Tag Archives: F.D.R.

Munchhausen’s by Proxy (Race and the Democrat Party)

Growing up I was taught that Republicans were racist and greedy. I was taught that Republicans were fascist and not unlike Hitler and Mussolini. I was taught that without the Democrats there would still be segregation and all minorities would be treated as inhuman. It is an incredible story, Oscar worthy in its ridiculous simplicity, arrogance and narcissism.  As I began to actually read a lot of history this meme melted into something nearer to the polar opposite.

To understand this we must go back, all the way back to the beginning of our country. When the world thinks of slavery they think of the U.S. Yet the U.S. was the first country to actually have political infighting over the morality of slavery. The values the country were built to fly directly into the face of slavery, those who wanted to continue the practice developed racism as an excuse for the obviously immoral and backwards institution. Racism and slavery were never linked before an excuse for slavery was needed, even though slavery was part of human society since before the advent of writing, possibly even before the advent of language.

We tore our country apart to rid our selves of the cancer of slavery.  The party that chose to take it to that point was the Democratic Party. I remember asking a teacher in middle school about this fact being absolutely opposite to what I was taught about the Republican Party; He said something to the effect of  “the Parties switched sides,” certainly an odd statement and totally meaningless as well. He used the idea that the civil war was about states rights. It was certainly not, in fact that is an excuse used by southern racists. The civil war was about the growth of slavery to the new states, and the fear of the south that their society based on bondage would be flipped upside down. They fought and lost, slavery is not only immoral but it is not economically viable as well. The north beat them through productivity, if I had to pick a singular term.

After the Civil War the Democrats got control of the government, destroyed the reconstruction process and let lose a flood of anti-black legislation in the south. The Democrat Party then made their bones on racism and disenfranchised the black population. Through racism they owned the south for decades. The democrat party was the party of Jim Crow.  The link between the Democrat party and racism doesn’t end there but links into another aspect of my overall point. I was taught that the right wing was fascist. Yet fascism requires large government. A relatively quick look at American political science around the turn of the 19th century seems to show that European fascism got it’s ideas from a Republican that started the Progressive movement and two very popular Progressive democrats, both of which were quite racist.

Since Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican talking about him doesn’t fit that well into my purpose but yes, he was horrible. Much like a Nixon, what a lot of conservatives call a RINO (a republican in name only.) After Teddy came someone whom I consider the most evil man to ever hold the office of the Presidency. Woodrow Wilson was by definition fascist and a eugenicist. In school I learned he was a peace loving genius and if people just listened to him World War Two never would have happened. None of those statements are true. In fact, all of them are quite the opposite. Wilson believed that English and Western European individuals were superior to all others genetically. He was a Eugenicist. When elected President he fired all but one African American on his staff, solely to avoid the fact he fired them all or had none.  Through his friend Margaret Sanger he even tried to cleanse our society of undesirables such as the poor, blacks, the Irish and so fourth through free abortion and sterilization. Planned Parenthood exists today with numbers that smack of something very disconcerting still. Wilson also interned ethnic Americans during World War One. He arrested people for speaking opinion in their own home. Started a brown shirt organization to watch for “sedition,” as well as being very quick to go to war for non-defense reasons.

Me being of Irish heritage, even having been 4th Generation would be considered less than human by many beloved Democrats. F.D.R. held very much than same backwards view on race as Woodrow Wilson. Roosevelt’s political advisors even begged him to support anti-lynching legislation; he refused despite polls and turning opinion, which made it not only moral, but a guaranteed political win. Roosevelt also interned Japanese, German and Italian Americans. Roosevelt arrested people for not burning crops and other ridiculous “solutions” enacted in his many bills. From Reconstruction on till the 1950’s, many southern districts African Americans still could not register to vote as Democrats. I have heard more times than I can count a reason for the historical reality of the Democratic Party, “all the racists switched sides.”

The Democrat party was factually the party of Slavery, Eugenics and Jim Crow.  The Democrat Party also committed tyrannical acts against its own people, and picked up Progressivism, which was the base on which Mussolini and Adolf Hitler built their governments; the fascist and NAZI elite held Wilson and F.D.R. in high respect. Knowing that the Democrat party was a haven for fascism and racism, the meme “all the racists switched sides” must be true if the received wisdom that was forced on me was accurate, that republicans are racist and fascistic.

Continuing past F.D.R. the major player of Part Two emerges. L.B.J. was a Texas democrat and an unrepentant racist. He fought anti-lynching legislation and pro-voting rights legislation put fourth by Democrat Harry S. Truman. He then was incredibly effective in shutting down the first large equal rights bill proposed by Eisenhower. Eisenhower a republican was the first to propose a real, effective equal rights bill, he was also the man who integrated the armed forces. L.B.J. continued to fight equal rights legislation until he was picked as Vice President by Kennedy to keep the deeply racist proportion of white Democrats.

