July 19, 2010
— Ace VDH:
How would we characterize the new aristocracy? In a number of ways.1) Untruth. One requisite to being a cultural elite, unfortunately, is a certain allegiance to untruth, to saying one thing and doing another. Consider the manifestations of falsity from ecology to race. Often exempt from worry over a weekly check, and distanced from the mechanics of how things work, the elite clamors for a green cap-and-trade revolution. It rejects compromise with a fossil fuel near future that would transition us in a half-century or so to renewable energy.
That said, it is hard to find cultural elites who live green lives. Most use their money at times to fly on jets or boat (like the president this weekend). As in the manner of the tastes of a John Edwards or Al Gore, the bigger and more impressive the home, the better to contemplate how lesser others use too much carbon-based power. Usually green sacrifice is to be made by coal miners, oil drillers, and timber men of politically incorrect industries — the distant horny-handed classes whose unmentioned work brings us instant convenience.
On matters racial, it gets complicated since advocacy is one thing, living another. The cultural elite use “pull” to get their kids into college, money to live in a “good” neighborhood, and “networking” to marry and “place” like others from a good background. All that remains unspoken and rarely articulated. Why so? Because otherwise the logical ramifications of such a liberal belief system would be to live in the San Jose or Fresno mixed suburbs, to have their children school with the “other” at Cal State Stanislaus or Indiana State, and to marry their children to Rick Lopez or Tyrone Hiller to encourage “diversity.”
In short, money, privilege, and status create in the cultural elite both a fear of mixing it up with others that might jeopardize position and placement, and yet guilt for that very sense of entitlement and exemption. All that, in turn, only heightens the shrill and sanctimonious rhetorical demands on less blessed others to prove their morality.
Barack Obama was a genius in recognizing all this, and at a very early age no less. The subtext of Dreams from My Father, and indeed Obama’s life from 18 to 45, was to allay elite fears, guilt, and suspicions. And by proving to be a calm, charismatic, minority wannabe fellow elite — who could ipso facto offer instant penance for rather isolated and shamed cultural elite s— Obama in return grasped that the rules simply would not apply to him (elites having few real unchanging principles and values): graduate admission without commensurate grades and test scores (their release to the public could in theory prove my hypothesis wrong), law review without a paper trail, teaching and offers of tenure at law schools without normal publication, community organizing without worry of tangible results, running for office without repercussions from tawdry attacks ranging from suing to invalidate petitions to leaking divorce records.
What is more startling is the growth in America of precisely the sort of political alignment which we have known for many years in Britain: an electoral alliance of the educated, self-consciously (or self-deceivingly, depending on your point of view) "enlightened" class with the poor and deprived.
America, in other words, has discovered bourgeois guilt. A country without a hereditary nobility has embraced noblesse oblige. Now, there is nothing inherently strange or perverse about people who lead successful, secure lives feeling a sense of responsibility toward those who are disadvantaged. What is peculiar in American terms is that this sentiment is taking on precisely the pseudo-aristocratic tone of disdain for the aspiring, struggling middle class that is such a familiar part of the British scene.Liberal politics is now – over there as much as here – a form of social snobbery. To express concern about mass immigration, or reservations about the Obama healthcare plan, is unacceptable in bien-pensant circles because this is simply not the way educated people are supposed to think. It follows that those who do think (and talk) this way are small-minded bigots, rednecks, oiks, or whatever your local code word is for "not the right sort".
The petit bourgeois virtues of thrift, ambition and self-reliance – which are essential for anyone attempting to escape from poverty under his own steam – have long been derided in Britain as tokens of a downmarket upbringing. But not long ago in America they were considered, even among the highly educated, to be the quintessential national virtues, because even well-off professionals had probably had parents or grandparents who were once penniless immigrants. Nobody dismissed "ambition" as a form of gaucherie: the opposite of having ambition was being a bum, a good-for-nothing who would waste the opportunities that the new country offered for self-improvement.
But now the British Lefties who – like so many Jane Austen heroines looking down on those "in trade" – used to dismiss Margaret Thatcher as "a grocer's daughter", have their counterparts in the US, where virtually everybody's family started poor. Our "white van man" is their Tea Party activist, and the insult war is getting very vicious. It is becoming commonplace now for liberals in the US to label the Tea Party movement as racist, the most damaging insult of all in respectable American life.
