Three waves of massive extermination were conducted by Marxist regimes during the twentieth century. The first was Stalin’s Bolshevik terror famine during which five million Ukrainian farmers and their families perished in the early 1930s. It is difficult to be precise with the number of Chinese killed by Mao during the Great Leap Forward in the 1950s and 60s because the communist government of China still limits access to the archives with the demographics. No one, however, disputes that the deaths topped off in the tens of millions. In the 1970s Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge slaughtered about a quarter of their fellow Cambodians.
The dead victims in all three of these utopias in progress were selected by the “theorists” in charge who planned and carried out the cleansing operations guided by an ideology that had deciphered the progressive movement of history and identified those, shall we say, “irredeemables” who were not part of the improvement plan. All three architects of mass murder (Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot), by the way, died in advanced years in their beds, never to be held to account, Mao now slumbering away as a revered mummy in his ornate mausoleum in Tiananmen square.
Underway for some time is another Leftist planned extermination program. The 21st century theorists like their 20th century predecessors are Marxists. The Marxist foundational template is the same—“Revolution.” Revolution is shorthand for the way Marxist history is supposed to unfold—a smaller number of designated oppressors (bad people) are overthrown by a larger number of the discovered oppressed (good people). It is important to note that there is no place for the oppressors once they are overthrown. These bad people,“bourgeoisie scum,” as Lenin called them, get what they deserve, “liquidation.”
There are important differences, however, in the way this extermination is currently unfolding. First, while the Marxist template (Revolution) remains the same, the place holders have been repositioned. Economic classes (the oppressor, bourgeois capitalist versus the oppressed workers, the proletariat) have been replaced by races (white European oppressors versus non-white oppressed third world people). Second, this revolution is a softer one. The oppressors are not being violently overthrown, murdered in mass or exiled. They are much more complicit in their elimination, ultimately surrendering their heritage and obliterating their identity, succumbing to a steady stream of propaganda that stresses their collective guilt, losers in a Kulturkampf where speech and behavior that is deemed “insensitive” to people of color bring severe social sanctions and ostracization. “Hate speech”is a tool for the left to monopolize power and criminalize dissent.
The left now is ramping up this soft revolution with their trifecta of the “white privilege” indoctrination of our children in the schools and universities, the relentless insistence on pervasive, ubiquitous racism in American history and society, and the advocacy of open borders. These are all of a single piece and the goal is not a colorblind, race-neutral society, free of discrimination and ethnic hatred, but the reduction of white Europeans to social and political irrelevancy, the elimination of their history and self-identity, and the purging of “whiteness” which now carries the eternal stain of racism and a permanent stigma of bigotry.
American history has been reduced to a narrative largely focused on racial subjugation and discrimination, so successful for several generations in defining the American experience that room has been created for supplemental stories of exploitation and oppression—sexism, homophobia, most recently Islamophobia—dramatically inflating the legions of the oppressed, and defining with more precision the identity of the oppressor, white males.
Students now in schools and universities are increasingly being subjected to a program of moral blackmail that leverages ethnic guilt. The teaching of “white privilege” bears a strong resemblance to the“self-criticism” sessions of political reeducation during the Cultural Revolution in China. Thus, courtesy of the Southern Law Poverty Center:
White skin privilege is not something that white people necessarily do, create or enjoy on purpose. Unlike the more overt individual and institutional manifestations of racism described above, white skin privilege is a transparent preference for whiteness that saturates our society. White skin privilege serves several functions. First, it provides white people with “perks” that we do not earn and that people of color do not enjoy. Second, it creates real advantages for us. White people are immune to a lot of challenges. Finally, white privilege shapes the world in which we live—the way that we navigate and interact with one another and with the world.
What then might be a rational response be from a white person subjected to the airing of a grievance of such magnitude? Since these sorts of tendentious deceptive semantics are impossible to refute—“whiteness” being so slippery and malleable an abstraction it can perform whatever subversive tasks are required of it—the only rational response is not to take it seriously, the way one would ignore an orating crackpot on a street corner. But the targets for this ethnic demolition are captive children and young people who do not understand what is at stake and are not quite up to fighting off professional indoctrinators. Clearly, the whiteness of “white privilege” is no less than an inherent, unalterable corruption, and whether or not any given individual white person bows to the cudgel, the widespread importation of “white privilege” teaching into the schools and universities as a social engineering tool helps to manufacture feelings of the sort of collective guilt that sets up future generations of “white folks” who can be more easily duped, manipulated and willing to assist in their destruction.
There is an old saying that the victors of war get to write the history of the world. White privilege works this way, too. Since white folks have been in control for so long, we have determined what is valuable or interesting or useful in terms of education. Greek and Roman mythology, Chaucer, and other canonized works have been selected and revered through the ages as critical components of any “solid liberal arts education.
