Search
  • stephen schecter

American orgy

American orgy

Out of the Hebrew history books

came my mother and her family,

from the plains of Cossack carnage

where horse and rider foamed with Jew blood.

My mother came with her parents

and the Jew blood came with them,

smearing the New World plains like protocols

and seeping into half-educated black-skinned ghettos

now on a rampage yet again,

cosseted by the gentleman’s agreement

of half-educated white-skinned

rich boys and girls,

the pussy whipped narodnaya volya

of twenty-first century America.

A white cop murdered a black man

and the country is held up to ransom,

everyone waiting for nightfall

to see the orgy start again,

all that pent-up sexual energy

splayed like shattered glass

by post-coital pornstar looters.

Black lives matter, the young yell to the night air,

but their signs herald death to the Jews,

while the elders take a knee

in pathetic solidarity.

The most important fact about the Black Lives Matter movement is that it is anti-Semitic. In its platform and in its actions it has denounced Israel as an apartheid and colonial state and lined up solidly behind the Palestinians, whose chief contribution to modern society has been the suicide bomber. Why is this important? It is important because the Palestinians’ rage against Israel and her supporters is justified and draped in its culture of victimhood. As a result, the Palestinians have done nothing over the more than a quarter century that has passed since the Oslo Accords were signed to build up a functional state and a society that is open, law-based, and democratic. Instead they have indoctrinated the people under their tyrannical control with a culture of Jew hatred, homicidal rage and resentment. Which tells us a lot about the kind of movement Black Lives Matter is, the way it regards black-skinned citizens in the United States, and the future it has in store for them and the rest of Americans should Black Lives Matter ever reach its goals. It also tells us a lot about the specious claims of this movement and the narrative about racism in America which it spouts and which so many white-skinned people are willing to endorse.

There are about 700,000 police officers in the United States. The overwhelming majority of them are not like the police officer who was charged with killing George Floyd. They are not even like the police officers who stood by and did nothing to stop it. But it is true that there are some rotten apples and they should be weeded out. No young black-skinned person should spend his or her life in fear of the police. No black-skinned adult should be pulled over when driving or walking because a police officer has it in for people with that color of skin. There are ways to put an end to this situation. Police forces all over the United States have been working to achieve precisely that. If America were truly a racist society, they would not be doing that.

If the concerns of the Black Lives Matter movement were to put an end to police discrimination against black-skinned Americans, then this could be achieved with hard work and serious reforms that are a lot more complicated than shouting slogans in a street and members of Congress taking a knee. But the aim of Black Lives Matter goes far beyond that. It aims at the dismantlement of America as a liberal, free-market, constitutional society under the false claim that America is rotten to the core, irredeemably racist and inegalitarian to boot. These assertions are historically and sociologically false and it is high time they were put under the microscope of serious analysis.

In the 1950s Jim Crow was still alive, segregation was rampant in the South, and the black-skinned Americans in the North were subject to discrimination of all sorts, even if was not legally enshrined and did not result in lynching. See Todd Haynes’ remake of Far From Heaven to get a glimpse of that period. Read James Baldwin’s Another Country. Or remember how the black ghettos in northern cities burned in the 1960s. People wondered if America would survive. Now fast forward to 2020. There is hardly an ad on tv that does not feature a black-skinned person or couple. Black-skinned athletes dominate so much of professional sports. Black rap music is played by white-skinned adolescents who have integrated its lyrics into their everyday language. When Kobe Bryant died all of America mourned. The outpouring of genuine grief was palpable and extended beyond the borders of the USA. In the entertainment industry black-skinned recipients of rewards launch into tirades against what they claim to be systemic discrimination and the accused bodies apologize, their white-skinned colleagues chiming in with support. The black-skinned middle class is growing, which does not happen in a society which practises systemic discrimination that justifies designating the society as racist. Black-skinned Americans run for the presidential nomination of their parties. One even became President.

