Since progressivism is largely a status game, in which people compete for social prestige by repeating a set of approved phrases and opinions to other status-seeking mandarins, it’s not surprising that some will go to sado-masochistic lengths to remain part of the alpha group. By now, the increasingly creepy tendency of using the word “white” as a glib insult has become well established in left-wing commentary. Here’s Geoffrey Dunn, doubtless partly aggrieved by his Anglo-Saxon name, writing about the Republican National Convention for The Huffington Post:
Sources have confirmed that “Dirty Harry” himself, Clint Eastwood, is about to sweep into the Sunshine State to serve as the so-called “Mystery Speaker” tonight at the Republican Snooze Fest–better known as the Gathering of Pasty White People–in Tampa.
“The Gathering of Pasty White People”: this is how Dunn prostitutes himself to the sociopaths and racists in his movement. As in the Soviet Union, one must continually prove oneself to be part of the correct crowd. Purity, you see, comes from ritual self-abasement, from flogging oneself in columns and blog posts and from swearing through gritted teeth that you love every minute of it.
Dunn continues:
Eastwood, of course, has a political resumé of his own, having served a two-year term as mayor of the upscale and frighteningly white community of Carmel–with a population of 3,800, there were only eight African Americans recorded in the 2010 census–very close in size and demographics to Sarah Palin’s Wasilla, albeit without the meth labs and strip malls.
Among progressives, low-rent snark like “frighteningly white” is required to prove you are part of the in-crowd. Imagine being part of a movement that not only requires regular self-immolation, but demands that you enjoy it and hector those who bristle at such cheap and pathetic bullying. Be glad you’re not a part of it, and be glad that, until now, you never heard of Geoffrey Dunn.
I think that we need a new term for a new mental psychosis: SELF RACISM. It is only in the bizarro mind of the ultra liberal that one can hate ones own race and be allowed, even lauded for hating another race, but only if it is your own and you are white.
Something else which “progressives” are often guilty of is psychological projection. Those who accuse conservatives of hate and racism are obviously very accomplished haters themselves, and often have deep-seated antipathies towards a racial group–either their own or another. Combine this with the urge to be in the in-crowd which Mr. Wargas describes, and you have some really mixed up people.
I’ve ays thought that most liberals actually despise the groups they advocate for because they can always view them as beneath them and in need of some paternal protection. That’s why liberals always support minorities who act like they just got off the boat and despise those who have shed their “old country” ways, adopted the Western ethos of hard work and self-scrifice and made something of themselves. Notice how they admire blacks who succeed through “natural talent” in music or athletics. But if it’s someone like Herman Cain or even Condi Rice then they bring out the “house negro” charge. It’s pretty sick adn shows it has nothing to do with race or gender. It has to do with allowing yourself to be a victim in need of help from the left.
re:”the Western ethos of hard work and self-scrifice”
There’s nothing specifically “western” about hard work and self-sacrifice. In fact, I’m inclined to believe that most immigrants come to this country with that ethos already intact. It’s their children who then adopt the entitlement stance that’s inculcated into them by the vastly Liberal public schools and media.
You have a point. People everywhere are capable of hard work and sacrifice. The real unique values about our culture are individuality and freedom, so a persons hard work and sacrifice benefits them first, and the collective second, while with leftist values, the collective comes first, and the individual second.
You hit the nail on the head.
I’d like to see these sassy guys put their money where their mouth is and move to vibrant non-white neighborhoods rather than the expensive well-policed whitopias they actually live in.
Heh. When I lived in Milwaukee, I occasionally met proggs who would lament that the city was “so segregated.” The looks on their faces when I’d mention the “for rent” signs in the black neighborhood where I worked–easily a third what they were paying for similar square footage in their white suburbs, and walking distance to small minority-owned shops!–were priceless.
No, what they wanted was to force other, less “enlightened” white people to move into those neighborhoods, while also ripping blacks out of their established neighborhoods and dispersing them into poor white neighborhoods (leaving their well-off communities intact). No consideration at all that people might not want to live so far from their churches or businesses or favorite restaurants or extended families.
That was my first real introduction to how proggs see non-proggs–of all races and cultures–not as human beings but as livestock, to be herded and fed and housed as they see fit, used to support themselves in lavish style and slaughtered when no longer needed.
If I was filthy rich I would pay some black people to move into those whitopias and mess with the progs. See how long it takes for the progs to de-evolve.
