Category Archives: Republicans

UPDATED: NEW COLUMN: Wake-Up. Systemic Anti-Whiteness Is Deadly. Witness South Africa

Argument, Capitalism, Communism, Race, Racism, Republicans, South-Africa, The West

A NEW COLUMN IS AT THE COURAGEOUS TOWNHALL.COM:

Wake-Up. Systemic Anti-Whiteness Is Deadly. Witness South Africa.”

The column is made all the more urgent given the race riots stateside, ongoing with impunity, and those in Senekal, South Africa, over the lynching of farmer Brendan Horner, one among many thousands.

Excerpt:

How is it possible to debate Critical Race Theory yet fail to mention its salient characteristic—that it is exclusively and ethnocidally anti-white?

One Federalist piece, “Critical Race Theory Is A Classic Communist Divide-And-Conquer Tactic,” brings it back to communism. Quite how this adds up is unclear, but the author decries a way of thinking that exploits the amorphous “tragedy of racial divisions in America.” In essence, some bad people with a communistic manual and mindset aren’t interested in healing us.

Really? Did communism, an equal-opportunity oppressor, revolve around the exclusive blackening of whites?

Western democracies are third way political and economic systems. They are already heavily socialized. Once Western societies go from third way to third world, debate over communism will cease, for communism will have arrived.

In other words, dissecting and decrying Communism is an ideological luxury, the province of relatively wealthy, stable, developed democracies.

America is indeed racially divided. Blacks, for the most, hate whites for a variety of unjust reasons, not least the incessant, institutionalized, propagandizing by other progressive whites. Deal with this truth! Communism is but an intellectual crutch.

By deferring to communism and ducking anti-white animus, the ever-quaking commentariat cloaks itself in the raiment of respectable argument.

Then there is that Uriah Heep like obsequiousness. Going by the aforementioned Federalist writer, Beltway conservatives refuse to even take credit for the “oppressive” culture for which Europeans are being berated. Ludicrously, they universalize the creed, the Protestant Ethic.

Recall the “Smithsonian display on whiteness” that condemned as “white” all elements of a civilized society, including politeness, hard work, self-reliance, logic, planning, delayed gratification, and family cohesion?

“None of those are ‘white’ values,” says the author cited , as she criticizes Critical Race Theory for framing them as white.

Imagine being so apologetic as to wash your hands of a really cool thing you invented, evolved or were born into: Western civilization.

Almost all these values are most pronounced in the European culture. One might even pin them down to Western Europe, because the sanctity of a man’s word, the handshake, culminating in the legally binding contract—these are some of the cultural and religious values that allowed capitalism to take off particularly well in the Anglosphere. Arguably, these are not part of the East European ethos.

Podcaster Dave Rubin also won’t say “anti-white.” Critical Race Theory is … wait for it, “racist.” Racist? Is Critical Race Theory anti-black, anti-Hispanic, anti-Asian, anti-Amerindian?

Even City Journal writer Christopher Rufo, a formidable warrior against institutionalized Critical Race Theory, still can’t bring himself to say it. …

… READ the complete column, “Wake-Up. Systemic Anti-Whiteness Is Deadly. Witness South Africa,” at Townhall.com.

UPDATE: Killer lines from the American Renaissance version of the column:

Not finished article, but I most like this poignant line:

By deferring to communism and identity politics, and ducking anti-white animus, the ever-quaking conservatives cloak themselves in the raiment of respectable argument.—ilana

On the Unz Review, where the article is unabridged, animalogic drills down well on the communism-Critical Race Theory comparison:

Good article Ilana. Linking critical race theory (CRT) to communism is not based on facts (communism is totally based on materialist philosophy, not the anti-empiricist, anti-science, & a priori nonsense of CRT). Nor is it useful: it clouds the CRT issue & sends it off down a cul-de-sac.
Its also vital to not deflect from the fundamental truth that CRT is in its essence anti-white racism

UPDATE III (11/10): What About Deep Tech’s Infractions Will Change If We Vote Republican?

Business, COVID-19, Donald Trump, Law, Media, Outsourcing, Republicans, Technology

UPDATED (11/1): In their weak case against Deep Tech, conservatives are still defending only some speech on the “merits,” rather than all speech, no matter how meritless. Libertarians: Deep Tech is not private property. It really isn’t, okay?

Richard Spencer makes a good case for a “free-speech zone”: “Instead, by focusing on S230 of the Decency Act—by threatening Twitter that it will be treated like a publisher—Republicans are encouraging Twitter to act more like a publisher: fact checking relevant information, censoring bad opinions, etc.” AND: “Republicans care deeply about free speech when it comes to posting Hunter Biden dick pics—not so much when it involves speech that is anti-Zionist or ‘racist.'”

Or, when Candace Owens’ boilerplate speech is compromised.

UPDATED: OCTOBER 12, 2020: When President Trump talks, one can’t help but be impressed by his unbounded force, energy and excellent command of details, down to a Bill’s public law number. In this case, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act:

Bartiromo … asked Trump about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects social media companies from being legally liable for content on their networks published by users. Trump called it “a disgrace.”