After Kennedy was assassinated L.B.J. not only passed a version of the Equal Rights bill he stymied but also started “the great society,” through “the war on poverty” and so fourth. Now, most liberals, yet hilariously not all, admit the fact that L.B.J. was an unrepentant racist. This creates problems. It seems on its face to be antithetical. The left would have you believe that either he did it out of respect to Kennedy, or that he was blackmailed or coerced into doing it. I do not buy either of those theories. L.B.J. the consummate politician did it to protect the Democrat  party, knowing that his great society was a trap.

“We will have those (horrific racial epithet deleted) voting Democrat for the next 200 years.”  – President Lyndon B. Johnson

Although these bills sound good and many people very similar to me in belief think the bills passed after the equal rights bill were well intentioned, I most certainly do not. This belief requires empirical and statistical evidence that I will provide. African American progress lessened and then reversed after these bills began to be passed. Making Johnson’s decisions effective in hurting the race he so despised.

A common liberal meme is that the rioting during the 60’s and 70’s was caused by inner-city squalor. Yet inner city squalor hit after the riots not before. Places like what became inner-city Detroit boasted amazing growth numbers and economic indicators higher than what they have seen since. The businesses and job opportunity left because of the riots, meaning that the riots made Detroit a slum, not vice versa. No business wanted to operate there, and it has nothing to do with race, just common sense. It is also a liberal meme that these riots caused equal rights legislation, while in reality the riots happened after.  It is also important to point out that these riots occurred almost predominantly under Johnson while there was not a single large scale riot under Ronald Reagan, even though hate for him was successfully cultivated in all minority populations to the point that people thought he was Satan.

African American success was staggering from 1940 to 1960.  Crime rates continuously declined with all races in that time. After the “war on poverty” crime rates skyrocketed over all and even more so in African American populations. For some historical perspective I want to note that African Americans had slightly higher rates of labor force participation than whites from 1890 to 1950. The percentage of black families under the poverty line for instance fell most sharply between 1940 and 1960 from 87% to 47%.  The decline of African American poverty rates started to lessen drastically when the “War on poverty” and “affirmative action” came to their modern conclusions. The rates of African Americans in white collar, managerial and other high-level occupations doubled from 1940 to 1960 while the rates of African American farm workers dropped. These positive rates in fact lessened after legislation while many would believe they caused such growth.

More importantly the subsequent government programs initiated specifically on African American communities, pushed on and supported by the Democratic Party, destroyed the base of African American culture, and all other culture, the family. Most African Americans during slavery were raised by two parents, Democrat “solutions” seem to have done what slavery could not. Marriage rates of African Americans after slavery were even higher than those of white Americans from 1890 to 1950. 31% of African American children were born to unmarried women in the 1930’s while 77% were in the 1990’s. By 1993 more than a million black children were being raised by their grandparents.

Johnson was a racist genius; He knew economically that besides the basic equal rights guarantee everything he passed would hurt the race he hated while also giving his party extreme power through programs that can be used as slush funds and Ponzi schemes much like those of his equally racist predecessor F.D.R. Even now the Democrat party claims anyone who would remove the things that have hurt minorities so badly is in fact racist or greedy, while what they spent other peoples money on has factually and unavoidably hurt those they claim to protect. Munchhausen’s by proxy, the new racism.

A Brave New World In 1984

The English language is beautiful in its complexity, dangerous beauty. Interpretation is an art in English, enough that you can paint your own pictures with someone else’s words. Orwell knew it. Aldous Huxley figured out how to control people without it. Unfortunately it seems the world’s governments have figured out how to use the ideas of both. In 1984 Orwell used “newspeak” while Huxley in “A Brave New World” just made everyone’s life just comfortable enough to not question.  I feel only a small minority of the political spectrum is being truly honest in the current debate. Although all sides say that our course is unsustainable, they are demanding that more money be spent or that if we just lessen the amount of unsustainable growth of government we will be fine. Whether the two larger sides of the argument are acting politically or not, this type of statist philosophy is attained through things Huxley and Orwell wrote about, through active shaping of the populace.

Newspeak is so prevalent today I have to pick from only a few terms that have been victims of the practice. These two will be the term “liberal” and the term “Social Justice.” I have chosen them for very important reasons, they are both old and loaded terms that have been used in incredibly dynamic ways.

