What Does 'Racial Socialism' Sound Like to You?

American Thinker ^ | February 19, 2010 | James Lewis

[neverdem]

The United States today has slipped toward race-based socialism: That's the true name for an overwhelming bias for one race above others, in employment, promotion, and educational opportunities. Our media are constantly stirring the witch's brew of racial grievances, constantly making black people feel aggrieved and white people feel accused. Our schools drive that lesson home with young and innocent kids in a totally ruthless way. Repeat that for twelve years of schooling and TV, and you have a brainwashed kid.

That is what European socialists have done with class envy for the last hundred years: whip up the poor against the middle and the rich. It's in their standard bag of tricks. The American Left has just added racial grievances to class anger and resentment, always feeding more and more power to the racial socialists to buy peace for the very grievances they have whipped up in the first place. The NAACP today practices racial socialism. So does Obama. "Racial Ssocialism" drives the Left's current assault on American values. That's why Jeremiah Wright is such a significant part of Obama's life. Wright specialized in whipping up racial anger for political purposes. Obama's career was powered by it.

Only 12.3 percent of Americans are black, and they cannot command a majority vote. It's therefore necessary to add gender socialism, because half the population are women. If enough women can be made to feel rage against normative America, along with blacks, Hispanics, and the poor, you've got majority control of the country. You can add the wackier Greens, the ones who fall for the global warming scam, the anti-nuclear scam, and all the other anti-scientific Luddites who vote Left. The Democrats control our major cities with a coalition of those whipped-up grievance groups. 

We are no longer a society run by talent, work, and opportunity. Like ancient Egypt and Sumer, we are a society where the ruling class exploits its productive workers by taxing their labor, talent, and ability to recognize and use new opportunities.

Barack H. Obama is the logical outcome of racial socialism. You can see it in his words and actions, and his very physical stance, all signaling his sense of superiority, the flip-side of feelings of inferiority he is reacting against. Obama's core support came from the Leftist alliance of grievance groups in spite of his total lack of relevant experience. Obama is objectively the least qualified person to be elected to the presidency. But the media could not say that, because it would have been non-P.C. to tell the truth.

Obama's election was a kind of guilt propitiation by the American people for the history of slavery. But that is bizarre. Living people are not responsible for what others did two hundred years ago. That is a racist idea -- it makes sense only if whites have Evil Genes -- just like traditional anti-Semitism and hatred for blacks as a race.

We are seeing the consequences right in front of our eyes today, as this administration demonstrates its incompetence and intellectual confusion about the most obvious problems we face -- the Islamist terror threat, for starters. 

The most famous version of racial socialism is you-know-who. The Nazis rose to power by whipping up racial resentment against the Jews, the Gypsies, and other "inferior" peoples: race-based national socialism. For the Nazis, the "oppressed" were the German people, das Volk, as a race. Racial socialism is routine in post-colonial regimes, like in the case of Robert Mugabe, who clings to power by scapegoating white Zimbabweans, people who also happen to run the farms that provide food for that country. Like Stalin and Kim Jong Il, Mugabe is exploiting racial divisions at the cost of starvation and poverty for his people.

That is also why Obama's Dreams from My Father is an important policy statement, whether Bill Ayers wrote it or not. Obama is a post-colonial socialist, as was his father -- a Kenyan who wanted revenge against white Britons who ran colonial Kenya. That is why as president, Obama bizarrely tries to diss the Brits -- both the Queen and socialist Prime Minister Gordon Brown -- while bowing low to autocrats like the king of Saudi Arabia. There is something very regressive about that. It is looking to the past, not the present or the future.

Post-colonial socialism has been a universal failure wherever it has been tried. Robert Mugabe is one in a long series of failures. In India, the big post-colonial socialist was Jawaharlal Nehru, and his Congress Party has now switched its economic policies to encourage free markets, having learned something from decades of economic failure. In China, a similar evolution has happened. In Africa the most successful regimes have rejected post-colonial revenge socialism.