Just to prove the point, here's the New York Times:
The question of racism in the amorphous Tea Party movement is, of course, a serious one, since so much of the Republican Party seems to be in the thrall of its activists. There have been scattered reports around the country of racially charged rhetoric within the movement, most notably just before the vote on the new health care law last March, when Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, the legendary civil rights leader, was showered with hateful epithets outside the Capitol.
Andrew Breitbart just emailed to say "You can go to hell."
But the insidious presence of racism within some quarters of the movement — or, maybe more accurately in some cases, an utter indifference toward racial sensitivities — shouldn’t really surprise anyone. That’s not necessarily because a subset of these antigovernment ideologues are racist, per se, but in part because they are just plain old....This does not mean that there aren’t hateful 25-year-olds coming to Tea Party rallies and letting fly racial slurs. What it does mean is that a sizable percentage of the Tea Party types were born into a segregated America, many of them in the South or in the new working-class suburbs of the North, and lived through the marches and riots that punctuated the cultural and political upheaval of the 1960s. Their racial attitudes, like their philosophies of governance, reflect their complicated journeys. (This is true for a lot of older, urban Democrats, too, who consider themselves liberal but whose racial commentary causes their grandchildren to recoil.)
Posted by: Ace at
07:50 AM
| Comments (66)
Post contains 1165 words, total size 8 kb.
Posted by: Vic at July 19, 2010 08:01 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman at July 19, 2010 08:01 AM (okmLW)
The Tea Party is not racist, per se. It's just filled with a lot of folks who have racist thoughts.
this is my convoluted attempt to avert the impending class war
Posted by: Joe "The Unifier" Biden at July 19, 2010 08:02 AM (554T5)
Great reads, and sadly too true -- it's been a long time coming, and perhaps what we are seeing is a normal, evolutionary progression of society...but that doesn't mean it's a great thing, and evolution can take different paths. In fact, it shouldn't have been allowed to get to this point.
But let's face it: the "esteemed" Rev. Wright's exhortation to his flock to scorn "middle classedness" has been a feature, not a bug, of leftist ideology -- and they are the ones who control the major outlets of socio-cultural dissemination. The hand writing was on the wall back in the 20s/30s, at the very least by the 60s/70s.
The middle class is what makes America strong (any nation actually), but it is a species that has always had a target on its back.
Posted by: unknown jane at July 19, 2010 08:02 AM (5/yRG)
I predict that the rise of the execrable American "ruling class," and the consequent revulsion of the lumpenproles at their hypocrisy, dishonesty and self-indulgence, will be the dynamic that will shape our politics for the foreseeable future, maybe in unexpectedly radical ways. "Real" Americans instinctively despise the condecension and self-entitlement that oozes from every pore of the Obamas, Kennedys, Pelosis, Reids, Dodd, Schumers, et al.
The problem is that these odious qualities are not exclusive to the left side of the political spectrum. Listen to McCain, McConnell, Romney, and Gingrich and it becomes clear that they perceive themselves members of the same political class as the worst of the Left. And unfortunately, class identification inevitably seems to trump political principle. Is that couch comfortable enough for you, Mr. Gingrich?
This country is overdue for a political bloodbath to remind our politicians that they are citizen legislators, not royalty. They answer to us.
Posted by: Cicero at July 19, 2010 08:04 AM (HtbJN)
Just a minor note.
Posted by: Dianna at July 19, 2010 08:06 AM (qrFCz)
Posted by: Drider at July 19, 2010 08:06 AM (HaJD9)
Posted by: FreakyBoy at July 19, 2010 08:08 AM (uKraB)
Posted by: EzE at July 19, 2010 08:08 AM (mNR/K)
WTF is Ace doing up so early on a Monday morning?
Didn't CT wear you out?
