Found this amazing book review in the fourth issue of National Review (1957), “Integration is Communisation” by Richard M Weaver—he saw gay race communism’s for what it was, from the very beginning.
Thread 🧵
“The Supreme Court's extraordinary dictate to the public schools promises to keep race relations inflamed for an indefinite period. It is therefore to be expected that there will be a continuing spate of books from "liberal" sources, filled with self-righteousness and preaching the funeral of what is pejoratively called "discrimination."
“In his discussion of race relations in South Africa, he notes that Communism is there being progressively redefined in racial terms. That is to say, Communism is coming to be identified in racial integration.”
“The Communist attitude toward race stems from Communism's positivistic representation of man, which has always had as one of its cardinal tenets the dogma that there are no real differences between people except economic differences.”
“Remove the economic differences and all the others -racial, cultural, social, and moral. disappear. Thus the collectivizing of the economy can be depended on to obliterate the various differences that keep people from being "socialized."”
“…the Communist tactic most aggressively used in this country now is the one hinted at by Mr. Kuper--the approach through the idea of "racial collectivism."
“This phase of the levelling or obliterating process can now be presented with a great deal of moral unction. Moreover, it has the tactical advantage of undermining our historic constitutional structure.”
“The common people often perceive elemental things which the over-educated cannot see. That they have been right in identifying this as the opening tactic of Communism in this country now seems beyond question.”
“We can observe in a number of areas how "racial collectivism" is being used as a crowbar to pry loose rights over private property.“
[end]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
judges alone aren’t responsible for releasing those animals over and over, it’s a SYSTEMIC set of brain worms that affect every aspect of the Democrat machine, there’s an industrial, professional, vested set of interests committed to not imprisoning criminals
lawyers, social workers, community activists, community aid workers, charitable foundations, ngo employees, psychologists, journalists, etc etc.
that’s how you get this happening at scale and why it’s much stickier and more difficult to change than it was in the 80s and 90s
What that entire system works to do is subvert people’s perception of guilt and innocence, and then shift the locus of responsibiltity from the offender to diffusing it throughout society, so that everyone else pays a price, akin to crowd funding the burden of these scumbags.
🧵 Prior to illegal immigration becoming a pet issue for Democrats (with the assent of big labor unions), labor economists were much more honest & less political in their analysis of illegal immigration.
Only the politics, not the underlying market mechanisms, have changed.
“... there is no debate that the magnitude of illegal entry is substantial & that the direction of change is toward increasing numbers…
…the vast proportion of illegal aliens come to the US to work. The impact on the labor force of the nation, therefore, must be substantial.”
“. . .the magnitude of illegal entry greatly exceeds the number legal immigrants by perhaps as much as 10 to 1 . . . If the INS approximations are anywhere near being accurate, the US is in the midst of the largest inflow of immigrants that the nation has ever sustained.”
“…the Popes recognize the existence & the great power of a "lawful love of one's fatherland & a sentiment of due piety towards one's own nation", as a "great & noble sentiment, productive of many virtues".”
Rev. John J Wright, National Patriotism in Papal Teaching, (1912).
“…the national society therefore represents a true good for the individual, one which he utilizes for the "well-being of his soul", and which exercises its claims on his affections and his loyalties…”
“This, then, is the effect of national patriotism: that the individual ceases to consider himself merely ego, and becomes conscious of being one of a group…it is in the last analysis *as his* that the patriot loves his fatherland and his nation.”
Of all types of relational violence, emotional & psychological abuse are the most devastating. They do the most long term damage, are the most difficult to recover from, and unlike a black eye or broken arm, you don’t even have any objective evidence that any of it is even real.
Physical abuse is now relatively rare and universally condemned. We know what to look for. We have a social script, and a vocabulary to communicate with one another about it, tonnes of resources, and a million and one services to help alleviate that problem.
But the totalising, isolating, coercive nature of psychological & emotional abuse remains almost entirely unspoken. Women are perpetrators as often or more than men & they also weaponise gendered assumptions to play the victim & mobilise legal/other systems in tyrannical manner.
A “micro aggression” is a term for the constant psychological abrasions experienced by a narcissist in the presence of any person who is effectively individuated from them & refuses to pander to them, yield to them, mirror their emotions or become hostage to their manipulations.
Ie. if you have strong boundaries & don’t let your existence become subsumed to their control, the narc can’t experience you as extension of themselves, any reminder of you—outside their control—is grating. The only way they can relate is by NOT actually relating to you AS you.
This is why they get so triggered by disagreeable and honest people by the way. Because they are individuated from the narcissist and refuse to submit to their delusional worldview, and therefore serve as a constant existential threat to the narcissists perspective/ego.