Category Archives: Reason

UPDATE III (5/11): NEW COLUMN: Earth To Conservatives: The Problem Is ‘Systemic Anti-Whiteness,’ Not Marxism, Not ID Politics

Argument, Communism, Conservatism, Logic, Political Correctness, Race, Racism, Reason, Republicans, South-Africa

NEW COLUMN is, “Earth To Conservatives: The Problem Is ‘Systemic Anti-Whiteness,’ Not Marxism, Not ID Politics.” It’s currently on The Unz Review, WND.COM, CNSNews,
and American Greatness.

An excerpt:

Institutionalized, systemic anti-whiteness, yoked to white hot, hatred of whites: That is the creed that is fast becoming entrenched across state and civil society in the U.S.

Chiseled down, these are also the building blocks of Critical Race Theory, a specious, subintelligent concoction, originated by subpar intellectuals.

The Critical Race project now pervades private and political life.

A further twist of the screw (or the shrew) was delivered recently by Vice President Kamala Harris, who insists on yammering about white America’s historic racism.

In practice, whites are being singled out for a punishing, institutionalized program of reeducation, subjugation and continued intimidation.

Dangerous in isolation, the entrenchment of anti-white animus is indisputable. It is made worse in combination with the conservative cognoscenti’s inability to come out with it. Too many conservatives euphemize our anti-white culture.

In particular, they will typically deflect from any anti-white outrage du jour by dubbing it identity politics: “Boohoo. Democrats are dividing us via identity politics.” This is an obfuscation.

Here’s why: Blacks are not being pitted against Hispanics. Hispanics are not being sicced on Asians, and Ameri-Indians aren’t being urged to attack the groups just mentioned. Rather, they’re all piling on honky. Hence, anti-white politics or animus. The multicultural multitudes are gunning for whites and their putative privilege.

The tarring of whites is now close to becoming a curricular requirement in education (primary, secondary, tertiary), and from entertainment to technology, anti-white racial “redress” is the all-important object of industry.

When they are not lamenting Democrat-driven, divisive “identity politics”; conservatives will wax to you about Marxism and communism. The anti-white theoretical kudzu enervating every aspect of life is, apparently, just a manifestation of the radical Left’s Marxism. Or, so you are told. This further downplays the anti-white project of the purveyors of Critical Race policy prescriptions.

Put it this way: If your first response to “Kill the Farmer, Kill the Boer,” chanted by South Africa’s murderous Julius Malema, is, “Marxism, identity politics”—you are going to come short in the survival department. …

READ THE REST… NEW COLUMN is “Earth To Conservatives: The Problem Is ‘Systemic Anti-Whiteness,’ Not Marxism, Not ID Politics.” It’s currently on The Unz Review, WND.COM, CNSNews, and American Greatness.

UPDATES I (5/7): Genocide Watch Wokes Up

Jack Kerwick Got It, In 2012:

Anti-whiteness warnings:

Google voids searches?

The Regime:

UPDATE II (5/8): An impressive reader, who first wrote after my appearance on Michelle Malkin’s Sovereign Nation:

From: eric
Sent: Saturday, May 8, 2021 6:05 AM
Subject: Fwd: MERCER > EARTH TO CONSERVATIVES: THE PROBLEM IS SYSTEMIC ANTI-WHITENESS, NOT MARXISM, NOT IDENTITY POLITICS

Dear Comrades & Friends,

[HERE] is the LINK to [the courageous] CNSNews for an exceptional linguistically accurate yet frightening article by Misses Ilana Mercer. This intelligent courageous lady, who originally came from South Africa, goes straight to the jugular vein for the truth of the matter: she clearly states that pigmentation, skin colour does matter, because it is about hating, murdering and reducing Whites and their European culture and traditions to nothing but a zero factor in the history of mankind. Also, inherently her criticism of the wrong terminology used by The Right reveals nothing but deliberate ignorance, by this I mean they suffer from the psychological disorder known as Confabulation, pseudo-intellectualism and, I will say, cowardice on the part of its doyens, … Those who say skin colour or race does not enter the equation should not avoid the internal LINK in Misses Mercer’s article “Kill The Farmer, Kill The Boer” by Mister Loyiso Sidimba.
God Bless You All & The Brave Ilana, Eric

https://cnsnews.com/commentary/ilana-mercer/earth-conservatives-problem-systemic-anti-whiteness-not-marxism