Posted by: Kemp at July 19, 2010 08:10 AM (2+9Yx)
Obama's favorite book, listed as a must-read classic is Native Son by Richard Wright. It is set in `1930s Chicago with communists as the hero of the oppressed black man defying the white American culture. It is noteworthy in that the criminal black character is a despicable criminal whose vices are not his own but are rather symptoms of his disaffection from white American culture. The communists understand this and attempt to show where the true fault lies. The message is that only the enlightened can grasp how the evils of America have caused despair, crime, rape, murder, and injustice. The solution is communism brought about by race war (which was one of the aims of Charles Manson).
I find the "intelligencia" not so intelligent because they fail to recognize how they are being manipulated by the global forces who want to bring the america which made them to it's knees.
Posted by: dagny at July 19, 2010 08:11 AM (DgcO5)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at July 19, 2010 08:14 AM (554T5)
It's like they sit around with the Democrats and figure new ways to silence the
Right.
And it's always with the same weapon: political correctness.
But they have no trouble recruiting useful idiots on the Right to help them, such as Bob Corker.
Posted by: boner pills cheap at July 19, 2010 08:14 AM (uFokq)
Of all the commentators, he, Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams are by far the most valuable. They don't mouth partisan talking points; nor do they suffer from "I strain" like some of the more successful egomaniacal mouthpieces.
In fact, I think a VDH/Sowell ticket could get the country back on the right path.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 19, 2010 08:14 AM (Ulu3i)
The government controls the economy through the corporatist model.
While their are nominal elections, real power is held by the shadow party of the bureaucracy, which is in no way accountable to the electorate, only each other.
Anti-government voices are suppressed, and the media is either a de facto or de jure arm of the shadow party.
In place of traditional nationalism, they've supplanted aggressive trans-nationalism.
They also extremely hostile to Christianity, though accommodating to Islam, amusingly, exactly as was true of the German National Socialists.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 19, 2010 08:17 AM (bgcml)
I have a lot of black friends and business associates. They are just not friend friends. A black aquaintance explained that to me.
Posted by: Biff Bennington III at July 19, 2010 12:01 PM (m2CN7)
Biff, Jolly right! I seem to remember you and I took the caddies out for that King fellas birthday last year.
They really enjoyed those hot dogs at the Club.
We should do that more often. Bonding and all that.
Next time let's get the Club to make burgers and dare I suggest give them a beer?
Posted by: Zombie Ted at July 19, 2010 08:17 AM (2+9Yx)
In my high-school days, I read Wright and Ralph Ellison.
Recently, I re-read Native Son and was repelled. If that book is significant to Osama Obama, we're in deeper dung than I realized. Some of the subtexts (buried beneath the Communism and racial persecution) play to the worst in human nature.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 19, 2010 08:18 AM (Ulu3i)
And it's always with the same weapon: political correctness.
But they have no trouble recruiting useful idiots on the Right to help them, such as Bob Corker.
Posted by: boner pills cheap at July 19, 2010 12:14 PM (uFokq)
Divide and conquer combined with New Speak. Too bad so many moderates and center-right people fall for it.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 19, 2010 08:18 AM (bgcml)
It should be noted that Jane Austen's heroines did not look down on those in trade. For instance, Elizabeth Bennet's close friend (and cousin) is married to a man who is something in the City. Thus, in trade.
It was Elizabeth Bennet's mother's brother who was in trade and who helped Mr Darcy get Lydia married. Mrs Bennet's other sister was married to a lawyer (not a gentleman). Austen habitually plays around the edges of "good society" where those in "trade" are more moral than those in the aristocracy but the heroines end up with the rich "gentleman" who eventually comes around. You may be thinking about Emma where her sister marries a man who has "interests" in the city.
Posted by: dagny at July 19, 2010 08:18 AM (DgcO5)
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 19, 2010 12:18 PM (Ulu3i)
Liberals believe humanity is horrible and needs a strong hand to keep it in line, though that we can be perfected by a dedicated enough ruling class.
Needless to say, this philosophy did not play out well in Eurasia in the last millennium.
Posted by: 18-1 at July 19, 2010 08:20 AM (bgcml)
Posted by: Zombie Louis XIV at July 19, 2010 08:20 AM (2+9Yx)
Posted by: dagny at July 19, 2010 08:20 AM (Sd9o3)
Posted by: Buzzsaw at July 19, 2010 08:23 AM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: Zombie Louis XIV at July 19, 2010 12:28 PM (2+9Yx)
Actually, cake it bad for you. Try these fat free rice cakes. Organic, and only $5 each!
