Anti-American Americans

I think I see another motive in the French writers who in 1914 adopted the attitude of M. Romain Rolland -- the fear that they would fall into national partiality if they admitted that their nation was in the right. It may be asserted that these writers would have warmly taken up the cause of France, if France had not been their own country. Whereas Barrès said, "I always maintain my country is right even if it is in the wrong," these strange friends of justice are not unwilling to say: "I always maintain my country is in the wrong, even if it is right." There again we see that the frenzy of impartiality, like any other frenzy, leads to injustice.

Julian Benda, La Trahison des Clercs [1927, The Treason of the Intellectuals, 1928, translated by Richard Aldington, 2007, Transaction Publishers, pp.187-188]


I have seen for myself how the original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles. It's the white supremacy that led to the senseless killing of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery and so many other black Americans... It's the spike in hate crimes over the past three years -- against Latino Americans, Sikh and Muslim Americans, Jewish Americans and immigrants. And it's the bullying, discrimination, brutality and violence that Asian Americans face every day, especially since the outbreak of COVID-19.

United States Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield, to the UN Human Rights Council, 14 April, 2021, which means that no Democrat, who will believe all this tissue of lies, can honestly take an Oath of Office in the United States, to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States," without endorsing the "white supremacy" in that founding document and its "principles." Therefore, all of them, in good conscience, should resign immediately, including Ambasssador Thomas-Greenfield. The UN Human Rights Council, of course, is dominated by vicious regimes like Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Russia, and China, which is why the Trump Administration left it, and the Biden Administration, with grovelling and self-lacerating statements like this, has rejoined.


When we Black Americans see this flag we know the person flying it is not safe to be around. When we see this flag we know the person flying it is a racist. When we see this flag we know that the person flying it lives in a different America than we do. When we see this flag, we question your intelligence. We know to avoid you. It is a symbol of hatred.

Black Lives Matter Utah Chapter, about the American flag, July 4, 2021.


Black Lives Matter condemns the U.S. federal government’s inhumane treatment of Cubans and urged it to immediately lift the economic embargo. This cruel and inhumane policy, instituted with the explicit intention of destabilizing the country and undermining Cubans’ right to choose their own government, is at the heart of Cuba’s current crisis. Since 1962, the United States has forced pain and suffering on the people of Cuba by cutting off food, medicine and supplies, costing the tiny island nation an estimated $130 billion.

Statement of "Black Lives Matter" (BLM), July 14, 2021, defending the brutal Communist government of Cuba, which is itself what prevents the Cuban people from the "right to choose their own government." BLM ignores the mass protests against Cuban Communism. This repeats the Communist party line, that Cuba suffers, not because of Communism, but because of the United State embargo, an embargo that actually does allow "food, medicine and supplies" to enter Cuba, while Cuba otherwise can trade or receive goods from anyone else in the world. But Cuba no longer gets enough money from Russia or Venezuela to support its economy. It cannot generate any wealth of its own -- apart from prostitutes provided for tourists -- since it is, after all, Communist. The loyalties of BLM are thus revealed, although informed persons knew about them already.


If you want to see the most equal, multiracial, it’s not a democracy, but the most equal multiracial country in our hemisphere, it would be Cuba... Cuba has the least inequality between black and white people of any place in the hemisphere...

In places that are biracial countries, Cuba actually has the least inequality...

That’s largely due to socialism.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of the fraudulent "1619 Project" of the New York Times, 2019, quoted by Mike Gonzalez, " Nikole Hannah-Jones is as wrong about Cuba as she is about American history," New York Post, July 20, 2021, p.17; actually, there is not racial equality in Cuba.


The United States has reached the extraordinary position where it has nurtured an ideology within itself, formulated and taught at schools and universities, that is not only hostile and disparaging to the majority race of the citizens ("white"), the majority religion (Christianity), and those economically successful minority groups (Jews, Koreans, people from India, etc.), but is equally and actively hostile and adverse to the principles of free speech, free association, free enterprise, freedom of religion, and an open, participatory Republic upon which the nation was built.

Joseph Schumpeter thought that capitalism could be destroyed by many of the people who benefited the most from it. But it is worse than that. Elite culture not only despises capitalism, it celebrates impoverished dictatorships like Cuba, or even, as with Noam Chomsky [], Eastern Europe under Soviet rule. Chomsky, who has constituted a one man communist propaganda factory, certainly didn't ask any Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, or Lithuanians what they thought about that.

These preferences were and are reflected in the complacency, or the active encouragement, for the Obama and now the Biden Administrations to rule by administrative decree and to arbitrarily suspend, enforce, or rewrite existing law to its preferences. The suppression of speech at American universities and the suspension of ordinary standards of due process and the rule of law demonstrate a preference for Stalinism that is contradicted by nothing otherwise expressed by elite intellectuals and "educators."

How that can happen may be obvious. Academics live an isolated, irresponsible, fantasy existence, among like minded colleagues, where there is no accountability for the possible folly or viciousness of their ideas, and opposing voices have been shut out or driven out of the Academy. And when the ideas derive from the philosophical foundations of Fascism and Communism, in Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, the Frankfurt School Marxists, etc., the result will be a poisonous recipe for tyranny -- with the irony that the racism and anti-Semitism of Marx and Nietzsche, and the actual Nazi Party membership of Heidegger, presumably would discredit all their thought to trendy "progressives." It doesn't. It is actually what they are.

The same evil ideology spread through the United States Government itself, which is why career bureaucrats, including the FBI and CIA, similarly insulated from accountability, worked from first to last to sabotage the Trump Administration and deliver the nation to its enemies, foreign and domestic. American government thus became its own means of betraying itself, voters be damned. When it was realized that this was happening, we got the term "deep state" to refer to the disloyal, irresponsible, and protected players in government. That they would serve themselves rather than the public good is described, not only by Public Choice Economics, but by Karl Marx himself in his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Few Marxists pay attention to that.

It is difficult to imagine a previous country whose own elites turned against it, and against most of its citizens, so thoroughly. Roman history was often written by historians who preferred the Republic to the Empire (Livy or Tacitus) or who were alarmed at disasters that had occurred (Ammianus Marcellinus); but the Roman elite never conceived a hatred of themselves. Indeed, the Roman state survived the disasters of the 5th and 7th centuries largely because of the confidence of the Romans in the value of their own civilization and their own religion.

The same cannot be said for America, which has raised and holds a deadly viper to her own breast; and an unprecedented event may occur, where a great nation is precipitated into eclipse through the self-hatred of its own privileged, educated ruling class -- however baseless, absurd, or perverse that self-hatred actually was, and however clueless and repellent the folly of that elite.

The ultimate irony may be that China, busy suppressing democratic dissent in Hong Kong and engaged in genocide in Tibet and Sinkiang, now has a word for self-hating American white elites:  , the "White Left" (Wade Giles Pai Tso). However corrupt and vicious the Chinese Communists, they've got the number of American Leftists, who, with futher irony, tend to abase themselves before the Chinese, concealing or excusing their crimes. Just perfect.

But it is worse than that. The Báizuǒ say that criticizing China is a "white supremacist" way of promoting "anti-Asian violence" -- which, oddly, is largely perpetrated by blacks -- unless it is Antifa thugs, who are apparently all white, beating up Andy Ngo. That doesn't get publicized as "anti-Asian violence," "white supremacy," or anything, since most media don't even cover it. Antifa, you see, is a "myth" and doesn't exist. Even though Andy has the scars, and the video. One beating was right in front of the main Portland police station. The police did nothing and have still arrested nobody.

Thus, the Báizuǒ are not just abasing themselves but are launching attacks for the Communists on other Americans (see Thomas-Greenfield above). This from people who systematically discriminate against Asians in college admissions, often on the grounds that they are not "likeable" -- practices protected by corrupt Congressional sell-outs, like Mazie Hirono and Ted Lieu (see below), who has tried to stop Congressional testimony about that discrimination. Just perfect again [note].

Of course, the Báizuǒ are not just stooges of Communist China. When we see their open advocacy of socialism and their open practice of Stalinism -- where they can get away with it -- it is pretty obvious that they collude with Communists because they are themselves Communists -- although calling them that in public discourse can be dismissed as "McCarthyism." But that was the great political achievement of the Democrats in the 1960's, that they turned all anti-Communism into "McCarthyism," despite Robert Kennedy (whose bust now sits behind Joe Biden in his office), for instance, having been one of McCarthy's lawyers.

But one might wonder, why would the Chinese have a disparaging word for their own stooges? Well, domineering people are often contemptuous of their submissives. And the Chinese have every reason to feel contempt for the submissive Báizuǒ -- people whose dearest ambition would seem to be the equivalent of, if not literally, sex-slaves -- starting with the Biden crime family. At least, unlike the Bidens, Judas felt remorse.

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. The First Amendment prevents me from doing so...

Ted Lieu (D-CA), 12 December 2018, ἀνάξιος. What planet is this guy from? Democrats, of course, want to silence any opposition; but they are usually clever enough not to say so publicly. But Ted Lieu lets us know about his lust for tyranny right out in the open. Perhaps he hasn't gotten the memo with instructions about lying and dissimulation. He really should think twice about his ability to honestly take the oath of office of a Congressman. His heart is clearly not in the requirement to "perserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States"; but then the Democrats, and most Republicans, gave up on that a long time ago.


Dear @RepScottPerry: Native-born Americans like you are no more American, and no less American, than an immigrant like me. And with every passing year, there will be more people who look like me in the US. You can't stop it. So take your racist replacement theory and shove it.

Ted Lieu (D-CA), 14 April 2021, ἀνάξιος. Lieu seems to confirm rather than deny Scott Perry's "replacement theory," which is that the Democrats want mass immigration with the expectation than the immigrants will be Democrat voters, to overwhelm Americans who bear true faith and allegiance to the United States of America, as naturalized citizens swear to become citizens. Thus, immigrants can be every much as American as the Native Born, as long as they believe in America, its institutions, and its history -- unlike, say, Ted Lieu and the present crop of Democrat politicians, who do not believe in any of those things. Indeed, legal immigrants are often more patriotic than Native Americans, while illegal immigrants have the offer of free services, voting rights, and exemption from criminal laws from the Democrats.


I saw, you know [on Long Island], dozens and dozens of pickup trucks with explicatives [sic, i.e. expletives] against Joe Biden on the back of them, Trump flags, and in some cases just dozens of American flags, which is also just disturbing, because essentially the message was clear. This is my country. This is not your country. I own this.

Mara Gay, ἀνάξια, New York Times editorial board member (of course), June 8, 2021, "triggered" by American flags; but is it her country?

This land is your land and this land is my land
From California to the New York island [i.e. Long Island]
From the redwood forest to the Gulf Stream waters
This land was made for you and me

Woodie Guthrie (1912-1967), 1940; is Mara Gay excluded by the flag and those flying it, or does she exclude it and them?


The visas came through in 1955, when I was 15. That June, we sailed for New York aboard the Conte Biancamano. When we passed the Statue of Liberty, Anna Maria [his sister] tried to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner."