NEW ON YouTube: Discussing The Role of ‘Racism’ In The Floyd Trial With David Vance

Crime, Free Speech, Law, Political Correctness, Racism, Reason

NEW ON YouTube: Discussing with David Vance the role of “racism” in the Floyd trial.

Who the hell writes such a difficult column, as, “Was The Cop’s Knee On George Floyd’s Neck ‘Racism’? No!”

Oh, well. David did really well. (By the way, I’ll also be on with Alex Newman, of the New American, on Tuesday, April 27, at 1:00PM Pacific. I am told that this is when we’ll record the conversation, to be uploaded some days later.)

NEW COLUMN: Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond

Argument, Law, libertarianism, Liberty, Logic, Natural Law, Race, Racism, Reason

NEW ON CNSNews.com: “Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond.”

An excerpt: https://tinyurl.com/3j6sdu5z

Racism consists of a mindset or a worldview that boils down to impolite and impolitic thoughts and words written, spoken, preached, or tweeted.

If that’s all racism is, you ask, then what was the knee on George Floyd’s neck? Was that not racism?

No, it was not.

Judging from the known facts, the knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck was a knee on a man’s neck. That’s all that can be inferred from the chilling video recording in which Floyd expired slowly as he pleaded for air.

Floyd begged to breathe. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest.”

There are laws against what transpired between former Officer Derek Chauvin and Mr. Floyd.

And the law’s ambit is not to decide whether the offending officer is a correct-thinking individual, but whether Mr. Chauvin had committed a crime.

About Officer Chauvin’s mindset, the most the law is supposed to divine is mens rea—criminal intention: Was the officer whose knee pressed on Floyd’s neck acting with a guilty mind or not?

For fact-finding is the essence of the law. The law is not an abstract ideal of imagined social justice, that exists to salve sensitive souls.

If “racism” looks like a felony crime, then it ought to be prosecuted as nothing but a crime and debated as such. In the case of Mr. Chauvin, a mindset of depraved indifference seems to jibe with the video.

This is not to refute the reality of racially motivated crimes. These most certainly occur. It is only to refute the legal and ethical validity of a racist mindset in the prosecution of a crime.

Surely, a life taken because of racial or antisemitic animus is not worth more than life lost to spousal battery or to a home invasion.

The law, then, must mete justice, in accordance with the rules of evidence, proportionality and due process. Other than intent, references to the attendant thoughts that accompanied the commission of a crime should be irrelevant—be they racist, sexist, ageist or anti-Semitic.

Ultimately, those thoughts are known only to the perp….

… READ THE REST ON CNSNews.com: “Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond.”

*Image via CNS.News (Photo credit: Noam Galai/Getty Images)

Dr. Seuss And The Wussification Of The West

Argument, Education, English, Literature, Logic, Race, Racism, Reason, The West

Tucker Carlson’s defense of some purged Dr. Seuss books is plain wrong: “Seuss was not a racist” was the gist of Tucker’s defense.

But before deconstructing the TV host’s conservative, typically defeatist argument, here is the latest in the saga of Dr. Seuss and the wussification of the West, from the New York Times:

Six Dr. Seuss books will no longer be published because of their use of offensive imagery, according to the business that oversees the estate of the children’s author and illustrator.

In a statement on Tuesday, Dr. Seuss Enterprises said that it had decided last year to end publication and licensing of the books by Theodor Seuss Geisel. The titles include his first book writing under the pen name Dr. Seuss, “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street” (1937), and “If I Ran the Zoo” (1950).

