides the option as well, but people are actively making the easier choice.
Of course not but not everyone is made fully aware of their options or the ramifications of their decisions. And you gotta believe they might be better educated had the government not backed these loans after a bunch of peoplr defaulted.
I think the counterargument to your bailout argument however is: what about the people who did make the better choice? I took very little federal loans and paid for most of my education with a bank loan, and joined the military after school when I couldn’t get a job anywhere else. Paid off my debt in a couple years. Other people drove their debts up, are unwilling to make the choices to pay them off, and are now requesting a bailout. Why do I (and make no mistake, I don’t want a bailout) get nothing while the people to made the actively worse choices get off scot-free?
Hell, bailout those people too. Nobody ever said you had to need a bailout to take one… I say that not really believing it, just sympathizing with it. but if it came down to dropping a few less bombs in syria inorder to fund my hypothetical bailout then im all for it. Of course its never presented like ttha. Of course if im king everyone getting the bailout have to acknowledge the gov aided in their bad decision so they can never support gov involvment in anyone elses lives. ?
Ask your nephew is breathing is a privilege to him.
Victim-hood is the new pathway to power. When you take the power of being a victim away, this nonsense will slowly disappear.
‘if you don’t have to think about it, it’s a privilege’
It’s just a redub secularization of original sin. Repent, o you privileged sinners, for you carry a great weight within you, and the only way to alleviate it is by obeying my rules! Within a slave morality there is always a need for a master.
“Since the social victim has been oppressed by society, he comes to feel that his individual life will be improved more by changes in society than by his own initiative. Without realizing it, he makes society rather than himself the agent of change. The power he finds in his victimization may lead him to collective action against society, but it also encourages passivity within the sphere of his personal life.” -Shelby Steele
My soon to be wife is white and we have discussed at length that we will make sure that our children won’t have this victim-hood complex and tell those who wants to constantly remind them of how “oppressed” they are, to fuck off and die in a fire.
I’ve witnessed first hand the poison of identity politics and unless it stops, it’s going to cause us some pain in the near future. How about we view each other as individuals instead of trying to collectivize everybody.
How about we view each other as individuals instead of trying to collectivize everybody.
Because that would be totally racist.
Good to see you here, Ed. Great post.
Brian: Please, please, please listen! I’ve got one or two things to say.
The Crowd: Tell us! Tell us both of them!
Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t NEED to follow ME, You don’t NEED to follow ANYBODY! You’ve got to think for your selves! You’re ALL individuals!
The Crowd: Yes! We’re all individuals!
Brian: You’re all different!
The Crowd: Yes, we ARE all different!
Man in crowd: I’m not…
The Crowd: Sch!
Wasn’t that line an ad-lib by the extra?
I remember Herman Cain (I think) telling about what his father told him as a child: (paraphrased) You see that caddillac? When you see someone drive by in one of those dont wish you had it. Taking from someone else gets you nowhere. Go out work hard and get your own.
There is a formative stage at between 5 and 12-ish where the lessons you teach your children will stay with them for life. If they haven’t learned by then they never will.
This is why I encourage all young libertarian expecting parents to go ahead and hook the chillin up to the libertarian propaganda portal, at conception. Did you hear that, founders of glibertaria? Get that portal going!
One of my plans to convert my future children to Libertarian-ism, is to read Hayek’s, The Constitution of Liberty, as a bedtime story.
In all seriousness though, I told my fiance that the children’s book, The Rainbow Fish is banned from the house.
Whut? Ooooooh. You said rainbow fish and this is what popped in my head:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5i85g-Rq8k&t=231s
Peacock bass! I want to go! One day when I’m in Brazil I’m going to find to find a guide and go. They’re like smallmouth on steroids.
*facepalm*
You weren’t supposed to notice the fish in that video.
What? The 12 year old girl?
A good libertarian children’s book is “If you give a moose a muffin”
It’s a pretty big indictment on the welfare state.
I’m a fan of The Little Red Hen.
It’s like the term African American. I really hate that term and refuse to use it. How many black folks in North America have ever been to Africa? Why can’t I just demand I be called a European American? What about the Asians I know? I don’t see any of them insisting that they be called Chinese Americans or Korean Americans. Fuck the left, I’m way past sick of their bullshit and could care less what they think.
I identify as a boureka.
*duck duck go’s boureka*
You are a middle eastern cheese filled puff pastry?
A very delicious one, yes.
One of the crane drivers where I work is a white guy from south africa. I refer to him as an African American all the time.
I have an English friend who is black, and he always corrects anyone referring to him as “African-American”. Gets people to stop and think…
I never thought about that growing up, as literally all of the black people around me were descendants of slaves whose families eventually moved north. Now I live in a city where a lot, perhaps even the majority, of the “black” people weren’t even born in America.
I don’t know any like that either, but I can assure you they’re out there. Most of them seem to find their way into politics and similar useless occupations.
I rarely have to distinguish people by skin color but when I do I just use the word Black. It was acceptable all my life, used by Blacks and Whites alike. It was never considered a derogatory term.
I think the movement to change the word to something else meant that those people saw being Black as inherently bad. I dont usually get a good reaction when I point this out. Also when I point out that changing words doesnt change reality and their perception of people isnt going to change by using different language.
