The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
 Ilana Mercer BlogviewTeasers

As a Jew on the libertarian Right, I am sickened by the compulsion of some American Jews to force President Donald Trump to convulse over Jewish angst. The Anti-Defamation League and other largely self-anointed representatives of Jewish interests are kvetching, accusing the president of not making it abundantly clear that he will not tolerate violence against Jews.

#AnswerTheQuestion is the dramatic, petulant hashtag these nudniks have tweeted out. Apparently, President Trump must spell out, tweet out and beat on breast, at every opportunity, his abhorrence for the specter of Jewish community centers, cemeteries, businesses and places of worship being vandalized.

The chief hate group of America, the Southern Poverty Law Center, has been gunning for President Trump back when he was still candidate Donald Trump. Their work and that of the head honcho at Hate Inc., has been to tar this president with the white supremacist Mark of Cain, simply because he loves Middle America, doesn’t hate the founding American nation, hasn’t yet dubbed Thomas Jefferson a hypocrite, called for the excising of American history from an already compromised curricula, or distanced himself from patriots such as Steve Bannon.

They now contend that “a racist, misogynist and xenophobe president” has inadvertently created the conditions for the current threats against Jews and the vandalism of Jewish property.

All these groups, certainly the Jewish ones, are silent about the existential elephant in the room that truly imperils Jewish survival (other than the community’s left-liberalism). These leaders refuse to grapple with the exponential growth through immigration of anti-Semitic groups. You’d think this would alarm them, as self-styled Jewish leaders.

It’s not right-wing populism that endangers Jewish survival in Europe and Canada; it’s the influx of Muslims. There’s nothing new in the Jewish leadership’s habit of kibitzing about the dangers to Jewish continuity from marauding Mormons (their sin is to convert dead Jews). Or, from Mel Gibson, whose movie “The Passion of the Christ” was supposed to unleash pogroms in Pittsburgh, as they falsely prophesied.

The same sorts say nothing publicly about the waves of Muslims washing up on Europe’s shores. One wonders if they know this intake doesn’t represent a new Islamic Golden Age. These Muslims bring with them the Islam that The Prophet practiced. This Islam does not tolerate Jews.

Muslims now greatly outnumber Jews in these formerly safe spaces for Judaism. What remains of a European Jewry devastated by the Holocaust comes under daily assaults and threats, mostly from the 20-million strong Muslim community. The violent assaults on Jews and their property in Europe and Canada are almost exclusively the handiwork of an ancient hatred, nurtured within Islamic countries, arrivals from which President Trump is trying to curb.

American Jewry is next. Second only to Latinos, the relatively new, roughly 40-year-old Muslim community is the most anti-Semitic community in the U.S. Explained Stephen Steinlight of the Center for Immigration Studies, in “High Noon to Midnight: Does Current Immigration Policy Doom American Jewry”:

“It is virtually impossible to be reared in classical Islam and not be educated to hate Jews—based on a literalist reading of the Koran, where many of the Suras concerning Jews are monstrously hateful, murderous, terrifying, as well as the literature of the Sunnah. These texts also regard Jews as a spiritually fraudulent entity—all the prophets and great figures of the Hebrew Bible, according to Islamic teaching, were Muslims, not Jews [historical identity theft, I call it]… With the exception of a tiny group of courageous American Muslims … who have spoken out and condemned … anti-Semitism, the ‘Muslim Street’ in the U.S. has yet to show its disapproval of this philosophical and political agenda.”

Jewish organizations are not unaware of this menace, although they’re tracking it in the utmost silence. They’re in the habit of silently tracking real threats, such as the hate coming from Islam and Latin America, while publicly, and with impunity, they heap insults on a president who belongs to one of the most politically submissive, bullied groups: white men.

To help those they claim to represent, Jewish leaders should join America’s equally endangered cultural majority, the Trump Nation, in the fight to forestall the lemming’s lunacy that is our current immigration policy.

The proper metaphor for the relationship between Judaism and Christianity is that of proud parent and progeny. Led by these characters—the Ann Frank Center, the obnoxious Anti-Defamation League—Jews have managed to cast themselves as just another faction in the noisy, multicultural mob that is America.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Islam, Jews, Political Correctness 

“More than 100 companies, including most of high-tech’s biggest names,” have threatened to “move jobs outside the United States,” unless they get their way.

What do they want? They want President Trump to give up on “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” the POTUS’s Executive Order, currently being refined to withstand legal challenges from these and related special interests.

Where will America’s “tech titans” go? Presumably to the banned countries, without whose high-tech talent our companies cannot do business. Or, so their antics imply. Washington State, which led the charge against President Trump’s “travel ban” on Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Libya and Iran, is home to some of these powerful, high-tech traitors.

Why the strong language?

I’ve yet to hear of a single coveted Syrian, Yemeni, Somali, Sudanese, Iraqi and Libyan needed right away in Redmond for his exceptional, technical know-how. (I know of one highly productive, much older Afghani. He acquired his degree under … Russian occupation and has been in the US for decades.)

The only case tech traitors can reasonably make for Muslim high-tech talent, invisible to the naked eye, are the Iranians. They’re well-represented in our state’s tech sector as top talent. In adding Iran to the travel ban, President Trump is clearly appeasing the neoconservative snakes slithering around his administration. They’re fixing for a fight with Iran, stupidly collapsing the distinction between the Iranian State (sponsor of terrorism), and the Iranian people (who’re not the reason the Eiffel Tower is being walled-off by bullet-proof glass).

Were our tech execs remotely honest, they’d make the case for their Iranian talent. No more. Don’t pretend you’ll relocate in order to employ Syrians, Yemenis, Somalis, Sudanese, Iraqis and Libyans to fabricate your (stunning) Surface Pro 4 Tablets. For their importation, American taxpayers will be the ones footing the bill in blood and treasure. Allow the president to protect America from what is generally an unproductive, atavistic, immigrant cohort.

Oh, and if I hear more indignant hyperbole about Steve Jobs’ illustrious Syrian lineage, I’ll hit the roof. Apple’s founder was not raised by his Syrian biological father, who deserted him. (Like members of the men-only refugee club, whose members left their women, children and elderly behind to … the sentence is yours to complete.) Jobs never cared for the Syrian sperm donor. The name Jobs is that of his adopted Armenian father, whom he credits with inspiring him. A “genius with his hands,” said Jobs about his Christian dad. (Armenians are Christians who’ve come close to extinction-by-Muslim. Remind me why we need more Muslims in America.)