Still, questioned he must be. Voters handed POTUS both legislative Chambers and the presidency for two years. Yet he and the GOP failed to strip Deep Tech of Section 230, …  which, to repeat, “protects social media companies from being legally liable for content on their networks published by users.”

(I use the Deep Tech coinage to better capture the power and reach of the high-tech monopolists in politics.)

What’ll change this time around, if we elect Republicans?

Moreover, small, independent entitles who suffer banning by social media (“MERCER DOMAINS BANNED BY DEEP TECH FACEBOOK“) cannot afford to sue conglomerates whose revenues are greater than “the GDP of four of the G20 nations.”

So what is the remedy for the powerless (check) who’ve been thrown off social media, for no good reason?

Speaking of one of the Five Big crooked Tech companies; Microsoft’s Bill Gates recently told Chris Wallace “that Trump’s travel ban may have worsened the coronavirus pandemic.”

Those who live a lie usually spout, at best, only half-truths. Trump’s travel ban after the unleashing of COVID was indeed worse than useless. Chinese were merely rerouted and their temperatures taken. But that’s because Mr. Gates “seeded the disease here,” by replacing American with Chinese workers and making these Chinese citizens who travel to-and-from Wuhan.

UPDATE II (11/9): Tucker Carlson Calling Out Deep Tech For Protecting Joe Biden

UPDATE III (11/10):

On Tucker Carlson, Allum Bokhari was very clear about the massive failure of the people we had sent to D.C. to prevent the Orwellian nightmare developing. On the line is dissidents’ ability to speak, publish, sell books, transact financially.

Russian Interference? How About American ‘Color Revolutions’ The World Over?

Argument, Conservatism, Democracy, Democrats, Foreign Policy, Globalism, Law, Neoconservatism, Race, Racism, Republicans

Regime change abroad is not the purview of the Deep State alone; it’s the practice of the American State, Republican and Democratic administrations:

… both the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute “are chartered to promote democracy abroad with [ostensibly] nonpartisan training and election monitoring.” “Loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties,” these institutes “were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations.”

As an example, take “The Adventures Of America’s Alinskyites in Egypt,” detailed in my 2012 column. Americans were outraged when Egypt expelled US nationals for fomenting regime change. Egypt was right:

The Egyptian Justice Ministry, under the authority of the military council, has detained and indicted 19 American democracy activists. To listen to the malfunctioning media stateside, however, the Egyptians are being petty, picking a fight with their American benefactors for “operating in Egypt without a license.” Or, if you want “expert” opinion, courtesy of Politico.com, the Egyptian plan to prosecute these “Americans and two dozen others” “is more over the future of U.S. aid to Egypt and who controls it.”

More…

Now, Darren J. Beattie, former Trump speech writer (who should have been kept on, if the Right had any moral courage), unsparingly reminds us of the American “Color Revolution” policy. His thinking is refreshingly original, the likes of which one doesn’t often see coming out of conservative quarters, where the same talking points are constantly recycled.

(To wit, on the same Tucker Carlson show, Candace Owens provided recycled boilerplate to the effect that the US is not in a race war, and that black violence is the doing of the Democrats. Untrue. There is most certainly a racial offensive against whites, to which conservatives can’t give expression. Irrespective of the Democrats’ undeniable agitation and incitement, this enthnocidal aggression against whites would persist.)

Essentially, Beattie empirically and analytically connected the US-launched “Color Revolutions” with the “lawfare” coups against Trump. I like the “lawfare” term Beattie has coinded. Nicely done.

Note: Beattie imputes “Color Revolutions” to the “US Government,” not merely to Democrat-run administrations. 

HERE:

There is no purer embodiment of Revolver’s thesis that the very same regime change professionals who run Color Revolutions on behalf of the US Government in order to undermine or overthrow alleged “authoritarian” governments overseas, are running the very same playbook to overturn Trump’s 2016 victory and to pre-empt a repeat in 2020. To put it simply, what you see is not just the same Color Revolution playbook run against Trump, but the same people using it against Trump who have employed it in a professional capacity against targets overseas—same people same playbook.

 

Should The Right Quit Gushing About The Military? Ya Think

Democrats, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Republicans, The State

Most of you will have noticed how many of the military brass have aligned with the Left.

Via The Economist:

The armed forces—[once] a generator and focus of patriotic fervour—were 75% white in 1990; now around 45% of their members are from mostly Democratic-voting minorities. And just as Roosevelt was able to push his values by enlarging his coalition, so the extremism of the right is expanding the left. The many veterans, of all ethnicities, who ran for the Democrats in the 2018 mid-terms proved that.

A row between Tucker Carlson, a Fox News talking-head, and Senator Tammy Duckworth encapsulated these developments. Mr Carlson accused her of hating America after she expressed willingness to debate the appropriateness of celebrating George Washington, a slave-owner. Nonsense, said Ms Duckworth, a half-Asian former army pilot: her views reflected her commitment to “every American’s right to speak out”. She had fought for her country—and lost her legs—for that, she said.

MORE:

The politics of patriotism: Americans are becoming less vulnerable to flag-waving opportunists. This is bad for the president.

RELATED:

A Message To America’s Anti-Trump, Never-Won-A-War, Treacherous General Officers And Admirals.”

AND:

Un-gushing Columns