Why I Am NOT A Democrat-11: Modern Democrat Racism!

   In the last couple of tidbits, I debunked the myth that Democrats and Republicans switched parties. This is necessary because Democrats use this myth to deny their own racism while simultaneously accusing Republicans of racism. As a matter of fact, if you listen to Democrats speak, the only tactic they use is to name-call Republicans: “Racists”! What is most tragic is that so many Blacks have swallowed this lie—and it is the primary reason that a large percentage of Blacks still support the Democrat Party!!
   How do Democrats respond to my accusations of their past racism? They often respond with a question: “But…how are Democrats racist today?” Of course, this very question is a smoke-screen to remove the spotlight from their voluminous historic racism!
   However, let’s take a shot at answering this disingenuous question anyway. So, what is my take on Democrat racism today? I answer with the following two points:
1.
   Sociologist Kenneth Stamp cites a list of five ways the typical ‘Slave Plantation’ of the antebellum South is similar to today’s contemporary inner city Black ghettoes. Stamp’s list is important because the inner cities of America are primarily run by Democrats. In other words, if Stamp’s list is true, we should find some of the same things in today’s Democrat-run cities as we found on the Democrat-run Southern Plantations before Reconstruction (1866-1876).
   Stamp cites five areas of similarities:
            i.Housing
ii.Family
iii.Violence
iv.Provision
v.Nihilism
 