Doubly victimized in all this are the taxpayers. We’re on the hook for litigation to advance the aims of social justice warriors; radical leftists, who take sadistic pleasure in displacing and diminishing American men.

Understand: For the tech tycoons it’s not about cheap labor, although importing a glut of mostly second-rate computer programmers and IT workers from India and Pakistan (birthplace of Tashfeen Malik, perpetrator of the San Bernardino massacre) does suppress wages, overall.

Conservatives are wrong. The myth that these strategically imported workers are paid less than an American worker with comparable skills, with whom they work side-by-side, is as bogus as the fairytale about the female-male wage gap. (It vanishes when variables such as education, experience and time in the workplace are held constant.)

Wage differentials obtain in the practices of the primary H-1B Visa hogs—Infosys, the Tata Group and eight or so other sister Indian firms. Different pay scales for imported workers aren’t a feature of the egalitarian American company. In places like Microsoft and Amazon, everyone is equal (white men excepted). Salaries, raises and bonuses are applied to all evenly, commensurate with an employee’s performance, and depending on his job level or the grade occupied on the company’s technical career track.

Again: Imported workers aren’t paid less than American workers.

Make no mistake, H-1B Visa sponsors, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg included, pay a fortune to process this generally mediocre class of immigrant. Enormous is the price of the in-house bureaucracy required to keep filing the paper work associated with the assorted classes of workers imported. Every year, until the coveted Green Card is granted, Human Resources departments will be jumping through countless legalistic hoops to help their Chosen Ones remain in the United States.

Labor imported by the H-1B Visa hogs is not cheap.

Touted as a means of trawling for the best and the brightest, the H-1B Visa system is anything but. “Ordinary talent doing ordinary work” is Professor Norman S. Matloff’s overall assessment of the standard H-1B crop. Matloff is a computer scientist at the University of California. By his telling, the 65,000 yearly recipients of H-1B visas are mostly “average workers. The vast majority of H-1Bs, including those hired from U.S. universities” [for which Washington State University sought taxpayer-sponsored representation before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals] are ordinary people doing ordinary work, not the best and the brightest. On the contrary, the average quality of the H-1Bs is lower than that of the Americans.”

The clincher: The majority of H-1Bs are not doing work for which qualified Americans are unavailable.

Would that our tech executives were just businessmen vested in the wealth of their shareholders. That would be a blessing and a good thing. The truth is that tech traitors are true believers, radical leftists; social justice warriors, vested in the engineering of tribalism (“multiculturalism”) and racial favoritism (“affirmative action”) in the workplace.

Workplace tribalism doesn’t contribute to creativity, productivity or the happiness of the Forgotten Man; it’s what his overlords want for him (I’ll tell you why, next time). It’s the corporate culture.

When it grows up, organizations like Microsoft want to be the government.

***

ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer and thinker based in the US. Her weekly column was begun in Canada in 1999. (Archive) Ilana is the author of TheTrump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) and Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). She’s a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies. Follow ilana on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer , Gab: https://gab.ai/ILANAMERCER Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaleolibertarianAuthorILANAMercer/
Subscribe to ilana’s YouTube channel

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Immigration, Silicon Valley 

Read the judicial rules for radicals issued by the United States Court Of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in affirmation of the ban on The Ban.

It follows the Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump, with the imprimatur of 62 million voters, to protect the nation from foreign terrorists entering into the United States. Two states objected to the president’s undeniably badly written Order, which, while upholding negative rights—and neither denying natural rights nor minting positive ones—was nevertheless replete with administrative errors.

Acting as coequal partners in the administrative tyranny the president is trying to break, the two states issued a temporary restraining order against “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” (I can already hear the election midterm ads.)

In the corner for the Deplorables was a government lawyer. August Flentje Esq. had “argued” (if you can call it that) for an emergency stay of the Washington State district court’s temporary restraining order against the president. The three Ninth Circuit jurists who heard the case said no.

CAREER GOVERNMENT LAWYERS. If you’re good at what you do, you look to make it in the private sector (as our president did, before he did us a favor). If not, you seek sheltered employment (as President Trump’s predecessor did). Clearly, clerking for the Supreme Court, as August Flentje had done, doesn’t mean a whole lot.

In presenting the oral arguments for the president and the people, Flentje evinced a level of incompetence that spurred the Bench to the heights of usurpation. For example, when The Court caviled about an alleged lack of evidence for the necessity of the “travel ban,” not only did Flentje fail to provide it, but he failed to question the need for this evidence, based on the scope of the president’s constitutional, executive power in matters of national security.

Mr. President: You promised to hire the best. Alan Dershowitz is champing at the bit. Kris Kobach would kill it in any court. (Jonathan Turley is soft. Don’t touch Fox News’ tele-judges.)

Helped by the poor job stumblebum Flentje did in arguing the president’s prerogative and position, the Ninth Circuit judges usurped President Trump’s constitutional authority, substituting their own judgment for his. The three refused to lift the ban on the ban and reinstate an Executive Order that was never meant to be subjected to judicial review, in the first place.

GEORGE W. BUSH’S LAWYER. Those on the Right who opposed George Bush during his presidency (check) were vindicated yet again. In the nooks-and-crannies of our command-and-control judiciary, Bush had squirreled away a jurist as bad as John G. Roberts Jr.

Recall, Roberts, chief of the country’s legal politburo of proctologists, rewrote Obama’s Affordable Care Act. He then proceeded to provide the fifth vote to uphold the individual mandate undergirding the law, thereby undeniably and obscenely extending Congress’s taxing power. (Lazy government worker Paul Ryan still hasn’t come up with an alternative to ObamaCare, one that’ll prevent the Left from torching the country. Patience. It’s only been eight years.)

The unelected Bush appointee under discussion is from my State of Washington. District Judge James L. Robart, like Bush, would wrestle a crocodile for an illegal immigrant. Or, for potential immigrants, preferably from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan.