Posted by: The Ministry of Health at July 19, 2010 08:32 AM (bgcml)
Thanks, dagny. I was typing off the top of my head. Thanks for remembering the details.
Posted by: Dianna at July 19, 2010 08:34 AM (qrFCz)
What it does mean is that a sizable percentage of the Tea Party types were born into a segregated America, many of them in the South or in the new working-class suburbs of the North, and lived through the marches and riots that punctuated the cultural and political upheaval of the 1960s.
IOW, those people are incapable of changing or learning anything in forty years.
Ugh. This says so much more about the writer than any imaginary people who only dislike the Prez because he's black (ish).
Posted by: Mama AJ at July 19, 2010 08:35 AM (XdlcF)
Well, that explains Holder at the DOJ.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at July 19, 2010 08:41 AM (ZJ/un)
The purpose is power and how to wield it.
Part of the trick is always semantics, the use of loaded words and phrases, and how the meanings can be manipulated and changed.
Left and Right, in the sense they have been used for the last few decades mean almost nothing, and that's another semantic trick too. Just as the "Blue" and "Red" state nonsense.
It's all about the wielding of power, which always leads to a form of collectivism; corporatism, fascism, socialism or communism.
Either we believe in the Constitution and the underlying principles involved, or it's just the hand of dead white men guiding us-to be shaken off in this Brave New World, where the Dreams of Barack's Father will guide us.
We are in for a helluva fight, peoples. It will either be to our great glory that somehow we restore Constituional government, or our children will curse us and the day they were born.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch says..... at July 19, 2010 08:44 AM (usS2T)
or our children will curse us and the day they were born.
If, that is, our children are raised to blame an entire group of people for the sins of some. Bambi's working on them.
Posted by: Marie Antoinette Solution at July 19, 2010 08:52 AM (gbCNS)
They go to the same parties, send their kids to the same schools, go to the same restaurants, vacation in the same places and on and on and on.
NOT one of the fuckers knows what a hard day's work is, not one of these fuckers knows what it's like to have to worry about paying bills, not one of thees fuckers have ever had to sacrifice one damn thing in their whole spoiled, worthless lives. And that goes for our politicians and a damn sight too many of our judiciary.
Damn right there is an aristocracy in this country--and the sickest part about huge parts of the GOP and nearly all of the left and the progressives is that they know it, see it and can't wait for their chance to become a minor courtesan.
Posted by: jimmuy at July 19, 2010 09:00 AM (66ScL)
I see this a lot. I'm in academia but I grew up in a good home with parents who never went to college (barely graduated high school, to be honest) and attending run-of-the-mill public schools. Safe, but not excellent by any means. I'm under 40 so the only institutionalized racism I've ever known was affirmative action. I went to a public university and got my Ph.D. in math. In research mathematics in the US, I'd say about 20% of the Ph.D.s got their bachelor's degree in the US. Most were born and went to school overseas in a high-achieving and competitive environment and never had to work that lousy part-time or summer job. In short, I didn't really get any material breaks and had to work very hard to get to the mediocrity I have. (I consider myself very lucky to have been inculcated with good values, however.)
But throughout academia, I either see foreign-born faculty who don't care for US politics or radical Marxists who use academia as their tool of choice (and don't mind negotiating higher salaries, thankyouverymuch) or not-too-activist liberal people wracked with this noblesse oblige.
One example is AGW. It plays right into their fears that their comfortable lifestyle is having dangerous consequences. For another example, I happened to stumble upon a three-year-old op-ed written by...Rick Moranis. It starts with:
"To: The board of directors, 814 Park Avenue
From: Lydia Katherine Powell-Watley, Apartment 10 C-D"
Enjoy: http://tinyurl.com/24yg7bp
Posted by: AmishDude at July 19, 2010 09:00 AM (T0NGe)
13 It is always worth remembering that the Russian Bolshevik revolution pandered to "ethnic self determination", and thus garnered support from many of the non-Russian ethnicities/"races" scattered about the empire. It is also well worth noting, indeed highly enlightening, how that all worked out for them in the end...uh, not so well.