Mario Andretti, race car driver, "Coming to America -- In the Fast Lane," "House Call," "Mansion," The Wall Street Journal, August 3, 2018, M1


We’re not going to make America great again. It was never that great.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D), August 15, 2018, ἀνάξιος;


When I hear these things about "Let’s make America great again," I think to myself: "Exactly when did you think America was great?... It certainly wasn’t when people were enslaved... It certainly wasn’t when women didn’t have the right to vote. It certainly wasn’t when the LGBT community was denied the rights to which it was entitled.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder (D), March 29, 2019, ἀνάξιος -- since slavery had always existed, and women voting or "gay rights" never (he might check with Islamic Law), Holder is asserting that nothing in history had ever been "great," I guess, before him -- the modern odious leftist combination of anachronistic self-righteousness and self-congratulation; and I don't think that Holder was with the Massachusetts 54th assaulting Ft. Wagner, one of the greatest moments in all of history.


“Slaves are generally expected to sing as well as to work,” observed ex-slave-turned-abolitionist Frederick Douglass. To the slave owners, singing slaves would drown out their own cruelty and oppression, clothe them in a coerced choir of decency. But it wasn’t enough that the slaves had to sing, they had to sing their oppressor’s feel-good songs that are summed up in the Porgy and Bess refrain of “I’ve got plenty of nothin’, and nothin’s plenty for me.”

Yay, nothin’.

Currently, the song being demanded is the national anthem during football games. But during a warm-up game on Aug. 10, despite President Trump’s previous condemnation, several Eagles players kneeled during the anthem or raised their fists — their way of singing their own song. For them, lyrics like “land of the free” don’t accurately represent the daily reality for people of color. They love their country [?!] but want that country to recognize the suffering that occurs when it isn’t living up to its constitutional promises.

Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Hollywood Reporter, August 14, 2018 -- a millionaire (Yay, nothin’) ex-basketball player, treated like a god most of his life, talking about millionaire (Yay, nothin’) football players, who were not being asked to sing anything, just stand respectfully, for the country where they earn millions of dollars playing a game, while "the daily reality for people for color" and "the suffering that occurs" is what has been created by the welfare state of the Democrats, who deny a decent education and decent opportunities for "people of color" by attacking charter schools and vouchers and holding students hostage in dangerous and worthless public schools, whose only purpose is to provide jobs for members of teachers unions. Chew on that, .


No Border, No Wall, No U.S.A. at all!

All Cops Are Racist, You Better Face It!

Chants by self-stylled "anti-fascists" ("Antifa"), i.e. anarchists and communists, who, of course, are themselves the fascists, wearing the actual black uniforms of Mussolini's Fascisti, and masks like the KKK, August 12, 2018


Yo no creo en fronteras.

"I don't believe in borders," a slogan on T-shirt worn by Keith Ellison (D-MN), ἀνάξιος, Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee, May 1, 2018, perhaps wishing to appeal to all in the common language of Americans and his constituents, that the United States should be like other nations, with no borders (?!); Ellison was accused of beating up his girlfriend, who had photographs and filed a police report, but the Minnesota Democratic Party ruled that there was "insufficient evidence" to act on the accusation, despite the Democrats recently claiming that 35 year old assault allegations, unheard until now, with no verifiable details, were sufficient evidence for them. Now Ellison has been elected Attorney General of Minnesota, the same office Bill Clinton had in Arkansas when he reportedly raped Juanita Broderick. Verily, the voters of Minnesota have their reward.


Maxine Waters supporters burn American flag outside California rep's office.

Headline, Fox News, July 19, 2018; Waters (D-CA), ἀνάξια, has urged followers to harass in public members of the Trump Administration, or any Republicans -- perhaps, like Kareem's football players, they "love their country" also, but burn the flag to show this.


The Trump phenomenon is pushback against what the late political scientist Samuel Huntington called the “deconstructionist” agenda, whose advocates seek to undermine America’s national identity through mass immigration and hostility to assimilation and opposition to the teaching of US history from a traditional, patriotic perspective, among other things.

Huntington argues that until the late 20th century, these elites promoted national unity, as one would expect. “Then in the 1960s and 1970s,” he writes, “they began to promote measures consciously designed to weaken America’s cultural and creedal identity and to strengthen racial, ethnic, cultural, and other subnational identities. These efforts by a nation’s leaders to deconstruct the nation they governed were, quite possibly, without precedent in human history.”

Rich Lowery, "Trump Week One: The Return of the Nation-State," The New York Post, January 27, 2017, p.25


All I want for Christmas is white genocide... To clarify: when the whites were massacre[d] during the Haitian revolution, that was a good thing indeed.

George Ciccariello-Maher, Associate Professor of Politics and Global Studies, Drexel University, Philadelphia, December 25, 2016


Meanwhile, in the echo chamber of late-night TV -- increasingly populated with hosts such as Samantha Bee [] and John Oliver, who smugly lecture an unseen, applauding audience of fellow liberals -- reaction was as vehement.

"It's pretty clear who ruined America -- white people," Bee said in her post-election monologue. Fairly trembling with rage, she continued, "the Caucasian nation showed up in droves to vote for Trump, so I don't want to hear a goddamn word about black voter turnout. How many times do we expect black people to build our country for us?...Holy shit."

Maureen Callahan, "The fault in Hollywood's loudmouth lefty stars," New York Post, Sunday, November 13, 2016, p.11, after the November 8th election of Donald Trump as President. -- Bee is supposed to be a comedian? This racist self-hatred, nauseating self-righteousness, and clueless politics is supposed to be funny? Other comedians pulling this at live performances have now been booed.


The digital media company BuzzFeed faced backlash this week after posting a piece titled “37 Things White People Need To Stop Ruining In 2018.”

BuzzFeed made online waves in December 2016 when one of its popular “listicle” pieces mocked the “plague” of “white people” populating the planet. Patrice Peck, the website’s multicultural beauty writer, added her own contribution to race-based click-bait on Thursday.

According to the article, some of the things white people are responsible for ruining in 2017:

The United States of America
The National Anthem
The Oscars
The Grammy Awards

Ms. Peck’s piece generated nearly 730,000 views for BuzzFeed in less than 24 hours, but not without backlash.

“Even if you subscribe to the asymmetric view of racism (ie, only some tribes can be racist, others can’t), it should not be hard to see why this sort of article is bad for America,” tweeted National Review Online contributor Dan McLaughlin.

Douglas Ernst, The Washington Times, December 28, 2017; the now totally conventional and automatic racism of the Left.


Harry Reid [] has done as much as anyone to pave the way for Donald Trump’s victory by promoting Washington dysfunction, so it’s no surprise that he has reacted to the election result by proving the point one more time.

The soon-to-be-former Democratic Senate leader issued a statement Friday that showed his contempt for anyone who voted for Mr. Trump. “I have personally been on the ballot in Nevada for 26 elections and I have never seen anything like the reaction to the election completed last Tuesday. The election of Donald Trump has emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America,” he said.

“White nationalists, Vladimir Putin and ISIS are celebrating Donald Trump’s victory, while innocent, law-abiding Americans are wracked with fear -- especially African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Muslim Americans, LGBT Americans and Asian Americans. Watching white nationalists celebrate while innocent Americans cry tears of fear does not feel like America.”

Crazy Harry went downhill from there...

"Harry Reid and the Horse He Rode In On," The Wall Street Journal, November 14, 2016, A16. Does Harry Reid really believe this stuff, or is it just another one of the lies he cherishes to ingratiate himself with the Left? He certainly doesn't seem to care that he smears and slanders "innocent, law-abiding Americans" all across the country. Verily, he has his reward. But meanwhile, we should note that this is apparently an example of the "civility" about which the Democrats are always lecturing everyone else. Presumably the anti-Trump riots that followed the 2016 election are also representative of Democrat "civility," complete with the burning of the American flag, signs that say, "America Was Never Great," and protesters marching behind Mexican flags -- to show, I guess, how much they believe in America. Cute.

Of course, they don't believe in America; and now we get some professors who've decided that civility is actually part of "white supremacy." Good manners deflect from the racism and oppression that dominates American society. Practiced by whites, civility is condescension and the invalidation of rage about racism. Practiced by minorities (except, of course, Jews or Asians), civility is submissive and defers to, rather than confronts, the unwillingness of whites to address racism, oppression, privilege, capitalism, etc.


Phrases deemed "microaggressions" by the University of California, "Tool: Recognizing Microaggressions and the Messages They Send" (a webpage now withdrawn); these are, of course, macroaggressions against, not just free speech, but any free political thought or expression -- there was a time when the Left thought it could get away with denying that "political correctness," i.e. political thought crimes, existed. Now it is in print as University policy. It is possible that its authors, with their heads far up their posteriors, did not even realize how vicious it would look.


The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing "God Bless America." No, no, no; not God bless America! God damn America! It's in the Bible, for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating its citizens as less than human!

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright [boldface added] -- as long as George W. Bush was President, we kept hearing charges, even from Members of Congress, that the government provided drugs and created drug dependency to destroy black neighborhoods; but as soon as Barack Obama became President, these charges evaporated, nothing more was heard about them, and nothing was done about what must have been thousands of federal agent drug pushers.


You state up front that your starting point is, quote, "No nonsense Marxism," unquote; but you dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word socialism or Marxism... in this land, the land of the greed and the home of the brave -- excuse me -- the land of the greed and home of the slave....

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright, September 17, 2009, anniversary celebration of the Socialist magazine Monthly Review [note]


America needs to follow the policies it has introduced in Germany. We have to go through a certain de-Nazification process.

George Soros, Davos Conference, 2007


The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Senator Barack Obama, March 18, 2008 [boldface added], ἀνάξιος


...for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country, because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.

Michelle Obama, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Monday, February 18, 2008, ἀνάξια

For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country...

Michelle Obama, Madison, Wisconsin, Monday, February 18, 2008, ἀνάξια


[T]here's nothing patriotic about hating your government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country.

Bill Clinton, 1995, ἀνάξιος


First of all, let me just say that any group that says "I’m young, I’m democratic, and I’m a socialist" is alright with me.

Bertha Lewis, President of ACORN, speaking at the Winter Conference of the Young Democratic Socialists on March 25, 2010


We are not part of the United States simply because the United States says so.... Rather than taking over the reins of power of the United States, we're talking about abolishing those reins altogether.... United States, out of your classrooms!.... United States, out of North America! And most important, United States, out of mind!

Ward Churchill, keynote address to the National Association for Multicultural Education (NAME) -- audience responds with standing ovation.


There are lessons we have not yet learned. I feel Karen would share my concerns that underlying forces of greed and hate persevere. American imperialism, corporate avarice, abuses of our power abroad and our historical support of corrupt dictators like Hosni Mubarak have created an abhorrence of us that, unfortunately, persists. We need to recognize how the rest of the world sees us, and figure out how to change that. Until we do that, more Osama bin Ladens will arise, and more innocent people like my sister will die.

Robert Klitzman, M.D., "My Sister, My Grief," New York Times, 3 May 2011, writing after the death of Osama ben Laden about his sister Karen, who was killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11, with "blame American first" ideology


At the time when they were the darlings of the international Left, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua were actively aided, facilitated, and protected by Democratic Members of the United States Congress. The Cold War was still going on, and the Soviet Union actively bankrolled the tendrils of international Communism, including Cuba, the American Communist Party, and the Sandinistas. Thus, these Democrats were engaged in treason, not just against the United States, but against civilization and humanity as well. Some of them are still in Congress. And their goals and loyalties have not changed. Indeed, they have become increasingly successful at getting their way -- which is still no less than to institute a socialist and totalitarian, i.e. communist, police state.

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


University of Hawaii Professor [of Hawaiian Studies] Haunani-Kay Trask [] counseled her students, "We need to think very, very clearly about who the enemy is. The enemy is the United States of America and everyone who supports it."

Walter Williams, "Loving and hating America," October 23, 2013; Walter . Trask


I hate Americans. I hate America.

Ariana Grande [], a native-born & rich child actor, at Los Angeles doughnut shop, while licking and replacing displayed doughnuts, July 4, 2015 -- I don't know yet if Grande has changed her tune since a suicide bomber, Salman Ramadan Abedi, killed 22 people and injured more than 800 at her concert in Manchester, England, on 22 May 2017. The bomber avoided security by waiting until the concert ended and people were streaming out of the venue in dense crowds. Certainly Grande doesn't "hate" Muslims the way she said she hated "Americans" in 2015. See the recent controversy about her tattoo.


A friend last weekend said he thought the story about the University of New Hampshire's website publishing a bias-free language guide, which declared that use of the word "American" is "problematic," was a hoax. Of course, it was real.

Daniel Henninger, "The Joy of Madness," The Wall Street Journal, September 17, 2015, A13


A few moments ago, the body was treated to a report from the senator from Iowa [Tom Harkin ] about his recent trip to Cuba. Sounded like he had a wonderful trip visiting, what he described as, a real paradise. He bragged about a number of things that he learned on his trip to Cuba that I'd like to address briefly. He bragged about their health care system, medical school is free, doctors are free, clinics are free, their infant mortality rate may be even lower than ours. I wonder if the senator, however, was informed, number one, that the infant mortality rate of Cuba is completely calculated on figures provided by the Cuban government. And, by the way, totalitarian communist regimes don't have the best history of accurately reporting things. I wonder if he was informed that before Castro, Cuba, by the way, was 13th in the whole world in infant mortality. I wonder if the government officials who hosted him informed him that in Cuba there are instances reported, including by defectors, that if a child only lives a few hours after birth, they're not counted as a person who ever lived and therefore don't count against the mortality rate.

Senator Marco Rubio, speech on the Senate floor, February 24, 2014, ἄξιος


Thus are assaults on patriotism failures of character. They are made by privileged people who enjoy the full benefits offered by the country they deride and detest, but they lack the basic decency to pay it the allegiance and respect that honor demands. But honor, of course, is also an object of their derision...

In the long and deadly battle against those who hate Western ideals, and hate America in particular, we must be powerfully armed, morally as well as materially. To sustain us through the worst times we need courage and unity, and these must rest on a justified and informed patriotism.

Donald Kagan, "Democracy Requires a Patriotic Education," The Wall Street Journal, September 27-28, 2014, A13


American culture often seems anti-intellectual in great measure because Americans have recognized that modern intellectuals have become anti-American -- hostile in fact to the intellectuals, such as Locke, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, etc., whose ideas founded the Republic. A Howard Zinn [] prefers those, like Marx, whose principles led to the murder, enslavement, and impoverishment of millions in the 20th century, while dismissing the freedom and success of America, unique in history, as oppressive to "The People."

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


A university conveys as much through its policies as it does in classrooms, and to dissuade students from considering military service could mean only one of several things:  "Democracy needs no defenders," or "This country is not worth defending," or "Let some loser do the fighting for you..."

No boots on the ground? No military strategy? Trust your enemies and diss your allies? Spokespersons for the president could have been lip-synced by denizens of his alma mater [i.e. Harvard]. That Mr. Obama has no use for the other side of the aisle is the logical extension of a university that has purged all but a handful of conservatives from its faculty -- and has done so in the name of achieving greater diversity.

Ruth R. Wisse, "Vote for Tom Cotton -- and Redeem Harvard," The Wall Street Journal, October 21, 2014, A13


When the Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, Nicholas Dirks [], commemorated the anniversary of the "Free Speech Movement" by saying that free speech, however important, must be balanced by "civility," he was, of course, saying that anyone who disagrees with leftist pieties better shut up. When he said, "[W]e can only exercise our right to free speech insofar as we feel safe and respected in doing so," he neglected the fact that the people on his campus who feel the least "safe and respected" would be conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, Christians, and often also Jews. The modern university, which has invented and relentlessly promoted and enforced "speech codes" that blatantly violate the First Amendment, which public schools, at least, are required to observe, obviously has no commitment whatsoever to free speech. This is commensurate with the practice of leftist academics, whose scholarship is uniformly illiberal, intolerant, anti-capitalist, and anti-American, to silence and purge dissent from academic departments, and to sanction students who voice disagreement. In other words, they are Stalinists. Their idea of "diversity" and "civility" is when we hear from black and Hispanic communists as well as white communists (like Bettina Aptheker [], who spoke at the Berkeley anniversary rally). They have achieved their greatest success, now, just as their ideas are the most obviously intellectually, morally, and practically bankrupt (despite the brief encouragement derived from Thomas Piketty []). And as their behavior has served to discredit the value of the humanities and of a liberal education, they are faced with a generation of students who are aware that the debt they take on to go to college, and the insults and outrages that they must endure from leftist faculty and politically correct administrations, are not compensated for by the increasing lack of career opportunities, or even employment, for college graduates. College is becoming a waste, and the Left has made it that way, even as they have already gone far to ruin all the rest of American education.

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


On Tuesday [October 9, 2018] Mrs. [Hillary] Clinton told CNN: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about." You cannot be civil. Behold the Trump sun and the Clinton moon in a moment of political eclipse.

Daniel Henninger, "You Cannot Be Civil," The Wall Street Journal, October 11, 2018, A15; well, since the Democrats want to destroy what America stands for and what most Americans care about, I am happy to find that I no longer need to be civil about it. But I doubt that Hillary Clinton thinks that Republicans or anyone else have a right to do what she does. The Left never remembers the basic adage of the playground, that "turnabout is fair play." They always expect exemptions for themselves. So I imagine she will soon go back to lecturing Republcians about civility, and that they are the ones who don't have it.


I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America... He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.

Rudolph "Rudy" Giulian, Dinner for Scott Walker, 21 Club, New York, 18 February 2015


The pathology of Western intellectuals has committed them to an adversarial relationship with the culture -- free markets and individual rights -- that has produced the greatest alleviation of suffering; the greatest liberation from want, ignorance, and superstition; and the greatest increase of bounty and opportunity in the history of all human life.

This pathology allows Western intellectuals to step around the Everest of bodies of the victims of Communism without a tear, a scruple, a regret, an act of contrition, or a reevaluation of self, soul, and mind.

Alan Charles Kors, "Notable & Quotable: The Victims of Socialism," The Wall Street Journal, February 17, 2016, A13


American flags were removed from three Arlington [New York] Fire District trucks Tuesday, sparking heated discussion on social media and disappointment from union members.

[Chief Tory] Gallante was directed by the board to remove the flags from the backs of the trucks during Monday's meeting. He declined to comment on specifics of why the decision was made but said he is “very disappointed with their direction.”

Poughkeepsie Journal, August 17, 2016


In the Fall of 2016, some professional football players in the National Football League (NFL) began refusing to stand for the National Anthem at the beginning of games. The explanation was that America was not deserving of their allegiance because police were murdering black people and because of other manifestations of racism and "white supremacy" in the country -- despite the success, wealth, and privileges of the football players themselves, and despite the decisions of the Justice Department of their own belovèd and certifiably non-racist President Obama not to prosecute the police in key cases.

This form of protest later spread to some college and even high school football players. Of course, self-righteous and malicious ideology is what is now taught in the schools and through the "progressive" politics that dominates universities and the media. Anti-Americanism is the prevailing conviction among educated and radicalized elites, including the Ruling Class of government, bureaucracy, and their brain trusts. One is tempted to say that these people will not be happy until Americans, particularly white Americans and Christians, are being killed by the enemies of America and of civilization. Islamic Terrorism promises the best opportunity for that, and the Obama Adminstration countenancing nuclear weapons in Iran offers the most direct hope that Jews and Americans can be annihilated.

America, the most successful nation in history, thus may also become the first to simply and abruptly commit suicide. Indeed, the very definition of a "failed state" may be one that no longer commands the loyalty of its citizens, and that may be actively despised by them, however absurd, fallacious, incoherent, and dishonest their reasons.

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


The problem for Mr. Obama is that Ms. [Meryl] Streep [] managed to step on many of the themes the president might be expected to hit in his last big presidential speech Tuesday [January 10, 2017], right down to a snarky reference to foreign birth certificates. Here are some of the lines Ms. Streep delivered, followed by a short interpretation of what she really means:

William McGurn, "Meryl Streep Upstages Obama," The Wall Street Journal, January 10, 2017; McGurn does not emphasize the implications that (1) for the "most vilified," she's forgotten the "basket of deplorables" vilified by Hillary Clinton and her supporters (referenced by McGurn himself), (2) somehow the Obama Adminisration has not been bullying people, although many of its enforcement and regulatory agencies have indeed been doing so, (3) the Obama Administration and its frequently dictatorial actions do not need to held "to account" by the press, which has not been doing so, and (4) none of the "nicest people" seem to be actual Americans. Obviously, if Steep wants to associate with the "nicest people," Americans need not apply. Which is worse, that she understands what she's saying, or that she doesn't?


Fuck your border,
Fuck your Wall,
We will make your system fall!

Chant during "immigration" protests, 29 June 2018, in line with the current proposal of "democratic socialists" (i.e. communists) to abolish immigration enfrocement. The "system" is certainly capitalism and American sovereignty, as in the previous chant.


Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, "Get that son of a bitch off the field right now. Out! He’s fired. He’s fired!" You know, some owner is going to do that. He’s going to say, "That guy that disrespects our flag, he’s fired." And that owner, they don’t know it [but] they’ll be the most popular person in this country.

President Donald Trump, September 22, 2017, about players who do not stand for the National Anthem -- I can just hear George C. Scott (as Geroge Patton) saying it.


The rot of anti-Americanism has gone far indeed when football players refuse to stand for the Star Spangled Banner. Why don't they just go ahead and burn the flag, while they're at it [see above]? Show us how you really feel. That's protected by the First Amendment too, you know.

On Sunday, September 24, 2017, the entire Pittsburg Steelers football team remained in the locker room during the national anthem, evidently with the blessing of the coach and the owner of the team -- except for one player, who was, of course, a veteran (Alejandro Villanueva). Meanwhile, Americans are fighting terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria -- and sometimes dying, for us, and for the flag -- while rich athletes "protest" all the racism that, what, pays them millions of dollars a year? These are confused, clueless, and vicious people, corrupted by enemies of the American people.

