The Real Racists

by: tim dunkin | published: 05 12, 2014

Unlike a large portion of the “conservative” commentariat, I am not throwing Cliven Bundy under the bus. Ever since a left-wing Media Matters/New York Times rendition of an interview with Mr. Bundy was released that purported to show him referring to black Americans using “not politically correct” terminology while suggesting that they should be re-enslaved, polite commentary on both sides of the aisle have rushed to condemn him. This is a ridiculous response, however, and any reasonable and thinking person can see this. Sean Hannity, Reince Priebus, Glenn Beck, and the rest are proving nothing by their condemnation of Mr. Bundy except that they are easily swayed and unable to think critically for themselves.

It will come as a surprise to exactly no one who knows anything about today’s mainstream media to learn that the taped interview of Cliven Bundy which precipitated this current kerfluffle was selectively edited to make it sound worse than it really was. As is usually the case with a media-driven campaign such as this, to find out what is really going on, you have to look past the smoke and mirrors. The Bundy interview is about nothing more than throwing a shiny bauble out there to distract the viewing public away from the increasingly scrutinized Reid family land shenanigans. If people are too busy focusing on Cliven Bundy and his speech heresy, they aren’t going to be paying attention to how Harry Reid and the Chinese are trying to bilk taxpayers and make billions off of publicly-owned lands. 

Nevertheless, some might still stand by their attacks on Mr. Bundy by pointing to his use of the terms “Negro” and “colored.” Obviously he’s racist if he’s using terms like that, right? Well, let’s not overlook the fact that these were actually the “polite” terms for African-Americans back in Bundy’s day (especially considering the alternatives) and therefore, in his own way, Bundy was actually trying to not be racist. Besides, it’s not as if he used any different terminology from that used by the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) and the UNCF (United Negro College Fund). If nothing else, maybe we should ask those close to the man whether he is a racist, such as his African-American bodyguard who says he isn’t and who says he’d “take a bullet” for Bundy.

But still, didn’t Bundy say that black Americans should “pick cotton” and that they were better off as slaves? Again, no. He didn’t. What he actually did do was to lament the way the government has destroyed the traditional African-American family, has trapped many black Americans into a nearly unbreakable cycle of dependency, and has destroyed millions of black babies through abortion. If you actually listen to what he said, he was posing a question, not making a statement. He was essentially making the point that modern day big government has been as destructive to black Americans as slavery was – which is entirely true. 

This leads us to a salient point – Democrats, liberals, and the Left in general are the real racists. They are the ones whose policies have contributed to continued poverty, apathy, lack of education, and other social ills in the African-American community. They are the ones who have reduced an entire population of American citizens into a state of dependency and despondency, and have systematically worked to keep them there.

And make no mistake – this all has had specifically racist overtones to it, beginning back at the start of Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” programs and his prediction that “I’ll have these n*****s voting Democratic for a generation.” The plan of these programs wasn’t to “help” people, it was to entrap them – and it did so along specifically racial lines as a purposeful (and ultimately successful) Democrat Party ploy to lock up the votes of an entire bloc of the electorate. As the party of big government, the Democrats sought to addict black Americans to the “protection” of big government handouts and other programs. The destruction of the African-American family structure was a calculated act by the Democrat leadership that was designed to weaken ties to family, church, and other non-governmental support mechanisms, and replace them with the government. So however poorly he may have articulated his point, the essential argument being made by Cliven Bundy was entirely correct. And I’m not the only one saying it. As far back as the late 1970s, Daniel Patrick Moynihan (a Democrat in good standing) was lamenting the same thing – that welfare and other dependency programs were destroying the black family and trapping people in a cycle of despair. 

Another of Bundy’s points – that African-Americans were aborting their children disproportionately – is also completely correct. African-Americans account for between 30-35% of all abortions performed in the United States, despite only making up around 12% of the population. Black women are roughly three and a half times as like to abort a child as white women are, per capita. For decades, abortion has been aggressively pushed to the African-American community in what amounts to nothing less than an attempted genocide. And not surprisingly, the Democrats and the Left are largely responsible for this. This figures, when you consider the idolization by those on the radical Left of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned “Parenthood,” who was a vicious eugenicist who openly called for the “phasing out” of the black race back in the 1920s and 1930s. Sanger was even cited by Adolf Hitler as an inspiration for his own eugenic proclivities. 

Seeing that Democrats and the Left apparently view African-Americans as little more than pawns by whose votes they gain political power, it is no surprise that these same liberals and Democrats themselves often say and do racist things, while holding themselves to a different standard than they do their political enemies. For instance, while Cliven Bundy was dragged through a media-generated circus for using the term “Negro,” Marie Stromolo Burke, a Democrat mayoral candidate in New Jersey was caught on tape lamenting that her town was turning into a “[expletive deleted] n*****town” and the local and national media largely ignore it, and the news outlets that do report it scrupulously omit her party affiliation. While L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling is crucified for racist comments he made in a private conversation, Larry Johnson, a former player and now executive with the New York Knicks, can basically call for the re-segregation of major league basketball in America, and for the Left it’s no big deal. 

And let’s not even get into the double standard that allows civil rights “leaders” like Al Sharpton to refer to Jewish parts of New York City as “Hymietowns” and who openly calls for racially motivated gang violence against Jews and Koreans. 

And what should we make of Democrat former Vice-President Al Gore, who recently lamented that Africa has too many people and that their fertility needs to be “managed”? Why aren’t the anti-racism people up in arms that the former Vice-President apparently agrees with the Ku Klux Klan that there are too many black people in the world? It’s because that kind of “anti-racism” – taking a leftist politician to task – doesn’t promote the agenda of worldwide Marxism and “progressivism.”  Indeed, self-styled progressives have consistently been at the forefront of population control efforts which seek to reduce world population. Notably, nearly all of these efforts focus on making sure that there are fewer and fewer brown, black, and yellow people having babies. 

Those on the Left routinely use hyperbole in their attacks on their ideological opponents, throwing around terms like “slavery” and “Jim Crow” to tar anyone who disagrees with them. Demanding that people show ID to vote is “just like slavery.” Calling for entitlement reform means you want to put black people back in chains. Eliminating affirmative action – a set of programs that set certain people apart and give them differential treatment on the basis of their race – is reimposing segregation on America. Sometimes it is taken to especially ridiculous lengths, such as by The Nation’s Christopher Hayes, who likens the abolition of fossil fuels to the abolition of slavery, and therefore the use of fossil fuels to putting people in chains. Incidentally, Hayes’ call for the end of fossil fuels itself ties in with the point above about left-wing population control efforts and their adverse effects on “people of color” – if Hayes got his way and fossil fuel use was abolished, it would kill around 5.7 billion people, most of whom live in decided non-white Third World countries. 

The problem with all of this hyperbole and rhetoric is not just that it slanders opponents of the Left grossly and needlessly, but also that it mocks the things being used as cheap debating tactics and cheapens the memories of those who had to endure these very real evils. Saying that burning gasoline is the same as enslaving another human being lessens the horror at the evil of putting our fellow man in bonds and treating him like a piece of property. It makes slavery, segregation, lynchings into debating tricks that have no meaning beyond scoring a “gotcha-now-shut-up” on someone you’re arguing with. 

Frankly, it’s getting very easy to simply roll your eyes and dismiss it whenever you hear someone cry about “racism.” Yet, there really is genuine racism lurking at various points in our country. However, this almost always resides on the left side of the aisle, and it’s time for us to start pointing out the racist hypocrisies of the “progressive” Left. 

add a comment