Raising Muslim Kids as Foot-Soldiers

Raising Muslim Kids as Foot-Soldiers, by Radhika Singh. Among other examples:

For the first time in 70 years after being partitioned from India, the government of Islamic Pakistan spared a thought for the perennially persecuted minorities of the country. It decided on giving the handful of Hindus in Pakistan a Hindu temple dedicated to the Hindu deity, Krishna. The construction had hardly commenced when Islamists attacked and vandalized the structure in progress. Numerous Pakistanis expressed their abject objection toward the sole Hindu temple being built, and fatwas were issued against its construction; but what drew the media’s attention to this part of the world (not the liberal print houses with a selective conscience) was a video posted by a Pakistani father featuring his two toddlers vowing to kill all Hindus if a Hindu temple was erected in Islamabad.

In the video, the Pakistani father greets fellow Pakistanis as “brothers and sisters” and introduces his two sons — aged no more than four years old. The camera focuses on the children, and the older one proclaims, “Mr. Imran Khan, if a temple is constructed in Islamabad, and then remember, I will kill all Hindus one by one. Understand? Allah Hafiz.” The younger one chimes in with an excited nod, the proud father then throws a challenge to the country chieftain, “See, now it is up to you.”

These are not mere children displaying their innocence to the world; they are future citizens, being raised with hate and bigotry. Their malleable minds are being criminalized from tender years, and they are being systematically conditioned to grow into adults with alarming instincts.

Islam’s ideas of its superiority, and intolerance of non-Muslims, is fourteen centuries old. A quarter of the world is now Islamic, and the penalty for leaving Islam is death. Hey, didn’t Tony Blair import lots of Pakistani Muslims into Britain recently?

Conditioning children to act with vehement disregard for non-Muslims is nothing new among Islamists. This practice is found across Asian countries with a thriving Muslim population and it’s being introduced to the West, step-by-step. …

In 2018, India Today carried out a sting operation on Kerala’s Madrassas and the findings exposed the seminaries programming impressionable minds with the objectives of ISIS. Their dream was to establish a universal caliphate, which they were determined to realize through a worldwide war. India Today quoted the joint secretary of a madrasa funded by a local trust:

“It’s there in our hearts. We share this with the children bit by bit. There’s no rush. A caliphate is not built in a day.”

Kerala supplies the maximum number of new recruits to ISIS from India. …

In 2011, CNN, a media house as leftist as it gets, spearheaded an investigation on what was being taught in Madrasas. … Kids were being trained to hate the Western world, the UK, and the Americas, and aspired to live the legacy of Osama Bin Laden. Usman Khan, the London Bridge attacker who was shot dead on November 29, 2019, aspired to start a Madrasa and terror training camp on his family-owned land in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and raise a fresh crop of jihadis.

While some children have their own families planting the seed of hate in their hearts, others develop this seed through their “schools.” Surrounded by and indoctrinated with hate, these youngsters’ futures are choreographed for violence and terror. Westerners need to know a lot more about the madrasas operating within their communities — and what these Islamic religious schools are filling children’s minds with and the dark journeys they’re setting them out on.

And to think western governments financially support Islamic schools in their midst. What could possibly go wrong?

Voice of America Makes Biden Ad for Muslims

Voice of America Makes Biden Ad for Muslims, by Sara Carter. Awesome stuff. Watch this, particularly from 1:20 on:

Yes, the ad is for real. No, it’s not by the Biden campaign.

Voice of America posted what appears to be a political campaign ad on at least one of its social media platform last week, asking the Muslim community both in the United States and abroad to support Democratic Presidential Candidate Joe Biden.

The ad, which was uploaded in late July to VOA’s Facebook page, used a speech Biden recently made during an online rally with the Muslim Advocacy Group, Emgage Action. In that rally he addressed Muslim voters in the United States, as reported.

The two plus minute political ad, which was uploaded to VOA’s Urdu Facebook account on or about July 21, used the VOA logo, was apparently translated into Urdu and promoted Biden for president to Urdu speakers globally. …

VOA, which was established in 1942, is considered the premiere U.S. agency for global media outreach. In fact, it is a U.S. government tax payer funded international broadcast entity with an annual budget of roughly $234.7 million. …

The ad uses Biden’s promise to “end the Muslim ban on day one” if he is elected to office. (For clarification, there is no Muslim ban in the United States.)

Deleted Biden video sets off a crisis at Voice of America, by Daniel Lippman.

