Black identity politics has zero interest in "content of character." It is all about black racism
Zimmerman, Identity Politics, and Not Turning the Other Cheek
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
I knew that the trial of George Zimmerman was going to be a circus as soon as the media started to label him a “white Hispanic.” Pardon me; I thought to myself, did they just say that Zimmerman is a white Hispanic? Indeed they did—they had to slip a honky into the mix somehow.
George’s father is Caucasian, you see (his mother is an Afro-Peruvian Hispanic). If we follow this line of reasoning, then seeing as how Obama’s mother was Caucasian, then technically he is our first white black President, (not to be confused with Bubba Clinton’s rep as our first black white President).
Be that as it may…I have been reading articles for some time now warning that race riots will erupt if a “not guilty” verdict is handed down at the conclusion of the ongoing trial of George Zimmerman. We know that racial divisiveness and turmoil are the last things that Barack “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon” Obama and the radical left wish for, so we will all keep our fingers crossed that no rioting occurs.
That being said, however, if someone comes into my neighborhood with the intent of causing trouble, then I don’t care if they are black, white, or green with pink polka dots—they had best be coming in tanks, because they will be on the receiving end of a “warm” welcome.
Do I want a race war? Absolutely not—I find the idea repellent. But believe me when I tell you I am prepared to protect me and mine, come what may. My motto has long been “Hope for the best but prepare for the worst.”
If you live in a high-risk neighborhood whose idea of a pro-active defense is to roll out a red carpet for every marauding band of thugs that comes your way, then I would suggest you move. And if you are clueless, and reckless, and naive enough to still be unarmed/unprotected at this late stage of the game, then I don’t know if we want you swimming in our gene pool anyway—nothing personal. (In all seriousness, there are people who for various reasons are unarmed, that I would feel obligated to protect—it’s a personal judgment call).
Although Alinsky-style agents provocateurs (“community organizers” and agitprop weasels) have been stirring up discontent in the urban black communities for a long, long time, the role that the Democratic Party has played in stoking the fires of racial resentment among blacks should be remarked upon—they deserve the recognition.
The Democrats were unabashedly anti-black until the early 1960s, when the Democratic Party switched horses in mid-stream and stashed their KKK caps and became “best buds” with the blacks. The Democrats proceeded to construct an “Entitlement Plantation”—complete with black overseers (usually a reverend of some sort) and “attack dogs” to track down and bring back any blacks attempting to escape.
Within the plantation, blacks are not educated so much as indoctrinated—indoctrinated with the sour, angry, bitter lessons of entitlement and victimhood. They have been indoctrinated to the point where they love their victimhood.
(Sidebar: As faithful readers know, along with hundreds of millions of others I believe in reincarnation. I could not care less whether you believe in it or not, and that is not my point in bringing it up. My point is that when I hear a black person talking about their need to be recompensed for the evils of slavery, I find it especially outrageous. For all I know I was a black slave back in the day, and this punk or punkette trying to shake me down was some cracker Simon Legree lowlife, and here he (or she) is trying to stick it to me again! I would be more than happy to tell them what they can do with their “reparations.”)
They treat their being guinea pigs for racial genocide via Margaret Sanger’s eugenics with a shrug of unconcern. They accept the huge amount of black on black violence with little if any words of protest. They have been taught to stuff themselves with entitlements and resentments, while shunning accountability and responsibility, and they have learned to love it. They meekly accept being under Massa‘s thumb—as long as Massa keeps those goodies coming. In short, they have been raised and groomed to love the plantation. And they do.
The following paragraph is from a short article in “Human Events” titled “The Democrat Plantation:”
Perhaps blind loyalty to a political party they perceive as their “protectors” is an inevitable consequence of black Americans’ unique history. That such loyalty is to a Democrat party whose own history is a tattered tale of segregation and racism is mind-boggling.
“Mind-boggling”—yes indeed, that’s the word. And “we the people” (including many fine black patriots) are instructed by Democrats to respect threatening, violent mobs simply because they are black? I don’t think so—but that is the way that the media propaganda outlets, Democratic apparatchiks, and liberal pundits would have it. I’m talking here about the asinine nonsense of “identity politics.”
Please understand that I have been talking primarily about poor urban blacks here (not all by any means, but all too many), and there are any number of outstanding black men and women that I have great respect and admiration for. This is not a black/white thing that I have been discussing; it is a civilization/barbarism thing.
Among the numerous problems inherent in identity politics is the fact that civilized behavior is merged with barbaric behavior. In the case of black identity politics, race trumps all, and behavior becomes a nonissue. Black identity politics is racist to the bone, and diametrically opposed to Martin Luther King Jr.‘s famous statement regarding racial equality: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
Black identity politics has zero interest in “content of character.” It is all about black racism, pure and simple. If you are black (and on the plantation) then you are right, no questions asked.
I treat individuals as I feel they deserve to be treated—no more, no less. If a black person treats me with respect and courtesy, then I treat them the same way in return. If a black person is disrespectful to me, then they get disrespected back. In neither case, is my response based on the color of their skin—it is based on the “content of their character.”
I do not like all black people, and I do not dislike all black people—I could say as much about any large subset of people. My experience has shown me that blacks are the same as any other large group of folks: white, black, men, women, etc. That is, most are basically decent, some are excellent, and others are monsters—I treat them accordingly.
That means, for example, that I am on my toes and prepared for “fight and flight” should I find myself in a poor black (or white) neighborhood. That is not because I am prejudiced, but because I am not an idiot. The “mean streets” of urban poverty are not known for their warmth and hospitality—they are areas where letting a smile be your umbrella can get you robbed and killed in no particular order. To think otherwise is suicidal foolishness.
This is all to say that when I am attacked by the forces of chaos, rage, and violence I stand my ground and protect my own. Some folks might say that standing your ground is not the Christian thing to do—to which I say…balderdash (self-editing at work there).
To be sure, the focus of Jesus’ ministry was love and compassion, but that should not be conflated with being a rug mat for every bully who comes down the pike. Jesus was divinely brave, as well as loving and compassionate, and we should keep in mind that He came to earth with a mission to fulfill, and part of that mission required that He allow Himself to be crucified.
We are not required to be crucified (at least not literally), and for our love and compassion to be whole we must include ourselves and those near and dear to us in our circle of love. Failing to protect yourself and those depending on you is not Christian—it is craven and spineless.
If you possess the elevated spiritual state and level of consciousness of say, Daniel in the lion’s den, then wonderful—you are among the ranks of around 1% of 1% of 1% of the population—congrats. For the rest of us, more mundane methods of defense must suffice. (I am not dismissing the power of prayer here, but I am underlining the wisdom contained in such proverbial sayings as “Trust God but tie your horse,” and “Pray, but move your feet”).
Nor are we being loving and compassionate when we encourage a fool in his (or her) folly. Acquiescing to barbaric behavior is to encourage such behavior, and by encouraging such behavior we send the one exhibiting it down the road to perdition. What is loving and compassionate about that?
Debating the esoteric meaning of such biblical verses as “resist not evil” is no doubt fascinating stuff, but when “the bullet hits the bone” it is past time to drop the abstract theorizing and get real…real fast.
If the rioting foretold by some should come to pass, and visit my neighborhood I will STAND. I will not run from or cower before barbaric mobs, regardless of their color. Deus vult.