But don't we owe black Americans something for the sins of slavery? Just like we owe women for the sins of sexism, and gays for the sins of heterosexuality?

The answer is no. Remedies for past injustices cannot be used to overthrow a society. Germany's forced reparations after World War I destroyed the economy and the middle class, thereby undermining France and the rest of Europe as well. The attempted "remedy" for past sins also created a nationalistic revenge movement, the Nazis, who committed aggression even bloodier than World War I. Revenge movements do not make for peace.

But that is precisely what Racial Socialism is all about. But a society based on racial compensation turns into a tyranny, just as a society based on racial superiority does. Real democracy allows individuals to overcome their circumstances. But you can't overcome your race, your gender, or, in some cases, your sexual preferences. America is therefore being driven relentlessly toward a European ruling class model based on inheritance and not talent, hard work, and opportunity.

Race-based socialism is not progressive, but radically regressive, going back to the clan-based ruling classes of the first city-states in human history, as in Sumer, Egypt, and the Indus Valley six thousand years ago. The Indian caste system arose as a racial layering of Indian society by different invading tribal groups. The Left is always pointing the finger at mainstream America for the sin of racism. But racial divide and conquer is precisely the deliberate strategy of the Left.

In Britain, Labour politicians have finally confessed that they has deliberately imported hundreds of thousands of Pakistani Muslims to serve as cheap wedge-voters against British whites, while constantly accusing normal, decent people of racism. Throughout Western societies, the Left has conducted a mean and cynical assault on the mainstream of society, constantly undermining normal people while laying claim to a higher morality.

When Saul Alinsky dedicated his Rules for Radicals to Lucifer, he wasn't kidding.

[Fred Nerks]

From the National Guardian
March 16, 1953

On Stalin
By W.E.B. DuBois

excerpt:

Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature. He was simple, calm and courageous. He seldom lost his poise; pondered his problems slowly, made his decisions clearly and firmly; never yielded to ostentation nor coyly refrained from holding his rightful place with dignity. He was the son of a serf but stood calmly before the great without hesitation or nerves. But also - and this was the highest proof of his greatness - he knew the common man, felt his problems, followed his fate.

Stalin was not a man of conventional learning; he was much more than that: he was a man who thought deeply, read understandingly and listened to wisdom, no matter whence it came. He was attacked and slandered as few men of power have been; yet he seldom lost his courtesy and balance; nor did he let attack drive him from his convictions nor induce him to surrender positions which he knew were correct. As one of the despised minorities of man, he first set Russia on the road to conquer race prejudice and make one nation out of its 140 groups without destroying their individuality.

His judgment of men was profound. He early saw through the flamboyance and exhibitionism of Trotsky, who fooled the world, and especially America. The whole ill-bred and insulting attitude of Liberals in the U.S. today began with our naive acceptance of Trotsky’s magnificent lying propaganda, which he carried around the world. Against it, Stalin stood like a rock and moved neither right nor left, as he continued to advance toward a real socialism instead of the sham Trotsky offered.

Three great decisions faced Stalin in power and he met them magnificently: first, the problem of the peasants, then the West European attack, and last the Second World War. The poor Russian peasant was the lowest victim of tsarism, capitalism and the Orthodox Church. He surrendered the Little White Father easily; he turned less readily but perceptibly from his ikons; but his kulaks clung tenaciously to capitalism and were near wrecking the revolution when Stalin risked a second revolution and drove out the rural bloodsuckers...

http://www.mltranslations.org/Miscellaneous/DuBoisJVS.htm

[TheThinker]

The thing is that white liberals continue to make whites the scapegoats for the problems that afflict the non-white population of the U.S. and the rest of the world.

This is used as an excuse to inject socialism into free societies in order to undermine them.

[TheThinker]

Marxism requires society ever be divided between two groups oppressor and oppressed, race happens to be the card they use in today’s world.

And the "oppressor" group is turned into the oppressed.

[mc5cents]

Jim Quinn just read this on the Quinn and Rose show. Excellent article.