The word liberal comes from the word liberty. In Europe during the Enlightenment individuals who felt that people should have more control over their own actions were called liberal. That is what the word meant originally and is the reason why many on the far right consider themselves libertarian. The Newspeak corruption of the word began With F.D.R. when after half of the new deal was deemed unconstitutional; He tried to add 6 more seats to the supreme court in order to pass similar bills that had been denied. He chose to claim he wanted more “liberal” justices. He chose the word for two reasons, because after the abuses of Woodrow Wilson and his Progressive buddies the term progressive was negatively loaded, and because the laws he wanted passed were the opposite of liberal in its original sense and that was the reason half the New Deal was deemed unconstitutional. The modern term Liberal has become the polar opposite of what it meant, now liberalism demands more economic and social control over people. Mussolini for example hated liberal government because it denied government control, while modern American liberals demand control in everything including what your children eat, whether you have health insurance and whether you can wear an American flag shirt at an American public school.

“Social Justice” is a meaningless term. It has been in use since the turn of the 19th century, has been used by Islamists, fascists, communists and totalitarians before it was adopted by American liberals. It can literally mean anything. From what I have seen Social Justice is invoked when a government wants to do something that by itself, would be called immoral, but it is excused by claiming it is for the greater good, i.e. for the justice of all society. Honestly justice needs no qualifier. Social Justice is so vague in fact; you can use it to claim the morality for anything. If you want to dispose of a group of people, all you have to do is say they are bad for society, there in it is justified to kill them and so fourth. That kind of power is not “liberal” in its original sense, but social justice has been a term used by American Liberals to coerce the ability to do many things thought tyrannical by our founding fathers.

To keep on the social justice theme, terms like “open space” and “smart growth” are the same kind of undefined or open-ended term that social justice is. These programs are what has sent Bay Area housing prices skyrocketing, these programs for example quadrupled the housing prices of Palo Alto CA, in the decade of the 1970’s. That isn’t smart growth. Keeping “open space” for posterity is great, but when the consequence of an unlivable cost of housing causes farm workers in Salinas CA to live 9 people to one apartment society isn’t being helped. Basically the fruition of these laws is that rich, mostly white liberals make money and price out  the poor and minorities. There is half the African American population in San Francisco than there was just 15 years ago and currently more African Americans die than move to or are born in the city. Not social justice in my eye.

What programs like “open space” and “smart growth” do is they provide money for the less fortunate, or affordable housing all of which is bad economically. It would be easier to not try to control what happens and let cities naturally develop lower income areas due to a reasonable cost of living, something the Bay Area hasn’t experienced since these types of government interventions started. Regardless of the damage these actions have caused the less fortunate, their newspeak terminology and the idea that they are giving to the poor makes people feel well, comfortable and good, that is if they don’t have to live in those places hardest hit and failed by an inevitably incompetent economic third party. This leads me into the Huxley side of my point. Make people just comfortable enough to not question. There are many ways to do this.

In Huxley’s book what is used is a removal of the family structure, drugs, sex and guaranteed food, shelter and work. In the book there was a biological caste system. The Alfa class was the hardest to control because they were the most biologically intelligent while the lowest biological class was the easiest to control, using guaranteed living, drugs and sex. We have only one biological class, human. Our class system is irrelevant to biological ability. Yet I see a Huxley like control system apparent. Regardless of the epic failure of government programs to help the less fortunate, these programs do control the helped populace. These individuals are stuck but their needs are taken care of, their animal needs that is. The STD and drug use rates of these communities’ shows that drugs and sex became a needed release or entertainment. These things are fun and addicting, even all consuming if you have a job let alone if you have none. These individuals are controlled with false comfort drugs and sex, which causes a breakdown of the family. Huxley would feel sick to his stomach thinking maybe his idea was used, but this particular idea has existed since the Ancient Greeks. Give people free stuff and take away their choices and they will be happy, for a short period.

Regardless of the extreme inhuman suffering of these groups leading to crime and at its worst riots, those that provide it receive a comfortable feeling at best and a megalomaniacal feeling with a need to protect these hurtful practices at worst. Through Orwellian newspeak even the most intelligent people can be fooled into thinking any program is for the best. “I live fine, I take care of those people, so I am like a protector, without me they would be worse off, I am more moral than those who would question and change things.” It is a type of moral comfortability. The Alphas of “A Brave New World” felt the same of the inferior biological castes. That false feeling of being a protector is incredibly pervasive and speaks to our most animalistic of instincts.

Unlike in Huxley’s book, when riots happen you cannot release drugs or “soma” in clouds from their government workstations. We are seeing what happens to a completely controlled populace as I type. In the U.K. where riots hit hard they have a whole lower class, many of which have not worked just in their lifetime, but their families have not had a job in three generations. People need liberty. People need choice and they need the ability to fail and suffer. We have been warned. Humans aren’t like a bear in a zoo that can be made happy with friends and activities to use up their time. It is in actuality about power and control. Read both books, especially “A Brave New World,” tell me that the scene when the teacher was instructing his very young students to stimulate each other sexually doesn’t make you question why the government wishes to teach your toddler about sex. This country is turning to a brave new world in 1984.