Blame it on the monster you created while it’s eating you alive

cnelsen

Gold Member
Oct 11, 2016
4,317
497
160
Washington, DC
Still scratching their pointy heads over losing an election they were certain that history had preordained them to win, the Democrats are blaming everything except their own stupidity and arrogance.

The intersectional house of cards has fallen. Every maladjusted minoritarian mini-tyrant in the country is freaking the frick out that their ragged, patchwork coalition of misfits is crumbing before their eyes. From coast to coast, every HIV-positive mulatto one-armed transgender lesbian midget is suddenly worried that Trump and his supporters in the heartland will become “normalized.”

Huddled inside a rainbow-colored yet opaque bubble, it’s obvious that they have no idea what just hit them. Many overpaid and demonstrably clueless strategists seem to think that perchance they didn’t call people racists, sexists, homophobes, and Islamophobes enough. Maybe if they just verbally shat upon the stupid, uneducated, hateful, and soon-to-be-extinct white masses in flyover country who put Trump over the top, they could have shamed enough of these irredeemable rubes into voting for a party and an ideology that clearly hates their guts.

Not for a moment does it seem to have occurred to them that maybe it’s not so wise to play aggressively hostile identity politics when your designated opponent is still the demographic majority.

“Maybe it’s not so wise to play aggressively hostile identity politics when your designated opponent is still the demographic majority.”
Listen up, dimwits: When you encourage racial pride in all groups except whites, you aren’t exactly making a case against “racism.” If you have even a semblance of a spine, sooner or later you’ll hear this nonstop sneering condescension about how you were born with a stain on your soul and say, “Hey, fuck you. I’ve done nothing wrong, but you’re really starting to bother me.”

I suspect that for perhaps the majority of those who voted for Trump, it had nothing to do with the stupid, juvenile, leftist catchall excuse of “hatred.” If you really think extraordinarily complex social conflicts over power and resources can be explained by a dumb word such as “hatred,” I hate you.

Instead, a large swath of voters grew so tired of being actively hated, they struck back and said “enough.” They didn’t “vote against their interests,” as is so often patronizingly alleged; they voted against the condescending, scolding, sheltered creampuffs who try to dictate their interests to them.

Emboldened with a cultural power that had grown monolithic, the left egregiously overplayed their identity politics. While relentlessly depicting Trump as a “racist,” they would be incapable of pointing to ONE instance of Trump using the term “white people,” much less directly appealing to them as a voting bloc. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton and that hyperventilating putz Bernie Sanders were pandering to little brown boys in sombreros, fist-bumping black rappers, and openly appealing to nonwhite racial groups BY NAME.

Democrats and leftists—despite their loud public chest-thumping about being “anti-racist”—repeatedly demonstrated over the past eight years that they could never, not once, not for a second, stop thinking about race or shut the fuck up about it. Democrats are the ones who pounded home the point that race is important. They mention race 100 times for every time a Republican dares to utter a word about it.

In a piece called “Democrats, Not Trump, Racialize Our Politics,” Heather Mac Donald writes:

…[The] Democratic Party is now dominated by identity politics, which defines whites, particularly heterosexual males, as oppressors of every other population in the U.S. Why should the targets of such thinking embrace an ideology that scorns them?...They have created entire fields devoted to specializing in one’s own “identity,” so long as that identity is non-white, non-male, or non-heterosexual….When Clinton called half of Trump’s supporters “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it” who belonged in a “basket of deplorables,” she was speaking the language of the academy, now incorporated into the Democratic worldview.

In an article called “STOP HATING WHITE PEOPLE AND MAYBE THEY’LL VOTE FOR YOU,” Daniel Greenfield—whom I’ll mention is Jewish before anyone else beats me to it—writes:

Oddly enough the left’s culture war of hating white people has only made them more likely to vote for anyone other than the left. Funny how that works….Lefties like to believe that they lost because the voters who picked the other side are bad people. They’re deplorable racists and sexists. They’re haters. But maybe they just don’t like being hated….People won’t vote for you if you hate them….Progressives are too besotted with their imaginary victimhood…to grasp that they fought on the wrong side of a class war. And that they lost.

And for one fleeting moment, even The New York Times gets it right:

In recent years American liberalism has slipped into a kind of moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity….[Hillary Clinton] tended on the campaign trail to…slip into the rhetoric of diversity, calling out explicitly to African-American, Latino, L.G.B.T. and women voters at every stop. This was a strategic mistake. If you are going to mention groups in America, you had better mention all of them. If you don’t, those left out will notice and feel excluded.

Maybe if you hadn’t encouraged your lunatic fanatics to insist that white people should kill themselves, that white males are a cancer and must die, that whites should commit mass suicide over slavery, that whites should be exterminated, and that they are racist no matter what—maybe, just maybe they’d think you weren’t stuffed to the gills with bullshit when you lecture them about “hate.”

Their myopic obsession with anti-white identity politics created a new white identity politics from scratch. They preached identity for everyone except whites—and they apparently are so dim, they expected that to work out well. This is not the old, aggressive, continent-conquering “white racism” of yore—this is a new, defensive white identity created by the endless scapegoating and minority-obsessed myopia of the leftist elites. This is a monster that the left created, one that will eat it whole.

Blame it on yourselves, assholes. Oh, wait, I forgot—you’re incapable of doing that. Your entire platform is based on shirking personal responsibility. Instead, you can blame it on the monster you created while it’s eating you alive.

How the Left Strangled Itself With Identity Politics
 
They also attacked Christians who ventured into politics. Couldn't strand the idea of Christians voting their conscience. Well this time 88% of Evangelical Christians voted Trump...and stood back.
Now they get to see what it means
 
The two political parties are merely bickering factions of a ruling aristocracy, playing a very successful (thanks to the emotional reactionism inherent in american society) divide and conquer game. But for about half a century now, the societal wealth extraction has been utterly bipartisan. The american public sat on it's ass and watched it's economic, political, and media machine systems get handed off to concentrated corporate power. Nothing yet has happened that will alter that trajectory, no 1%er is come down to save you.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
The two political parties are merely bickering factions of a ruling aristocracy, playing a very successful (thanks to the emotional reactionism inherent in american society) divide and conquer game. But for about half a century now, the societal wealth extraction has been utterly bipartisan. The american public sat on it's ass and watched it's economic, political, and media machine systems get handed off to concentrated corporate power. Nothing yet has happened that will alter that trajectory, no 1%er is come down to save you.
Handed off? More like sneakily grabbed. But you are right about the divide and conquer angle. The New York Times and George Soros created #blacklivesmatter. Jews successfully pitting whites against blacks.

What's the deal with the New York Times on race?
 
The two political parties are merely bickering factions of a ruling aristocracy, playing a very successful (thanks to the emotional reactionism inherent in american society) divide and conquer game. But for about half a century now, the societal wealth extraction has been utterly bipartisan. The american public sat on it's ass and watched it's economic, political, and media machine systems get handed off to concentrated corporate power. Nothing yet has happened that will alter that trajectory, no 1%er is come down to save you.
Handed off? More like sneakily grabbed. But you are right about the divide and conquer angle. The New York Times and George Soros created #blacklivesmatter. Jews successfully pitting whites against blacks.

What's the deal with the New York Times on race?


You still have some distance to travel don't you.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
The two political parties are merely bickering factions of a ruling aristocracy, playing a very successful (thanks to the emotional reactionism inherent in american society) divide and conquer game. But for about half a century now, the societal wealth extraction has been utterly bipartisan. The american public sat on it's ass and watched it's economic, political, and media machine systems get handed off to concentrated corporate power. Nothing yet has happened that will alter that trajectory, no 1%er is come down to save you.
Handed off? More like sneakily grabbed. But you are right about the divide and conquer angle. The New York Times and George Soros created #blacklivesmatter. Jews successfully pitting whites against blacks.

What's the deal with the New York Times on race?


You still have some distance to travel don't you.
Not a response. I win.
 

Forum List

Back
Top