Voice of America is weighing a suspension of four contractors who were involved in publishing a story and video that was deemed too favorable to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Look at how the ad plays to Muslim sensibilities as a culture that is not intending to become part of the West, but take it over. Numerically.

Islam is a very strong culture. Muslims in the West often see western culture as decadent and weak, and want no part of its immorality.

It is naive and foolish of secular westerners to assume that the West will assimilate Islam, rather than that Islam will conquer the West from within. Fourteen hundred years of history indicate that the modern West is making a huge mistake.

hat-tip Stephen Harper

Joe Biden’s Capitulation To The Crazy Left Is Alienating Democrats Like Me

Joe Biden’s Capitulation To The Crazy Left Is Alienating Democrats Like Me, by Scott Street, a Democratic lawyer and consultant in Los Angeles.

Last year, Joe Biden’s path to the presidency seemed clear: Treat President Donald Trump as a historical anomaly whom Biden would replace, then restore American values, overcome petty politics, and get government working again. This message was designed to appeal both to Democrats, like me, and to Republican and Independent voters tired of the toxic political environment we’ve suffered since 2016.

That strategy initially worked well. Despite constant attacks from opponents and the press, by March 17, Biden had effectively wrapped up the nomination, and polls showed him trouncing Trump in key states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania.

In recent weeks, however, Biden’s messaging has changed. …

Nowhere is this more apparent than in Biden’s new alliance with democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders. Biden deserves credit for trying to bring Sanders’ supporters into the fold, something Hillary Clinton never really did. The 110-page “unity plan” Biden’s campaign developed with Sanders supporters such as Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez tries hard to make both the far-left and moderates happy.

Like most such efforts, however, it fails. It throws trillions of dollars at problems without explaining how to pay for them or taking into account the debt-fueled trillions Congress is spending to deal with the coronavirus. It envisions a bloated bureaucracy that would shift even more power away from states and local governments and into Washington, D.C. …

Surely you are kidding Mr Biden:

Although Biden takes a law-and-order approach to coronavirus, he has thrown actual law enforcement officers under the bus by kowtowing to activists who want to “defund the police.” As Biden knows, defunding the police is a myth. Its proponents openly admit they want to abolish police departments, not only defund them. …

Trump is following Reagan’s strategy:

In this vein, Trump is following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, just as he did in 2016. Democrats underestimated Reagan’s appeal during the 1980s. It wasn’t until 2006 that one prominent Democrat [Barack Obama] observed that Reagan’s skill in winning middle-class voters “spoke to the failures of liberal government, during a period of economic stagnation, to give middle-class voters any sense that it was fighting for them.” …

Why non-activist voters increasingly prefer Trump:

CNN’s Rich Thau has been conducting focus groups of Obama-Trump voters in the Midwest and found recently that 22 of 33 respondents preferred Trump to Biden. It’s easy to see why. According to Thau:

They think a businessman is best suited to turn the country around economically. They feel COVID-19 was not Trump’s fault, and he’s doing the best he can to contain it. They conflate the Black Lives Matter protesters with the rioters attacking federal buildings and retail shops. They don’t want historic monuments torn down. And they dismiss defunding the police as ridiculous.

These voters tell me they want America finally to be put first; they oppose immigration and trade policies they say give benefits to foreigners at their expense. And they want a non-politician who relentlessly fights back, after witnessing too many officeholders fold in the face of special interests.

These voters cannot be discounted as racists or deplorables who need to be canceled. Their votes matter just as much as the protesters and rioters. They could easily lift Trump to a second term.

The polls say Biden is well in front, but cancel culture ensures more silent voters. So who will win?

Surely the Democrat failure to even criticize the rioting that trashed many American cities rules them out of serous contention. As does their anti-white racism, in a mainly white country. Those are seriously non-partisan issues, or should be.

If the US media wasn’t so biased, the Democrats would have worked out a decade ago they were on the wrong path. But many of them stay only in their echo-chamber, so they don’t realize there is a problem.

Those who support a cashless society aren’t fully aware of what they are asking for

Those who support a cashless society aren’t fully aware of what they are asking for. By Amy Bailey.

A cashless society means no cash. Zero. It doesn’t mean mostly cashless and you can still use a ‘wee bit of cash here & there’. Cashless means fully digital, fully traceable, fully controlled. …

What you lose by going cashless:

  • If you are struggling with your mortgage on a particular month, you can’t do an odd job to get you through.
  • Your child can’t go and help the local farmer to earn a bit of summer cash.
  • No more cash slipped into the hands of a child as a good luck charm or from their grandparent when going on holidays.
  • No more money in birthday cards.
  • No more piggy banks for your child to collect pocket money and to learn about the value of earning.
  • No more cash for a rainy day fund or for that something special you have been putting £20 a week away for.
  • No more selling bits and pieces from your home that you no longer want/need for a bit of cash in return.

In a cashless society:

  • Banks have full control of every single penny you own.
  • Every transaction you make is recorded.
  • All your movements & actions are traceable.
  • Access to your money can be blocked at the click of a button when/if banks need ‘clarification’ from you which will take about three weeks, a thousand questions answered and five thousand passwords.
  • You will have no choice but to declare and be taxed on every pound in your possession.
  • The government WILL decide what you can and cannot purchase.
  • If your transactions are deemed in any way questionable, by those who create the questions, your money will be frozen, ‘for your own good’.

Cashless means all financial transactions involves moving money from one bank account to another.

Cashless is good for banks and government, but bad for the rest of us and bad for liberty.

The Decline and Fall of San Francisco

The Decline and Fall of San Francisco.

San Francisco is a left wing city, in a left wing state that leads the western world in trends. It’s 30 miles up the freeway from Silicon Valley (which is part of the same urban area).

A reader commented:

That video about San Francisco is awful on many levels, one of which what the Leftists who created the mess say.

They cannot see any connection between what they have done and the disaster in front of their eyes, and want to double down and double down again.

Intelligence community’s top election official: China and Iran don’t want Trump to win reelection, Russia working against Biden

Intelligence community’s top election official: China and Iran don’t want Trump to win reelection, Russia working against Biden. By Alex Marquardt.

“We assess that China prefers that President Trump — whom Beijing sees as unpredictable — does not win reelection,” said William R. Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, in a statement updating the election threat landscape heading into the November election.

“China has been expanding its influence efforts ahead of November 2020 to shape the policy environment in the United States, pressure political figures it views as opposed to China’s interests, and deflect and counter criticism of China.”

“We assess that Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden and what it sees as an anti-Russia ‘establishment.’ This is consistent with Moscow’s public criticism of him when he was Vice President for his role in the Obama Administration’s policies on Ukraine and its support for the anti-Putin opposition inside Russia,” Evanina added.

Just so you know what the teams are, and why Russia will get bad press while China will get a pass (as much as is possible, considering they just poisoned the world with something from their bioweapons lab).

Countries that use Hydroxychloroquine may have 80% lower Covid death rates

Countries that use Hydroxychloroquine may have 80% lower Covid death rates, by Joanne Nova.

Poor countries all over the world are using Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and it appears to be very useful.

The new HCQTrial suggests that despite the billion dollar budgets and expert staff, people in wealthier countries are dying from Coronavirus at far higher rates than people are in lands where HCQ is being used. And the effect of HCQ apparently holds even after researchers correct for patients being older, heavier, with higher blood pressure, living in high density apartment towers, or with getting tested more. …

Take a close look at this (click to enlarge).

If word ever gets out that the Politico-Academic-Corporate-Swamp buried useful drugs because they were unprofitable and out of patent, there will be hell to pay.

The HCQTrial was done anonymously by @CovidAnalysis – who say they are PhD researchers, scientists.

“You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. For examples of why we can’t be more specific search for “raoult death threats” or “simone gold fired”. We have little interest in adding to our publication lists, being in the news, or being on TV (we have done all of these things before but feel there are more important things in life now).”

It’s a mark of the times when people do a lot of work but don’t want credit. They just want to get the answers out there. When the main tool of public argument is ad hominem, this is sometimes how it has to be. …

The low death nations include Cuba, India, Turkey, Indonesia, Algeria, Greece, Ukraine, Costa Rica, Russia, Morocco and Israel. Not all of which are poor.

The list itself may be a shock — for people in the West to find out that so many countries are using it.

Hydroxychloroquine is a 60 year old drug used by millions of people around the world. The wholesale cost is about $5US for a whole month of treatment in Africa. In the US HCQ was approved in 1955, and there are about 5 million prescriptions for it every year for things like Malaria, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Lupus.