Ἐγκλινοβάραγγος (Enklinobarangus)


Our country is an embarrassment in the world... Well, because it's uncomfortable and there has to be an uncomfortable element in the discourse for anything to change. Whether it's the LGBT movement or women's suffrage, it doesn't matter. People have to be made to feel uncomfortable, and especially white people, because we're comfortable. We still have no clue of what being born white means...

Gregg Popovich [], San Antonio Spurs, Head Coach, Sep 25, 2017; the NBA is a sports league that takes much money from China but disciplines members who notice that China is engaged in genocide in Tibet and Sinkiang, while imprisoning democracy activists in Hong Kong. So Popovich is a vicious, self-righteous hypocrite.

People don't go to sporting events to endure political demonstrations from players or listen to racist and anti-American rants from self-hating coaches. The pleasure and entertainment of sports is the opposite of the "uncomfortable element" that the Left wants to inject into everything, on the totalitarian Marxist principle that everything is political. Get this son of a bitch off the basketball court! Cuba beckons!

Τηλεπατητικός (Telepateticus)


The US Army has condemned the actions of a West Point grad and current infantry officer who has been posting pro-communism messages on social media as a show of support for Colin Kaepernick.

In one of his most recent posts, Second Lt. Spenser Rapone [] can be seen wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt under his military uniform.

In another, he holds up a fist and points his cap toward the camera — showing the words “Communism will win” scrawled on the inside.

"Army officials condemn West Point grad for pro-Kaepernick tweets," The New York Post, by Chris Perez, September 26, 2017, 8:44pm


You should make a shirt that says, "being white is terrorism"... There are many Americans protesting US govt aggression towards Iran... Look, I only say I hate America like 3 times a day... I mean yeah I do [hate America] it's literally the worst thing to happen on the planet. We invented capitalism the downfall of the environment.

Reality Winner [sic ], charged with leaking classified documents to the press, statements in court transcripts; sentenced to five years and three months in prison.


ACLU, you protect Hitler, too...
Blood on your hands...
The revolution will not uphold the Constitution...
Liberalism is white supremacy.

Chants and signs of Black Lives Matter students who rushed the stage and shouted down Claire Gastañaga, of the American Civil Liberties Union, attempting to speak about Free Speech, at the College of William & Mary, September 17, 2017 -- members of the "revolution" obviously will not be able to take public office by swearing to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," since they reject the Constitution. But some supporters, and enemies of the Constitution, are already (shamelessly) in public office. Some Americans even vote for them.


Black ppl have been dehumanized, brutalized, criminalized + terrorized by America for centuries, & are expected to join your commemoration of "independence", while you enslaved our ancestors. We reject your celebration of white supremacy & look forward to liberation for all.

Colin Kaepernick, 4 July 2020; as the President of Uganda had to tell Bill Clinton, it was Africans (or Arabs) who "enslaved our ancestors"; how rich do you need to be to be this twisted and ignorant and hate America this much? And "liberation" like what? Cuba? Will you get to play football for millions of dollars after "liberation"? Oh, and, by the way, your friends are attacking statues of the man who ended slavery, and was praised by Frederick Douglass, who you also seem to think hated America.


"The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”

That quote, attributed to Lenin, was a colorful metaphor for what Marxists call the internal contradictions of capitalism. Belief in the inherent inevitability of the West’s imminent collapse sustained the Soviet Communists right up to the moment in 1989 when their own system proved more self-annihilating than anything capitalism could muster.

But the old maxim has taken on a new and more plausible form today. It was on display last week in the first encounter between President Biden’s foreign policy team and the modern claimants to Marxism-Leninism’s primacy in the Chinese Communist Party.

It was evident from the moment the two sides sat down that an emboldened Chinese leadership understands that the greatest ideological weapon it now holds in its increasingly existential struggle with America is the gleeful enthusiasm for self-destruction that characterizes so much of elite opinion in the U.S.

When Yang Jiechi, the Communist Party’s foreign-affairs chief, lectured Secretary of State Antony Blinken about America’s human-rights record, its treatment of minorities and its system’s innate inequity, everything he said could have been lifted straight from the pages of the Democratic Party’s presidential election platform, culled from Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper stories, or jotted down in a student’s notes from lectures delivered daily at America’s top universities.

In fact, it probably was.

Gerard Baker, "Western Culture Elites Are Giving Away Lenin’s Rope, How can a nation prevail in an ideological struggle when its leaders believe its values are evil?" The Wall Street Journal, March 23, 2021, A15


Americans need to face the truth about themselves, no matter how pleasant it is.

Jeanne Kirkpatrick (1926-2006), quoted in "Tuesday Night Trump," by William McGurn, The Wall Street Journal, February 4, 2020, A15.

Editorial Update: 2020, 2021

Anti-Americanism has reached a new level of intensity and ferocity in 2020. The Marxist ideology called "Critical Race Theory" has spilled out of the universities and taken hold, not just in the press, but among corporations, publishers, and the tech companies. The cowardice of capital, as well as that of Republican politicians, RINO's and otherwise, is well on display. The Democratic Party openly embraces anti-American ideology but makes some gestures to conceal it, with American flag backgrounds and an amiable, senile Presidential candidate, who proclaims himself "unthreatening." For those who judge by such appearances, the strategy seems effective [note].

However, nothing on the ground can conceal the hatred of the Left for America and most of its honest, peaceful citizens -- let alone Christians and Jews. The program of the Democratic Party means that its constituency seems to consist of criminals, illegal aliens, anarchists, terrorists, anti-Semites, and Communist China. Indeed, recent legal "reform" pushed by Democrats consists of abolishing bail for most offenses, and responses to the Pandemic have meant release of vast numbers of violent criminals from prison. Thus, offenders are back on the street shortly after being arrested, if they are arrested, while the new, free criminal population means rapidly rising crime rates, from murders on down, in New York, Chicago, and elsewhere.

At the same time, those participating in "demonstrations," who are actually engaged in rioting, looting, and arson, may not be arrested at all. If they are, radical District Attorneys, elected with the help of money from people like George Soros, refuse to prosecute them -- as they refuse to prosecute many other crimes, including volent ones. Instead, where rioters attack citizens who defend themselves, the DA's file charges against the citizens instead of the rioters. It is a Bizarro World where everything is backwards. In a jurisdiction like Missouri, where the State government is Republican, but the St. Louis DA is a radical leftist, the State officials are late and passive about protecting the rights of honest citizens from malicious prosecutions. Public figures proclaim that the destruction of property and looting are acceptable because property can be replaced, and the looters have a right to it anyway. These are not things that any nation can long survive -- which, of course, is the goal of the anarchists, who have grown in numbers, ideology, and sophistication since their debut in 1999.

The furor of 2020 was set off by the evident misconduct of a police officer in Minneapolis, who was seen on video kneeling on the neck of a suspect in custody, who subsequently died. This was a prima facie homicide, and it is not surprising that riots followed. However, the suspect had been complaining "I can't breathe" before the officer did anything potentially harmful; and the Attorney General of Minnesota, Keith Ellison, whose anti-Americanism we see in the epigraphs above, concealed, for months, the autopsy findings that the suspect had ingested a fatal overdose of opiates, which suppress breathing. Whether his death was from the opiates or from neck trauma remains unclear, and the truth may not come out until the actual trials of the officers charged in the incident. Indeed, we did not learn that Trayvon Martin was beating up George Zimmerman until Zimmerman's murder trial, where he was acquitted. After Martin was shot, activists claimed that it was part of an "open season" on shooting black men.

This claim is what is now promoted by the organization "Black Lives Matter" (BLM), that black men are being shot by the police and "other" racists, to the extent that it amounts to "genocide." As it happens, there is indeed a kind of open season for shooting black men, but in fact the vast and overwhelming majority of black murder victims have been killed at the hands of criminals, almost always black criminals, and gangs. Not the police. The "Black Lives Matter" narrative has been founded on lies, ever since a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, shot and killed a suspect in 2014, setting of national riots and demonstrations. This was presented as a gratuitous murder, but in fact the officer was being assaulted, with his skull fractured, by the suspect. Lies about this were circulated by the press and activists. The Obama Justice Department, with all its bias, declined to file any charges against the officer. I have considered the nature of that incident, and subsequent riots, elsewhere.

Thus, the slogan "Black Lives Matter" is itself dishonest, since the organization overtly and obviously cares nothing about all the black lives lost to crime and gangsters, even when it is young children caught in gunfire, week after week, in Chicago. Instead, where 70% to 80% of black residents generally ask for more police protection in their neighborhoods, the program of BLM is to "defund" or actually abolish the police. And we see "demonstrations" and riots from BLM supporters for every police shooting, even when the officers are obviously threatened and their actions clearly justified.

Various jurisdictions have signed on to the "defund" or abolish bandwagon, including Minneapolis, New York City, Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland, Austin, and elsewhere. Spikes in crime are the inevitable result, although people like the members of the Minneapolis City Council seem puzzled that fewer police somehow has ended up meaning more crime. This is testimony to the basic idiocy of leftist politicians. One City Council member had previously said that the expectation that police will show up to protect you rather than kill you is part of "white privilege" -- as she then retreated behind her taxpayer funded police bodyguard.

To what extent do the American people appreciate the folly and nauseating hypocrisy of all this? It is hard to tell. The polls seem to say that Americans want to be humiliated, robbed, raped, and murdered by the Democrats and their thugs.

The reaction to apparent police misconduct in Minneapolis was swift and general, raising the suspicion that it was organized prior to the event and was kept ready, waiting for a pretext. Rioting supplies, including bricks, shields, and other necessities, were quickly provided to "demonstrators," and now vehicles have been spotted, and their sponsors identified, that are engaged in these practices. Also, "demonstrations" quickly picked up where they left off a few years ago in attacks on monuments and statues, not just of Confederate heros, erected in the days of Segregation, but of historic figures generally, including Junipero Serra, Francis Scott Key, Theodore Roosevelt, Andrew Jackson, and even Abraham Lincoln. The rioters demonstrated, not just their general ignorance of American history -- one young idiot actually told reporters that "Lincoln owned slaves" -- but their unmistakable hatred for that history, whatever it is. Also, the nihilism of the movement was evident internationally, when statues were attacked in Britain, including one of Winston Churchill; and a statue in Montreal of the first Prime Minister of Canada, John A. MacDonald, was successfully pulled down by rioters. So we know that the reach of anarchist and nihilist ideology, a "perfect storm" of ignorance and folly, is international and is not just a plea for police reform in America. The target is really all of Western Civilization.

Sometimes the police do show up and kill crime victims rather than perpetrators; but when this happened to a white woman in Minneapolis, Justine Ruszczyk Damond, an Australian, on July 15, 2017, little notice was taken of it. No protests, no riots, no looting. And the officer was black, Mohamed Noor, a Somali immigrant. These names are not familiar in national political discourse. All under the radar. What part of this was the "white privilege" of Justine Damond?

A new example of a riot over a justiable police shooting invoved a black officer, Joseph Mensah, who killed Alvin Cole on February 2, 2020. Cole was shooting at him. On October 7, 2020, when it was decided, reasonably, not to charge Mensah with any offense, riots began in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin -- obviously this was another racist murder of a black man by a racist (black) cop. Besides the customary looting and arson of businesses, rioters began to target residential neighborhoods, breaking windows with stones or other objects. One resident rebuked them by pointing out that the neighborhood was mostly Democrats, including teachers and union members, who otherwise can be counted on to support the attacks of rioters on businesses or the police. No matter. Police eventually showed up, with the National Guard waiting in the wings, but it was all a little late.