Having been granted standing by the Ninth Circuit to appeal President Trump’s Executive Order, Robart, as explained by a Daily Caller contributor, “hinged his entire ruling on a concept called parens patriae, a term meaning ‘a doctrine that grants the inherent power and authority of the state to protect persons who are legally unable to act on their own behalf.’” It’s “ordinarily used by states to protect children and those who are incapacitated.”

Was parens patriae invoked to stop the state-sanctioned starving of Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo? Terri was an American adult suspended in a vegetative state, whose husband wanted her dead. She was fatally denied due process by the appellate courts, state and federal.

Robart’s mission of mercy was to rescue “two visiting scholars who had planned to spend time at Washington State University” and “were not permitted to enter the United States. One was informed he would be unable to obtain a visa.” As “helpless” were “three prospective employees from countries covered by the Executive Order,” which “the University of Washington was in the process of sponsoring.” Protected, too, from “irreparable harm” were a couple of interns. Likewise, they were sponsored by WSU, a university which receives money from American taxpayers, but brags of serving “citizens … worldwide.”

This university’s mission of “global engagement” received Court sanctioned parent-like protections. In logic, this constitutes a mistake of category. I’ve never heard of a vulnerable “mission” that requires parental protection. People, not things, require protection against harm. Don’t judges—even if Sharia-compliant—follow logic?

Universities funded by American taxpayers might try doing some local engagement. You don’t need a visa to visit Washington State from West Virginia.

IRAQI, SYRIAN, YEMENI, LIBYAN, SOMALI AND SUDANESE TALENT. Despite the disconcerting push by neoconservatives in the Trump administration to conflate the Iranian people with their government, and to lump them with the rest in the Ban—you should know the following: Iranians are well-represented in our state’s high-tech industry as top talent (PhD’s galore).

I’ve yet to hear of a single coveted Syrian, Yemeni, Somali or Sudanese whom we absolutely must have here, for his unique contributions. The same applies to the poor Iraqis. Perhaps Bush killed most of them.

And if Libya had top technical or scientific talent, Hillary Clinton killed their prospects. (And with a good deal of hilarity; that broad is a natural-born killer.)

Yes, Bill O’Reilly, President Trump was correct when he asserted that, “We have a lot of killers.” Our country’s politicians have left lands not their own slick with blood. But this doesn’t mean the American people deserve to be killed stateside, which is what President Trump’s Executive Order was meant to prevent.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Immigration, Muslim Ban 

Donald Trump is the gift that keeps giving. The week is still in its infancy, but the president has already made Chucky Schumer cry, fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates within hours of her acting up, and caused the Forgotten Man to go even harder for their president. This Trump accomplished by inadvertently exposing the Democrats as firmly in the camp of Hollywood harridans, tech execs, the immigration lawyers lobby, the global refugee industry; and in the grip of the international human rights octopus.

The Democratic constituency can no longer hide. It’s as though all these ghastly people are wearing the pussy dunce-caps adorned by the Madonna and Ashley Judd protesters.

The first moment of joy came when, flanked by swaddled Muslim women, the sanctimonious Schumer, a politician to his fingertips, choked up because of President Trump’s executive order to “temporarily halt the U.S. refugee program and ban entries from seven Muslim-majority nations for 90 days.” The president campaigned on this promise, was elected based upon it, and is now fulfilling it, a novel concept to a shyster like Schumer.

Then, before Sally Yates could use her perch, as a public servant at DOJ, to crusade for a centralized value system—the POTUS fired her, promptly ending Yates’ two-hour insurrection at the Department of Justice.

Here’s the Yates fit of pique that so energized CNN’s Alpha Females (Anderson Cooper, Erin Burnett, Brianna Keilar, Don Lemon, David Gergen):

“I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right. At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful.”

And I thought the DOJ was charged with implementing the laws of the land, in accordance with its mission statement. To wit, “The Department of Justice is a cabinet-level agency responsible for enforcing the laws of the United States federal government. DOJ ensures public safety against foreign and domestic threats, including terrorism, and preventing crime.”

Whether it was borne of insubordination, incompetence or both, Yates’ virtue-signaling press conference was about feelings—her own. It was bereft of legal argument. Clearly, this activist was chosen by Obama not for her analytical, legal mind, or her understanding of the plenary power the legislative and the executive branches possess vis-a-vis immigration.

In her mind, the job of the country’s top cop is to police our values (or enforce her own).

Not in dispute is professor Alan Dershowitz’s analytical acumen. The liberal lawyer called Yates’ posturing “holdover heroism. It’s so easy to be a heroine when you’re not appointed by this president and when you’re on the other side,” he admonished, deriding Yates for resorting to political posturing, while failing to offer a nuanced legal analysis of the “Executive Order [to Protect] The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States.”

Mercifully, Yates’ conniption didn’t last long. In doing what’s right for the country, President Trump exposed the Justice Department as a politicized fiefdom, controlled by a feeble-minded female.

He had been gone for only eight, jam-packed days, but Barack Obama’s reappearance was likewise blissfully brief. The cable girls were destined to be disappointed. Again. After releasing a short, woolly statement to say how “heartened” he was “by the level of engagement taking place in communities around the country,” Obama retreated, neutralized, too, by President Trump’s decisive actions.

Beware the Values Cudgel

In the Obama universe, the carnage in Boston, Orlando, San Bernardino, Fort-Hood and Chattanooga dwarfs when compared to the importance of preserving “our values.” (By which Obama means his values, Hillary Clinton’s values, Angela Merkel’s values, Yates’s values, Schumer’s values, Jeff Bezos’s values, John McMussolini’s values, Lindsey Graham’s values.)

When a politician pules about “the values that make our country great,” to quote Mrs. Clinton, chances are they mean multiculturalism, pluralism, open-borders, Islam as peace, communities divided in diversity as a net positive, and the Constitution—it mandates all the above, ask Ruth Bader Ginsburg—as a living, breathing, mutating philosophical malignancy.

For them, “protecting” the abstraction that is “our way of life” trumps the protection of real individual lives. “We must guard against a weakening of the values that make us who we are,” dissembled Obama in the waning weeks before he was gone. The empty phrase is meant to make the sovereign citizen forget that government’s most important role, if not its only role, is to protect individual life. This is something President Trump grasps on a gut level.

