"They’re Inhuman and They Don’t Need to Be Loved…" 5

This is a great bit of commentary from ATS contributor MRDA.

This is a particularly good comment:

I wonder: does Morrissey’s little outburst offer a snapshot of what could happen if the Left acknowledge that their favoured folk aren’t always as innocent, victimized and enlightened as they portray them? Would these universal uplifters react venomously, out of a sense of “betrayal”, upon staring reality straight in its pockmarked face? Does the type of of white Leftist I describe here assign bigotry to his breed in order to avoid acknowledging it in himself? Like the rector who yearns to take it up the rectum, does his socially-sanctioned superego shield a malignant Morrisseyan id, itching to smash the slanty, swarthy “subspecies” into submission?

This reminds me of what Tom Sunic observed about the former hard-line Communists in Yugoslavia who managed to somehow convert themselves into uber-capitalists overnight as the Communist meal ticket suddenly became invalid.  Sunic has said before that the liberal-multiculturalist elites would likely reinvent themselves as hard line racialists or nationalists if the multicultural system proved to be no longer viable. In other words, how many liberals would lose their pretentious humanitarian gloss and become fascists if the latter offered a better deal? To quote myself:

It should also be pointed out that the old-guard Marxists, even the Stalinists, only took their egalitarianism so far. Their professed aims were limited to the ostensible equality of wealth among the social classes and, in some instances, political equality of racial and ethnic groups. They did not nearly go so far as to attack the long list of “isms,” “archies” and “phobias” (for instance, “looksism,” “phallocracy” or “transphobia”) so reviled by today’s leftoids, nor did they typically advocate equality of looks, weight, ability, intelligence or even species (hence, the modern leftist infatuation with concepts ranging from “grade inflation” to virtual prohibition of so-called “fatty foods” to giving animals legal rights approximating those of humans). Nor did they advocate ending race and gender oppression by simply abolishing races and genders. Indeed, the contemporary leftist obsession with both race and health under the banner of multiculturalism and the therapeutic state calls to mind the other great totalitarian ideology of the twentieth century. One shudders to think what will happen when these elements gain control of a more fully developed genetic engineering technology and subsequently combine this with emerging surveillance technologies. An increasing popular concept in leftist academic circles is the notion of “whiteness” which, as might be expected, is typically used as a term of opprobrium. Indeed, one of the more extreme proponents of “whiteness” theory maintains a website whose masthead reads “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” To understand the implications of this slogan, one need only remove the term “whiteness” and replace it with “Jewishness.”

5 comments

  1. From RACE TRAITOR #16 – “The ‘Jewish’ population of Israel includes people from fifty countries, of different physical types, speaking different languages and practicing different religions (or no religion at all), defined as a single people based on the fiction that they, and only they, are descended from the Biblical Abraham. It is so patently false that only Zionists and Nazis even pretend to take it seriously.”

  2. The first time I ever saw the Race Traitor site with that slogan it reminded of a quote I had once heard from Tom Metzger: “Judaism is a conspiracy against all races.”

    Maybe I’m reading them wrong, but as I understand their ideology, the Race Traitor people are anti-Zionists who regard Zionism as a form of whiteness. So in their view, the Jewish-Zionists in Israel would be just another group of white assholes taking a dump on people of color like the Palestinians. I’ve known left-wing anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian activists, including some ethnic Jews, who had views similar to that.

  3. It’s always amusing, as Jim Goad pointed out, to see the pc leftist’s ideals clash with each other and also to see where their real loyalties lie when they are forced to choose. I recall an article either on this site, or linked from this site, back in 2008, I can’t remember where. The article was a liberal author, who was shedding the whole universal racial love thing and attacking the non-whites in California for not voting the right way on prop 8.

    I wonder if the whole white self-hatred thing is really part of a larger culture of masochism coupled with a glorification of victimhood that permeates leftism in general, unfortunately to an even greater degree among the radical elements, often in those cases to a degree of such absurdity that it would be almost impossible to parody.

  4. Doesn’t all this criticism assume that these leftists we speak of even *strive* for consistency? This is all about identifying with the good guys, not defining what it means to be a good guy. Even the people who can be thoughtful about the contradictions still want to be on the side of the people who can’t.

    The sad part, as I’ve pointed out before, is that you can’t really bring about change until you’ve allowed the people you’re asking to behave differently the safety to let down their guard and listen to you. Because the Progressive Left so often focuses on finding the enemy rather than understanding him, I suspect their humanism is mostly a sort of identity cum religion that’s more important to believe in and march alongside in some abstract, catch-phrase manner than to actually think about and work towards. The global culture to which they aspire is too often just global groupthink.

    It sucks for those of us who actually believe in many leftist tenets but increasingly find the Left has no patience for it.

  5. “Doesn’t all this criticism assume that these leftists we speak of even *strive* for consistency? This is all about identifying with the good guys, not defining what it means to be a good guy.”

    That’s one of Thomas Sowell’s criticisms of the Left. It’s all about moral masturbation, not genuine truth-seeking. I’d very much recommend his “Vision of the Anointed” on this question.

    “I suspect their humanism is mostly a sort of identity cum religion”

    Yes!

Leave a Reply to Jared Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s