That’s what happened in my neighborhood, Ragnar, about 15 years ago. They didn’t de-evolve. They just packed up and moved. People who loudly proclaimed their progressive credentials publicly, complained bitterly in private about what was happening and how they were “forced” to move. I really don’t think they saw any contradiction in that. I’m still here, in a very ethnically mixed and quite pleasant neighborhood. They are now loudly proclaiming their progressive credentials in neighborhoods where the mortgages are now worth more than the homes they bought.
Of course they moved. There’s a vast gap between what they say and what they do.
I live in Westchester County, NY, which is set up the exact same way: Yonkers and Mount Vernon for the “vibrant minority community” and those white people pulling in less than $100,000/year; beautiful manicured suburbs with magnificent houses, private security forces, and panicked phone calls to the police at the sight of a black person on the street (if not wearing the work uniform of your lawn service). Many of them are against school choice initiatives, as they are “firm supporters of the public schools” to which they do not send their children.
I grew up in Westchester, NY, had a local JP as a neighbor. One day when I was turning into a young man he looked both ways and leaned forward conspiratorially once he was sure the coast was clear. “If you have a chance, get out. There’s nothing here for young people.” He was right.
Yes, Progressives like their minorities well controlled and acting as the Progressives damn well tell them to. It maintains the feeling of superiority Progressives desperately crave. It’s all very Soviet isn’t it comrade.
“When I lived in Milwaukee, I occasionally met proggs who would lament that the city was ‘so segregated.”
Never mind that there were no laws enforcing “segregation”, it was all self-chosen. What outraged our prog friends so much was the fact that free people were freely making the “wrong” choices. Those progs wanted to use the power of the state to force us to live at their command…all in the name of freedom, of course.
Yes, Milwaukee has a large population of progs whose hearts belong to Stalin.
Yes, you are exactly right. I live in a small northeastern town, where we have had a sizeable black community “forever”. The hospital wanted to expand, so a large section of the 19th C very old neighborhood was (I guess?) eminent-domain-ed? The black commmunity just moved one neighborhood to the west. It was quite interesting to watch the old neighborhood sort of “self-segregate”. BUT of course you would. You would still want to live close to your parents, grandparents, children and grandchildren. Your church would now be a few blocks to the east, where it had been a few blocks to the west, but still in walking distance. Your old neighbors, whom you knew well & had worked out the relationships a long time ago, are still in the vicinity, and when those who had moved away came back for Homecoming in August, it would still be a big Family Gathering.
Actually, we do have at least one data point on that – the tingly-legged Chris Matthews was revealed to live in a tony DC suburb in which the census showed TEN black people among of thousands of their pasty-white neighbours!!!!!
It’s funny actually; in the Orwellian mind of a liberal, who supposedly deplore profiling, white has attained a sheen of innate and endemic immorality.
I wonder if these people are aware of how many enemies they are making. What’s the cost of this kind of rhetoric? And of course none of these people would actually live in a black neighborhood, and don’t.
1.7% of Dunn’s Santa Cruz is black. Rev. Wright lives in an almost entirely white enclave as does Oprah. Chris Matthews has 10 blacks in his community of 2,000.
When you want to know what people really believe, look at their feet, not their mouths.
Reality has its own morality.
How many enemies ARE they making?
Obviously not enough, given that they keep getting reelected. People may take offense at what is being said but not enough to give up voting for these thieves.
I was surprised not to see the word “Christian” in any of Dunn’s masterpiece. For while every progressive claims to be tolerant of religion, we know that an exception is made for Christians.
If you’re going to hate yourself, don’t forget that you are a product of Christian culture. A progressive’s real respect is reserved for religions like Radical Islam, or Black Liberation Theology.
Want to bet the 10 Black people in town are live in “servants” of the Progressive elites?
Golly. Every time I try to listen to something someone says, it seems like some guy is shouting, “RACIST!”
I mean, really, is Clint Eastwood a racist? Is everyone else?
There comes a point when I have to conclude that, by calling anyone who disagrees with you a racist, that you are not only bereft of arguments for your position, but that you are ignorant, evil or racist yourself:
1) Ignorant of the reasons why someone might disagree with your (or your preferred politician’s) position regardless of race;
2) Evil, because you are just throwing attacks at someone without addressing their arguments; or
3) Racist yourself, because you see everything as a matter of color.