About 15 years ago it was shown to work against SARS, the close-cousin to Covid-19-WuFlu. It’s one of the most prescribed drugs in the world and people sometimes take it for years. The side effects and risks are well known, and doctors already know who shouldn’t take it. The “dangerous” drug is mainly dangerous to Corporate profits. It threatens Big Pharma which has taken some breathtaking punts on new drugs and new vaccines.

Take the 80% figure with some skepticism. Country by country comparisons are the lowest grade of medical studies — hunting for answers under a hill of confounding factors — but this is a well thought out, respectable study. …

People, like Sydney Morning Herald writers are being willingly fooled by badly done studies which start the drug too late when patients are already in a severe state and use it without the cofactors — zinc and an antibiotic. Some studies are so badly designed, it’s almost like they were not meant to succeed.

This is not proof that HCQ works — because it neglects differences in infection rates — but it is very suggestive.

Notice that it is poorer countries going down the HCQ route. Presumably they looked around, figured they couldn’t afford the huge price of what Big Pharma was proposing, and saw that there are several much cheaper alternatives.

Trump 2020: Make America Normal Again

Trump 2020: Make America Normal Again, by Bookworm. Normal was welcomed in the 1950s, and perhaps overdone after the brutal horrors of World War II. But by the 1960s, a new generation was growing up who only knew the strong normal, and they rebelled. Something similar happened after WWI.

One of the main differences between 1920 and 2020 is that, for the first time in American history, we have a major political party that absolutely rejects the entire notion of normal. They rejected it on racial grounds. They reject it on sex grounds. They reject it on climate grounds. They reject it on law and order grounds. They reject normal wherever it tries to take root. This is the leftist’s way of accruing power.

Andrew Sullivan looked at “the roots of wokeness,” which is the left’s vehicle for power today, and found those roots in “critical theory,” which rejects reality — including the reality of the norm or normal. He even uses the word “normal” to explain the concept:

Most normal people have never heard of this theory — or rather an interlocking web of theories — that is nonetheless changing the very words we speak and write and the very rationale of the institutions integral to liberal democracy. (Emphasis mine.) …

Objective truth? It stands in the way of the comrades’ route to power.

Most people think they’re pretty clear on objective truth. When you look into your underpants, you know if you’re a boy or a girl. When you see yourself in the mirror, you know you’re a person, not a dog or a dragon. And while you recognize that your skin color may bring you closer to one racial classification than another, reality also tells you your species: You’re a human being, same as the people next to you, whether their skin is darker or lighter or their eyes narrower or rounder.

We also have the human capacity to look around and evaluate things. If you’ve learned that young black men with their pants hanging off their butts and expensive, unlaced shoes are dangerous, you avoid them. It’s not their race, it’s the choices they make about their appearance. If you saw those same young black men, neatly dressed, standing outside a church with their family, all of them holding Bibles, you wouldn’t give your safety a second thought. …

We intuitively understand that men and women are biological matched sets that exist to produce children. .. There is no “today I am a man, tomorrow I enjoy being a girl” in Nature.

Normal also means we crave peace. We will fight if we have to and, if our society is terribly out of wack, we’ll do terrible things. …

Because we are a civilized, Judeo-Christian society, though, we Americans want that punishment to come through a fair, reasoned, and reliable process that does not embrace cruelty for its own sake. When we look at screaming mobs in the street, violating all norms of law and order, we are instinctively revolted.

Both candidates promise peace. Trump promises peace by reinstating the normal, which is the rule of law.

Biden promises peace by saying that, if we give the rioters, Marxists, and anarchists what they want, they’ll go away and leave us alone. He’s too demented, perhaps, to remember that appeasement has never worked in the history of all humankind, but the leftists surrounding him should and do know better. They don’t want peace. They want chaos because they see that as a path to power. …

The logic of law and order — of a reliable system that protects citizens from criminals and criminals from outraged citizens — demands that society must punish those who use violence to put their ideas forward. They have the choice to use persuasion and the ballot box, not screaming, violent attacks on valuable institutions. Make the wrong choice; go to jail.

Incidentally, those screaming, violent anarchists actually look abnormal. That is, they’re not normal warriors; they have a frightening aura of mental illness hanging about them. ..

What’s unusual this time around is that it’s not just war, disease, and anarchists that have created the abnormal. Instead, half of our political class is working on denying reality and normalcy altogether.

