One of my favorite things about being a political commentator is reading the comments that people leave under my articles. Sometimes I get a lot and others only a few, but I have to admit I am a junkie for it. I don’t know why, maybe it satisfies an inner urge to feel as if what I have to say is resonating with people, or maybe it’s just a huge ego boost, who knows? Whatever the main reason there are certainly several others. One, it was through commenting on the articles of other writers that brought me to the point of being a writer in the first place. If it wasn’t for the watchful eye of some talented writers I may have never had the opportunity. Perhaps I feel indebted to acknowledge the talent of others posting their thoughts. Two, I usually make an effort to respond to those who leave thoughtful commentary because I just enjoy communicating with people. I understand that no matter how factual the information I am presenting is, it is still tainted with my opinions and there is, without a doubt, different perspectives that people have that can broaden my understanding of any given topic. There is a particular example I would like to share with you.
I spend a lot of time writing on the issue of racism and how the topic relates to the Marxist takeover of our country. I have written a great deal of material concerning the welfare state, and the entitlement mentality as well as delving into issues like affirmative action, Critical Race Theory and Black Liberation Ideology. I have tried to show readers the connection between the real racism in this country and the Democrat party as well. The underlying message of all of this is that there is an agenda which seeks to empower minorities by reinforcing a victim mentality. This empowers minorities because it attacks the supposed “white hierarchy” that we are constantly told dominates every aspect of their lives. For the longest time I believed all of this originated with Cultural Marxism and the idea of creating a victim mentality was formulated for the purpose of instituting socialism. That may well be true enough; however, as I am about to demonstrate this is in fact a much older idea which predates Karl Marx and his socialism.
During the Antebellum era in Americas south there lived a man named George Fitzhugh and he was a huge supporter of slavery. That, of course is no surprise as the whole south was supportive of the institution. What is surprising, is the argument George Fitzhugh formulated in order to justify his position. George believed that the black man simply was not capable of competing in a white man’s society. He believed that slavery as it existed in the south was the only logical way in which the black race would survive because as an institution, slavery itself cared for the slaves by housing and feeding them. Fitzhugh compared this to the north’s wage labor system that he also identified as a system of slavery; however, just as today’s liberals see capitalism as an evil system that unfairly chooses who succeeds and who doesn’t, Fitzhugh saw the north’s system as one in which workers were discarded once they lost their usefulness. Viewing the world through this tainted lens, Fitzhugh believed that the only compassionate, moral thing you could do with Negroes was to keep them enslaved. This is from Fitzhugh’s book, “Cannibals All.”
Does this history explain the welfare state mentality that infects the minds of liberals on the left? Is this why we have an education system that pushes the ideas of white privilege and black victimology; because in Americas past this man justified the enslavement of blacks using the same arguments? It seems that the answer could be a resounding yes as all of the lefts social engineering programs resolve around the idea that blacks need special protection and privilege in order to compete in today’s society.
It’s funny, Fredrick Douglas, a freed slave who advocated for the freedom of black men so they could choose their own destinies, was a Republican. Of course we all know it was the Republican Party that led all the efforts to free the slaves and advocate for equal rights of blacks all the way up until the 1950’s. On the other side, we have Fitzhugh, a southern slave owning Democrat arguing that blacks needed to be governed as children and they were meant to be nothing more than slaves because they were unable to compete in a capitalist society. Somewhere along the line blacks choose to accept that worldview, whereas in the beginning it was outright rejected by men like Douglas.
Today, many blacks are enslaved to the chains of democrats who lord over their impoverished communities making promises of continued handouts because they are “owed” something. They make these promises because they believe that black men are incapable of competing in today’s capitalistic society, so they created a world where they receive special privilege and entitlements based on skin color alone. Many (if not all) of these programs have such low standards that they fail to even challenge the black man, so the black man has been failed by those who have created these programs. There is nothing for them to strive for, they don’t have to try. Based on the new rule put out by the Eric Holder justice department, they don’t even have to behave in school less they claim they are being “disproportionately punished.” How does this help them overcome poverty? Somehow, through all of this, people who believe that blacks can be more than this are the new racists because we fail to conform to this ridiculous ideology. Failing to believe that blacks need to be treated this way because they can’t be expected to compete, to the liberal mind, is racism.
So, thanks to a reader I was able to conclude that the basis for theories like Critical Race Theory was actually established long ago. What started as wholehearted, albeit flawed, argument to justify slavery ended up being a political strategy, a method of instituting change and seizing power if you will. Carrying this belief through the centuries has done nothing but worsen the lot of the black man as they remained dependent to a political power that has mastered the methods of exploiting their struggles in order to increase their own power and prestige.