The phrase, “Eastwood, of course, has a political resume of his own,” showed your bias. The “of course” was probably inserted to prove your bona fides to slobbering little leftist wannabes.
The rest of your quote is deconstructed by the author here. I’m guessing you have no shame and just published this tripe to be licked up by ignorant malcontents so that you could continue to write bigoted trash that would pay for your “99%” lifestyle. (yeah, right.)
See chapter 11 in The Culture of Nations, by Angelo Codevilla.
“The regime rules more by fashion — stric, pervasive, unforgiving of nuance — than by statute. It defines itself by icons and taboos.”
Dunn is just paying fealty to the regime, thereby keeping himself as a member.
Self-hate? Not a bit — he’s just engaged in the pro-forma ritual of membership. Nobody actually believes that stuff; you just have to say it when required.
“Nobody actually believes that stuff;”
I would disagree with your blanket statement.
“Nobody who writes thist stuff actually believes it;” would have been more accurate.
You see the Useful Idiots, the kind who come to sites like this to troll, actually are True Believers and have swallowed that tripe Hook, Line, and Sinker.
How about this: Nobody actually practices any of that; they just preach to others to. It’s sort of like green piety: it’s ok to have a Lincoln Navigator as long as you tell others to ride the bus.
Thanks for the recommendation, Robert. Amazon lists The Character of Nations.
Anyone who reads Codevilla’s Character of Nations will come away thoroughly depressed at the state of ruin worked by, successively, the original Progressives a century ago, the New Dealers of the 1930s, and the destruction of civic character (for lack of a better phrase) since the 1960s.
The destruction pervades all of society at all levels. I frankly can’t see much of any way back. At the very least, recovering something of this country’s founding character is going to be the work of many, many decades.
Why so long? Several reasons: it’s been brewing for a long time, there’s loads of institutional inertia built-in, and a great many people (decent people) benefit large and small by the current arrangements.
So any transition will have to be gradual, operating on a scale of a couple generations or so. And I can’t help but wonder if we’ll have the intellectual stamina to do all that’s needed. Especially as the route back means turning away from all those favors and benefits dropped on all levels of society as a means of buying their complicity in the regime’s work.
Sigh. Society has a lot of inertia; So did the Titanic.
It is more likely that Heinlein will prove prophetic, again:
‘Old age was not a usual cause of death in that generation.’
“The white race is the cancer of human history.” Susan Sontag.
The self-hating white loves her/himself for hating him/herself.
The same definition applies to the self-hating Jew.
I don’t miss Suzy Sunday at all. Not one bit.
Ms. Sontag was neither a self-hating white, nor a self-hating Jew. She was a Jew who hated white gentiles.
It is all they’ve got, poor tortured souls. Their tenets are undefendable. Their ideas are 1930s and older. Their icons overseas are on the ropes, the Europes. The US will never accept substituting the thoroughly corrupt UN for self-government. They are pacifistically inclined, but their leader keeps making war. He is the stone-cold drone killer. In short, they’ve got nothing but hate whitey left, even if whitey is they.
“indefensible”. That’s the word I was looking for. Why use a neologism when a perfectly good word is available, Fred?
hate the white half of himself
As an interesting sidelight showing that people don’t much like Dem candidates, Akin and McCaskill are tied as of yesterday, says at least one poll, a Demunist poll at that:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/aug/30/poll-akin-mccaskill-race-still-tossup/
Maybe it will turn out that Akin’s gaffe was too early. Had it happened the week before the election it might have done more harm, sort of like Bush’s DWI. Didn’t that come out just days before the election?
It came out early in the GOP primaries. The story was a yawner. Then it was regurgitated by the Establishment Media days before the November election, yes.
From the very article you linked:
“A poll last week by Rasmussen Reports showed him trailing Mrs. McCaskill by 10 points, while a St. Louis Post-Dispatch poll released last week showed him trailing by 9 points.”
These polls are accurate, the PPP poll is designed to keep Akin from doing the right thing and stepping aside for a candidate who can actually win. Come September 26th, PPP’s polls will start to show AT LEAST a 9-10 point lag for Akin . They may actually show him down 15 points or more (falsely) in order to discourage Republican turnout. He’ll lose the race, but probably by only 4-5 points , not by double digits.(That’s even with the inevitable McCaskill ads playing the “gaffe” again and again and again…
“Come September 26th, PPP’s polls will start to show AT LEAST a 9-10 point lag for
Akin.”