Nowhere is general folly more evident than in Portland, Oregon, where daily riots have continued for weeks and months, surpassing 100 consecutive nights. Portland has been the home of the "Antifa" anarchists for years, whose violence has been consistently tolerated by the City government. Reporter Andy Ngo was beaten to the point where he had a cerebral hemorrhage, all right in front of the Portland police headquarters, whose officers did nothing. And no one has been been charged in the attack, even though it was all caught on video. The self-styled "Anti-Fascists" are, of course, themselves Fascists, dressed in Mussolini black, and masked like Klansmen; and so they are the successors of the "Black Block" anarchists we originally saw in Seattle in 1999. In 2020, they have now come into their own; and the tolerance and support they get from Democrat politicians, in Portland, Seattle, and elsewhere, is all too evident. Actually, they do not repay it with much respect for such politicians, who are more often opportunists than ideologues.

When nightly attacks on the federal courthouse in Portland were tolerated by the authorites, federal officers were dispatched and a fence erected around the building. As firebombs and explosives where thrown at the building, with attempts to dismantle the fence, federal officers would finally come out to drive the mob away, with a few arrests. This was characterized by the politicians of Portland and Oregon, and by national Democrat politicians, as the equivalent of Cossacks or the Gestapo attacking peaceful "demonstrators." The anarchists posed for the press with a "wall of moms" and a "wall of vets" to protect "demonstrators" from attacks by the federal officers. The participants in those defensive "walls" were later seen joining the typical attacks on the federal building. The Mayor of Portland said that if only the federal officers would leave, the riots would stop. When the Mayor and the Governor finally said that the police would protect the building, the federal officers did leave. The riots didn't stop. In fact, rioters began harassing the Mayor of Portland, to the point where he fled his apartment building. The legal offense of "disturbing the peace" seems to have dropped out of modern law, and after harassing the Mayor, the "demonstrators" began harassing whole neighborhods around Portland, threatening, among other things, to burn down the houses of people flying American flags. This is tolerated by the authorities.

Extraordinarily, one place where riots have not been tolerated by the authorities is in Detroit. The sad story of this city, which has been all but destroyed by bad government for decades, now arrives at a moment of hope, thanks to Chief of Police James Craig. Although a native of Detroit, Craig was in the Los Angeles Police Department at the time of the Rodney King riots in 1992, and he saw what happened when the police were pulled back and the authorities allowed the rioters free rein. He was not going to do that in Detroit. His doctrine was to stop a riot with overwhelming force before it would have much chance to get started. That's what he did, and it worked. Rioters, of course, complained that they didn't get their chance to loot and burn; but Craig was backed up, unusually, by his Mayor. The general response of Democrat mayors has been to order the police to stand down and leave rioters alone -- as indeed originally in the Rodney King riots. While it doesn't make them immune from Leftist bile, Craig and the Mayor defuse the typical "racism" charges, to an extent, by actually both being Black. Detroit has enough problems as it is. Indeed, so many cities have been so badly damaged, the Left probably figures that sparing Detroit doesn't make much difference. Portland grabs all the headlines anyway.

No Trump, No Wall, No U.S.A. at all!

Chant by self-stylled "anti-fascists" ("Antifa"), 2017

So far, no home owners harrassed by "demonstrations" in their neighborhoods have begun shooting at the rioters, but one might wonder how long it will be before something of the sort happens. Since the anarchists reject the existence of the United States, and are actively waging war against it, in their own self-description, my modest proposal is that they be arrested en masse, designated as "enemy combatants," and sent to Guantanamo Bay, to be interned "for the duration" of their war. Not likely, but a nice thought. Some of them might like it, since they can continue not needing to get a job and support themselves.

The ideology of "Critical Race Theory" reduces everything to a fairy tale morality of racism. The Left has accused everyone of racism for years, but the New York Times upped the ante with its "1619 Project," which condemned all of the United States history, and its institutions, as irredemably racist from the beginning. You see, slavery was invented here, just to oppress Africans, and nothing was ever done about it. That is what one might think. That slavery has always existed, that African and Muslim Arab slavers were the ones at the source of the slave trade, and that the principles of the American Revolution eroded the legitimacy of slavery until a bloody and terrible war brought it to an end, more than 150 years ago, is something one would never know from an "education" in what is taught in American schools today. But it is all a fraud anyway. "Racism" is just a smokescreen for Marxism, whose terms become pretty evident in short order anyway. "Systematic racism" means equal opportunity, equality under the law, due process of law, and many other hard-won civil rights and liberties. This will all be abolished, as we have seen at American schools during the Obama Administration, where accusations without evidence, guilt without proof, anonymous accusers, prohibition of counsel, and other misconduct became common.

Princeton University found itself in an awkward position when its President, trying to be an au courant leftist, with craven and self-flagellating submissiveness, blamed, not only all of society, for "systematic racism," but also the institutions of Princeton University itself. Uh oh. The Department of Education pointed out to the President that Princeton had recently certified to the DOE, as a condition of recieving federal money, that it practiced non-discrimination. Now the President has contradicted that.

However, all of this conceals the racism that actually is practiced by Princeton -- and by Yale, Harvard, and many other schools -- of systematically discriminating against Asian students, whose admission numbers are held down, just as were those of Jewish students before World War II. Harvard is currently being sued by Asian students over this, although it recently got a temporary victory from a dishonest, racist judge who ignored all the evidence against it and agreed that Asian students are not as "likable" as others. Yale has recently been accused of anti-Asian discrimination by the DOE itself. Princeton has escaped scrutiny, so far, but its practices are evident to any honest person.

In fact, all the "systematic racism" narrative tends to ignore Asians -- where Chinese and Japanese Americans, and people from India, are among the most prosperous ethnic groups in the country. Where "anti-racism sensitivity" training, which promotes the racist principle that all white people suffer from irredemable race guilt, says things like that the "Protestant work ethic" is part of "white supremacy," it ignores what we might call a "Confucian work ethic" among Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. But that is off the radar, as is college discrimination against Asians, because it doesn't fit the political dogma.

Democrats expect the American people to vote for them and endorse and encourage the vicious ideas and violent behaviors of the Left. And perhaps they will -- they all want their "benefits," after all -- or perhaps the Democrats will just steal the election. But, either way, it means the end of America and of Enlightenment civilization. Which is the whole idea.

Indeed, it isn't just that the Democrats want to prohibit self-defense. The mobs of anarchists and radicals are obviously the pattern and the cadre for the equivalent of the gangs of thugs who enforce the power of the regime in Venezuela, where the people foolishly kept voting for "socialism" and now have gotten a communist dicatorship. In Central America, these gangs were called "death squads." Thus, "defund" the police only means fully funding the thugs. Fly an American flag, and your house will be fire-bombed. This can happen in America, and many people who should know better are allowing it to happen. Plenty of disloyal RINO's apparently think that communist dicatorship is preferable to the "deplorables" of Donald Trump. Unfortunately, the principle looms that people may get the kind of government they deserve. People have sold their birthright before.

πᾶς γὰρ ὁ φαῦλα πράσσων μισεῖ τὸ φῶς
καὶ οὐκ ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ φῶς,
ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῆ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ·

omnis enim qui mala agit odit lucem
et non venit ad lucem
ut non arguantur opera eius.

For every one that doeth evil hateth the light,
neither cometh to the light,
lest his deeds should be reproved.

John 3:20



Ἵνα τί ἐφρύαξαν ἔθνη, καὶ λαοὶ ἐμελέτησαν κενά;
Quare fremuerunt gentes, et populi meditati sunt inania?
Why do the heathen [gôyim] rage, and peoples imagine vain things?

Psalms 2:1

There is a curious feature about American politics. A substantial body of political opinion, evident in the media, academia, and popular culture, simply despises America -- its history, its principles, and its institutions -- and sees no value in the Great Republic unless it profoundly changes its character and assumes a form quite different from that of the past. In 2008, examples of this attitude emerged in relation to the political campaign of Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama. None of them was more blunt and striking than the statement of the pastor, for 20 years, of Obama's own church. In a sermon that was taped and available for sale at the church, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright could be seen simply saying, multiple times, "Not God bless America! God damn America!" The aftermath of this becoming public was instructive in its own right. Defenders of Wright protested that he didn't really mean it that way, that the quote was taken out of context (though anyone can watch the unedited sermon). Or, of course, anyone complaining about Wright was simply a racist.

Senator Obama first expressed concern, as though these kinds of statements from Wright were not familiar to him, and then, as Wright unapologetically defended himself in television appearances, Obama denounced him and resigned from his church. However, it was undeniable that Obama's political career had begun associating with Wright and many others of similarly radical and anti-American stripe in the Chicago area. Also, as in this case, it is characteristic of much Anti-Americanism in politics that, while it is freely expressed in private or partisan venues, it shuns the full light of public exposure and, when thus exposed, dissimulates, denies, or qualifies extreme statements. When Senator Obama's wife, Michelle, made statements asserting that she had never before been proud of her country, reponses that were attempts at misdirection were also common. Although Michelle was campaigning for Barack and making political statements, the claim was (from Barack himself) that she was above politics and properly immune from criticism. Thus, in both controversies, the initial response was to avoid the substance of the matter and to claim that the story itself was dishonest or inappropriate.

But why should Americans be anti-American? The problem is ideological. Mexicans are proud of Mexico just because it is Mexico -- regardless of crime, poverty, corruption, tyranny, etc. Mexicans or Mexican-Americans wave Mexican flags at sporting events or in political demonstrations -- often booing teams representing the United States or the playing of The Star Spangled Banner. Many Americans, however, are squeamish about even flying, let alone waving, the American flag -- patriotism, as Dr. Johnson said, and we are often told, is the last refuge of the scoundrel. The difference between Mexico and the United States is that Mexican identity has a geographical, cultural, and historical foundation, while the United States was founded entirely on the basis of certain principles and ideals, with a history believed to embody those things. The principles and ideals were the accomplishment of the Enlightenment, which especially in political terms, as recognized and advocated by Voltaire to his French readers, went back to John Locke and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 -- other Enlightenment tendencies, as with Jean Jacques Rouseau, involved other ideals more in tune with later collectivism, statism, and totaliarianism.

Countries that
Hate America the Most
1Pakistan79%
2Palestine77%
3Algeria67%
4Lebanon64%
5Egypt62%
6Iran61%
7Iraq60%
8Yemen59%
9Greece57%
10Serbia57%
In the 19th century the priniciples of Locke and the American Revolution would become Classical Liberalism -- for limited, secular government, private property, and the dignity and liberty of the individual. Part of the problem, then, with the founding of America was the degree to which people would judge the country by its success, in their estimation, in living up to its ideals. All the worse if popular political ideals were to change, while American institutions remained largely those of Classical Liberal form. In a very significant way this is what happened. Limited government and individualism lost favor by the beginning of the 20th century. What appeared to be progressive ideology in the 20th century was largely for absolutist, collectivist, and statist government, following the ideology of people like
Hegel, who influenced the 19th century development of European governments and politics. This was bad enough, and the success of America certainly could not be favorably judged in terms of ideals alien to the spirit of her founding and development; but there would be something worse. Even the successes of America could be judged as inadequate in terms of her own ideals, with the bitter irony of a kind of Catch 22.

