“…aside from those rare, stubborn, historical workhorse activists who step ‘out’ from the pack, whites in general cannot be trusted to lead or solely spearhead a Civil Rights Movement.”
Trouble In Black Paradise Chapter 17: Black Lesbians And Gays Rock The Frontlines Of Historic Civil Rights Battles, page416.
Greetings charged-up readers!
Troubles in Black Paradise smolder as American voters clearly chose to “socially, ethically and mentally” regress.
News pundits trying to appear neutral promote a peculiar assumption about the “working classes” who actually elected “Not My President.” An embryonic cabinet’s scandalous investigations, conflicts of interest and policy debacles stream nonstop—as opponents predicted.
Commentary paints supporters as innocent struggling citizens, holding their noses choosing one of two political undesirables; simply “hopefuls” praying he’ll both represent and vastly improve lives.
I say it’s far more insidious—even nefarious:
They’re not just sideline “hopefuls,” they overwhelmingly are “him”—no matter how media wishes to convince us of its own objectivity—coating revelers in a cloak of innocence.
The “Deflector In Chief” disgracefully flaunting depravity swiftly jolted exceptionally wise advice my parents stressed eons ago: when someone persists—telling and brazenly showing you who (and what) they are—believe them!
Oddly this advice perplexes basic Americans: it disturbs genteel “benefit-of-the-doubt” positions—a thing seriously coming into play viewing the character of our “Deflector’s” electorate. And make no mistake—“character” is definitely what this is all about. Three character cases give a good look at the standouts in his base.
We know “Not My President’s” supporters are overwhelmingly white—a central fact. Another is that for now those “classified” as white make up America’s ethnic majority. And character being profoundly central here is what exposes the crux—added many underlying factors: these whites also are self declared proud “Christians.”
“Characteristics” grabbed mountains of flagrant white supremacists dancing with gut splitting thrill for his campaign—avowed Christians they zoomed to his camp like flies to a carcass. Bigotry smells (with a vengeance) a rotten climate—one so favorable to actually celebrating the subordination of “outsiders”—where policies outright return white religious privilege. And today’s air arguably is like no other since governing segregationists abandoned Johnson’s democrats in droves for the extremist Goldwater—after Kennedy’s murder.
Racist politic stompers getting a supercharge injection—drooling over “Deflector’s” candidacy like no other in recent years—is huge and can’t be brushed aside.
Then there’s case two:
That mishmash of women, people of color and LGBTQ “others” (those supposedly not republicans) staunchly backing “Deflector”—they truly aren’t blind. No one missed brazen white bigotry high stepping back out of the dastardly shadows—flinging off that cloak of false transformation with glee. These so-called “underdog others” purposefully ignored they were literally in the crosshairs of endless moral assaults—right beside non Christian “others”—and elected “him” anyway. None held their noses.
Where CNN and the like continue marketing neutrality we see clear charades: a populace’s implied blind hopeful innocence particularly can’t be made to fit case two’s “others”—their traitorousness to human decency really bringing no shock to seasoned reformers (while of course inconceivable to many).
Irony now says a thing about case three:
So-called white voter naiveté (if genuine innocence can be found) actually is far more troubling—there’s definitely no valid pass for anyone putting a monster into place—an indication that in all conceivable cases such supporters are the exact same monster.
Now, full circle back to that critical parental advice:
Wisdom regarding “character” does disturb American “wait-and-see” morals, so I must be a dead on realist about what our legacy persistently tells—and brazenly shows “me”; especially given the gutbucket lowdown on exactly who and precisely what practicalities genuine reformers are up against.
Yes, harmonious national infrastructure is declared the goal of this country. But pundits throw up a PR smokescreen, boasting (in modern times) that human diversity and revolutionized constitutional principles make us the “world’s greatest”—they laud our constitution like a magical equality wand from god.
Broadcasters do bark like ringleaders to proudly itemize tyranny—only if its elsewhere. Powers that kill democracy in so-called “lesser” nations: governments, militaries, business class, police and economic privilege, etc… our Bill of Rights being the brag item—pushing the notion we are the shining example of bolstering everyone’s protections.
Then, that strategic key: founding rulers did structure the means to “update” our constitution (ironically enabling assaulted underdogs with strengthening civic protections—against those rulers themselves). This had unprecedented edicts hitting Western lives—in theory leveling out decision making on monopolized playing fields. As in Europe’s monarch system “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” for America’s poor was a pipedream—previously unheard of.
So, does U.S. “aristocracy” really support equality?
Public school administrators convincingly quote governors telling students “yes”—with this popular phrase:
“…that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from this earth”; closing words in Lincoln’s 1863 Gettysburg Address—hoping to retie shattered kinship among war torn “white America.”
But Lincoln warned whites of a bitter pill: that Blacks and outsider “others” (including women) are now also to be identified as “the people,” integrated officially—of course if those “others” choose to fight for it!
Interestingly Daniel Webster in 1830 originally evoked the phrase:
“It is, sir, the people’s government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people. The people of the United States have declared that this constitution shall be the supreme law.” Northern Senator Webster said this debating Southern Senator Robert Young Hayne to refute the Foote Resolution—Southerners battled the feds over states rights related to land expansion (including slavery’s expansion out West).
But towering white power drove home rooted veracity as a stern reminder. Illinois Senator Stephen A. Douglas debating Lincoln in 1858 haughtily stated:
“In my opinion this government of ours is founded on the white basis. It was made by the white man, for the benefit of the white man, to be administered by white men, in such a manner as they should determine.”
By 1928 white journalist Christopher Morley ridiculed the “Average Joe’s” extreme rejection of intellectual growth—astutely he spoke out:
“America is still a government of the naïve, for the naïve and by the naïve. He who does not know this, nor relish it, has no inkling of the nature of his country.”
Morley was a fellow realist. Founding fathers had dangled the morsel of “shared equality” adding upgradable rights—but made a thing clear: only aristocracy was thought fit to both govern and make policy decisions.
Thus the “ah-ha” moment of the ages struck America’s rich!
The world’s newest independent aristocrats got their dream opportunity of a lifetime! Planners’ orchestrated the world’s newest “test tube society”—flooding it with the perfect ingredient to morally kill public defiance against corrupt authority: “radicalized” Christianity.
Of course Europe’s early monarch thugs swiftly “radicalized” Christianity—they hijacked mystic humanitarian founder Joshua (Judaism’s most famous rabbi—later called “Christ” by Greeks); his original “socialist egalitarian” intent immediately expunged.
So America’s “test tube” became a 500 year “pressure cooker,” scrupulously managed by the latest administrative monsters; Puritanism’s distorted faith perfectly bolstered “radicalized” Christian theology—then gelled a ruthless hierarchy with icing on top: white supremacy.
U.S. governors discretely flip-flopped on democratic principles—instead, glorifying pompous kingly “god given” attitudes—and fraudulently stacked the “tube.” Revised religion rained shady characteristics upon all—doggedly enforced by the sword.
Joshua’s command to protect the meek, help the downtrodden and offer absolute hospitality to strangers was solidly curbed—Afro slavery, white indentured servitude and grinding down “outsiders” kept solidly intact. Blacks thus ground in at the bottom (future organized LGBTQ’s crunched in even lower) privilege’s foul frontline now guarded by poor whites—swallowing the illusion of holier-than-thou power.
Racist strong-arming—coupled with “radicalized” religion’s psychological validation—was the social marriage-from-hell; excellent to “manage”—not end social chaos. “Radicalization” methodically:
Kills empathy, hospitality and loyalty to integrity; blurs lines between truthfulness and flagrant fraud; keenly keeps masses distracted from launching legislative weapons against corruption; and destroys one’s allegiance toward protecting themselves, or “others”—especially as outsider underdogs.
Maybe worse: “radicalization” numbs the desire to “intellectually grow.”