(In short – You are a fucking bigot and nothing is going to change that)
I had a Black girl freak the fuck out on me once. I was driving for the state and she was staff. She kept going on and on about Blacks this and Whites that while I just sat silent and drove. Finally I turned to her and said “hold your arm up here *indicates center of dash*” She held her arm up. I lifted mine up and placed it next to hers. My arm was at least two shades darker. I am pretty white but have a little Injun in me and tan readily in the sun. She freaked the fuck out. Then she wouldn’t speak to me anymore.
I don’t know what I like more: Suthen’s folksey anecdotes or stories about Rufus’s cousin.
Great stuff right? Lol
Beck when I worked in fast food, one of the girls I worked with was from Jamaica. She would tell off anyone who called her African-American.
So, I have to ask, is Charlize Theron an African American?
I remember the MSM building up to a crescendo of “reparations”-related derp just before 9/11. Then, nothing for a good ten years. I fear we’re nearing the top of the cycle again only this time the derp is being dialled to 11.
It means you need to check your privilege, white boy.
They won’t be happy until they turn us into Yugoslavia without the hot chicks. And we all know how well that turned out.
If there’s ever been an unholy alliance from the pits of hell, here it is:
The Unholy Trinity
I was wondering why I saw four horseman over Lake Michigan this morning.
Did the pale one look distinctly like John McCain?
“What if the left has manufactured straw giants”
What if the sky is blue.
As a Southerner, I really appreciate this stuff Suthenboy
One of my plans to convert my future children to Libertarian-ism, is to read Hayek’s, The Constitution of Liberty, as a bedtime story.
In all seriousness though, I told my fiance that the children’s book, The Rainbow Fish is banned from the house.
Get an old, original copy (not the “modern” social justice version) of The Little Red Hen, and read it to them; early, and often. And when you tell them the story of the ant and the grasshopper, make sure they come away knowing the goddam grasshopper isn’t the hero.
It’s like the term African American. I really hate that term and refuse to use it. How many black folks in North America have ever been to Africa?
I was eating lunch in Indianapolis, one day, and at a table near me were two black couples, all dressed better than I. There wasn’t anybody else in the place, so I could hear bits and pieces of their conversation, even though I try not to be an eavesdropper.
Anyway, at one point, one of the men said, in a somewhat raised voice , “African American? I’m not an African American. Africa’s got nothing to do with me. I was born and raised in Indianapolis, Indiana.”
I couldn’t help it. I started laughing. They all laughed, too.
*obviously paraphrased
Enjoyed the read, good stuff.
“Fortunately it appears to be a failing strategy of late yet they are doubling down on it.”
For all our sakes, I hope you are correct about the “failing” part. No doubt there has been a long overdue pushback, but they are “doubling down” because it’s all they know. And I can still seeing go either way.
FYI I also left a late reply on Pt. 1 regarding the “creoles”.
You know who else says there is no such thing as “race”?
Self-ownership does not tolerate the assignment of collective guilt – that some are guilty of the sins of others. Personal responsibility is an anathema to those pushing to redistribute wealth from the descendants of slave holders to the descendants of slaves.
You know, if I were a hardcore racist, not just a person with dated or backward notions of race relations, but a real, black-hating, Grand Cyclops bastard, I can’t imagine I could come up with a better plot to destroy and marginalize black people than the progressives (albeit with a fair share of conservative help) have pushed. I’d look to organize government programs to try to disincentivize and marginalize black fatherhood. I’d trap them in schools that serve primarily as jobs programs for my cronies. I’d create a Drug War that gave huge numbers of black men criminal records. I’d institute wage controls to price lower skilled (or even just discriminated against) talent out of the market. I’d teach them that the only way they could possibly hope to advance in life was through the largesse of my assistance. All the while, I’d teach them that the only thing stopping them from reaching the promised land, was those people who didn’t agree with me.
A fair number of those started life as Jim Crow laws. Minimum wage and the drug war, for two.
Well, progressives are the same people who fondly eulogized Fidel Castro. Which makes sense: as a white man who enslaved an island nation of mostly black citizens for half a century, he pretty much lived the dream of Western progs.
And by the way, great follow-up, Southen.
I can’t imagine I could come up with a better plot to destroy and marginalize black people than the progressives
Exactly. I have said, in the past, that if the Democrats had explicitly set out to destroy black communities, they probably couldn’t have devised anything more effective the the Great Society.
“if the Democrats had explicitly set out to destroy black communities, they probably couldn’t have devised anything more effective than the Great Society.”
I grew up in the rural south in the 60’s, and that was my observation. Lot’s of dirt poor Black folks (and some White folks not much better off); I’m talking tar-paper shacks and outhouses. But by-and-large the kids knew who there daddy was, and he probably lived with them as a family in most cases. That changed in a remarkably short period of time……. due to good intentions and all.
One good thing about all this lefty nonsense escalating so sharply is that many lefties are getting turned off by it too. The hardline true believers aren’t going anywhere, but that’s ok. Without the army of foot soldiers they’re impotent. Among a number of similar recent stories I could tell, I have an extremely Right-thinking prog friend who was recently called a “racist with a child’s view of right and wrong” because she wasn’t attending a protest. Needlessly to say, that didn’t go well. After a number of long, in depth conversations with me, she has registered for Chicago LP and is ready to put the orphans to work.
Could it be a false, temporary conversion? Absolutely. But at least for now there’s one less foot soldier in the social justice war. And there are other defectors daily. And maybe, just maybe, if they ever return to the democrat party, it’s at least as a sane “liberal” with an appreciation for civil rights, economic freedom, and limits on government freedom instead of a screeching batshit prog.
*limits on government power* Jesus. My kingdom for an edit button
I would also like an edti button.