Thread by @cvaldary

It has just dawned on me that the @womensmarch and @TamikaDMallory's inability to denounce Farrakhan is a logical conclusion of the religion that is Intersectionality. Ladies and Gentlemen, a thread:

Its been noted by many that intersectionality is a religion that contains certain aspects of Catholicism, namely St. Augustine's concept of original sin, which in this case = privilege; repentance - which means admitting you're privileged; & conversion - becoming "woke."

The religion of intersectionality has a hierarchic virtue system where those who are allegedly most oppressed are deemed the most virtuous and those who belong to groups that have historically been oppressors are deemed sinners and in need of repentance.

Now ironically, this system is reallllllly prejudicial. People are literally prejudged according to immutable characteristics like skin color or gender. If you're a white cis-male you're the worst, if you're a black lesbian woman you're the best.

As an analogy, it's good to think of those episodes of @GameOfThrones where Cersi Lannister's reign was taken over by the High Sparrow. Intersectionalists = The High Sparrow. While it's true that Cersi was crazy we know that the High Sparrow was equally cruel, insane, & horrid.

And the High Sparrow has this facade of being pure and meek and uninterested in power but he's actually ruthless, machiavellian, and power-obsessed. So too are intersectionalists. They often claim to want to destroy power structures but actually just want power for themselves.

In a sense, the Jewish community represents a kind of proof that intersectionality -- the religion whereby practitioners engage in the prejudicial reducing the human experience to skin color, gender, or ethnic make up -- is untenable as a way of creating a flourishing society.

As it turns out you can be personally successful and still come from a historically oppressed community. Or vice versa. Welcome to the human condition - it's complex and multifaceted and deeper than the superficial ways in which intersectionalists would have us believe.

Now what does this have to do with @TamikaDMallory, @lsarsour, @womensmarch and @LouisFarrakhan? We'll have to do a deep dive into Louis Farrakhan's writings for the answer.

Note the obsession w/ power

"I believe that for the small numbers of Jewish people in the United States, they exercise a tremendous amount of influence on the affairs of government &black people will never be free in this country until they are free of that kind of control ..."

Note the belief in white people having original sin. This from the @splcenter

He believes that "Yacub, a renegade black 'scientist,' created whites 6,600 years ago as an inherently evil and ungodly people — 'blue-eyed devils.'"

Reread that. Now again.

Thats right, Farrakhan LITERALLY BELIEVES that white people are blue-eyed devils who are not fully evolved. He LITERALLY BELIEVES that white people are inherently deceitful and murderous and as such they are banned from the NOI.

But whats even crazier than this racism is that it is eerily oh-so-close to the default position that many intersectionalists take when it comes to white people: namely that they have some sort of original sin that inherently comes with being white and for which one must atone.

Let me reiterate; Farrakhan's anti-semitism is NOT, as some have argued, a product of white-supremacy. Farrakhan literally believes that black people were created by God and that white people are inferior beings created by a mad scientist.

This is of course crazy, guys. This is so so crazy. But it also rhymes with intersectionalist theory. The only difference is that one is overtly religious while the other is not. One uses theological language, the other uses political language. But they're the same thing.

Thus Farrakhan claims that white people are inferior and @lsarsour tells a white person who asks her a question that he has no right to do so because he's a "white boy."

It's the same thing.

The Jewish community inevitably becomes trapped in such a worldview. Like most rabid power-hungry racists, Farrakhan sets his sights on one of the most historically oppressed communities in world history, a community historically oppressed for *not* being white.

But remember, intersectionality is a hierarchy. And all must bow on it's altar.

@TamikaDMallory , @lsarsour, & the leaders @womensmarch cant condemn Farrakhan.They BELIEVE in too many of the basic principles he believes in. His assessment of power IS INTERSECTIONAL THOUGHT.

One wonders what exactly @TamikaDMallory feels the need to be loyal to? Is it Farrakhan's belief that white people really are inferior beings made by a mad scientist? I wonder.

What's incredibly bizarre and the ultimate tragic irony is the fact that some white supremacists have expressed loyalty to Louis Farrakhan, the same warm feeling that @TamikaDMallory feels for him.

Literal members of the KKK have expressed loyalty to Louis Farrakhan, the same warm feeling that @TamikaDMallory, @lsarsour, and @msladyjustice1 feel for him. nytimes.com/1985/10/12/us/…

I'll end by reiterating what I stated earlier: This is intersectionality. The difference is that one is overtly religious while the other is not. One uses theological language, the other uses political language. But they're saying the exact same thing about ethnicity and power.

Louis Farrakhan believes in a grand meta narrative that claims white people have an original sin and were created by a mad scientist and are un-evolved. Intersectional theory claims white people suffer from the original sin of being privileged and must atone for it.

Shame.

*of the