I have always admired those who can accurately predict the future in a mood of great confidence. We’ll see if you are one of them in a few weeks.
“frighteningly black” would certainly be a racist expression.
And so it is in any variation, white, yellow, or blue.
The totalitarians are totalitarians, they cannot hide it.
Ah, but there’s a difference: “frighteningly white” means “embarrassingly white, so uncool,” while “frighteningly black” means what it says: if this black neighborhood has the characteristics of most black neighborhoods, a white person has reason to be frightened.
Hipsters deduct points for common sense, didn’t you know that?
Even Jesse Jackson feels he has reason to be frightened. I don’t know whether progressives have decided he’s a racist or not. Their logic gets so confusing after a while.
click to view Dunn
Beta male? Much!
I don’t know – to me, he just looks like some guy.
More like “gamma”…
Does this dude have any pigment at all? Even his hair is devoid.
Well let’s get back to the subject, hating whites.
Liberals who obsess about the horrors of white people in the suburbs are usually under 45-50 years of age. The “whiteness = racism/ignorance/stupidity” anti-racist crowd skews young: anti-racism (i.e., being an anti-white white person) is the new social currency for bien pensant Millennial and Gen Y hipsters, and for rapidly-aging-but-trying-to-stay-hip-and-edgy Gen X’ers (like Janeane Garofolo).
Horned-rim glasses, ironic tats and pale white skin (ironically) are almost prerequisites if you’re going to gain acceptance in the club. Ditto for extreme passivity (except when excoriating racist whites for being racist Rethuglicans) and extreme ectomorphic physiques (although you’ll always find the random fatty who squeezed into the club too).
So it’s kind of surprising to see that Dunn looks so much like a late middle-aged suburban dad. He looks like the kind of guy who should be loading his golf bag into the back of his BMW X5 so that he can get home to his suburban McMansion in time to eat dinner and check his Fidelity account online before the pregame show for Thursday Night Football comes on.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that … oh, wait. That’s the kind of thing that pasty white males do in their terrifying white suburban bastions of racism, bigotry, intolerance and hate.
Anyhoo, Dunn is quite the f**kin’ poseur! It would be cool to see how much good will this azzhat’s public hatred of the wrong kinds of white people would afford him if he were to take a late night walking tour of the ruins of Detroit, or a midnight stroll through Newark, or even better, a 3:30 AM Critical Mass-style naked protest bike ride through any of, say, the South Shore, Englewood or Roseland neighborhoods on the South Side of Chicago.
Perhaps they have weighed their accomplishments, counted the good they have done and those they have helped, and found themselves lacking. It can’t be their fault, they have all the participation awards. It’s because they are white. Gotta be.
Actually, in the right enclaves, this self-hating attitude isn’t all that new. I had an eighth grade history teacher in New York way back in 1970 who had migrated to teaching straight from the Ford Foundation and spent the entire year trying to convince us yutes to hate our own cultur.
He and I, at the ripe age of 13, also ended up in an argument about whether or not Russians qualified as ‘white’, since he claimed they had high cheekbones that excepted them from the attacks he was bringing down on ‘white’ society. Several weeks of failing grades and parent-teacher-administrator conferences followed (the only shame of it from his side was he didn’t arrive at the school a year earlier, when a ninth grade member of the student body was one David Axelrod. They would have been kindred spirits).
Well, assuming he has a standard mirror in his bathroom, he must scare the shit out of himself every morning.
He tries to throw in some humor but is too angry and hateful to pull it off. The punch line “gathering of the white people” could work for example, but he throws in “pasty” which makes the joke fall flat. The rest of the article is even worse.
As far as I can tell his only other accomplishment was getting a publisher to print 417 pages of “Why I Hate Sarah Palin and so does everyone else I know and you should too” or something like hat, which can now be purchased new in hardcover on Amazon for $1.59 with free shipping.
And I hope we never hear of this white-hating Geoffrey Dunn again.
It’s hard to underestimate what rot this kind of attitude has created in America, by hobbling the historic White majority’s capacity to think and see reality. And it infects “conservatives” as much as liberals.
Robert’s quote from Culture of Nations, btw, is brilliant.