When it comes to the nature of ideals of the American Revolution, however, part of the problem is very old. We find Greek philosophy in origin and development associated with commercial culture and democracy. The ultimate exemplar of this was the city of Athens, which was wealthy from trade, the principal democracy in the Ancient World, and a wellspring of much of what we think of as Classical Greek civilization, from the theater, to history, architecture, art, and philosophy. Nevertheless, the attitude of probably the greatest philosopher produced by Athens, Plato, was hostile to almost all the cultural, economical, and political characteristics of the place. He didn't like democracy, didn't like commercial culture, didn't like the foreign influences and residents who flowed through the city, and, expressed in a memorable addendum to the Republic, didn't even like the unfettered artistic expression that so immortalized the place -- an artistic expression of which his own vivid writings were a part. Instead, Plato admired Sparta, a place without literature, art, history, or philosophy, a place that would have vanished from human memory if Athenians had not begun writing about it. In a very real sense, Anti-Americanism is part of this ancient conflict between Athens and Sparta; but of course there must be reasons for that conflict, Plato's reasons, in the first place. Indeed. Even now, it is often instructive to see Anti-American attitudes expressed through criticisms of Athens.

Both Athens and America are critized over slavery -- as we see referenced by Barack Obama above as "this nation's original sin." Criticism of Athens about slavery is a little silly, since no ancient state ever abolished slavery. A condemnation of Athens would need to be of the form, "somehow, they should have known better." America is more vulnerable, since the ideal of the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal" seems to be immediately contradicted by the continuation of slavery. But we may well ask how, by introducing a contrary principle, slavery was America's sin. Was slavery invented in America? No. Slavery had always existed everywhere. The slave trade in West Africa had not even been started by Europeans, but by Arabs. Instead of slaves being exported north across the Sahara, as they had been for centuries, Europeans bought them from the south and exported them across the Atlantic.
Be it known to you, that the Traffic in Slaves is a matter on which all Sects and Nations have agreed from the time of the sons of Adam, on whom be the Peace of God, up to this day -- and we are not aware of its being prohibited by the Laws of any Sect, and no one need ask this question [i.e. whether the trade in slaves be lawful], the same being manifest to both high and low and requires no more demonstration than the light of day.

'Abd ar-Rah.mân ibn Hishâm, Sultân of Morocco (1822-1859), to British Vice Consul Henry John Murray, 1842

Was slavery widely recognized as a wrong at the time of the American revolution? No. As we see in the statement of the Sultan of Morocco in 1842, it had not been prohibited by the "Laws of any Sect." Slavery was legal under Roman Law, Islamic Law, and, in general, in the Bible. The idea that slavery was wrong originated in the Enlightenment ideology of the American Revolution itself, with about half of the American colonies abolishing slavery during that era, and the Constitution anticipated the abolition of the slave trade in 1808 -- a delay singled out, apparently as a reproach, by Barack Obama. Support for slavery, of course, continued, not the least among African rulers who sold slaves, but also among slave owners who mostly had history, religion, custom, and law on their side. Did America just never do anything about slavery as time went on? No. The controversy, argued with fury and recrimination, dominated the early years of American politics, resulting in a terrible Civil War in which more than 600,000 Americans died -- in contrast to the sum of about 400,000 African slaves that had been imported into the 13 American colonies in the first place.

In essence, then, how can slavery be the "original sin" of a country that not only conceived the ideal that slavery was wrong but then, at monumental cost in lives and fortune, got rid of it? There is a serious perversity to such a charge, as though the evil of slavery had always been evident and recognized, or as though America (or the Constitution in particular) had invented or revived the institution, with stubborn complacency in the face of universal protest. Nothing of the sort was the case. And if it took America 20 years to abolish the slave trade and 74 years to abolish slavery, in the face of deep and violent opposition, how is it the fault of America for pressing against this opposition and finally, at great cost, overcoming it? This makes no sense [note].

Similarly, when Southern opposition substituted Segregation for slavery, and little could be done about that politically until the 1950's, when those institutions were finally destroyed, why would that be America's fault? Were racial and ethnic minorities just loved and protected everywhere else on earth? Hardly. Instead, the accusation of American hypocrisy in this regard looks motivated by a predisposition to condemn America on any pretext. This is especially evident in regard to Islam, under which slavery and the slave trade were only abolished under European influence, pressure, and, very often, military force (i.e. "Imperialism"). Indeed, one often finds apologetics for slavery in Islam, that it was more humane and, well, hardly even slavery at all. This wouldn't have passed muster with the Kings of Mali, who continually complained to their Islamic brethren north of the Sahara that slavers repeatedly captured the black Muslim inhabitants of Mali, despite prohibitions of enslaving Muslims in Islamic Law.

The readiness to condemn America even for its accomplishments, as though the principles of the Declaration of Independence were immediately discredited just because they were new and faced resistance, is mainly ideological in origin. The real problem does not come with the fulfillment of the ideals, but with what the ideals were in the first place. A "somehow, they should have known better" view of American history that is fully ahistorical and anachronistic is not a genuine independent conviction but is simply used in the service of ideals that are alien and hostile to the original form of the American project. As a rhetorical device, it condemns America both for things that it excuses in others and for failing to live up to ideals that are not respected anyway. Part of this I have discussed elsewhere as the problem in Ethics of Moralistic Relativism. There I quote Paul Hollander in The Survival of the Adversary Culture:

Paul Craig Roberts characterizes the resulting attitudes [of Western and American intellectuals] as a "fusion of moral scepticism with the demand for moral perfection..." He also points out that the high, moralistic demands on the part of intellectuals are almost invariably directed at their own society, rarely at those opposed to it.... In other words, the intellectuals discussed alternate between moral absolutism and moral relativism. [The Survival of the Adversary Culture, Transaction Publishers, 1991, p. 156]

It is certainly a painful irony when people who otherwise deny the objective or binding existence of moral principles, often with a nihilistic nod to Friedrich Nietzsche, nevertheless rise in furious moral indignation at the shortcomings of American history and government. We may suspect, however, that this sort of incoherence and confusion, deliberately or not, masks something else. In the background there may actually be a rather complete system of morality and ideology that is either deliberately concealed or is naively assumed to be so self-evident that, obvious to all, it need not be discussed. It often seems to be a matter of both. Thus, when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, and Lillian Hellman said, "The Motherland has been attacked!" this was not because she believed in a Nietzschean transvaluation of all values, but because she was a Communist. Yet much of the effort of the Communist Party in the United States in the 40's, 50's, and later was spent on denying that Communists were Communists, or that the Party was, in fact, a paid and controlled agent of the Soviet Union. Thus, while in Marxist ideology what one is -- a class enemy -- counts for more than what one believes, the approach of the Party was to argue that Communists were being attacked simply for what they believed, not for what they were (Communists) and what they were doing (spying and subversion). Thus, America could be faulted for violating its own individualistic principles, when those principles were not honored by the Communists anyway, and when the real complaint was criminal and treasonous activities, not speech (when people like Hellman, to confuse and dissimulate, never openly confessed what they believed anyway).

This whole strategy continues in American politics today, where the "race, class, gender" development of Marxist ideology, as "post-modernism" or "critical theory," dominates American academics and intellectuals, where political correctness, ideological uniformity, and unconstitutional "speech codes" stifle or penalize dissent in education, and where any exposure, response, or complaint about any of this is immediately demonized as fascist, racist, or "classist" attacks on academic freedom or freedom of speech -- again from people who, in the appropriate private, protected, and friendly contexts, reject freedom of speech, and whose acolytes faithfully protest, intimidate, threaten, or physically assault opposition speech on campuses (free of sanction by compliant or sympathetic administrations).

If we look at anti-Americanism from its modern Marxist perspective and at the opposition to Athens by someone like Plato, they end up with something very significant in common:  the desire on the part of people who are essentially thinkers, talkers, and plotters to control other people. The essential problem of politics for Plato is just that the wrong people are in charge. It should be, well, people like Plato -- the knowers, the wise, the philosophers. The intellectuals, as the wise and the good, want to rule and they know that they will do a better job, regardless of the desires of the ignorant masses. This is often called "democracy"; but we should not be surprised to learn that supposed democratic "reforms," like "campaign finance reform," only serve to protect established politicians and political parties, often criminally sanction grass roots efforts by ordinary citizens, who are bewildered or uninformed about the complexity of election laws, and are then aided and abetted by a press and media comfortably dominated by ideological friends. The alternative media, like popular Conservative talk radio, are then attacked as illegitimate or unfair. Rush Limbaugh, but not the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, gets called "the most dangerous man in America."

Yet it is the likes of Wright who, by a constant pressure through education, opinion, and entertainment, still give the Soviet Union a chance to win the Cold War and turn America into a Soviet-style state. Limbaugh, as a Conservative, merely fights to maintain traditional American cultural values and the traditional principles of American government. As a Conservative, he is bound to be embarrassed when traditional cultural values are simply undermined by freedom (as with pornography and sexual mores), but his support of that freedom on the political side, as when he parts ways with Culture Warriors seeking censorship, puts him at odds, not with Gay Pride parades, but with people on the Left who, as noted, are aiming and active in attacking and suppressing free speech.

The essence of anti-American politics may perhaps be found with demonstrators at the University of California at Berkeley not long ago. They were literally burning books while carrying signs that said, "fight Fascist censorship." It is a tribute to their own poor education that they could stage a book burning without realizing what this would look like, and what it would remind people of with any knowledge of history. But they need not have worried. No one put the images on the evening news, and one had to go to the alternative media to know that it had happened at all.

In great measure, however, it is too late. Anti-American principles have already infected government at all levels. The New Deal was a mortal blow to the Constitution, and most Americans are not even aware why. Most Republicans would not even agree with this -- ever since Dwight Eisenhower announced that his Administration would not challenge the basic changes effected by Franklin Roosevelt. While the Goldwater wing of the party did seem ready to challenge them, the ultimate Goldwater President, Ronald Reagan, nevertheless did not, and continued to praise Roosevelt, as have subsequent Republican leaders like Newt Gingrich. Republican Presidents after Reagan, i.e. the Bushes, have retreated further to the fatally compromising Eisenhower position. By their own definitions, however, the Founders of this Nation, with the possible exception of Alexander Hamilton, would all regard the present, New Deal-modified Federal Government as an active system of tyranny. In American political culture, the conventional wisdom is that only the most extreme lunatic fringe crackpot would assert any such thing; and Democrat leaders, like Bill Clinton, are pleased to claim the identity of the present form of government with all that has ever been good about the United States. Thus, in a famous statement, Clinton asserted that, "[T]here's nothing patriotic about hating your government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country."