In his last few addresses, Obama promised to speak up on “certain issues,” in times when he imagined “our core values may be at stake.” Likewise, in delivering her Control-Alt-Delete speech against the Deplorables, Clinton had asserted that “our country is great because we’re good. Donald Trump disregards the values that make our country great.” The two’s group-think notwithstanding, only individuals can be virtuous, not collectives.

To manipulate Americans, politicians Before Trump have used the values cudgel. With respect to immigration, the idea is to impress upon gullible Americans that the world has a global Right of Return to the U.S. Fail to accept egalitarian immigration for all into America; and you are flouting the very essence of Americanism. (Or, to use liberal argumentation, you’re Hitler.)

Self government, and not imposed government, implies society, not The State, is to develop value systems. The State’s role is to protect citizens as they go about their business peacefully, living in accordance with their peaceful values.

When you hear an appeal to “permanent values”—”the values that make our country great,” to quote Clinton—know you are dealing with world-class crooks. They want to swindle you out of the freedom to think and believe as you wish. For in the classical conservative and libertarian traditions, values are private things, to be left to civil society—the individual, family and church—to practice and police.

The American government is charged purely with upholding the law, no more. Why so? Because government has police and military powers with which to enforce its “values.” A free people dare not entrust such an omnipotent entity with enforcing values, at home or abroad, because values enforced are dogma.

When incontestable majorities call on government to curb Islamic and other in-migration because this imperils American lives, President Trump’s unswerving opponents—the Obama, Clinton, Ryan, McCain, Graham, Schumer, and media mafia—will invariably intone, “That’s not who we are.”

When you hear that manipulative mantra, tell them to shut up, mind their own business, and stick to their constitutional mandate to protect the people, not police their minds.

Remember that through an appeal to values, the State aggrandizes itself.

A limited government, serving an ostensibly free people, must never enforce values. Because our form of government is incompatible with enforcing values, the American People can’t and mustn’t welcome into their midst civilizations whose values are inimical to the survival of their own.

 

ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer and thinker based in the US. Her weekly column was begun in Canada in 1999. She is the author of TheTrump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) and Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow ilana on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer , Gab: https://gab.ai/ILANAMERCER, Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaleolibertarianAuthorILANAMercer/.
YouTube channel

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Left, Donald Trump 

RELOCATING the American Embassy to Jerusalem, as President Donald Trump has pledged to do, is more than symbolic. It’s what Christians should be praying for if they value celebrating future Easter Holy Weeks, in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, located in Jerusalem’s Old City. With such a forceful gesture, the Trump Administration will be affirming, for once and for all, the undivided Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish State.

There’s a reason Muslims living in Israel proper—1.5 million of them—don’t migrate to the adjacent Palestinian Authority. They’re better off in Israel. Should Jerusalem, East and West, be recognized formally as the capital of Israel only, under Jewish control alone; Christianity’s holiest sites will be better off. Judaism’s holy sites will be safer. And so will Islam’s.

Jerusalem is no settlement to be haggled over; it’s the capital of the Jewish State. King David conquered it 1000 years Before Christ. The city’s “Muslim Period” began only in the year 638 of the Common Era. “Yerushalaim,” and not Al Quds, is the name of the city that was sacred to Jews for nearly two thousand years before Muhammad. Not once is Jerusalem mentioned in the Quran. And while Muhammad was said to have departed to the heavens from the Al Aksa Mosque, there was no mosque in Jerusalem. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aksa Mosque were built upon the Jewish Temple Mount. Muslim theologians subsequently justified this usurpation by superimposing their own chronology—and relatively recent fondness for Jerusalem—upon the existing, ancient sanctity of the place to Jews.

Essentially, this amounts to historical identity theft.

It’s bad enough that Bethlehem—the burial site of the matriarch Rachel, birthplace to King David and Jesus and site of the Church of the Nativity—is controlled by the Palestinians. But, as one wag wondered, “How would Christians react if the Muslim theologians aforementioned had chosen to appropriate the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, rename it and declare it Muslim property?”

There is nothing Solomonic about splitting up Jerusalem, which—it bears repeating—was sacred to Jews for nearly two millennia before Muhammad and is not in the Quran. “The Muslim Claim to Jerusalem,” notes Dr. Daniel Pipes, is political, not religious or historic. As such, it’s also a recent project. “Centuries of neglect came to an abrupt end after June 1967, when the Old City came under Israeli control,” explains Pipes. “Palestinians [then] again made Jerusalem the centerpiece of their political program, [when, in fact] Mecca is the eternal city of Islam, the place from which non-Muslims are strictly forbidden. Very roughly speaking, [Mecca is to Islam] what Jerusalem is to Judaism.”

East Jerusalem was not annexed in June of 1967. Rather, Jerusalem was unified.

Loose paraphrasing of U.N. resolution 242 requires Israel to give the Golan Heights to Syria (which is tantamount to returning land to the aggressors) and allow the Palestinians to establish a state capital in East Jerusalem. For their concessions, this “peace initiative” entitles Israelis to “an effective veto” on the national suicide pact known as the right of return: the imperative to absorb millions of self-styled Palestinian “refugees” into Israel proper. (A similar mystical right—call it a global right of return to the US for citizens of the world—was discovered in the US Constitution by Trump-hating, Gold Star father Khizr Khan.)

A quick quiz: What does “unoccupied” or “liberated” Palestinian land look like? Answer: Like Gaza.

Gaza serves as a sufficiently strong precedent against the folly of ceding territory to Islam. (With the exception of the long-suffering Kurds, what Muslim nation has recently made good on territorial gains or on self-determination won?) Gaza was “returned” to the Palestinians, who promptly destroyed the hothouses Israelis had built there, and planted in the ground Qassam rocket launchers, instead. Gaza now hothouses Hamasniks.

In all, granting statehood to their nihilistic neighbors has, hitherto, been pretty thankless for Israelis.

History and the “unequal civilizing potential” (in James Burnham’s coinage), notwithstanding, what of Palestinian families who’ve resided in The City for generations? This the libertarian must address.

The question of generational attachment to place and title in property is a simple one to solve if intentions are good. Naturally, Palestinians should retain their properties. An historical, national Jewish right to the city of Jerusalem does not extinguish the property rights of individual Arab homesteaders acquired over the years. Muslims residing in East Jerusalem must just learn to extend to their Jewish neighbors the courtesy their Muslim brethren receive from their Jewish neighbors, in Israel proper.

