0 comment Monday, November 10, 2014 | admin
The Rocky Mountain News published this 'Speakout' piece by Peter Brimelow of VDare.com, in response to an article titled, 'Funding Questioned' by Kevin Flynn, which appeared in the same paper recently. Flynn's article, (a hit piece, really) described Brimelow's website, VDare, as a 'white nationalist' site. All in the service, it seems, of discrediting a group called Defend Colorado Now. The group is an anti-illegal immigration group, and the Rocky Mountain News piece had attempted to slur them by associating them with a 'white nationalist' site. The article attempts to smear the group's largest donor, John Tanton, of the Social Contract Press, for his supposed ties to non-PC groups and individuals.
As Brimelow points out, the innuendo was based on allegations made by a notorious leftist group which justifies its existence by making accusations of bigotry and hate. Of course, their definition of 'bigotry and hate' include mainly efforts by patriotic Americans in defense of their country's sovereignty and laws. Never are there any accusations about obvious hate groups like La Raza, MEChA, or the Mexica Movement, or groups like the Nation of Islam.
Brimelow gamely tries, in this response, to differentiate between 'white nationalists' and 'white supremacists', but I am afraid his efforts are in vain. Does it help to try to differentiate, as Brimelow attempts to do, between, say, 'nationalist' and 'supremacist' groups? I think it's a distinction that matters little to the liberal types; in their worldview, both are equally illegitimate.To the accusers, there is no distinction. To such people, as with everybody on the Left (and also among Neocon me-too-ists) all groups which defend, however civilly and reasonably, the interests of majority America, are beyond the pale.
Many anti-illegal immigration groups, such as Defend Colorado Now, try to hold to a moral high ground and deflect charges of racism by emphatically stating that they oppose only illegal immigration. Many such groups try to ward off the witch-hunters on the left by vociferously (and somewhat defensively) asserting that they are in favor of all legal immigration. This, however, does not protect them from the race-baiters; such groups are still likely to be called 'racist', 'Nazi' and the like.
We see this in play with the current allegations, eagerly seized on by the pro-illegals, regarding the Minutemen. The Minuteman Project, (MMP) expressly states on its home page that 'MMP has no affiliation with, nor will we accept any assistance by, or interference from, separatists, racists, or supremacy groups.'
This kind of disclaimer is almost universal among the various anti-illegal immigration groups. It's understandable, because of the kind of smear campaign conducted against any immigration restriction group, or any conservative, pro-American group. Race-baiting is de rigueur whenever our agenda-driven media write about such groups. It seems that no disclaimer, no protestations of anti-racism, will be sufficient to deflect such attacks.
Many such groups actively recruit non-whites, and this also does little to discourage the race-baiters.
So while it's understandable that immigration-restrictionist groups try to disavow any connection to anything which remotely seems discriminatory, it seems not to be a very effective tactic. It seems to require the diversion of energy and time and perhaps money to try to defend against the inevitable attacks by the open-borders, PC zealots. How much better to simply ignore the shrill accusations and the sneaking innuendos; we have far too much defensiveness and too much apologizing on our side. It only makes us look weak, and keeps us off balance.
There was a time when holding 'nationalist' views was considered normal and not the least bit suspect or 'bigoted.' It's only in our present generation that the concept of 'nationalism' has been declared politically incorrect -- at least, for the majority. It is perfectly fine and healthy, according to the PC opinion-police, for minority groups to form nationalistic movements. What else is La Raza, but a nationalist movement, or a supremacy movement? As usual, there is one standard for the majority and another opposite rule for the 'oppressed minorities.'
The liberals and 'progressives' have succeeded in linking nationalism to 'extremism,' and conflating it with 'supremacy' movements. Yet supremacy movements like La Raza are not condemned by these censorious people.
As long as the majority in America is not allowed to act in legitimate self-interest, as are other groups, there is no justice. That double standards apply is an affront to the American way of life, to our Constitutional freedoms.
I only hope that patriotic Americans persist, in defiance of the character assassins and bullies on the left who are determined to bring us to heel. Our country is at stake.
As Brimelow points out, the innuendo was based on allegations made by a notorious leftist group which justifies its existence by making accusations of bigotry and hate. Of course, their definition of 'bigotry and hate' include mainly efforts by patriotic Americans in defense of their country's sovereignty and laws. Never are there any accusations about obvious hate groups like La Raza, MEChA, or the Mexica Movement, or groups like the Nation of Islam.
Brimelow gamely tries, in this response, to differentiate between 'white nationalists' and 'white supremacists', but I am afraid his efforts are in vain. Does it help to try to differentiate, as Brimelow attempts to do, between, say, 'nationalist' and 'supremacist' groups? I think it's a distinction that matters little to the liberal types; in their worldview, both are equally illegitimate.To the accusers, there is no distinction. To such people, as with everybody on the Left (and also among Neocon me-too-ists) all groups which defend, however civilly and reasonably, the interests of majority America, are beyond the pale.
Many anti-illegal immigration groups, such as Defend Colorado Now, try to hold to a moral high ground and deflect charges of racism by emphatically stating that they oppose only illegal immigration. Many such groups try to ward off the witch-hunters on the left by vociferously (and somewhat defensively) asserting that they are in favor of all legal immigration. This, however, does not protect them from the race-baiters; such groups are still likely to be called 'racist', 'Nazi' and the like.
We see this in play with the current allegations, eagerly seized on by the pro-illegals, regarding the Minutemen. The Minuteman Project, (MMP) expressly states on its home page that 'MMP has no affiliation with, nor will we accept any assistance by, or interference from, separatists, racists, or supremacy groups.'
This kind of disclaimer is almost universal among the various anti-illegal immigration groups. It's understandable, because of the kind of smear campaign conducted against any immigration restriction group, or any conservative, pro-American group. Race-baiting is de rigueur whenever our agenda-driven media write about such groups. It seems that no disclaimer, no protestations of anti-racism, will be sufficient to deflect such attacks.
Many such groups actively recruit non-whites, and this also does little to discourage the race-baiters.
So while it's understandable that immigration-restrictionist groups try to disavow any connection to anything which remotely seems discriminatory, it seems not to be a very effective tactic. It seems to require the diversion of energy and time and perhaps money to try to defend against the inevitable attacks by the open-borders, PC zealots. How much better to simply ignore the shrill accusations and the sneaking innuendos; we have far too much defensiveness and too much apologizing on our side. It only makes us look weak, and keeps us off balance.
There was a time when holding 'nationalist' views was considered normal and not the least bit suspect or 'bigoted.' It's only in our present generation that the concept of 'nationalism' has been declared politically incorrect -- at least, for the majority. It is perfectly fine and healthy, according to the PC opinion-police, for minority groups to form nationalistic movements. What else is La Raza, but a nationalist movement, or a supremacy movement? As usual, there is one standard for the majority and another opposite rule for the 'oppressed minorities.'
The liberals and 'progressives' have succeeded in linking nationalism to 'extremism,' and conflating it with 'supremacy' movements. Yet supremacy movements like La Raza are not condemned by these censorious people.
As long as the majority in America is not allowed to act in legitimate self-interest, as are other groups, there is no justice. That double standards apply is an affront to the American way of life, to our Constitutional freedoms.
I only hope that patriotic Americans persist, in defiance of the character assassins and bullies on the left who are determined to bring us to heel. Our country is at stake.
Labels: Race-Baiters