A year ago I felt kind of intimidated by the left. But the veil has been removed and now it’s starting to get fun. This is a great little article that removes another veil, that to bash white people in America is cool and even morally proper. Thanks for breaking it down and exposing this scheme as purely a status move, by those whose viewpoint is bankrupt. My fear, at least, is quickly vanishing.
If he hates white people so much, why was he in downtown Tampa at the RNC? Why not hang out with the “people” he identifies with off of Fowler and MLK north of downtown? (or Ybor City) My guess is they don’t want any part of his disease either.
Many readers may not be familiar with the silliness of Geoffrey Dunn, but they will recognize the irrational White Liberal Guilt Complex (WLGC) in a talking head like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. However, let’s look on the positive side. The insanity of the current regime & their lapdog talking heads may just bring about the extinction of WLGC. PTL!
“in which people compete for social prestige by repeating a set of approved phrases and opinions to other status-seeking mandarins”
quite an insight. It is certainly true that “elite” liberals and their sychophants are motivated by a desire to conform to their arrogant peer group, but the phenomenon has never been more clearly stated.
But we shouldn’t let it obscure the primary motivations of leftist; which are, of course, envy, theft, and lust for power.
Left/libtards… the definition of politically-correct; conformity is power, be the first one on your block to debase yourself for advancement!
Frascism.
Fraud, racism and fascism all rolled into one slimy, smarmy, Liberal Lounge Lizard minstrel act.
Nothing is quite so cringeworthy as a pasty white pimp, hamming it up for the black folk, just to “prove”…’I'm not one of THEM.”.
Except, the RNC had featured speakers such as Ms. Love, Condi, the first Latina governor of a state, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, Rep. Davis, …the Frascism doesn’t even work as a visual any longer, video killed the radio slur.
When the sniveling tie-dye toadies are through beclowning themselves with the empty rhetoric of divisiveness, they are left with the following haunting thought. “I don’t exist, but for my hate, my lies, my spite. And, I’ll be damned, no matter how many times I look in the mirror, I don’t wanna be, but I am white”.
Sadly, this is nothing new. When MLK was assassinated I saw an evening news film of a group of white people in a demonstration carrying signs that read “I’m ashamed to be white”.
And then there are those who proclaim they are ashamed to be human beings.
There are solutions to these problems. Obvious ones.
For a party that touts itself as colorless, it sure seems that they like to bring it up a lot.
BTW, the sneering intellectual misspelled résumé in his opus.
…upscale and frighteningly white community of Carmel…
Yeah, Mr. Dunn, and they’re progressives. All 3800 of ‘em. Progressives who can afford to cosset themselves in upscale and frighteningly white communities like Carmel as wealthy progressives are wont to do. Why, where do you live?
I believe that the other fascinating part of this self-loathing is that these are the same people who vilify Christianity as a faith built on sin, guilt and blame. They laugh at all that, curse it for the idea of repentance, then immediately proclaim their own sins (like the sin of being white), and make every effort to do penance for their genetics and upbringing.
Exactly. This was Mr. Dunn’s confession–a catharsis. His soul is now cleansed and he no longer has to feel guilty for having a more comfortable life and earning more money than the people he is protecting.
These people remind me of the stereotypical southern preacher. One day he feels lust for one of his congregants, so that day’s sermon is devoted towards convincing the congregation how sinful they are.
Damn You Robert,Now I DO know who he is,Thanks a lot,PFHT.
Someone should ask Dunn if “white” is the progressive new “CODE” word for white
Nothings funnier than seeing the beta losers wish death on others and then describe them as ‘angry’ and ‘haters’. Without the combination of sanctimony and hate their skeletons wouldn’t hold together.
“Be glad you’re not a part of it, and be glad that, until now, you never heard of Geoffrey Dunn.”
Not only have I never heard of him before, but by this time tomorrow, I will have forgotten all about him. There’s certainly nothing even slightly memorable about his rote recitation of the same leftist dogma that we’ve been hearing for decades. No new ideas, not even the tiniest spark of original thinking . . . just a regurgitation of the standard lefty shibboleths.
“Dunn” is not an Anglo-Saxon name. It’s an Irish name.
http://www.henneberry.org/dunn/surname.htm
It has Celtic origins; some with the name also go back to old British families with similar names. Also, despite its origins, it nowadays is the name of many Anglos, Brits, whatever you wanna call them. And the name Geoffrey has Germanic origins. To put it simply: It’s a white name, whiter than white, so he must be ashamed.