In other words, allow Jews to live in peace. Or, just to live.

Fat chance.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Israel, Israel/Palestine 

The Hollywood Idiocracy has let out a primal scream to protest Donald Trump, the people’s president. Members of the collective convened to convulse like Linda Blair in “The Exorcist,” to the sounds of Gloria Gaynor in “I Will Survive.”

This particular protest was made up of mediocre females: Emma Stone, Natalie Portman, Amy Adams, Hailee Steinfeld, Chris Pine, Michael Shannon, Matthew McConaughey, Andrew Garfield, and Joel Edgerton (the last five are women with the Y chromosome).

Miss Blair, of course, was great in “The Exorcist.” The same goes for the demon Pazuzu who possessed Blair’s character (Regan MacNeil) in the film. At his gurgling snarling worst, Pazuzu was easier on the ear than the actors who primal-screamed their way through Gaynor’s fabulous, 1979 disco number.

How full of yourself must you be to sound and look as vapid as these celebrities did on the vid? A less self-aggrandizing group would have used the Auto-Tune technology, a must for the pop-pornographers who parade as artists these days! Or perhaps they did, and Team “I Will Survive” is even worse than it sounds.

Speaking of self-adoration, I’ve lost count of how many goodbyes Barack Hussein Obama has bid. The countdown to President-elect Trump’s inauguration has morphed into a search-and-rescue for the Obama legacy, except that when something is dead; it becomes a recovery operation.

The other day, Obama “popped by” to say goodbye to Press Secretary Josh Earnest. I can’t quite recall what 44 said, but the interlude was all about Obama.

Indeed, nothing Obama has ever said is memorable, or has intellectual acuity to it. This goes for his farewell address. President-elect Trump might be inarticulate and plain-spoken; but each of his words means something tangible and actionable. The incumbent’s words, conversely, are like a Rorschach test: fuzzy, hazy verbal vapor, designed to absorb the listener’s projected emotions and reflect them back soothingly.

The cliché is the operative word in an Obama sentence. Visit any random site or video clip featuring Obama excerpts and you’ll hear mind-numbing banalities. Here’s one at random (2009): “What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart.”

As measured by the Flesch-Kincaid readability test, a “Smart Politics,” 2012 study concluded that “for the third straight Address, the President’s State of the Union message was written at an eighth-grade level.”

During his interminable farewell address, Obama appeared to imply that from the fact some western immigrants were once disparaged and discriminated against in bad old America—it follows that all immigrants to his newly transformed America should never-ever be doubted or rejected. What did I tell you about eighth-grade reasoning?

For the farewell address, Obama had asked BJ the Chicago Kid—is he a Malia crush?—to ululate the National Anthem. “Take people’s minds to another place” was the instruction BJ allegedly received. BJ’s crushingly bad warbling took me back to 2009.

The scene was a “sedate” soiree at the White House—down to the disco ball and the half-nude, pelvis-grinding Beyoncé. The soiree was held by the first lady for Mexican President Felipe Calderon. Bibi Netanyahu, also visiting, was confined to the basement.

Good times.

Back to the farewell address. No sooner had I tweeted, “How long before our dreadful cur of a president mentions the ignominy of slavery and the glory of illegal immigrants”—than Obama went ahead and mentioned … the ignominy of slavery and the glory of migrants and refugees.

“White Americans” were encouraged to keep “acknowledging … the effects of slavery and Jim Crow,” and be cool about allowing “minority groups” to “voice discontent,” which is Obama’s code for burning down neighborhoods.

“How long before the president belittles white yokels,” I tweeted next. Not one to disappoint, Obama followed with a derogatory reference to “the middle-aged white guy.” “From the outside,” noodled Obama, “the middle-aged white guy may seem like he’s got advantages, but has seen his world upended by economic and cultural and technological change.”

Yes, give him some change.

All in all, it was as though the guy failed to realize his vision had been rejected root-and-branch when Mr. Trump was elected. America’s potential, intoned the POTUS, would only be realized if the American democracy works; if we have common purpose. Beware of a socialist preaching solidarity. What “our democracy” actually demands is that the POTUS know the US was born a republic, never an unbridled democracy. In this republic, self-government was to trump centrally imposed solidarity.

To follow was an Obama audacity we won’t miss. He praised his spoilt daughters for graciously wearing “the burden of years” of life in the lap of luxury (courtesy the taxpayer), a sentiment his wife, Michelle Antoinette Obama, voiced non-stop on the talk-show circuit.

As I write, 44 is making news with the Fake News establishment. Obama is giving a last, long press conference. The final love-in with an adoring press corps saw the president—for two more days!—praise the sycophants in the room for keeping him honest. Obama’s “skeptic” lapdogs obliged, as they’d done for eight years, with a drubbing. The phrase “(Laughter)” is the most challenging in the transcripts of this, Barack Obama’s last news conference.

Deplorables can agree with one sentiment Obama expressed on the occasion: “I want to be silent for a while and not hear myself talk all the time.” Hear, hear.

We serenade Barack Obama, who just can’t exit center stage, with the chorus line from “I Will Survive”:

Go on now, go, walk out the door ‘Cause you’re not welcome anymore …

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Barack Obama, Political Correctness 

A known quantity in the faking department is Rev. Al Sharpton. In a video that gets considerable play on TV, Sharpton informs a rapt audience that “white folks” were cave dwellers when blacks were building empires and pyramids; teaching philosophy, astrology and mathematics. “Socrates and them Greek homos” were mere copycats, aping black civilization.

As revealed in “Helping The Sharpton and Obama Afrocentrism ‘Fade to Black,’” this mythistory has a presence in America’s schools, tertiary and secondary.

By now we know that mass media and government under both national parties routinely generate fake news to achieve political ends. That our progressive pedagogues propagandize the youth: That’s well-known and passively accepted, too. Less known is the extent to which fabricated history has been incorporated into curricula.

In “Black Athena,” Martin Gardiner Bernal of Cambridge, England, suggested that “Ancient Greece” had been “fabricated,” and that chroniclers of “classical civilization” had concealed its “Afroasiatic roots.”

