Search Box

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

A strange silence from the Left

While the forces of political correctness pressured us to kowtow to Jenner's new identity, they have been strangely quiet about Rachel Dolezal. It's hard not to conclude that Dolezal's scam has raised a number of questions that the Left doesn't want raised.

First, how did Dolezal benefit from being perceived as black? What exactly are the benefits that she wanted for herself? Did she enjoy her new "victim" status? Did it help her get ahead? How so? And how could that possibly occur in a world of white privilege?

Second, what does it say about the Left that so many who are drawn to its ideology -- or, at least, who exploit its ideology for personal gain -- are sociopaths like Dolezal?

Third, given that the "hate crimes" Dolezal claimed were committed against her now appear to be fictitious, and given that so many "hate crimes" the media has chosen to focus on turned out to be not as initially advertised, is this simply not one more piece of evidence that the hate crime industry is more often than not based on lies?

And fourth, isn't a fraudulent white-on-black "hate crime" in fact an actual hate crime against whites?


Steven said...

Here is a prominent article in the Guardian about it. Heads up: Suzanne Moore, the writer, tends to be one of the saner voices at the guardian. I suppose that's why she is the one honestly tackling some of the issues you raised.

John Craig said...

Steven --
I tried that address, nothing came up.

Steven said...

I'll try again. It turns out that the guardian have covered this a lot so the silence you spoke of is not true of the British left. Here is the general page for Dolezal articles:

And here is the one I originally linked:

John Craig said...

Steven --
Thank you for that link, yes, Suzanne Moore nails it.

High Arka said...

I'm not so sure how she nailed it by calling race a "social construct." If race is a social construct, then Dolezal successfully socially-constructed herself, up until June 2015.

If race is a social construct, then how does that operate? Democratically? If we all get together and hold a referendum, and 51% of us vote that Dolezal is "white," does she then became white?

That's all very well and good, but what if 51% of us vote that she is "black"? (As we probably would've done based on her resume in May of 2015) Were we right then? Was she actually black?

And how can we tell the truth, anyway? The only information we're allowed to receive is filtered through the same corporations that told us, just a few weeks ago, that a woman named Caitlyn Jenner exists. A hundred years from now, historians might review records of the 21st century and conclude that Caitlyn Jenner was a woman like any other. Would that make them right?

They really timed this one impeccably well...Mike Brown, Freddie Gray, Baltimore riots, and then suddenly Caitlyn Jenner and Rachel Dolezal. What in the everliving hell are they going to come up with next? If they run out of options, it'll be time to go to war with the Sino-Russian alliance.

John Craig said...

High Arka --
I don't think that was what Moore was saying at all. The one time she used the two words "social construct," what she said was:

"Dolezal can argue all she likes that race is a social construct, but it is a social construct with very real consequences. Her fabrication of identity and need to assume the position of the victim has reminded some of Binjamin Wilkomirski, whose 1995 memoir as a holocaust survivor, Fragments: Memories of a Wartime Childhood, complete with death-camp stories, tuned out to be completely made up. He wasn’t even Jewish."

Other than that, she basically described Dolezal as a fraudster. And she concludes:

"But identity politics, indeed all politics, gets entirely stuck when somehow it becomes reduced to only identity, to the oppression Olympics. That’s when cheating becomes an option."

Moore is basically bemoaning identity politics, saying that it breeds fraudsters like Dolezal.

Quartermain said...

Now in... Rachel Dolezal is planning on a new career:

John Craig said...

Allan --
Wow. Reality television really revels in showcasing -- and I suppose catering to -- the lowest common denominator.

She's actually a natural for it: people will be curious about her, she'll be a good performer, as she is a typical sociopath without inhibitions or shame, and will not suffer from any sort of stage fright. She certainly kept her composure a couple days ago. The liberals who for the most part run the media will not bear her any long term ill will since she is, after all, down with the cause.

High Arka said...

Ehh, good point.