The ruling class does this because the only way to convince people that socialism works is to force them to believe that … boys and girls are interchangeable, that violent anarchists are mostly peaceful, and every other bit of nonsense and fantasy leftists foist on us. Oh, and of course, they’re telling us that a manifestly senile old man is a fit candidate to be president of the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Trump tried to bring normal back in his first term (borders, rule of law, foreign allies who actually like us, lower taxes, etc.) but was consistently blocked by the forces of anarchy, resistance, and downright madness.

The Waning Luxury of Being Color-Blind

The Waning Luxury of Being Color-Blind, by David Cole.

Beverly Hills is not an exclusive gated community. We’re a city of 34,000 people, half of them renters (our median income isn’t even in the top 10 of L.A. County). .. In 2016, the only district on the entire Westside that went for Trump was in Beverly Hills. Yes, Trump won here. …

We’re neither all wealthy, nor all leftists.

BLM is targeting us because of race, not wealth. The terrorists are under the impression that we’re a “white” city. Putting aside that we’re 30% Persian and heavily Jewish, BLM sees us as “white,” and what they’re workshopping here with the late-night residential raids is a form of terror not seen in America since the KKK’s midnight rides through black neighborhoods: the intentional disruption of life and security in neighborhoods that are specifically targeted because of the race of the residents.

The Alinsky types who comprise the brains behind the BLM brawn were quite clever to field-test the terror raids in Beverly Hills. They knew that rightists would cheer the sight of “Hollywood leftists getting what they deserve,” thus the tests could continue unimpeded by negative coverage from Fox or the right-wing blogosphere. That’s how predictable and easily manipulated the right is; BLM knew your spin before you did. Faced with a choice between intelligently strategizing a way to put the kibosh on this new antiwhite terror campaign, or profiting from it via juicy blog posts that positively spin the raids, most rightists chose the latter.

And while the right blogs, the left accomplishes. …

Simplified, SCOTUS ruled that you have no legal right to police protection. That’s why city leaders in hellholes like Portland, Seattle, and New York can legally do what they’re doing. They have absolutely no obligation to provide police protection for their citizens. The left’s beloved anarcho-tyranny is not a violation of your rights. As my favorite constitutional law scholar Eugene Volokh told me last week, “The remedy for inadequate policing is political — retaliation against elected officials at the polls — and not legal.”

But but but:

You may not have a right to police protection, but if the state is failing to provide that protection based on race — if race factors into that deprivation — your rights are being violated, and you have a case. …

The state can get away with tormenting its citizens, or allowing its citizens to be tormented, to a massive degree, as long as the torment is broad-based and not racially discriminatory.

The BLM terrorists have not hidden the racial nature of their targeted riots. Indeed, they’re proud of it. BLM leader Melina Abdullah boasted to the L.A. Times that BLM “wanted to go to places of white affluence” in order to bring “pain” to those communities.

And leftist mayors and neutered police chiefs are not providing aid to the victims of this race-based violence. Police departments all over Southern California were ordered to stand down and allow majority white areas to be trashed by rioters who were by their own admission targeting those areas for reasons of race. And while the Beverly Hills PD (and our mayor) stopped the residential raids cold, L.A. County politicians have promised to fight against the city’s protection of its residents.

Now, you folks can sit back like dicks and laugh at the plight of the whites in those areas (hyuk hyuk them liberal Hollywood jerks is gettin’ whut they deserve!), or you can be smart for once and realize that if this lunacy isn’t stopped in its infancy, it’ll soon be coming for you, wherever you live.

The problem is, if BLM is to be fought using anti-discrimination statutes and case law, that means white folks will have to use race-conscious legal arguments, just as nonwhites do. But decades of indoctrination have made white Americans reluctant to pursue any cause — even their own safety and well-being — in the name of their race.

But that may be the only way out. Whites have lost the luxury of being color-blind. There are laws on the books that can protect whites from BLM (and any other group that engages in specifically antiwhite violence), but only if whites seek protection as whites.

That’s a fine irony: “Anti-racist” groups like BLM may be forcing whites to become more racially conscious, as a defensive measure. In the end, BLM might be undone by the overtly racial nature of its brutal and merciless tactics.

Pay attention. This will spread throughout the West if not stopped.

BLM’s White Female Fanatics: Big Sister Is Watching Us. But Why?

BLM’s White Female Fanatics: Big Sister Is Watching Us. But Why? By Lance Welton.

Leftist women seem to be emerging as the “New Church Ladies”, as Jim Goad has called them.