Posted by: unknown jane at July 19, 2010 09:05 AM (5/yRG)
1) Apply to a college
2) Try to get a government job
3) Are up for promotion in a government job
4) Try to get a government contract.
All because we are white. And my mixed asian relatives get even more fucked.
To have the same odds of college admission is a black candidate who scores 1100 on the SAT, a white candidate has to score 1440. And an asian has to score 1550. That's almost perfect. I tell my mixed-race asian-white cousins don't check the "asian" box. Hell, check "hispanic". Nothing wrong with screwing over a racist government when it's trying to screw you.
Rich whites are able to buy their way around affirmative action, middle class whites get fucked. And the elite Obama-scum are proud of themselves for this collective blood libel punishment of an entire ethnic group for past sins of the long dead.
Posted by: huh at July 19, 2010 09:07 AM (+ABdJ)
Not really. Newt is a poseur. He wants to be among the Gores. His problem isn't guilt but an old-fashioned desire for social climbing.
I am surprised that one name hasn't surfaced in this thread: Palin.
She's the touchstone for all of this and has revealed a lot of this undercurrent for us.
BTW, VDH talks about Britain, but the better example is France. All of the elite -- except Sarkozy -- all went to the same school, regardless of party. They don't even have the Harvard/Yale rivalry, as superficial as it is.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 19, 2010 09:07 AM (T0NGe)
7The problem is that these odious qualities are not exclusive to the left side of the political spectrum. Listen to McCain, McConnell, Romney, and Gingrich and it becomes clear that they perceive themselves members of the same political class as the worst of the Left. And unfortunately, class identification inevitably seems to trump political principle. Is that couch comfortable enough for you, Mr. Gingrich?
Amen, brotha. They are no more your friends than are the Obamunists.
Posted by: Thread Killing Spammer at July 19, 2010 09:08 AM (jat5l)
Posted by: NM Hick at July 19, 2010 09:10 AM (IzuWw)
The theory of affirmative action is that there are virtually comparable candidates and so the minority gets the job to compensate for...whatever.
But you have to ask yourself, who is the one who needs the leg up? Joe the Plumber's kid or Obama's kids? I have an inkling of how much harder Joe's son will have it, especially if he wants to go into engineering or business rather than Obama's kids who will go from Sidwell Friends to the Ivy's and manage to get into a highly-ranked law program after getting a mediocre GPA majoring in Women's Studies.
As Sowell has so often points out, the practice of AA is terrible. Black students, in particular, who are in no way prepared to compete at, say UC Berkeley are sent there and fail rather than go to, say UC Irvine, where they can succeed. It makes the whole situation worse.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 19, 2010 09:15 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: AmishDude at July 19, 2010 09:16 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at July 19, 2010 09:28 AM (R/qRq)
Posted by: Marie Antoinette Solution at July 19, 2010 12:52 PM (gbCNS)
This would be an awesome name for a band.
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at July 19, 2010 09:30 AM (JxMoP)
I am convinced that pissing me off by calling me a racist when I am not one is all part of the grand plan. Lie, lie, lie until everyone believes it's true, then point a finger at me when I blow my stack.....
Posted by: plymouthmom at July 19, 2010 09:30 AM (O/5X6)
They're Neo-Feudalists.
They get to be the lords. Guess who's going to be the peasants?
Welcome back to the 12th Century.
"Progressives" my ass . . . these idiots are simply re-inventing the Dark Ages . . .
Posted by: filbert at July 19, 2010 09:44 AM (smvTK)
37 I will beg to differ with you on one score Amish: I don't think the liberal elite care much that their lifestyle may have dangerous consequences; I think they are more concerned that the planet's resources are depleting and there will not be enough for them if the "little people" take too much. Hence they do not twitch a whisker if thousands of African children die from malaria, thousands of (poorer) American children are aborted, or that the little brown people are killed by the thousands again in their own countries -- it is as they want it.
The reason they screech about it so much is to asuage their guilt to be sure...and to make sure the people who would do something to stop it are hampered by guilt and overburdened...so nothing stops the killing of "the lesser people".