Such is the light that three key “character case” groups electing “Not My President” must be seen in.
Our “pressure cooker” spilled out an absolute dog-eat-dog monster populace—desperately clinging to “radicalized” Christianity like a life raft. Mini “tubes” still roast in the greater “cooker” and represent every aspect of voting society: from white power club stompers at one end, to illogical, naïvely gullible hopefuls struggling at the other.
But then there’s the strategic “left,” including social spiritual “progressives”—like me.
Amazingly quite the political assortment—never imagining they’d ever toast together—held noses against “The Deflector” and joined Democrat’s camp. Atypical conservatives notwithstanding, the plethora of standard party backers—from the radical left to liberal moderates—also have a commonality:
All of us—including the “Social Enlightenment” spiritual movement—spilled right out of America’s same municipal “pressure cooker.”
To say chaos also pesters “the left” is an understatement. Aristocratic worship still tenaciously dictating Democrat “party interests” is the nastiest contender in clashing “coalition agendas”: infighting magnified by conflicting class interests makes resolve for unity impossible; undermining substantial reform action for the disenfranchised—even more seriously.
Electorate potential smolders. Burned-out on dominant “two-party” corruption a chasm of apathy overflows with nonparticipants—bringing me to a faulty juncture: “Average Joes” are still charged with critical intellectual decisions in utilizing our most powerful weapon—the “vote.”
Legitimate reformers last November watched millennia of unresolved civic toxicity boiling over our feet and cringed. Two insidious “founding” glitches screamed home to bear: no solid blanket equality decree was made constitutional, shielding underdog citizens—where “majority vote” rules.
And this: the president is not chosen by majority populace, but instead an Electoral College—of aristocrats.
A terrible “ah ha!” moment for the left:
Citizens fight a cruel, self-serving “majority” for inclusion protections (that should’ve been basic) while elites exploit a system they’ve always run; the poor stays hard pressed and distracted while managers charismatically siphon colossal parasitic wealth.
Oh! But standard pundits push us to ignore my parental advice and give “The Deflector” a chance!
Shaking a false transformation cloak over this throne anchors flip-flopped on hounding admin corruption: “Deflector” bombed Syria and Afghanistan while still deflecting refugees—it’s now called “presidential.”
The conundrum is major: far greater masses realize a majority populace tremendously lacking “social enlightenment”—intellectual growth still soundly rejected by “Average Joes”—ransacks their lives frighteningly deeper than believed.
Squeezing utopia from America’s infamous electoral “machine” always required supersonic “dreaming.” Voter majority trusting political chicanery—or held hostage to burnout—would 1. Become “enlightened” (a daunting task for self initiates—let alone reformers who wish to instill “enlightened perspective”); 2. Convince non evolved citizens that an enlightened “social position” is best; and 3. Actually become involved.
If possible, I know untold numbers of folks (devastated discovering relatives and loved-ones had actually voted for “The Deflector”) would promptly instill “wisdom” rather than toss friends under-the-bus—if possible that is. Others who do angrily “share” disgust (but deplore relatives still parading other ugly “radicalized” prejudices) would also rather not outcast kin—if imparted “wisdom” could prevail.
Burn-out pointedly argues that “enlightening effort” is a waste.
But its dismissal grows more deeply shadowed—mocking irony. Seeing untold numbers of traumatized folks jolted to “arise” might mean hope does scramble out of chasms—ready to shake off apathy—throwing a wrench in dismissive attitudes.
Even then, I ask where will hopeful’s go?—an agreeable question, rising from those deepening shadows. Gaping organizer vacancy is ominously unaddressed—and looms.
Here’s a thing: I’m an Elder that’s tread over 40 years of trenches, networking with and organizing many camps—coast-to-coast. “Purpose” says blueprint knowledge—tried and effective—cannot stay on a shelf.
And my “resource”—unlike novelty museums or a celebrity aristocracy’s—aims to fill gaping vacancies—not let them shut!