i.Housing. In general, on plantations, slaves lived in shanties which were one-room dilapidated shacks with dirt floors, with or without windows. Many slaves and slave families slept
head-to-foot in those shanties using only hay as bedding separating them from the cold ground.
   Similarly, most of America’s inner cities are governed by Democrats, and even more tragically Black Democrats. Of course, Democrat Socialist policies have resulted in contemporary inner cities being filled with dilapidated public housing project high-rise apartments such as in Chicago’s Cabrini Green, the Robert Taylor, or Ida B. Wells homes. That’s in addition to the many substandard broken-down homes which are often without consistent running water, heat, or electricity.
ii.Family. The slave families were often broken-up as either children or parents were sold-off for any reason. In contrast, Black Washington Post writer Joy Jones quotes Black historian Eugene Genovese in ‘Roll, Jordan, Roll’ in her piece ‘Marriage is for White People’*:
"A slave in Georgia prevailed on his master to sell him to Jamaica so that he could find his wife, despite warnings that his chances of finding her on so large an island were remote. . . . Another slave in Virginia chopped his left hand off with a hatchet to prevent being sold away from his son."
In the very next sentence, Jones makes a most startling statement:
“I was stunned to learn that a black child was more likely to grow up living with both parents during slavery days than he or she is today, according to sociologist Andrew J. Cherlin.”
  Tragically, this statement is not so startling when we realize that 73% of Black children are born out of wedlock.
iii.Violence. With the beatings and whippings that regularly occurred on slave plantations, it is obvious that violence was a norm. Yet, the violence of the Black inner cities is in some ways worse, when considering the nearly daily assaults, shootings, and murders perpetrated by Black gangs on other Blacks! 
iv.Provision.  
On the slave plantations, many times the slave owner provided for their slaves. Complete and total provision by their owners had to often occur because of the long hours worked by slaves. For example, Fredrick Douglas declared, “Master Thomas told me, If I would be happy, I must lay out no plans for the future. He said…he would take care of me…and taught me to depend solely upon him for happiness.”
   Similarly, with the Socialist policies of the Democrat party, such as ‘Equity’, which means equal outcomes; under their rule, the government has replaced God as the provider for Black people.
v.Nihilism. Dictionary.com defines nihilism: “an extreme form of skepticism; the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth; nothingness or nonexistence.” The phrase ‘chattel slavery’ means generational slavery. Therefore, seeing themselves locked into slavery like their ancestors, and then extending beyond their children going forward, an American slave often had no foreseeable hope of freedom!
   If there was a glimmer of hope at all, it was often a hope for death. So too, in contemporary Black ghettoes, there is sheer established hopelessness and inevitability over one’s present circumstances. Therefore, the same historic nihilism that existed in slavery past often still exists in today’s Democrat-run cities.
2.
My second point is Liberal Racism. There are four primary types of racism in contemporary America: Anti-semitism; White racism; Black racism; and Liberal Racism; however, this does not mean racism does not apply to any other groups. On the contrary, because racism is a sin of pride it can be committed by any person or group(Jms2:1,9).
   While the dictionary.com definition uses other words, it agrees with the Biblical definition declaring a racist as one who believes one race is either superior or inferior to another race based on skin color. It is important to note that the traditional view of racism does not require hatred—just racial discrimination! However, because racial discrimination is a sin of pride, it organically devolves into hatred; for sin leads to sin, ultimately ending with death/murder and destruction (Rom6:23; 1Jn3:15).
   So, Black Racism agrees with the traditional dictionary.com definition, for example, Black Muslims, Black Panthers, Black Israelites, and Black Nationalists, etc. Moreover, White Racism also agrees with the dictionary definition, for example, the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Skin Heads, etc. In short however, Liberal Racism intentionally complicates and confuses the real definition of racism to make itself palatable to the masses. For example, Liberal Racism has three faces, all relative to a particular situation. First, Liberal Racism rejects Black Racism, declaring Blacks cannot be racist because they are a minority group without power—and therefore cannot be oppressors. Second, Liberal Racism accepts the traditional dictionary.com definition of White racism—but ONLY when it benefits an agenda. And third, Liberal Racism redefines White racism to mean Whiteness (White skin color), in spite of the Whiteness of its adherents; while simultaneously professing a pseudo-empathy for Blacks because Blacks are oppressed---all done in order to either gain or retain political power.
   Because Democrats are liberal, nearly all have adopted Liberal Racism or parts thereof. For this reason, Democrats can hide their own racism by simply applying the ‘relativism’ of Liberal Racism!!! In other words, when they are called-out for racism, they simply change to another of the three faces; and then another of the three faces, etc.,---in order to justify themselves.
   Using the above definition of Liberal Racism, you will find expressions of it in the news almost daily. Allow me two quick examples that immediately come to mind.
1.‘White Privilege’. How can it be rational for White people to call-out other White people for their White Privilege? If White people have White Privilege due to their Whiteness—and Whiteness equals racism; and because the current American culture cancels White racists--then all Whites should be cancelled for their White Privilege…especially those Whites who accuse other Whites of White Privilege!!!
   How do liberals maneuver around this unresolvable dilemma? They simply declare, Whites must “acknowledge” their White privilege! However, acknowledging White privilege does not change the Whiteness of one’s skin color—because Whites still remain White after acknowledging their White Privilege! Therefore, using their own logic ‘Whiteness equals racism’, they must still retain their racism—because they remain White regardless of what words proceed from their mouths!!!
  How do liberals maneuver around this second unresolvable dilemma if it is true that Whiteness equals racism then White people still have their racism because they are White regardless of acknowledging their privilege? They simply declare: “by using the term White privilege, we don’t mean skin color, we mean “White systems”. They declare American systems presently  favor White people and therefore give Whites privilege over Blacks.
    First, the response: “American systems favor Whites” is simply a poor attempt to justify themselves when they ‘get caught’ in the irrational conclusions of their own liberal racism. How? They originally declared that ‘acknowledging’ White privilege is the way to rid oneself of White privilege. However, once they are ‘caught’ in the untenable position that: “acknowledging White privilege rids Whites of White privilege”--when those declaring this position are themselves White---they must immediately find a way out of such an irrational position…so they declare: “I really meant White systems. I did not mean White skin color.”
   The problem with the “American systems favor White people” conclusion is that first, a system cannot favor a skin color, only a person directing a system can favor one person over another. However, the main problem with “American systems favor White people” is that Blacks have prospered under the current American system (Capitalism, a.k.a. ‘free markets’) greater than any Blacks, not only in the world, but in the history of the world! Therefore, how can it be rational to declare the American system favors Whites when Blacks use it and prosper?
  Moreover, the end purpose of using the myth: “American systems favor White people” is
to replace Capitalism (‘free markets’) which liberals consider to be a racist ‘system’…with Socialism! In other words, Liberal racism has an ultimate agenda.
 
2.Nick Sandman, which is a teenager from Covington Catholic School, was nationally defamed for literally ‘standing and not moving’!  A Native American named Nathan Phillips walked up to Nick while he was waiting for a bus after attending a Pro-Life rally in Washington D.C. As the Indian beat a drum in his face, liberal America declared that Nick committed a “facecrime”. What is a “facecrime”?** Liberals simply invented it as part of redefining White racism to mean whatever they desire for a particular moment, in order to convict a White person of White Supremacy!!
 
These are just two examples of Liberal Racism!
 
*https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2006/03/26/marriage-is-for-white-people/095b1136-1440-4380-ac23-64beeeac3df4/
**By the way, Nick has won tens of millions of dollars in lawsuits!!!
 
Quotebit
“Every man is entitled to be valued by his best moments.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson