Home » And Brian Beutler and his ilk are de facto rabble rousers

Comments

And Brian Beutler and his ilk are de facto rabble rousers — 14 Comments

  1. One good look at South Africa now will show you that they were correct in doing what they did.

  2. rechill:

    That South Africa had problems then, and continues to have them now, is no justification for apartheid.

    Hey, according to your “reasoning,” why not just have killed all the black people in South Africa? It probably would have solved a lot of the problems, too.

    Ever hear of the old saying, two wrongs don’t make a right?

  3. Five literal clubs with which to beat figurative baby seals into submission:
    Apartheid
    Genocide
    Racist
    Sexist
    ?(insert perfectly conventional deviant)-phobe

  4. Lying for a good cause is ok and since all liberal causes are good they lie all the time.

    I used to think that Carter was just feckless but now I believe the man is evil.

  5. This isn’t apartheid or some other intentional system of racial control, it’s just a case of a rapid change in the racial demographics of the town. Per Megan McArdle via Bookworm:

    “Twenty-four years ago, it was a majority white town. Fourteen years ago, it had the slimmest of black majorities. And four years ago, it was almost 70% black. Although the town demographics changed rapidly, the police demographics did not.”

    So would these race hustlers and media folks expect towns and cities to review census bureau information on their racial demographics and staff accordingly – is that what we’ve come to in Obama’s America? That’s what Beutler is implying – that the police force should have laid off its white officers and hired blacks based on the shifting population of the town (violating the law and likely union rules, too). Should they have kicked out the white City Council members, too? Maybe included race as a candidate qualification (say X number of white seats and Y number of black seats on the City Council).
    It’s an ugly assumption on Beutler’s part that people can only trust and relate those of their own race.

  6. Using the word “apartheid” is sort of like calling your enemy “Hitler.”

    We need a “Godwin’s Law” for when folks do use the word apartheid.

  7. Who can miss the bizarre usage of “apartheid” as a smear against Israel?

    &&&

    Africa was self-segregating long before the Dutch ever reached the Veld.

    Because of American Jim Crow laws — and slavery — Americans conflate essentially EVERYTHING that ever happened in southern Africa with what happened in Antebellum southern America.

    But the Dutch / Africaans never, ever enacted slavery. They didn’t even have indentured Irish.

    Hard as it is to believe, most of the Blacks in South Africa migrated hundreds of miles — on their own volition — to hook up with the Dutch/ Africaans economic engine.

    The original (European) settlers entered a land that was literally no-mans-land. Lacking modern firearms, no African tribe was ever able to make a go of it down on the ‘flats.’ (Veld/ Veldt)

    So from the very outset, the Dutch wanted to self-segregate — generations before apartheid.

    Likewise the Africans and the South Asian Indians also self-segregated.

    This practice was never codified into any statute, it just happened. This was a natural evolution of a multi-tribal economy. Neither African, Indian nor Dutch trusted their young women in the hands of the others.

    And they still don’t. The White, Brown and Black tribes of South Africa are STILL largely self-segregating… even after statutorial apartheid has been swept away.

    Americans have this cockeyed attitude that the rest of the planet is socially able to blend into a harmonious polity. The exact opposite is normally the case. Africa is so fractious that most everything breaks upon tribal lines.

    Who could forget the Ibo? (Nigerian civil war) The Hutsi-Tutsi genocide?

    As for apartheid — as enacted by the Africaaners (circa 1948) — it smacks of totalitarianism. It’s just too much government meddling in economic and social arrangements.

    It prohibited any opportunity for lawful, hard-working, native Africans to break out of their lower economic caste. While the Zulus were obviously in the stone age less than two-centuries ago, it is a manifest evil to keep them so backward.

    (This reality must really be conflicting for anthropologists — and Stanley Ann Dunham.)

    Nothing like that is true for modern Israel. Yet the slur is cast around, far and wide. I do believe the younger generation does not comprehend how unjust and bizarre that insult is.

    Agitprop is debasing political argument at every turn.

  8. When the “measured opinions” being sanctimoniously discussed by Lefty pundits are full of such racially divisive garbage, I start to believe the claim that The Obominable Administration *wants* civil unrest.

    From “the police acted stupidly” to the notion that Trayvon Martin looked “like my son, if I had one”, the highest office of our land has pushed racial dissension at every possible turn.

    Do the nation’s top Alinskyites believe they can stir up enough urban hot-spots to make martial law palatable to the masses? I can see that their tactic is “sow chaos” (financial, social, racial, etc) . . . but I don’t know what the Progressives think they will reap at the end.

    I assume they’re not simply nihilists – but do they think this nation is ANYWHERE near ready for the famous “Strong Leader” who can “weed out corruption” and “fix what’s wrong” if we just allow him to bypass the protections of our Constitution/ Bill of Rights (but ONLY temporarily, of course!)??

  9. Most of the people who routinely vote for the (D) candidates have not the slightest clue about the nefarious intentions of the likes of an Ayers or an Alinisky. Their votes are based upon emotions and a lack of appreciation for the unintended consequences of their mushy ideas. The failure of 50 years of the so called war on poverty isn’t on their radar screen. Instead of asking why this has not decreased poverty, they fall back on the tripe propaganda that it is merely a matter of coming up with more money to be spent on new and improved programs to combat poverty.

  10. The apartheid in South Africa was a matter of practical necessity. It was a coping mechanism to address the conflict between warring factions in the African plains. The end of apartheid was stoked by Mandela’s faction conspiring with international forces to brutally murder millions of black and white Africans in order to gain control of the developed resources in South Africa. It’s not a coincidence that the Left uses the same language and emotional appeals in order to marginalize Israelis and Americans. The resolution of apartheid, implicit or explicit, in South Africa, Israel, and elsewhere does not justify the murder of millions of people, and it does demand the transparent revelation of the related special interests.

  11. Sorry… it’s late

    Rodney King Riots 1992
    James Byrd 1998
    Travon Martin 2012
    Ferguson MO 2014

    See a pattern? Feel free to add others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>