Ditto historian George G. M. James, whose “Stolen Legacy: The Egyptian Origins of Western Philosophy” claims that a rather large chunk of ancient civilization is fraudulent. The Greeks stole it from the Egyptians. The Egyptians were as black as Al Sharpton and Idi Amin.

The school tracts known as the “Portland African-American Baseline Essays” are another counterfactual abomination to have percolated into America’s anti-intellectual schooling system.

The Science Baseline Essay, in particular, claims that thousands of years ago, Egyptians-cum-blacks “flew in electroplated gold gliders, knew accurately the distance to the sun, and discovered the Theory of Evolution.”

According to Afrocentric academic Cheikh Anta Diop—a Senegalese with considerable celebrity in the US—Africans invented everything from Judaism, to engineering, to astronomy, including dialectical materialism (apparently Marxism is cause for inventor’s pride).

It’s easy to dismiss this mythistory as too ridiculous to swallow. However, mythical thinking thrives in a culture that eschews objective truth: ours.

Where once there was an understanding that a reality independent of the human observer exists; students are now taught that truth is a social construction, a function of the power and position—or lack thereof—of persons or groups in society.

Casting fact and objective truth as no more than a perspective is a handy bit of egalitarianism: If nothing is immutably true, then all positions are but a matter of preference and can claim equal validity. This vortex is the scaffolding for Afrocentric pseudohistory; the American academy its perfect foil.

When all is said and done, what are a few curricular concessions if they increase self-esteem among young Africans? What’s the big deal about making history palliative rather than factual, if, as Collin Flaherty would say, it makes the black kids less angry?

For this reason—and unlike the equally nonsensical Holocaust denial, which immediately raises establishment and media ire—remedial historical revisionism for blacks meets with little objection.

Refuting Afrocentric pseudohistory has fallen largely to Mary Lefkowitz, a brilliant Greek classicist. In “Not Out Of Africa: How “Afrocentrism” Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History,” she asks: “If the Greeks had learned their philosophy from a large theoretical literature produced by Egyptian writers, surely some trace of that literature would have remained in Egypt?”

Alas, there’s no point searching for logic where there is only African chauvinism. Nor should one look for methodological coherence in the tracts mentioned. For scholars whose mission it is to promote a view of African superiority, Afrocentrists have done a poor job.

Their methodology consists in neglecting chronology, treating myths as history, and using citations fraudulently to support the crux of their argument. In Afrocentric works, hypothesis morphs into fact, authorities that don’t bolster a thesis are recruited in its service, and the absence of proof becomes evidence of conspiracy.

One example among many of a jarring deception is a reference to the “Egyptian Mystery System” whence the Greeks allegedly stole their philosophy. The reference comes not from an authentic historical text, but from eighteenth-century French fiction and Freemasonry.

As amusing is that the city of Alexandria was founded only after Alexander’s conquest of Egypt, and the library from which Aristotle allegedly pilfered his genius was founded after the philosopher’s death.

Accompanying the dogged repetition of the lies are the vicious ad hominem attacks leveled at scholars like Lefkowitz, who has dared to confront the evidence.

Of course, entire civilizations are not typically the kleptomaniac’s item of choice. Afrocentrists, moreover, look especially dimwitted in their incongruous claims, considering that, on the one hand, they blame the Great White and his wicked, linear thinking for practically every reprehensible event in history. On the other hand, they lay claim to his civilization.

If Eurocentric culture is so horrible, why would these fake historians want to claim it as their own? By coveting it, aren’t Afrocentrists providing the ultimate validation of Western Civilization?

(Part I is “Helping The Sharpton and Obama Afrocentrism ‘Fade to Black.’”)

 

ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer and thinker based in the US. Her weekly column was begun in Canada in 1999. Ilana is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) and Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow ilana on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer , Gab: https://gab.ai/ILANAMERCER, Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaleolibertarianAuthorILANAMercer/.
YouTube channel

 

TWO PIMPS IN A POD

Boy, have whites done hard time under Barack Hussein Obama! To deliver his inauguration benediction, eight accursed years back, Obama commissioned one Rev. Joseph Lowery.

Lowery is to poetry what Beyoncé is to music. Both were greatly elevated by the outgoing, déclassé first couple. Lowery’s anti-white inaugural jingle beseeched the Lord to finally make “white embrace what is right,” allow “brown to stick around,” “yellow to be mellow,” and “the red man to get ahead.”

High art.

Indeed, on day one, Obama and his bitter and twisted better half hammered home that to be white in their America was never to be right. To be black was to have an eternal claim against whites, for no other reason than that they’re white.

Although America is the land of quotas, set-asides and affirmative action—a country that privileges minorities—the majority is, nevertheless, subjected to non-stop, relentless propaganda. Enforced by the tyranny of political correctness, this agitprop has led white Americans, most of whom harbor no racial animus, to believe racism saturates their society. So, whites say nothing when they’re roped into a Sisyphean struggle to appease the unappeasable.

Unappeasable is the job description of Rev. Al Sharpton, with whom Obama had made common cause. (Later, Black Lives Matter stole Sharpton’s thunder.)

With the election of Donald Trump, white America has essentially told these race pimps to talk to the hand (‘cause the face ain’t listening). They’ve had enough of the pigment burden. Besides, as a pragmatist and a doer, Trump is constitutionally indifferent to the racial-grievance industry.

So march Sharpton must.

Ahead of President-elect Trump’s inauguration, Sharpton’s “We Shall Not be Moved March” will take place on January 14. The reverend and his foot soldiers at CNN will meander to the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. There, they will say stuff as memorable and meaningful as the ectoplasm that tumbled from Obama’s mouth, during his farewell address.

Let us hope that President-elect Trump “shall not be moved,” and that Al’s presence in the People’s House will be greatly reduced under a Trump administration. For as of June 2016, the White House Visitor Records logged 57 Obama-Sharpton love-ins.

Before he fades to black, in the memorable words of a Metallica ballad, an aspect of Sharpton’s lying persona should be exposed. It has been omitted from the tit-for-tat that goes for debate between Republicans and Democrats. (By which I mean the perennial, “No, Democrats are the real sexists, we love women. No, Democrats are the real racists; we’re the party of Lincoln.”)