In an extraordinary expose, American Conservative columnist Rod Dreher recently reported that even Democrat operatives worry privately that “hard left women” incensed by Hillary Clinton’s defeat have “completely taken over the middle management of the party” and are “allowing their rage to guide them”

And watched any of the coverage of Black Lives Matter riots will be struck by one unavoidable question: Why are so many of the participants women — especially young women?

I reported a while ago on the evidence that more than 50% of young, extremely liberal females have been diagnosed with depression. There is also evidence that females are far more socially conformist than males. …

[A new] study — entitled “The Next Great Awakening” [June 27, 2020, National Policy Institute] and researched by independent academic Edward Dutton — argues that BLM should be understood as a kind of “religious revival.” It notes that it has all of the central components of traditional Christianity (dogmas, group-orientation, despising the outgroup, even over-detecting agency — evil racists though, rather than God’s presence) except metaphysical belief.

According to Dutton, religiousness, which is significantly genetic, became selected for partly because it reduced stress in the face of “mortality salience” — the realisation that you might die. Charting twentieth-century British history, the author shows that periods of “elevated mortality salience” — such as wars or the possibility of destitution — are always followed by “religious revivals” in which people become intensely devout and have overwhelming religious experiences, which reduce their feelings of stress.

Dutton presents evidence indicating that the kind of people who have such religious experiences, or who go through phases of extreme religiosity, tend to be high in Neuroticism (mental instability, intense negative feelings) and thus prone to depression and anxiety. In such people, these feelings are pushed to such extremes, that they become profoundly religious; an adaptive trait to calm the person down.

Fearing exclusion and ostracism, Neurotic people also tend to be easily caught up in mass movements, such as religious revivals. And these revivals are always dominated by young females.

According to Dutton, part of the reason for this is that females are, in general, more religious than males, Pew Research finding that 70% of American women are “absolutely certain” that God exists, compared to 57% of men. …

Females do not tend to create and lead religions. But they are religion’s most fanatical enforcers.

And is this nowhere better illustrated than in the BLM movement.

Hmmm. Food for thought.

YouTube Can’t Handle the Truth

YouTube Can’t Handle the Truth, by John Hinderaker. A few days ago we posted Heather MacDonald’s video presenting some (non-PC) facts about crime, race, and policing in the US. YouTube slapped restrictions on a similar video, then removed it.

According to YouTube, our video “has been identified by the YouTube community…” What does that mean? They got a complaint from a lefty? Two lefties? It is noteworthy that currently, the video has 3,400 “likes” and 50 “dislikes.” So it appears that the “YouTube community” overwhelmingly approves of the video. Unless YouTube takes the position that conservatives are not part of its “community.”

“…as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.” What audiences are those? Leftists? Democrats? People who are afraid of the truth? YouTube winds up with the warning, “Viewer discretion is advised.” Because Heather’s speech is too hot to handle. Of course, it has been viewed more than 78,000 times with an overwhelmingly positive response. Are left-wing videos on YouTube–BLM videos, for example– deemed “inappropriate or offensive to some audiences” and slapped with a similar warning label?

Just kidding. At the moment, YouTube is desperately trying to help elect Joe Biden president.

Steve Sailer:

A couple of decades ago, the Internet was based on non-proprietary standards with very few centralized chokepoints. Now it’s dominated by profit-making monopolists who can squeeze out anybody they feel like.

The humiliation of Western history

The humiliation of Western history, by Frank Furedi.

The most important issue at stake in the culture war is who controls the narrative through which society understands itself. At present, those controlling the narrative appear to be committed to reorganising society’s historical memory, and disputing and delegitimising its ideals, from liberty to equality. …

The humiliation and demonisation of the past and its ideals is now enacted at every important cultural event.

Prize-giving ceremonies, be they the Oscars, the Tonys or the Pulitzers, invariably include speeches boasting of the bravery of the recipient for daring to ‘speak truth to power’. Ironically, this supposedly rebellious rhetoric is espoused by those who actually wield cultural power. These cultural elites see it as their raison d’être to denounce the culture into which they were born. Moreover, they do so for the public’s benefit, in order to ‘raise awareness’. …

The 1619 project by the left in the US is the latest, outrageous rewriting of history:

One powerful proponent of the dogma of awareness-raising is The New York Times, the most influential newspaper in the US. In August 2019, it decided ‘to speak truth to power’ by launching the 1619 Project, an ongoing initiative, featuring essays and other contributions, which maintains that the year 1619, and not 1776, is the true origin of the US. This, the project argues, is because the US was founded for the purpose of entrenching slavery, and 1619 was the year African slaves first arrived in Jamestown. All subsequent US history is therefore shaped by this founding, enslaving moment.