You cannot help but relish the candor expressed with this and wonder why any sane white person would cooperate with such an obvious attempt at intimidation and extortion. No dissimulation of raw, racial resentment, and not even the pretense of a win-win outcome is suggested here—whites have been in control for too long. It is time for them to capitulate and come to know what subjugation really feels like. There is neither a moral nor a self-interested reason to respond affirmatively to this.
White privilege is the corollary of racism, ubiquitous, and so deeply entrenched in white-controlled and white-dominated America, so pervasive and in so many recondite forms, that a white America without racism is virtually unthinkable. Here is how former President Barack Obama explains it to a recent interlocutor.
Obama: What is also true is that the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, discrimination in almost every institution of our lives—you know, that casts a long shadow. And that’s still part of our DNA that’s passed on. We’re not cured of it.
Obama: Racism. We are not cured of it.
Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail in 2016, not to be outdone by her former boss, had this to add to the genetics of Obama: “We all have implicit biases. They are almost in the DNA going back probably millennia. And what we need to do is be more honest about that and surface them.”
How something can “almost” be in the DNA is a bit puzzling, but don’t bother. It has been a problem for thousands of years, so things will not change soon. In her 2016 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton, in a brief moment of honesty before her LGBT followers, slipped out of her tightly regimented script and went full-Leninist to share her feelings about the supporters of her rival, Donald Trump.
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up . . . . Now, some of those folks—they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.
Yes, we know. The picture now should be coming into a very sharp focus: whether they will admit it or not, these recalcitrant, racist white folks, as any good contemporary Marxist will happily explain to you, are the oppressor class. Do not expect them to happily renounce their unearned and undeserved privilege they daily use imperceptibly to exploit and discriminate against non-white people. As our former geneticist-in chief informed us, discrimination derives from a racism that is embedded in our DNA with no “cure” in sight. Obama is being his usual disingenuous self when he says “our DNA” when he really means the DNA of the oppressor-discriminators. What Marxism 101 teaches is that the oppressor class never voluntarily steps aside to make room for the oppressed: Lenin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot overthrew them and then killed them.
What then to do about these DNA infected, racist irredeemables, the oppressors who dismantled Jim Crow fifty years ago, but who still want to, as Vice President Joe Bidden so elegantly put it in back in 2012, “put y’all back in chains”?
The Stalinist, Maoist approach, so last-century, is not necessary. Bring on part three, open borders, a final solution, so to speak, that eliminates white privilege and the white racist infrastructure that keeps it in place by flooding the country with third world people in sufficient quantities to displace those“white folks” too long in control. This has been going on in California since the 1965 immigration law change, and the most populous state is now sufficiently non-white as to give open-borders Hillary Clinton most of her two-plus million vote majority in the last November election. If Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were to have their way, in a few short years, the entire country would be “Cali-fornicated” and that “basket of deplorables” would no longer be a problem.
To get a glimpse of what the elimination of white privilege in its final stages looks like and how to put the oppressors out of business, African Marxist, Robert Mugabe, perhaps, best shows the way. As Ilana Mercer illustrates in her recent book, Into Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America in Post-Apartheid South Africa, Mugabe in a few short decades turned Rhodesia, the bread basket of Africa into a third world hell hole, expelling and murdering the white farmers who produced the food and ultimately the wealth. But Mugabe was an illustrious member of the oppressed race, and even though he wrecked the country and murdered thousands of people, black and white, he dismantled white privilege. This made him into an international star of sorts, a particular favorite at Western universities such as Edinburgh, U-Mass, and Michigan State University where he was bestowed with tributes along with honorary degrees.
The revolutionary freedom fighter was spokesperson and cherished idol of the anti-apartheid growth industry abroad. It took decades and piles of dead bodies before Robert Mugabe lost luster in the eyes of the American mainstream media. Mercer, Ilana. Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa (p. 134). Bytech Services. Kindle Edition.
Michigan State University must have forgotten Mugabe’s success in dismantling white privilege and in 2008 stripped him of the doctorate awarded eighteen years prior.
Michigan State University trustees Friday stripped Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe of an honorary law degree it gave him in 1990, citing a pattern of human rights abuses and political repression. Mugabe led the successful struggle to overcome White minority rule over what then was called Rhodesia. But he now faces wide domestic and international opposition because of Zimbabwe’s economic collapse and his crackdown on opponents.
The American people have just finished eight years of being governed by a version of Robert Mugabe-Lite. Mrs. Mugabe was anointed and waiting in the wings with, we can be quite sure, her plans for that “basket of deplorables,” her very own Untermenschen who are really not part of America. Much to the chagrin of our sneering overlords, she was upended by the Orange Man who may at least slow down our own miserable journey to Zimbabwe.