Posted by: unknown jane at July 19, 2010 09:47 AM (5/yRG)
I was particularly struck by VDH's section on muscle. The elite do work out to create a sort of muscular look, even as they despise someone who uses those very same muscles to do valuable physical work -- even though they themselves would be drained by half a day of hard labor. They really are labor virgins; or more to the point "blister" virgins. Have any of these people ever raised a blister in their life (with the exception of the edge of their penises?)
Posted by: Call me Lennie at July 19, 2010 09:47 AM (r/5/5)
50 Very few -- I've been among the Chippys, Buffys, and Kippers, and they all have the "look of the Kennedys" about them; sleek, well fed, toned/tanned/rested/perfectly coiffed, but those are not hard muscles used to any sort of physical exhertion. Then there are those who look like they could have been lifted from the tomb artifacts at Tel-El-Amarna.
As their physiques wither, so does their native intelligence -- that whatever morality they had has long since bitten the dust is without saying.
Posted by: unknown jane at July 19, 2010 09:56 AM (5/yRG)
Posted by: dagny at July 19, 2010 12:20 PM (Sd9o3)
Most of us black kids had to read that book in school (inner city) back in the day. I hated it back then and always thought that Richard Wright was a terrible writer and probably psychotic. And, yes, Obama citing it as his favoritet was an alarm bell. But there were so many of them.
Posted by: baldilocks at July 19, 2010 09:59 AM (bFVz8)
I am convinced that pissing me off by calling me a racist when I am not one is all part of the grand plan. Lie, lie, lie until everyone believes it's true, then point a finger at me when I blow my stack.....
Posted by: plymouthmom at July 19, 2010 01:30 PM (O/5X6)
You nailed it. Now imagine that happening with the millions of other white Americans. The outcome would get this Statist Government exactly what they want.
But, more and more, we Americans, all of us, are being herded in that direction. The only solace to be taken is that there is a God in Heaven and he sees what's happening.
Posted by: baldilocks at July 19, 2010 10:07 AM (bFVz8)
I am convinced that pissing me off by calling me a racist when I am not one is all part of the grand plan. Lie, lie, lie until everyone believes it's true, then point a finger at me when I blow my stack.....
That's what I've been trying to tell everyone.
Posted by: Mel Gibson at July 19, 2010 10:18 AM (gbCNS)
America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution
By Angelo M. Codevilla; The American Spectator; from the July 2010 - August 2010 issue
Never has there been so little diversity within America's upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America's upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and "bureaucrat" was a dirty word for all. So was "social engineering." Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday's upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.
[Via Instapundit and Small Dead Animals]
Posted by: andycanuck at July 19, 2010 10:19 AM (7b1Uc)
Affirmative Action was politically sustainable when America was about 80% White, private industry hired most of America, wages increased far more in private industry than government, and admission to the "correct" College did not set you up for advancement in career, mating, and everything else.
None of that applies. America is 65% White and dropping. In California, Whites will be the minority and Mexicans the Majority, in six years. Almost all political leadership in the Assembly and State Senate is Mexican. LA, which was majority White when I was a kid, is now Majority Mexican, with a smarmy Mexican-only interest following Mayor.
Admission into Yale, Harvard, Cornell, Stanford, UCLA, Berkeley, etc. puts a man or woman into far better economic earnings ("correct" social credential and validation) and far better mating opportunities (particularly for men) due to social validation of "our kind."
All the job growth is in Government -- CLOSED TO ORDINARY WHITES. Government by the Breitbart NAACP video, is comprised of non Whites, mostly Blacks/Hispanics, at lower levels, that openly discriminate against Whites in bestowing aid and benefits. To "punish them for racism" and so on. See the Hotair link.
Bottom line: America's economy is screwed, for more than ten years, and will remain so if Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, Fred Thompson, and Tom McClintock sweep into the major offices between 2010 and 2012 (i.e. Senate, House majority leader/speaker, President, etc.) ALL THERE IS REALLY IS GOVERNMENT.
Who else can employ anyone? Give any aid? Every dollar going to non-Whites in preference is a dollar not available to Whites. Every limited place going to a non-White kid at UCLA or Berkeley (both notorious for discriminating against Whites and Asians) is a "University of Idaho" background that in particular, women find "low class" and "trashy" (the major libel against Sarah Palin).