There’s nothing remotely “Anglo-Saxon” about the surname Dunn. The “Anglo-Saxon” equivalent would “Brown.” This isn’t about criticizing you, just making sure there is no misunderstanding. I agree 100% with your assessment of Geoffrey Dunn, btw, but no matter how obnoxious and pathetic he is, the reality of his surname should not be confused. Which means I’m embarrassed that such a jerk bears an Irish name.
“This interesting surname [Dunn], found in England, Scotland and Ireland, has a number of possible origins. Firstly, it may be of Anglo-Saxon origin, from the Olde English pre 7th Century and Middle English “dunn”, meaning “dull, brown, dark-coloured”, and was a nickname for a man with dark hair or a swarthy complexion. It may also have originated from an unrecorded Middle English survival of an Olde English byname, “Dunna”, dark.”
http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/dunn#ixzz25GsSoLUG
There are possible Anglo-Saxon origins. But you’re right, Irish is more a more accurate designation. In any event, what’s relevant (and which was my point to being with) is that it’s now a very white name denoting very white people, which he probably finds distressing, although ironically its origins suggest someone with dark skin.
In any case, I should add that I was using the term “Anglo-Saxon” in the looser, more general meaning of relating to the cultural traditions of England and the U.S. (as in WASP), which is one accepted dictionary definition/usage of the term, not the more restricted, historical meaning of the term as relating to Germanic tribes.
But thank for your clarification!
did some research in the 80′s on this subject. the expression in vogue at the time was “animating guilt” which is defined as “a guilt or shame manifested as guilt, which compells a person to act or overreact to a wrong or perceived wrong in their past, usually demonstrated as a collective guilt, as in racial overcompsensation by certain demographics to alleviate the actions of their predecessors”
so what was explained in very academic terms then, may not have been formally studied by the Liberal press. they just know that they feel guilt for the way blacks were treated in the past, and they think that by discussing it, that they are somehow going to compensate for the past generation’s wrongs.
Which is of course complete poppycock on so many levels. First of all, the sins of previous generations for instance, slavery, lack of civil rights, reconstruction, bigotry and lynchings for instance, cannot be overcome by any mere mudslinging or false accusations by the likes of Matthews, Sam Donaldson, or Al Sharpton, or the Black Panthers. What is funny is that they have taken the word: “Racist” and twisted it out of all proportion.
A racist is someone who blatantly acts out against other nationalities or skin color in such a way as to be unreasonable and irrational in their dislike of that person, for reasons that only have to do with race. For instance, someone who blows up a black church or sets it on fire, and leaves a message that all black people should die. That is a racist.
What we have here is a complete disconnect with the definition from what the expression means. It is tossed around cavalierly, and with no regard whatsoever for what it really means, and I think the mainstream press has fallen into this hateful stage in their lives where they don’t even realise how far out of touch with reality that they have become.
The expression is overused, and by habit, and repetition, they have watered down it’s meaning, and re lit animosities amongst blacks toward whites. The object lesson here is that the Press can, will and has dragged out the race card so much as to make a huge section of the population actually think that all Republicans are “Racists” which is a sick, and almost demented and warped goal to have achieved.
And this is why: After this election, the population will have been set back to a time before the Civil Rights act. Where blacks think all whites are racists, except of course the Whites in the Mainstream Press who were so quick to point out who all the racists were, or are.
The country will be left in such a shambles, that is akin to a scorched earth policy. The Press, The WHite House and Obama’s henchmen don’t care. They are obviously going to take this line right to the wire, and let this all go. They are not going to reign in this hate speech. They really, in their heart of hearts don’t care. If they can’t win, then neither with the U.S. and if they leave all blacks disenfranchised, and hating all whites, then so much the better for them.
It is a sad, sad day to hear the use of these expressions, and we can only hope that the President takes a stand against it, shows some leadership, and asks that the Liberal Press STOP IMMEDIATELY these hateful tirades, and stop using that word, and that his liberal operators will be lectured that all this must stop.
Or we will remain a divided and ignorant nation for many years to come.
I TWeet at @Samuel_Clemons
“we can only hope that the President takes a stand against it, shows some leadership, and asks that the Liberal Press STOP IMMEDIATELY these hateful tirades, and stop using that word, and that his liberal operators will be lectured that all this must stop”
HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh my aching sides.