“These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong,” Dr. Seuss Enterprises said in the statement. The business said the decision came after working with a panel of experts, including educators, and reviewing its catalog of titles.

Mr. Geisel, whose whimsical stories have entertained millions of children and adults worldwide, died in 1991. The other books that will no longer be published are “McElligot’s Pool,” “On Beyond Zebra!” “Scrambled Eggs Super!” and “The Cat’s Quizzer.”

In “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” a character described as “a Chinaman” has lines for eyes, wears a pointed hat, and carries chopsticks and a bowl of rice. (Editions published in the 1970s changed the reference from “a Chinaman” to “a Chinese man.”) In “If I Ran the Zoo,” two characters from “the African island of Yerka” are depicted as shirtless, shoeless and resembling monkeys.

A school district in Virginia said over the weekend that it had advised schools to de-emphasize Dr. Seuss books on “Read Across America Day,” a national literacy program that takes place each year on March 2, the anniversary of Mr. Geisel’s birth.

“Research in recent years has revealed strong racial undertones in many books written/illustrated by Dr. Seuss,” according to the statement by the district, Loudoun County Public Schools.

An example of “wussification,” namely the melding of “wimp” and “pussy” to make a wussy, is this fretful headline: “Parents grapple with racist images in Dr. Seuss books.”

You “grapple” with a shortage of food; with the fact that your kids are not learning to speak, read and write English proficiently. You “grapple” with footage of Kamala Harris, swallowed whole and  subjected to the peristaltic movements of a python snake, as he digests her—to pull or to publish the ostensibly upsetting images?

But you don’t “grapple” with Dr. Seuss content.

And, yes, Dr. Seuss Enterprises rolled over, conceding to cancelling its own books.

Tucker’s defense:

“Dr. Seuss was not a racist,” Carlson asserted. “He was an evangelist against bigotry. He wrote an entire shelf of books against racism, and not in a subtle way. They were clearly, explicitly against racism. That was the whole point of writing them, to teach children not to be racist.”

Actual racism in the targeted literature should be a peripheral issue, or no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not substance.

Whether he intended it or not, the premise of Tucker’s defense is that if we do detect legitimate racism in literature—there is a case for banning it. (Tucker didn’t mean it that way comes the counter-argument. This, however, is what the structure of his argument portends. The premise of Tucker’s argument is precisely that.)

And freedom means that politically impolite books may be published and read freely. Freedom means no book banning. Period!

Moreover, banning books demands a higher authority that decides for the rest of us. As does banning  assume a lack of choice and agency among individual human beings.

It’s called freedom. The Argument from freedom means arguing for Mein Kampf as well as for McElligots Pool. A free market in ideas.

And not because of history, blah, blah, blah; namely, so that we don’t forget it or repeat it, as I heard it enunciated by radio mouth Jason Rantz, the other day. Mein Kampf, and any literature, needs to be available in a free society to free men and women who want it.

In the face of the cancellation of conservatives, the latter invariably just keep making these logically impoverished “arguments.” In this case, it’s the Argument from Hitler: “I want what Hitler got, Ebay. Me too, Amazon.” Or, call it a kind of “WhatAboutism”: Amazon sells Hitler’s book, why not Dr. Seuss’s?

“Conservatives,” tweets “Musil Protege,” “start arguments by legitimizing the premises of stupid questions. Then they condone presentism. As Audrey says in Whit Stillman’s Metropolitan: “Has it ever occurred to you that our world judged by the standards of Jane Austen’s time would (look ridiculous)?”

Most great literature doesn’t meet the sub-standards of the woke illiterate who control the means of intellectual production, these being schools (primary, secondary, tertiary), press, publishing print, think tanks, Deep Tech and Deep State.

Much of the literary canon—the greatest works of literature—is guaranteed to violate woke racial dogma.

Shall we ban Shakespeare for Othello?

*(Christopher Dolan/The Times-Tribune via AP)