BEWARE OF ACADEMIC AFROCENTRISM

When radio and TV talkers play a 1994 Al Sharpton harangue, delivered from Keane College, New Jersey, they typically call Sharpton a homophobe and a racist and leave it at that. They fail to explain the substance of the nonsense with which the reverend riles-up the receptive audience. Roars Sharpton (1.11 minutes in):

“White folks was [sic] in the caves while we was [sic] building empires. We never admired them, but they knew to admire us. We built pyramids before Donald Trump even knew what architecture was. We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”

The mythistory Sharpton peddles on this tape, frequently played by the heroic Sean Hannity, is called Afrocentrism. It’s promoted by a number of undistinguished African academics and imparted in some schools across North America, from grade school through to the university level, and, naturally, in the African Studies department.

I don’t know how else to break it to you, but the white man stole the black man’s accomplishments. According to the Sharpton abracadabra, Africans have an ineffable claim against Europeans. For how does one put a price on the mugging of a civilization?

The gist of Afrocentric mythistory: The venerable Greeks, the founders of Western Civilization, stole their philosophical and scientific know-how from Egypt. Egypt, and not Greece, is the fount of Western tradition. And although artifacts indicate that the Egyptians were more Benetton than black; by Sharpton’s telling, the Egyptians were actually black Africans.

How did this civilizational mugging occur? Aristotle is said to have sojourned to Egypt with Alexander the Great, smuggled books out of the Alexandrian library, and slapped his name on these books, promoting them as his own. He wasn’t alone. Socrates, Pythagoras and Plato were plagiarizers in their own right.

Elizabeth Taylor The Appropriator had no business playing Cleopatra. The Macedonian of the Ptolemaic bloodline was really a long-limbed black woman. In Afrocentric mythistory, even the Sphinx had negroid features. That is until it became the target of one of the first documented, racially motivated acts of vandalism. The facial crater borne so stoically by the Sphinx comes—don’t you know?—from being socked on the nose by Napoleon’s racist troops.

Is there no end to the antics of those white bad boys?

****

Tune in to Part II. Especially crucial for parents whose kids are pedagogically institutionalized, it’ll counter Afrocentric mythistory.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Barack Obama, Blacks, Political Correctness 

You’re witnessing a fantastic fit of pique from Barack Hussein Obama. This American president is watching a legacy of statism, Islamism, globalism, elitism, blackism, post-Americanism, post-Christianity slip away, and he’s fighting tooth-and-nail for the ideological sludge in which he has mired America.

Obama is having a terrific tantrum, the effects of which President-elect Donald Trump must reverse. Why so? Aside from a few laudable initiatives—trade with Cuba and a lesser involvement in the Syrian civil war—Obama has fought for nothing but the dreadful propositions already mentioned. Trump has promised to fight for the American people. Never the twain shall meet.

To Trump, making America great means making the American people great. To Obama, making America great means making government great and aggrandizing himself in the process.

But the metrosexual Obama has finally met his match. Two Alpha Males, Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, are causing the world’s wunderkind to unravel. Both represent the interests of their voters; while Obama fights for the coercive ideology he shares with Angela Merkel and George Soros. Looking for a brawl with the Russian Bear certainly works against the interests of the American people, and for Washington, Brussels and the “expert” and think-tank internationalist industry.

And so, in the words of a Kremlin spokesman, “Almost every level of dialogue with the United States is frozen.” This, as a spiteful Obama punishes Russia for infractions the American people, by-and-large, don’t believe the Russians committed. Differently put, “The proof is not in the Putin.”

Ordinarily, to mouth about someone’s “motivation” is to make a logically invalid argument. The reason being that the motivation behind an individual’s deeds can seldom be divined. But, “Barack Obama, it’s not as though we hardly knew thee.” We know the outgoing president all too well. Obama is a case study in hubris. He began his presidency by claiming, in 2008, that his crowning was “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

“[T]his was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth,” Obama vaporized. “This was the moment—this was the time—when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.”

His eight lean years Obama ended with similar arrant and arrogant nonsense: “I’m confident that if I had run again and articulated [my vision of progressive change], I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it.”

It’s perfectly plausible, then, to posit that Obama’s retaliation against Russia, three weeks before the inauguration of his successor, is a last-ditch attempt to gain one-upmanship over Trump, who is dominating the news cycle, a thing the narcissistic incumbent can’t abide.

Essentially, B. Hussein Obama is crashing about like a maniac in trying to retain his unwarranted status. Lo and behold, in the course of BHO’s flailing, we discover that government is perfectly capable of deporting foreigners when it wants to. Witness Obama’s petulant expulsion of Russian diplomats, payback for that country’s alleged harassment of American diplomats (no proof provided). This from the man who did nothing about Muslims murdering an American diplomat in Afghanistan.

Likewise, Obama’s Russophobic lickspittles—establishment conservatives and neoconservatives included—screamed blue murder when Trump merely threatened trade tariffs, as part of a clever negotiation strategy. Trump would launch a trade war, they hollered. The same sorts think nothing of risking real wars by inflicting sanctions that starve children and radicalize entire countries against the US.

In the context of our America-First interests, let’s look briefly at the significance of Obama’s dust-up with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel, seeing a weakness in Obama’s crumbling facade, has pounced. Here’s the sequence:

First came the UN’s unremarkable resolution, condemning the establishment of West Bank settlements as a flagrant violation of international law and a major obstacle to that ever-elusive peace with the MOPE (Most Oppressed People Ever, the Palestinians). Security Council Resolution 2334 was one among countless over the years. Passing anti-Israel resolutions is a popular UN parlor game.

Next was the US’s “decision to abstain” from vetoing that resolution.

Last but not least was Netanyahu’s well-timed fury. The Israeli prime minister has asserted that the US orchestrated the UN vote against Israel. Helping to cement Obama’s legacy as an enemy of the Jewish State was Alan Dershowitz. The prominent pro-Obama civil libertarian has accused B. Hussein of personally lying to the law professor (Dershowitz), early in 44’s presidency, about being friend to Israel.

To top the blows to the outsized Obama ego, the UN cheerily kicked Obama and Secretary Kerry to the curb: It endorsed a truce in Syria, brokered by Russia and Turkey, sans Obama.

So Obama is spinning out of control. His parting shot at Russia has been described in the Russian press using bon mots like “impotent,” “political corpse,” “illiterate in foreign policy,” presiding over a “campaign of disinformation,” as badly behaved as a tenant trashing an apartment he no longer rents; his goal being to “create new problems for President-elect Trump.”