If you want your son to have a shot at marrying a decent woman, he'd better go to a good school, have good earning potential, have the "correct" credentials.
America is a reverse Indian Casino. We don't have sudden wealth that goes further the less its split, we have sudden poverty which goes less the less its split. Reverse condition, same point.
UNLESS ordinary White folk stop feeling guilty (absence of guilt is not equal to being a KKK member) about stuff done long ago which they had no part in (not being even alive) they'll be last in line in resources as America turns into Brazil.
Don't be deceived. The NAACP audience applauds the Black USDA official who screwed over the White farmer (her words) because he was White. Feeling guilty or caring about being called racist won't change the beliefs or actions of non-White government officials one way or another -- and being government officials they have considerable power over every aspect of your life. Seeing that video, it is not something I'm comfortable with.
Demanding your fair share, not being pushed to the back of the bus, when it comes time to benefit from stuff you pay taxes for, is not racism.
Posted by: whiskey at July 19, 2010 10:36 AM (t3UKO)
Posted by: logprof at July 19, 2010 10:37 AM (BP6Z1)
Posted by: Zombie Louis XIV at July 19, 2010 12:28 PM (2+9Yx)
--Actually, it was Louis XVI who got the ax, uh, guillotine.
Posted by: logprof at July 19, 2010 10:44 AM (BP6Z1)
Posted by: King Louis with a Scottish accent at July 19, 2010 10:51 AM (7b1Uc)
Posted by: andycanuck at July 19, 2010 02:19 PM (7b1Uc)
Codevilla's The Character of Nations is a must-read and outlines this thesis in much greater detail. Libertarian-oriented conservatives might be turned off by his rather obvious social con leanings, but his essential point--that the "Ruling Class" has degraded American citizenship and spoiled the ability of families and communities to work together to solve their problems, and that power is embedded in a system of patronage--is a sound one.
This patronage system used to be practiced on a local level to some extent, depending on the culture--in New Mexico, for instance, it's a way of life--and in human interactions it's inevitable. You're naturally going to be more likely to favor your friends, or "friends," after all. The problem is when this system overtakes the rule of law and inhibits equality under said law, and that is the system of government we increasingly are dealing with today. It's especially problematic when this patronage philosophy is applied on a national level, because it ends up trickling down to the local level and influencing far more areas than it normally would otherwise.
Posted by: Red Rocks Rockin' at July 19, 2010 11:10 AM (/Pw+r)
10 No one ever mentions that polls show the Tea Party demographics are 24% minority, which is not too far from the country as a whole.
But how many of them are successful Asians? The left doesn't count them as minorities.
Posted by: Pervy Grin at July 19, 2010 11:16 AM (OxKj2)
#57, yep.
It's a shame my wife has never been healthy enough to have kids. I would have liked to have "trained my replacement", so to speak. I suppose the collapse will have to come while I am still healthy enough to participate.
Posted by: SGT Dan at July 19, 2010 11:16 AM (QUuUE)
Liberal politics is now – over there as much as here – a form of social snobbery. To express concern about mass immigration, or reservations about the Obama healthcare plan, is unacceptable in bien-pensant circles because this is simply not the way educated people are supposed to think. It follows that those who do think (and talk) this way are small-minded bigots, rednecks, oiks, or whatever your local code word is for "not the right sort".
This is the crux of the matter. As well as the tribalism and regionality of leftism. You will be ostracized in NY, SF, LA, or DC if you feel this way. I know many people here is the SF bay area who were considered liberal in their midwest or rust belt home towns, but here they are considered conservative. Daley also should have added that concern about Islamic terrorism makes one an Islamophobic racist hater.
Posted by: Pervy Grin at July 19, 2010 11:19 AM (OxKj2)
Posted by: King Barry XV at July 19, 2010 02:43 PM (BP6Z1)
Got to be a sock. Only language the Statist Tool speaks in Teleprompterese.
Posted by: baldilocks at July 19, 2010 02:42 PM (bFVz8)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2515 seconds, 194 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at July 19, 2010 08:00 AM (SCcgT)