But is hating a government that has burst all Constitutional boundaries and has extended its cold probing hand even into details about how much water a toilet can flush the same as being anti-American and hating the country? It is hard to know if Clinton himself even believes this. There is a fringe on the Right that has considered the country ruined ever since Abraham Lincoln, if not earlier (i.e. since the Constitution itself, which the Anti-Federalists suspected of all the evils that have in fact transpired). Yet in one respect the choice is clear. The Socialist temptation continues, and the overwhelming bulk of anti-American sentiment in academia and elsewhere is strongly fueled and founded in Marxism, as much or more so as even in the days of the Soviet Union. Anti-Americanism is anti-Capitalism in all opinion that regards itself as "progressive." That is why the New Deal continues to be so harmful, since it embodies the judgment that free markets fail and government knows best. Instead, as the Founders knew well, government largess handed out for political favor is the essence of corruption. This has now made the entire Federal Government one vast mechanism of rent seeking and vote buying. As "reforms" have attempted to make the government more democratic, all the classic evils of democracy, with demagogues promising free goods (such as the looming, and in fact continuing, socialization of medicine), again as well understood by the Founders, have emerged triumphant. It may just be too late. The Fabian anti-American Americans are getting their way on a broad front, hoping to transform the United States into France, if not another Soviet Union.

The passive protests against the National Anthem referenced in the epigraph above began with a player named Colin Kaepernick. After the presidential election of 2016, Kaepernick admitted that he hadn't even voted, asserting that voting didn't make any difference in the evils of the United States. What alternative political system Kaepernick might prefer was revealed when, after the death of Fidel Castro, he began wearing shirts featuring Castro's image. Asked about this, Kaepernick praised Castro and repeated the usual bogus lefist talking-points about Cuba's great accomplishments in education and health care. He added that Cuba spends more on education than on prisons, while the United States does the opposite. When reminded of Castro's crimes and of the health of Cuban prisons, full of political dissidents, some of whom President Obama expected to be freed as part of his deal to reopen diplomatic relations with Cuba, Kaepernick resorted to the old "moral equivalence" arguments familiar from the Cold War, that any crimes Castro may have commited are matched by those commited by America. However, if the crimes of Castro and America really are equivalent, then why does this fellow love Castro and hate America? Shouldn't he hate both?

Of course, the millionaire athlete Kaepernick is a clueless idiot, but praise for Castro was common on the the Left, often just in terms that Castro resisted American "imperialism," or even with preposterous assertions of Castro's care for the poor and oppressed, for which, of course, he had no concern whatsoever, since he destroyed Cuba's previously successful economy and condemned Cubans to decades of poverty, not to mention to totalitarian dicatatorship in a police state. Equally curious were tributes to Castro, as from Barack Obama himself, that tried to maintain a neutral tone which highlighted things like how Castro had "altered the course of individual lives" and which emphasized the "enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him." Unfortunately, the people formulating such tributes (Obama, in this case) don't seem to have noticed that they had crafted things that could have been said as well about Adolf Hitler, who probably had an "impact" and "altered the course of individual lives" of far more people than Castro did. With both of them the unanswered question would be the nature of their influence and impact.

Protests against the election of Donald Trump in 2016, whose campaign slogan was "Make America Great Again," often featured signs saying "America Was Never Great," along with actual burning of the American flag. The protesters thus revealed that their complaint was not so much against Trump as it was against the United States of America. The protesters, who often also became rioters, also carried signs that we previously saw at the "Occupy Wall Street" events, saying, "This is what democracy looks like." However, in the election, American democracy had already spoken; and what a lot of the protesters and rioters seemed to think was that their actions could start a violent revolution to overthrow the government and install the kind of dictatorship that they favor, i.e. like their ideal, Fidel Castro. Protests about police shootings had previously featured signs calling for violent revolution. The press was careful not to allow viewers to see these kinds of things too clearly.

Viewers, however, had gotten the message; and viewers had also gotten the message that, when Trump was smeared as a racist bigot, just for complaining about illegal aliens and terrorist infiltrators among Middle Eastern refugees and immigrants, the people engaging in the smear were themselves anti-American racist bigots, whose hatred for America, white people, Christians, and Jews was usually palpable. The Hillary Clinton campaign featured cute signs saying "Love Trumps Hate," but it could not conceal the hatred among her supporters, especially in the academic brain trust at American universities, where free speech is now regarded as an evil, and students are taught that the United States is the worst regime that has ever existed. Hampshire College in Massachusetts lowered its American flag to half-staff after the election. The flag was then taking down and burned just before Veteran's Day. The President of the College then decided not to fly the flag at all, provoking protests from actual veterans. Meanwhile, nearby Amherst, Massachusetts, flies the United Nations flag rather than the American. People know what this means.

The Left and the leftist press and academics of America still don't seem to realize that their anti-Americanism and their own racial and religious bigotry helped Donald Trump get elected. And by continuing to pour in on after the election, they stand a good chance of giving him a positive approval rating before he even becomes President -- someone who, like Hillary, had historical levels of disapproval before the election. But protesters who protest a fair election and then burn the flag hand him priceless favorable publicity. People know what that means. With any luck, 2016 will turn out to be the Armageddon of the anti-American Left, although the rot had already gone very deep indeed. The National Football League has lost considerable viewership this year, and observers wonder how much of that is due to the League's tolerance of players who disrespect the National Anthem and the Flag.

The Post-Modern or "Leftover" Left

The Essential Anti-Communist Bibliography

Political Economy

Home Page

Copyright (c) 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved

Anti-American Americans, Note 1

The attempt of the Left to smear conservatives for "Anti-Asian Violence" has a couple of dimensions we might consider. One is the narrative that "white supremacy" is responsible for attacks on Asians, and indeed for most crime generally. Even the riots conducted by "Antifa" and BLM ("Black Lives Matter") often get attributed to "white supremacists," even though none are ever in evidence on such occasions. But an essential element of dismissing such riots is that "Antifa" itself doesn't exist, is a "myth" -- despite such anarchists having flags, websites, books, uniforms, etc. And BLM riots are actually "mostly peaceful protests," even with burning buildings in the background. So, however absurd and dishonest it is, "white supremacists" must be the ones waging nightly attacks on the Federal Courthouse in Portland, Oregon.

When a white man shot up a Florida massage parlor in March 2021, killing 8 people, including 6 Asians, the press jumped on this as "white supremacist" Anti-Asian violence. However, it turned out that the shooter blamed masseuses for his obsession with sex; and the presence of Asians among his victims was an artifact of the perhaps troubling circumstance that massage parlors are often heavily staffed with Asian women. Sex trafficing, anyone? How about sexual exploitation of Asian women? This is a large part of the economy in Thailand.

Since more than 80% of attacks on Asians have subsequently featured black assailants, obvious from surveillance cameras, the press has quietly back burnered the issue. But Public Service Announcements, and some demonstrations, continue.

The narrative that does continue, evident in such PSA's, has a curious feature. The issue is said to involve "Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders." But I don't remember any stories about anyone, black or white, attacking Samoans in New York City; and anyone might wonder how "Pacific Islanders" got involved when what we see are black people beating up small Chinese women. Most of these attackers would be ill advised to attack Pacific Islanders, who tend to be larger in size.

What is going on there betrays the stereotyped thinking of the Left. "Asians" itself is a category absurdly broad and vague, since it could range from Japanese, to Indians, to Arabs. Yet it seems to be generally used to mean mainland East Asians, i.e. Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Thais, etc. Discrmination in American universities against "Asians," however, certainly includes people from India. There is less reason to discriminate against Arabs, Turks, and Iranians, although any hint of that could immediately be tarred as "Islamophobia."

But "Pacific Islanders," except for Indonesians, generally have nothing to do, historically, ethnicly, racially, culturally, or lingusiticly, with mainland Asians. Lumping them all together, into "Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders" is a totally artificial political category. But, for the Left, once you've got your stereotype and your talking points, you're stuck with them. The leftist press and activists literally cannot think outside a box that absurdly lumps Samoans in with old Chinese victims. This shows us how defective their minds and reasonings are. They are not just vicious, they are stupid, trapped in their own blinding ideology. This would not be surprising to anyone who has seen the absurd jargon and obscurantism that Marxists and modern academics typtically produce. They are people literally unable to think, and so they repeat, over and over again, nothing but mind-numbing slogans.

Return to Text

Anti-American Americans, Note 2

The speech that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright gave on September 17, 2009, at an event in honor of the Socialist magazine Monthly Review, continues his anti-American rants but also reveals something else. He complained that the "corporate media" did not allow the truth about socialism, Marxism, racism, imperialism, etc. to be uttered to the American people and especially did not allow people "of color" to speak these truths.

This is a characteristic conceit of the Left, that they are somehow silenced and that the urgent message they have for the American people cannot get out. Such a conceit, however, is disingenuous, dishonest, or deeply and grotesquely self-deceived. The truth is that they want to conceal their message as much as possible. Whenever the Reverend Wright's rants (or the views of any other influential Leftist) become public, there is uproar and outrage at the depths of their folly and viciousness -- while they complain that they are being "attacked" with revelations that are somehow distorted or "out of context." Far from desiring the exposure of the whole context, people like him want their views directed at a target audience and otherwise kept secret. Marxists prefer moving in their friendly circles and really don't like being outed to the public. Even when they display their naked views and loyalties on signs at public demonstrations, the media, even Fox News, conveniently never focuses on such signs long enough that they can be read easily (even in freeze-frame), let alone pauses to discuss what they are and what they mean.

The strategy of concealment and deception was explicitly formulated by the Marxist Saul Alinsky, and it is generally and cleverly followed by the Left. Wright knows this himself, since one of his statements that became public was that Barack Obama was only saying what he needed to, i.e. moderate, vague, and unthreatening promises, to get elected. After Obama was elected, Wright said that he was not being invited to the White House only because "them Jews" were keeping him out -- presumably so that Obama would not lose support in the Jewish community, which foolishly and self-destructively continues to vote for Democrats -- with Anti-Semites like Wright in the near background.

The irony and absurdity of Wright's accusation against the "corporate media" is that the so-called "main stream" media is almost wholly in league with the Alinsky strategy of the Left. It is mainly on the dreaded Fox News that Wright and other radicals in the Obama Administration or from Obama's background are regularly exposed to public view. They obviously don't like that. This constantly puts the lie to their conceit of not being able to get out their message.

Return to Text

Anti-American Americans, Note 3;
Critical Race Theory According to Caleb Wells

We see a brief video explanation and defense of "Critical Race Theory" by an Illinois Eighth grade English teacher named Caleb Wells. We might not be impressed by Mr. Wells' credentials, but his education degree certainly brought him up to date on the relevant ideology. And if we want to know how students are being indoctrinated even in middle schools, this is what we want to hear about.

Wells says, "Critical race theory talks about how the systems that we have, the laws that we have – how all of those are designed to oppress people groups." This is at a level well above "miscroaggressions" and "hate speech." In talking about "systems," we see the shadow of Marxism, which is not about the actions of individuals, but about class structure. However, if Wells says that these "systems" were "designed," he has missed part of his Marxism lessons. In Marx, social structure is the result of the economic dynamics of history, the "dialectic." The free decisions of individuals have nothing to do with it. That is why it is called "economic determinism."

It is also odd that Wells says that the "systems" were "designed to oppress people groups." This is also not good Marxism. The system exploits the workers, for the economic benefit of the capitalists, but "oppression" as such is not any overt purpose. So from this, we know the mentality of Caleb Wells, who thinks in terms of malevolent agents, rather than economic forces. This goes along with what I have called "English Department Marxism and "Cargo Cult Economics," where Wells, as an actual English teacher, is a good exemplar of the former. Whether his economic understanding is at the level of the latter is not as clear, but it is likely.

The confusion in all this certaintly goes back to the actual originators of Frankfurt School Marxist "Theory," who needed some way to disguise the economic failures and the bloody tyranny of Marxist governments. "Racism" and other sins simply function as a smoke screen to conceal the real purpose of the business, which is the restoration of totalitarian government and command economics. Some of them, like Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), mixed Marx with Freud to draw in some kind of sexual interest. That survives with the feminist and "gender" sides of the "Theory" movement.

Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.

Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction [New York University Press, 2001]; in other words, anti-discrimination law, and other civil rights, do not apply to what they avocate.


Provide an already-created, in-depth, study that critiques empire, white supremacy, anti-Blackness, anti-Indigeneity, racism, patriarchy, cisheteropatriarchy, capitalism, ableism, anthropocentrism, and other forms of power and oppression at the intersections of our society, and that we oppose attempts to ban critical race theory and/or The 1619 Project.

Programatic statement for education, the National Education Association (NEA), 2021 Virtual NEA Representative Assembly, May 10-3 July 2021, since removed from their website.

Wells continues, saying, "Things like mass incarceration, the prison-industrial system, the military-industrial system. All of those are used to oppress people groups. By teaching this in the classroom, we can show our kids what systems need to be challenged and thought about differently."

This gives us some nice examples of what Wells and "Critical Race Theory" mean by the "systems of oppression." "Mass incarceration," of course, means the recent history of locking up criminals to reduce crime. That was effective, and now it has largely been undone, thanks to people like Mr. Wells. This has been through a combination of actually releasing criminals from jail, with the justification to protect them from Covid infection, abolishing cash bail, which means that criminals are out on the street to reoffend within 24 hours of arrest, and electing prosecutors, financed by George Soros, who refuse to prosecute offenders from the riots in the last year and who we see recently dropping charges, especially in Portland and New York, against rioters, looters, arsonists, and even those accused of assaulting police officers. But even prosecutions of ordinary violent crimes have been reduced, despite the victims of street crime overwhelming being minorities. Thus, the "anti-racism" of someone like Mr. Wells results in more victimization and deaths of racial minorities than the cumulative misconduct of any police for many years. In the last year, the murder rate in the United States has jumped more than it ever has before on record.

Much of "mass incarceration" has been due to the drug laws and the "war on drugs." At the federal level, this has all been unconstitutional. The issue is now confused with the general impression that things that are not prohibited by law must be harmless or good. This is absurd. At the same time, people in prison for drug offenses are often violent criminals, and often plea deals have involved dropping the most severe, violent offenses, in favor of drug charges that make it look like the criminals are mere drug users, not predatory gangsters. Thus, ending the "war on drugs" can result in violent offenders and gangsters, not dopey pot-heads, being released on the public.

At the same time, the toleration of public drug use results in public nuisances -- people living on the street, in parks, or just lying in the gutter. This was formerly not tolerated. Allowing such conditions is not compassionate, either to the drug addicts or to the public. It also breeds crime, as people in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and elsewhere have discovered. Unfortunately, it is often the case the judges have prevented cities from cleaning up homeless encampments and removing addicts or crazy people for treatment. Mr. Wells would certainly consider such measures "oppression," but the current situation is simply a matter of the breakdown of civilization.

With "mass incarceration" as one of the "systems," Wells mentions "the prison-industrial system." Of course, if you lock up criminals, you needs prisons. What else makes this an "industrial system" is not clear. I don't see a lot of American prisoners set to work in factories. The factories, anyway, have often moved to China, where the Chinese use prisoner and slave labor in them. That is undoubtedly a "system of oppression," but "Critical Race Theory" enthusiasts never talk about it -- despite it's being a racial matter also, since the Chinese use their own oppressed ethnic minorities for it.

And while one might say that the "war on drugs" had its racial aspect, it was broadlly supported by black politicians. Maxine Watters accused the CIA of created the Crack epidemic in black neighborhoods -- although we didn't see any reckoning for that once Barack Obama became President and the guilty, presumably, could have been exposed and punished.

The next "system" Wells mentions is the "the military-industrial system." Even if politicians force the military to accept weapons systems that it doesn't want or need, just to create employment in a certain Congressional district, it is not clear how such a thing constitutes anything like a racial "system of oppression." Perhaps Wells is thinking that racial minorities are over-represented in the military, who are recruited to fight imperialistic wars. However, since the military is all voluntary, the argument can only be that they are forced into the militry by lack of economic opportunity. Unfortunately, minority employment surged under Donald Trump, who also wanted to withdraw from foreign wars in Afghanistan and Syria.

Curiously, the Left and the "deep state" resisted Trump's efforts at military withdrawl, even to the point of ranking officers ignoring and sabotaging orders for troops to be withdrawn from Syria. The anti-Trump media was curiously complacent about this. Perhaps Mr. Wells should ask them why they were protecting the "military-industrial system of oppression."

Then the Chinese Corona Virus allowed enlightened governors to lock down businesses and prohibit people from making a living. Unemployment surged. Suddenly, the economic advantages created by Trump evaporated. Then there were riots, which also, coincidentally, targeted small businesses.

So we might be wondering what Caleb Wells was talking about. Of course, he was talking about capitalism, whose destruction is more overtly advocated by more honest advocates of Critical Race Theory. Indeed, if you can, by fiat, close businesses and prohibit people from working, that is a very good start on destroying capitalism. That it also means the destruction of all productive economic life doesn't matter. The modern Marxist isn't worried about the actual production of goods anymore. Government can just print money (called "modern monetary theory," MMT, or "Magic Money Tree"), and then everyone employed by government can get paid and buy their Chinese manufactured goods. From Amazon.com. That makes Jeff Bezos richer; and he then tells the newspaper he owns, the Washington Post, to say that this is good. For some reason, Caleb Wells doesn't mention the "media-industrial" system.

Racism isn't going to be fixed by me going down to a kid right here, and saying, ‘hey buddy,’ you really need to be nicer to that kid over there even though they look a little bit different than you. We can dismantle racism by dismantling systems of oppression, not by being nice to people.

Thus, we see from Caleb Wells that "racism" isn't about personal attitudes or beliefs at all. It is about the "systems." But the only "system" he gives us any clarity about is the system of locking up criminals. "Dismantling" that system means unleashing crime on the American people, which quite literally does effect women and minorites more than comfortable bureaucrats sitting at their computers in suburban Virginia or Maryland.

When you don't want to teach about how these systems were designed to oppress people, you're taking the side of the oppressor and being racist.

Again we get the sort of un-Marxist "intentional fallacy" of the "designed" systems. Nor was it very clear how the "prison-industrial" or "military-industrial" systems involved racial oppression. I have already noted how this doesn't work with the military, but we should also recognize the argument that criminal justice is racist just because it involves a greater percentage of racial minorities than white (or Asian) people. Unfortunately, crime is often a cultural, not a racial, phenomenon. Releasing, say, black criminals because they are victims of "oppression" just means that the number of black and minority (and Asian) victims increases. This is why "Black Lives," in general, do not matter to the Marxist activists of the corrupt organization called "Black Lives Matter."

We can dismantle racism by dismantling systems of oppression, not by being nice to people.

Perhaps this means that Caleb Wells doesn't need to be "nice to people." The street criminals, the Antifa rioters, and the campus thugs of political correctness certainly are not. But his treatment never did address how his "systems" are actually "racist." We can try and supply the backstory, but Wells actually doesn't do that. And in supplying the backstory, we must ultimately infer that the "laws" to which he objects include things like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, property rights, self-defense, etc. More open and honest advocates get into that.

But we do know from some staffers of Bernie Sanders that concentration camps may be needed for "reeducation." And Asatar Bair, a self-identified "communist," and an economics professor at Riverside City College in California, says that Josef Stalin was, "at once a very successful revolutionary, a great contributor to Marxist theory, and said to be a great listener and collaborator during discussions." I love that. A "great listener" right up until he ordered you shot, or shipped off to Bernie Sanders' GULAG. This is American "education" today.

I don't know if Caleb Wells wants concentration camps or monuments to Josef Stalin, but we can detect areas where he is ignorant and foolish, and where he has skipped over some issues that needed explaining. His explanations, like many of those on the Left, are dissimulating.

One thing that Wells doesn't get into is the racist theory of "whiteness." We don't get any explanation from him, for instance, why getting the correct answer in mathematics is "white supremacy." But I do have a review here of the racism of the movie Snow White, according to Maria Tatar, an actual professor at Harvard University.

Return to Text

Anti-American Americans, Note 4

When 2008 Republican Presidential nominee John McCain appeared on "The View," a morning television talk show on the ABC network, and said that he wanted judges to rule according to the "original intent" of the Constitution, host Whoopi Goldberg asked if this meant that she would be returned to slavery. McCain hardly knew how to answer such a strange question -- stated as though the Constitution had created or required the existence of slavery, or the slavery specifically of Africans. Indeed, slavery was already enough of an embarrassment to many participants in the writing of the Constitution that the word "slavery" was deliberately kept out of it. One wonders what the basis of Golberg's remark was.

Actually, what Goldberg had in mind may have been the "three fifths" rule for determining apportionment in the House of Representatives, as mentioned in Ariticle I Section 2. After mentioning free persons, those "bound to Service for a Term," and Indians (who were excluded from the Census), the text says that "three fifths of all other Persons" will be counted. Thus, "all other Persons" would be those neither free, nor bound to service for a term, nor Indians. That only leaves the "non-free" slaves. This rule is often cited as meaning that the Constitution regarded slaves as not fully human, providing more evidence of racism and evil on the part of America. Unfortunately, it only provides evidence of the ignorance and anti-American animus of those promoting such an interpretation.

One need only ask how slave owners wanted slaves counted for apportionment. Although slave owners would certainly have been the ones to regard slaves as less than human, it was in their self-interest to have slaves counted as full persons, since this would then give Slave States greater representation and power in Congress. Anyone opposed to slavery didn't want slaves counted for apportionment at all, since that would reduce the power of the Slave States. The three fifths rule was a compromise. It had nothing to do with whether slaves were fully human. It simply reflected the political fight over the power of the Slave States. The result was, as the North grew faster than the South, the House of Representatives was soon dominated by the Free States. The South focused its political efforts on retaining an equal number of States in the Senate. One of the causes of the Civil War was that, beginning with California in 1850, only Free States were admitted to the Union. The balance of Slave and Free States was upset in the Senate, and there was no prospect that any new Slave State would ever be admitted to the Union. The South knew it had a losing cause and, when Lincoln was elected in 1860, chose Secession. Anyone who does not acknowledge this political dynamic is simply looking for a pretext to hate America.

Return to Text