Hissed one Russian political commentator: “Obama has nothing else to do but break all the windows in the White House and deposit a pile of […] on the steps.”

Why is all this good for America Firsters? The dynamic “Process of Trump,” delineated in “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed,” is ongoing. Trump, inadvertently yet tactically, has chipped away at the Obama legacy, as the Left, steered by the nitworks, desperately galvanizes court historians to reinflate this empty vessel of a president.

ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer and thinker based in the US. Her weekly column was begun in Canada in 1999. Ilana is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) and Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow ilana on Twitter: https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer , Gab: https://gab.ai/ILANAMERCER, Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PaleolibertarianAuthorILANAMercer/.

Subscribe to ilana’s YouTube channel

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin 

“We’re going to be saying Merry Christmas a lot more. And we’re going to have fewer criminal aliens to contend with,” promised President-elect Donald Trump on separate occasions.

Alas, Christmas and a criminal alien coalesced tragically, when Bob Clark, director of “A Christmas Story,” was killed by a drunk illegal alien in 2007. Clark’s son, age 22, also died on that day in April.

Like the director of that enchanting film, the family depicted in “A Christmas Story” is all but dead and buried, too—killed by Uncle Sam, the patron saint of social disorder.

Described by a critic as “one of those rare movies you can say is perfect in every way,” “A Christmas Story” debuted in 1983. Set in the 1940s, the film depicts a series of family vignettes through the eyes of 9-year-old Ralphie Parker, who yearns for that gift of all gifts: the Daisy Red Ryder BB gun.

This was boyhood before “bang-bang you’re dead” was banned; family life prior to “One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads,” and Christmas before Saint Nicholas was denounced for his whiteness and “Merry Christmas” condemned for its exclusivity.

If children could choose the family into which they were born, most would opt for the kind depicted in “A Christmas Story,” where mom is a happy homemaker, dad a devoted working stiff, and between them, they have no repertoire of psychobabble to rub together.

Although clearly adored, Ralphie is not encouraged to share his feelings at every turn. Nor is he, in the spirit of gender-neutral parenting, circa 2016, urged to act out like a girl if he’s feeling … girlie. Instead, Ralphie is taught restraint and self-control. And horrors: The little boy even has his mouth washed out with soap and water for uttering the “F” expletive. “My personal preference was for Lux,” reveals Ralphie, “but I found Palmolive had a nice piquant after-dinner flavor—heady but with just a touch of mellow smoothness.” Ralphie is, of course, guilt-tripped with stories about starving Biafrans when he refuses to finish his food.

The parenting practiced so successfully by Mr. and Mrs. Parker fails every progressive commandment. By today’s standards, the delightful, un-precocious protagonist of “A Christmas Story” would be doomed to a lifetime on the therapist’s chaise lounge—and certainly to daily doses of Ritalin, as punishment for unbridled boyishness and daydreaming in class. Yet despite his therapeutically challenged upbringing, Ralphie is a happy little boy. For progressives—for whom it has long been axiomatic that the traditional family is the source of oppression for women and children—this is inexplicable.

Perhaps the first to have conflated the values of the bourgeois family with pathological authoritarianism was philosopher Theodor Adorno. Adorno’s formulations on authoritarianism have informed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. In general, the consensus among these rights advocates has been that the traditional family’s hierarchical structure disempowers children. The solution: Let the State destabilize the parent-child relationship via policies that would define and limit the power of the parent, while increasing the power of child and political proxies.

While America’s founders intended for the family to be left untouched as “the major source of an orderly and free society”—Dr. Allan Carlson’s words—politicians and jurists have ruled to the contrary. What was once the economic and social backbone of American society has been inestimably weakened by both the Welfare State and the Supreme Court—what with the latter’s redefinition of family and marriage, and the former’s incremental steps to trounce parents as the child’s primary socialization agents.

Culturally, the family has been demoted to what broadcaster Charles Sykes once termed a “Therapeutic Family.” Having “adjusted itself to the new demands of the social contract with the Self,” wrote Sykes in “A Nation of Victims,” “the modern family has ceased to inculcate values.” Instead, it exists exclusively for the ostensible unleashing of “self-expression and creativity” in its members.

An aside: In the 1990s, Mr. Sykes was writing this important book protesting “the decay of the American character.” Fast forward to 2016, when Mr. Sykes was vocal in defending an iffy character, reporter Michelle Fields, on grounds he once rejected in his trailblazing book. When Mr. Sykes lamented the “The Decay of the American Character,” no reader was under the impression it was the mettle of Ms. Fields he was hankering for and hoping to see restored.

Back to Ralphie and his family: Progressives have triumphed. Very little remains of the unit that was once a vector for the transmission of values in American society. Women and children are less likely than ever to have to endure the confines of this bête noire of a family, with its typically “oppressed” mother, old-fashioned father and contained kids. Nowadays, women are more likely to be divorced, never married, or to bear children out of wedlock.

Unencumbered by marriage, women are also more prone to poverty, addictions and sexually transmitted diseases. Their children, a third of whom are being raised in households headed by a mother only, are paying the price in a greater propensity for poverty, and higher dropout, addiction and crime rates. Witness the black family. Having survived the perils of slavery, it was still intact until the 1930s, when the dead hand of the Welfare State finished it off. As a social unit, the black American family is near extinct.

Contemporary America’s familial fragmentation—sky-high divorce rates and illegitimacy—has translated into juvenile crime, drug abuse and illiteracy. Yet despite all the State has done to “liberate” children from the strictures of the traditional family, ask any “emancipated” child and he’ll tell you: More than anything, he yearns for a mom and dad like Ralphie’s.

Indeed, lucky is the little boy who has such a family. Luckier still is the lad who has both such a family and … a BB gun.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Christmas, Donald Trump, Political Correctness 
Ilana Mercer
About Ilana Mercer

ILANA Mercer is the author of "The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed," (June, 2016) and “Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa” (2011) She has been writing a popular, weekly, paleolibertarian column—begun in Canada—since 1999. Ilana’s online homes are www.IlanaMercer.com & www.BarelyABlog.com. Follow her on https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer.


PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The unprecedented racial transformation of California and its political consequences.