From this distorted vantage point, the American Revolution is presented not so much as a War of Independence, but as a selfish attempt to preserve the exploitative and oppressive legacy of 1619. The famous founding assertion that ‘all men are created equal’, and are entitled to ‘Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’, is denigrated as mere cover for the practices of a group of unprincipled and dishonest slave-owners.

Unlike previous initiatives designed to encourage people to look critically at uncomfortable truths about their past, the 1619 Project offers a ‘take it or leave it’ version of history. Its aim is not to criticise existing historical narratives about the US. It is to negate and even morally annihilate the very foundation on which the US was built. As the NYT put it: ‘Our founding ideals of liberty and equality were false when they were written. Black Americans fought to make them true. Without this struggle, America would have no democracy at all.’

In rejecting the founding ideals of liberty and equality as false, the 1619 Project strips America’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence, of every shred of moral authority. It also erases the profound contribution the American Revolution made to the development of the Western ideal of freedom.

The 1619 Project does not offer any new insights into the past. Rather, it seeks to contaminate the past and render it toxic.

Indeed, one of the main contributors to the project, Nikole Hannah-Jones, admits that its principal objective is not to shed light on the past, but to undermine the moral authority of the present. ‘I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not history’, she writes. ‘It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and therefore national memory. The project has always been as much about the present as it is about the past.’

Clearly for Hannah-Jones, the objective of the project is to alter America’s historical memory in order to gain control of the national narrative.

This sort of thing has been building for decades:

Since the 1980s, Western culture has exhibited a discernible discomfort with the past. The sense of national pride that inspired generations of British people, for instance, has given way to a powerful mood of estrangement from the past. This sensibility is widely promoted in schools and universities and by cultural institutions such as the BBC. Indeed, the school curriculum is increasingly dominated by projects pointing out the blemishes on Britain’s past, rather than drawing attention to its achievements. …

To cultivate a love of the British way of life was therefore deemed immoral. …

The use of terms like ‘Victorian values’ or ‘Victorian morality’ in Britain is now almost entirely derogatory.

The left/media are lying about the past in order to grab control in the present. Orwell warned us about this in 1984: “Who controls the past controls the future.”

A reader comments:

These cultural elites see it as their raison d’être to denounce the culture into which they were born.

That sentence sums it up precisely. It also begs the question ‘why’? It’s so hard to find a good answer to that because the only conclusion one can come to is they’re bent on burning their own house down.

Communists think they can build a better house, after they’ve burnt our house down. I’ll bet they’ve never read Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, which pretty much proves that tyranny and repression follow intrinsically from communism. “Oh no, not if we were in charge,” say today’s communists. Sure, power seekers.

UPDATE: ‘These are killers’: Giuliani blasts BLM as ‘terrorist group’ that ‘hate white people’.

Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for President Donald Trump, has slammed Black Lives Matter as a “domestic terrorist organization” full of “killers” who “hate white people” and want to “overthrow our way of life.” …

He added BLM and other liberal groups hate “white men especially” and want to do away with the traditional nuclear family. …

“Do you know who knows that best? African-Americans. I’ve actually had them tell me, why aren’t they classified as a terrorist group. Just because they are black, nobody can say it?”

See, burning down our house. Reminds me of some left-wing white man’s music from the 1980s:

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Twitter Staffer Who Announced Trump Censorship Used to Work for Kamala Harris…

Twitter Staffer Who Announced Trump Censorship Used to Work for Kamala Harris… By Tyler O’Neil.

On Wednesday, Twitter deleted a Trump campaign video showing President Donald Trump saying that children are “almost immune” from COVID-19, claiming that the president’s claim was “misinformation,” even though children face much less risk for the coronavirus than adults. Facebook had deleted the video earlier on Wednesday. …

The Twitter staffer who announced the video’s deletion was himself a former press secretary for now-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), one of the two black women who are reportedly on Biden’s vice-presidential short-list…

Speaking of Kamala Harris, Biden’s pick apparently is a two horse race between Susan Rice and Kamala Harris:

How the US Democrats now choose the leader of the free world, whilst calling their opponents racist and sexist.