Tuesday, June 5

Demographic Genocide, Plantations and Joe Walsh R-(Bigot LoL*)

Lately from the familiar cesspools has been bubbling up repeated instances of the phrase "Democratic Plantation". A Google search will demonstrate that the phrase recently gained traction last Summer and fall during the republican "Pre-Primary Season", most notably by Herman Cain The phrase has been around for quite some time, and if I recall correctly, the first time I remember hearing it would have been sometimes during the Clinton Administration. It is one of those phrases that seems to come into vogue during Democratic administrations, and seems to be used to help the Republican base "understand" why their guy did not win this time around (it may also serve as a feeble attempt to shame the "Coloreds" into leaving the "Plantation"). Lately it has been showing up again, initially in response to the news that for the first time Births to people not of European descent have for the first time outnumbered births to people of European descent. A couple of weeks ago, NRO published a column by Thomas Sowell which starts thusly:
Now that census data show — for the first time in American history — that the number of white babies born is exceeded by the number of babies born to non-white minorities, the question is: What does this mean for the future of American society?

This bit is simply packed to the gills with unspoken subtext. One might convey the new census data in the following way: "This is the first time that births to people of non European descent outnumber births to people of European descent. While this marks a point that demographers have long predicted, persons born of European ancestry will long remain in the majority as a homogeneous cultural group." Put this way, you remove unstated assumptions while providing context. Context is an enemy to obfuscation, misrepresentation and in this case also would get in the way of this obvious attempt to stir up the tribal insecurities of the dominant majority, though Sowell will vociferously deny that the latter is his intent. Any suggestion of Demographic Genocide would indicate that you are either talking to a crazy person or a manipulator of fear and the latter is precisely what Sowell is up to here.

Let's unpack the unstated assumptions. First is the assumption that White persons are real Americans as in representative of the default "American Identity". Following quickly on its heels is the assumption that "non-white" minorities are somehow less than full "Americans". Again, Sowell will deny this, as will his defenders, and I would not be surprised to find that my observation makes me the real racist in their calculus.

The tell is in the question that ends the sentence: "What does this mean for the future of American society?". If it were posed as an honest question, the answer would be pretty simple. Not much, not much at all. But this is not posed as an honest question. What Sowell is really asking is: What does this mean for the future of the Republican party in particular, and White male hegemony in general? The answer to this question is fairly easy as well: Eventually both groups will suffer losses of power, prestige and privilege, and this is what terrifies and motivates most of their actions. It is also why the "Plantation" rhetoric, and suggestions that certain easily identifiable groups should not possess the right to vote with the underlying implication being that they are not mature or smart or white or male enough to vote wisely. Along these lines we run into that hot house flower and paragon of meritocratic virtue himself, Jonah Goldberg, who, I should remind you, said with a straight face that "the white male is the Jew of Liberal Fascism".
“It is a simple fact of science that nothing correlates more with ignorance and stupidity more than youth,” Goldberg said. “We’re all born idiots, and we only get over that condition as we get less young. And yet there’s this thing in this culture where, ‘Oh, young people are for it so it must be special.’ No, the reason young people are for it because they don’t know better. That’s why we call them young people.”

This is an example similar to the "Plantation" metaphor which serves on the one hand to explain why that dirty commie is in the white house and to call into question his legitimate residency by calling into the question of the legitimacy of the voters who put him their. Is it no wonder that Republican state legislatures are working overtime to put into place I.D. voting laws, or furiously rushing to purge the voter rolls of "illegitimate" voters? The latest use of the "Plantation" metaphor comes from Congress person Joe Walsh (R-DeadbeatDad**-LoL*) who dives in with both feet tasting:
"All Jesse Jackson is trying to do is to keep African Americans down on some plantation," he said on the "Big John & Amy" radio show Friday, as reported by Chicagoist.

Later he continued:
"Amy, I know enough of the man to know that if African Americans -- how come Jesse Jackson opposes school choice for inner city African American parents? How come he won't give that ability to low-income black parents? Because he doesn't want blacks, African Americans to escape miserable public schools.He won't give them that opportunity. Why? Because he wants them dependent and imprisoned in terrible public schools in the inner city."

The wondrous beauty of the Plantation metaphor as employed by rich republicans (the vast majority of whom are white and male) is threefold: First, they get to insult the African American community (which gives them points with their racist base), second, they get to claim Lincoln as one of their own and by extension carefully dust under the rug the realities that the vast majority of their agenda is likely to result in a great deal of suffering in the African American Community, and third, essentially suggest that Democrats are the real racists. As far as school "choice" and "vouchers" are concerned, they are designed to funnel tax revenue to subsidize private schools with the full knowledge that the vast majority of the "inner city" kids that Walsh seems to care so much about, will never be able to afford to pay the balance, have the grades required to qualify for enrollment, or afford the transportation to attend the private schools that their tax dollars are supposed to subsidize under the scheme. So the poor inner city kids will have to attend schools with even less funding, poorer conditions and fewer opportunities. So when Walsh accuses Jackson of wanting them "imprisoned in terrible public schools" it is actually Walsh and his fellow republicans that desire that outcome. Walsh is pissed that there is a great deal of resistance from the African American community with regard to "choice" and "vouchers" because it get in the way of accomplishing the following goals. The desire to destroy public education and more importantly, the teachers unions. Now theoretically Sowell and Walsh are professionals, but I would like to highlight a comment made by a reader in response to Sowell's column.
Andy D 05/21/12 08:09 The sad thing about this is that although the left panders to minority voters, the promises the left makes with those voters are promises that are never fulfilled. Those promises can’t be fulfilled because if they were, the left wouldn’t have any snake oil left to sell those voters. [...] This is despite overwhelming evidence indicating that government assistance and success rarely go hand in hand. It’s hard to point to a single man or woman, now a successful businessperson, who points at a battery of government programs as being the source of their success. Yet it remains the top selling point for the left in swooning minority voters. Until voters realize the left is essentially keeping them on the plantation they’ll keep voting left and losing out in life.

Now let's examine the first sentence for example. Replace the word left with right and minority with evangelical, and you actually have an honest description of of Republican governance to date. More often than not if you perform a search and replace when "left" and "minority" show up in a winger screed, you will likely be staring at the truth as it is and not as they would have you have it. As Andy is not a pro, we will forgive him for failing to cite any of this "overwhelming evidence" regarding the success or lack thereof related to government assistance, other than to suggest that the facts in question might have a bit of a foul odor associated with something that has just passed through the colon. The fact that it is difficult to find a captain of industry who might acknowledge, that government programs, might have been a contributing factor to their success, ultimately sounds pretty, but proves nothing. Most successful people are more than willing to pretend that the infrastructure on which the very success of their business depends, exists in a vacuum. I like to call that "the Bootstrap Fallacy". And while Sowell to my knowledge did not employ the allusion to contemporary Negro slavery, he did not have to, his commenter's got the message loud and clear.

I can't finish with Walsh without sharing his very enlightened views on why Obama was elected.
Walsh has displayed penchant for creating controversy at town halls in the past. Late last month, he told a gathering that Obama had gotten elected in 2008 because he was black.
"He was a historic figure. He’s our first African-American president. The country voted for him because of that. It made us feel good about [ourselves]." Walsh said. "I’ve said it before, it helped that John McCain was about 142 years old. It helped that the economy was tanking. A lot of these things helped. But he never would have gotten there without his historic nature."

**(apparently no longer a deadbeat dad, but still a stone cold idiot and first class bigot)

*LoL (land of Lincoln)