“Dunn prostitutes himself to the sociopaths and racists in his movement. ”
The left is a cult, and like any cult its members spend a great deal of their time deliberately and strenuously looking away from painful reminders of objective reality. There is very little difference between a leftist, a Scientologist, a Branch Davidian, and a follower of Jim Jones, other than the existence of a pulse perhaps.
So many people make the mistake of granting leftists legitimacy rather than treating them as the sick fools they truly are.
Another reason for progressives’ ritualistic repetition of certain words and tropes is simply that they don’t read or think much, so they have a fairly small conceptual vocabulary. They compare every use of authority they dislike to Hitler, in part because they can’t think of a merely authoritarian (as opposed to totalitarian) regime, for comparison purposes. They call those they don’t like racists, as racism is one of the few evils they think they understand (the other is anti-environmentalism), because that’s all that was drummed into their heads from elementary school onwards. They never attempted to think about about more comprehensive accounts of good and evil; what are the fundamental virtues & vices; what makes good character.
Progressivism is a refuge for the ill-educated and/or dumb, who nevertheless are motivated to fake that they have something to say.
Update to your article, according to Chrissie Mathews, he live in a black rich city of DC. Only problem, he does not, he lives in a “lily white” little suburb with a whole 10 black people as well.
Oh never mind, RACIST!
Actually I have noticed a pattern to all of this that goes way beyond just race. It seems to be seated in a deep self-loathing. For example: I am bad. I am an American, therefore Americans are bad and I will champion any other nation who is against ours. I am bad, I am white, therefore white people are bad. I will devalue my race and champion all others at its expense at every opportunity. I am bad, I am from a Christian (or Jewish) family, therefore Christians (or Jews) are bad. I will champion any cause that is against my religious heritage. I am bad, I am a human being, therefore human beings are bad. I will support whatever I can to further the elimination of human beings from this planet (misanthrope). I am bad, I came from a wealthy family, therefore wealth is bad. I will work to eliminate wealth. I am bad, I am heterosexual, heterosexuals are bad, I will work to actively promote homosexuality.
I see this mostly from the guilty while trust fund liberals. There is a lot of this in San Francisco where people will go completely out of their way to attempt to reverse everything about themselves. They will embrace Islam or atheism, veganism, abortion, affirmative action, population control, etc. It all seems to be based on very deep-seated self-loathing. They just don’t like anything at all about themselves and seem to believe that if they can stamp out the traits from which they spring, then there will be less bad in the world. It’s just literally crazy.
I’m not sure it’s about being ‘bad’. Liberals seem to hold themselves as superior to the rest of us, they have found the ‘secret’ principles which elevate them to a higher intellectual plane.
It’s a way of gaining power in a group in which you are just one of the average Joes. To rebel against the status quo and aspire to be ‘other’ is to gain power because you are then noteworthy and can hold up your head as a swimmer against the stream of convention. “People will take notice of me now, hah, I’m important because I’ve rejected the group, and best of all, I’ve pissed you all off!”
In other words, attention-seeking.
While I agree that they often hold themselves superior, I seem to notice a bit of self loathing in their superiority. For example, we are a capitalist country so capitalism must be opposed. American culture must also be opposed or suppressed and other cultures venerated. They tend to oppose anything connected with their own identity and at the same time project an air of superiority in doing so as if to say what they actually are is inferior and so to become superior, they must support these other things.
I don’t know any white people. I’m pink!
This projection of self-loathing is not about being inclusive nor seeking diversity. The goal is to adopt and embrace any culture and values except those held by Caucasians. Going further, it is assumed that people from these other cultures who hold these other values are all alike! This is why Bill Clinton can be named by Tony Morrison as the “first black president”, and why Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas are not “black”.
Indeed, the word “black” clearly no longer refers to race, it refers to the culture and values the left assumes that blacks must surely hold, which are in harmony with leftist values. So “black” is the new red. The leftist gets a twofer, he gets racial identity and reinforced ideology! No wonder they complain so loudly when a conservative pushes back against an Obama policy initiative.
One thing though, it is not self hatred. When leftists reek disdain for whites, they mean non leftist whites, you know those white trash types, or those greedy people that go into business, rather than entertainment, news, academia, or gov, where every right thinking white person should work. Themselves, the leftist whites, are part of the governing elite, and can direct us all toward their utopia.