Protest, in short, has worked. The racism of the 1950s was dismantled. Sure, prejudice remains in certain pockets of the society. But America can no longer be regarded as a racist society, in large part because America is a democracy and democracy responds to demands from the people because that’s how democracy works. The bifurcation of power at the top where the government can always be replaced by the opposition at regularly held intervals called elections means that the people can always find a way to make their voices heard, for someone in the government or opposition will champion their cause, if only out of self-interest. Eisenhower sent in the troops to Little Rock. Kennedy came out in support of Martin Luther King. Johnson got Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act. Because the United States is not China, is not a totalitarian dictatorship but a democracy, it thrives on the logic of integration of more and more differences. That’s just the way it works, and it is good that it is so. In the end democracies are incompatible with racism. To suggest otherwise is to be wilfully blind and ignorant. Unfortunately, that is where our society is heading, led by academic elites who propagate these false narratives to the rising generation, which makes the young who wind up on the streets shouting slogans half-educated and intellectually lazy.

When you point out that America is not racist, those who insist that it is shift the argument to economic inequality. Black-skinned Americans are over-represented among the poor in our society, they claim, and cite that as proof of society’s racism, which they lump together with assertions of growing inequality in America. But sociological studies have shown that assertions of growing inequality depend on the measure of inequality. That there are many more millionaires in our society than before – and more ethnically diverse – and that the less than 1% of the income brackets take a hugely disproportionate part of the income pie does not indicate that there is more overall inequality in our society. Nor does it indicate that redistributing that wealth at the top would make a dent in overall inequality or in the position of the poorest of our citizens. Studies of what goes on for the vast majority of households and even studies of the poor indicate that over time there has been considerable improvement, though even there one has to be careful how one measures something like poverty. Is absolute poverty being measured or income inequality? Nonetheless, the profile of the poor has changed dramatically over the past half-century throughout modern democracies, including the United States. People poor in one year are no longer poor five years later. The poor are as mobile as most of the population. Seniors no longer constitute the bulk of the poor; in fact, they are the richest group of the population by age-category. Single parent households have now replaced them, but single parent households are the consequence of decisions taken by individuals in their personal relationships, not of government policy.

Which brings us to another important point of the argument. The still best study of inequality in the United States published in 1972 showed that when all is said and done, individual talent and luck accounted for 50% of individual socio-economic outcomes. The effect of societal factors and policies, such as parents’ socio-economic status or type of schooling received, did not explain too much. To the extent that it did, no one knew how. And for those who think they know how social policies could make a dent in these outcomes, there is little evidence to suggest that anyone knows what to do to achieve that. In retrospect these findings make sense when you realize that in a modern society that prizes individual freedom and functions on a logic that requires everyone to participate as much as possible in as many areas of social endeavor as possible, individual talent defined as widely as possible would be a prime factor in affecting the outcome of socio-economic success. Only a society that would place legal and institutional barriers to the exercise of those talents – such as a color bar in baseball – could negate that. In other words, only a racist society could make individual talent and luck factors that would not explain socio-economic success. Since America no longer has such barriers in place, the claim that racist America keeps black-skinned people down is manifestly untrue.

But the claim does have a function for the leadership of the black-skinned community in the United States. By encouraging their constituents to think of themselves as victims, by insisting that the past of slavery and racism is still alive in America, they keep their constituents from exercising their talents by giving them a stake in hopelessness. Seeing them as eternal victims, they absolve their constituents of any responsibility for their own situation. In short, they rob black-skinned people in America of their dignity, deny them any moral agency in their lives, and in complicity with the white-skinned progressive elites whom they have blackmailed with guilt, keep black-skinned Americans down, hostage to an ideology that is outworn and untrue. Little wonder that the leadership of the black-skinned community in the United States is so pro-Palestinian and anti-Semitic. So racist, to put it bluntly, whose first victims are their own people whom they zealously guard hostage. Reverend Wright. Al Sharpton. Louis Farrakhan. Jesse Jackson. The list goes on and on, down to the nameless and faceless ideologues of Black Lives Matter and Antifa, not to mention their more visible sycophantic echo chamber in the media and the Democratic Party.

The latter, as usual, call for meaningful reforms of all kinds in almost every area of social life – schools, health, jobs, income, to name a few – and the funding of programs and community organizations to carry them out, like the kind that started Barack Obama on his career to the Presidency, one imagines, and now promises some as yet unknown a similar stepping stone from the CHAZ free zone of Seattle taken over by the George Floyd protestors. The problem with this approach of course is that it addresses a problem that is not a problem. Modern society is the most egalitarian society in history. The vast majority of its members are better off than the populaces of any other society known to us; better than feudal aristocratic societies, better than fascist or communist totalitarian regimes, better than the tribal societies we like to glorify. Of course, there is income inequality in modern society, but that, like so much else, is distributed along a normal curve. No society can do away with individual inequalities. But modern society has seen to it that inequalities in wealth do not carry over into inequalities before the law, inequalities in dignity, inequalities in human worth. Indeed, every attempt to flatten the curve of inequalities in wealth in modern society has only produced disaster and murder on a terrifying scale. See Stalinist Russia and Maoist China for examples.

No, the real problem of modern society is how to integrate so many individual differences, of which individual talents are but one, into a cohesive whole that hangs together without people killing themselves over those differences – religious, sexual, aesthetic, to name a few. Spending money to make people more equal in income is tantamount to throwing your money away; all our money, really, since it comes out of public funds. Governments would do much better spending money to ensure that the conditions under which individuals can flourish are there for everyone: safe neighborhoods, nurturing families, happy childhoods and venues for the young to grow in so many diverse ways. Good policing, community centres, free internet, libraries virtual and otherwise, sports fields and leagues, supervised exchange programs, schools where kids learn, all come to mind, and more if people had imaginations and their heads screwed on right. But also if they understood what modern society does and does not do. Little wonder that in the absence of that, all those programs of the past fifty years designed to improve the socio-economic standing of black-skinned Americans, and not only them, have come to naught.

Of course, the clamor for more of such policies is good for the people who run them: the Congresspeople who devise them, their friends who draft them, the civil servants who supervise them, the businesses who supply them, the community organizers who staff them. There is a whole supply chain of income here that meshes well with the political and cultural elites who keep peddling this discourse that enables them to keep the black-skinned community in their pocket one way or another. There is no scam like the scam that runs on noble intentions and sentiments. For that too look at the experiments of Communist Russia and China in the past hundred years. The clamor for reforms that do not work also covers up other elements that keep a bad situation going. What about black-skinned community leaders speaking out about black on black crime? What about their speaking out about the notorious absence of fathers in black-skinned family homes? Instead of abolishing and defunding the police why not send them in massive numbers to patrol crime infested streets and have a zero tolerance for even petty crime? What about, indeed?

In the end, if the problem is America and if America is, as its denouncers claim, fundamentally racist, then there is no point in any reform at all, because the aim of the protests is not to improve people’s lives but to destroy the society. And so we come back to the affinity between Black Lives Matter and the Palestinians. For just as the protestors who have taken over the grief at George Floyd’s death have called for the end of America, so do the Palestinians call and work relentlessly for the destruction of Israel, hiding behind the libelous accusations that Israel is an illegal occupying power and an apartheid state. But to denounce Black Lives Matter and to call them out on their fundamental claims and aims is tantamount to calling out the Palestinian sympathizers. The pushback is swift and nasty, and those who do the pushback are quick to play the race card, accusing those who point out these painful truths as being racist. I have followed the Israeli situation for two decades now and have seen this all too often, and I see it now again in the recent protests that have spilled out far beyond the borders of the United States into the streets of cities across the democratic West.

In Canada the Prime Minister was silent when asked to comment on the protests in the United States, but a few days later he marched with protestors on Parliament Hill and took a knee with them. It was a photo opportunity as shameful as the one President Trump took holding up a Bible outside a Washington church, but even more sinister. In so doing the Canadian Prime Minister was endorsing the claim that America is racist. And indeed, a few days later he went on to say the same thing about Canada, accusing Canada of systemic racism, the very same Canada whose values of tolerance and diversity he has so often cited as defining who Canadians are. I ask: if a country is tolerant and respectful of diversity, how can it also be racist? And so I also ask: how can the leader of a modern functioning democracy repeat the slogan that is so manifestly a sociological lie? Perhaps he too is a product, and producer, of a half-baked education system. A former high school drama teacher, he could have quoted Shakespeare to remind people that just as people can smile all they want and yet be villains, so people can shout all they want and yet tell untruths. But Shakespeare is no longer persona grata in the curricula of academia, just as Winston Churchill seems no longer to be venerated in the streets of London where anti-racist protestors sought fit to deface his statue. Clearly, the western world has lost its mind, and soon it will lose its very soul, and along with it the freedom which is its bedrock and for which Churchill and all the valiant soldiers who fought the Nazis dedicated their lives.

Lest the reader think I exaggerate, he or she would do well to contemplate the sad case of Stockwell Day, a former parliamentarian in Canada and leader of a political party. On a television show of the publicly funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, he dared to suggest that Canada is not a racist country. He talked about his experience as a schoolboy when he was bullied and derided for wearing glasses and for the kind of work his father did. But, he said, he did not extrapolate from that to indict the whole country. People did not like his analogy, but there was more truth in it than he was credited for, as I have tried to point out in the preceding lines. The egregiously brutal behavior of some American police officers does not make America a racist country. The assertion is simply not tenable and to challenge it does not one a racist make. Poor Mr. Day was summarily cashiered from his position as a commentator on that program and subsequently forced to resign from the board of Telus, a major Canadian communications company, which claimed that Mr. Day’s views were not reflective of its values and beliefs. Clearly, people who exercise their right to free speech are made to pay a heavy price. The sorry thing about this whole incident was that Mr. Day’s comment about Canada’s not being a racist country is true. That he felt impelled to resign is reminiscent of the penalties imposed on dissidents during Mao’s Cultural Revolution. One should be grateful he was not thrown out of an office window. One should also wonder when that is coming to western countries.

Lest people think the latter sentence is also an exaggeration, let them ponder HBO’s decision to remove Gone With The Wind from its lineup. In his wonderful book called The Book of Laughter and Forgetting Kundera wrote about how the Soviets would simply airbrush former Communist Party leaders out of photographs once they were declared enemies of the people. Today in western democracies progressive cultural elites are doing the equivalent, shaming and ostracizing voices that dissent from their agenda and rewriting history to make sure that only their version informs the options that face us on questions great and small. The moral and intellectual collapse of our educated leaders in the face of the self-righteous onslaught on liberal values coming from the ranks of the poorly tutored and untutored young presage nothing but ill for the future. A similar combination of forces preceded the Russian Revolution by a half century, ushering in that disaster which resulted in the great famine and murder of at least twenty million people and a gangster society that continues to plague Russia today.

This is a virus that is sweeping the western world, as witnessed by the mass demonstrations picking up the themes of Black Lives Matter in countries that have never experienced the history of slavery and its fallout in America. In Europe, Australia and Canada the freeloading off this issue to launch a cruel and baseless attack on democracy plays directly into the hands of societies that would be more than happy to see their brand of dictatorship triumph. One has only to see the consequences of the coronavirus epidemic which the Chinese Communist regime has exported to the world and the way that regime has dealt with it internally, including its treatment of Africans living in China. With America shackled and her allies joining in the feeding frenzy, who will stand up for freedom?

90 views

Recent Posts

See All

Evening in America

I first met them on a sidewalk outside a friend’s house at the end of a party. She was somewhat drunk and he was comforting her. I could not remember where I had met her previously, but I had the dist

Zimbabwe at the Park Board

The City of Vancouver’s Park Board held consultations recently on a proposed by-law to permit people to camp overnight in public parks. Vancouver is notorious for the number of people living in the st

© 2020 shabbtai.com
 

  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon