If you want to understand the hate-hoax perpetrated by the gay “Black-Jewish actor” Jussie Smollett one freezing Chicago night in late January 2019, it helps to go back to a book published twelve years before and thousands of miles away in Britain:
Multiculturalism promotes segregation, stifles free speech and threatens liberal democracy, Britain’s top Jewish official warned in extracts from [a recently published] book … Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s [then] chief rabbi, defined multiculturalism as an attempt to affirm Britain’s diverse communities and make ethnic and religious minorities more appreciated and respected. But in his book, The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society, he said the movement had run its course. “Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation,” Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Timesof London.
“Liberal democracy is in danger,” Sacks said, adding later: “The politics of freedom risks descending into the politics of fear.” Sacks said Britain’s politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been “inexorably divisive. A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others,” he said. In an interview with the Times, Sacks said he wanted his book to be “politically incorrect in the highest order.” (Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy, The Jerusalem Post, 20th October 2007)
Let’s have Rabbi Sacks’ hate-think again: “The [poisonous culture of victimhood] began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays.” Jussie Smollett literally embodies three of those groups. He’s the embodiment of an intersectional dream — gay, Black and Jewish. His mother is “African-American” and his father was from a family of Russian and Polish Jews. No wonder Smollett smouldered to be seen as a victim of “pain, injury, oppression, [and] humiliation.” But because no White Trump-supporter was willing to supply him with those valuable commodities for free, he had to manufacture them for himself with the aid of two Nigerian bodybuilders.
The least likely White Supremacists on the planet
But I must admit that the sudden and spectacular collapse of Smollett’s hate-hoax took me by surprise. Like everyone with an even vaguely functional bullshit-detector, I never believed his story. He’s famous among liberals, not among Trump-supporters. What were the odds that two homophobic and racist MAGA-fans, ready-equipped with rope and bleach, would encounter and recognize him as they roamed the streets on the coldest night of the year in one of the most liberal cities in America? No, I didn’t believe a word of it. But I was worried that the Chicago police would never find proof that his story was as false as Chuck Schumer’s smile. Well, the police have found abundant proof, and of the most hilarious kind. The buff Black brothers Olabinjo and Abimbola Osundairo are perhaps the least likely White supremacists on the planet.
The Osundairo brothers are as Black as they come. And so they’re unlike Smollett himself, whose relatively light skin and homosexuality may have helped shape his anti-White and anti-Trump psychology. Identity politics is, in part, uncertainty-about-identity politics, because it’s often driven by the desire of marginal people to prove that they really belong to some sacred racial minority. As Steve Sailer has pointed out, the leaders of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement are disproportionately gay. Large numbers of Blacks reject homosexuality as weak, effeminate and White-acting, so some gay Blacks feel the need to assert their Blackness as unmistakably as possible. What better way than to identify with and campaign for hyper-Black street-thugs like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown? Accordingly, BLM is at least as much a reaction to genuine Black homophobia as it is to alleged White racism.
“Seeing a Black body terrorized…”
But the liberal media ignore the homophobia of Blacks just as they ignore the homophobia of Muslims. When hate-thinkers expressed doubts about Jussie Smollett’s story, the Black journalist Arielle Gray vigorously defended him at Vice, lamenting the terror and violence inflicted on the “black bodies” of “queer and trans people of color,” or QTPOC for short:
Doubting that a hate crime could happen reflects the general ignorance of the daily violence queer and trans people of color face and endure every day. Nuanced and existing at a myriad of different intersections, the attack on Smollett represents a unique form of racialized queerphobia that impacts QTPOC. Seeing a Black body terrorized because of race and sexual orientation is an all too familiar scene to the QTPOC community, which is why accepting it as reality wasn’t a problem for us when it seemed difficult for those doubters to believe. (Jussie Smollett Reminds Us That Fame Doesn’t Protect Queer and Trans POC, Vice, 14th February 2019 )
But who is inflicting that “daily violence” on “queer and trans people of color”? It isn’t Whites or Trump-supporters: it is other “people of color.” The title of Arielle Gray’s article is completely wrong. Fame does protect “Queer and Trans POC,” because it means they can live in wealthier, and therefore Whiter, places and move in Whiter, and therefore less prejudiced, circles. This obvious truth is unacceptable to the cult of minority worship, wherein all vice is assigned to the White majority and all virtue to minorities. When reality contradicts dogma, liberals are in no doubt that reality must give way. And so they will censor key facts in stories about sacred minorities.
For example, in September 2013 the New York Times (NYT) ran a schmaltzy story entitled “Embarking on a New Life, Transgender Woman Has It Brutally Taken.” It was written by the possibly Jewish journalist Michael Schwirtz (who was nominated for a Pulitzer with Michael Winerip and Robert Gebeloff for exposing such things as “The Scourge of Racial Bias In New York State’s Prisons”). This 2013 story was about a young Black man called Vaughn Nettles who “had begun to live publicly as transgender.” Having taken this admirable step, Nettles metamorphosed “seemingly overnight … from a shy and insecure youth into a radiantly confident young woman.” In his new persona as a woman called Islan Nettles, he encountered and possibly flirted with “a young man.”
But the “young man” reacted badly to the subsequent discovery that this “radiantly confident young woman” was not in fact a woman after all. Michael Schwirtz described how the “young man” “knocked [Nettles] to the ground after learning she was transgender and struck her with his fists until she was unconscious and battered beyond recognition.” Nettles went into a coma and died “less than a week later.”
And Schwirtz wrote a lot more than that as he ladled schmaltz on an undoubted tragedy. He was also very careful never to “misgender” Vaughn Nettles by referring to him with male pronouns. But Schwirtz failed to provide any more details of the “young man” who had allegedly murdered Nettles. And when a 24-year-old called James Dixon was arrested in 2015 and charged with the murder after a long police investigation, the New York Times did not see fit to supply any photos of Dixon. There and elsewhere it supplied photos of Vaughn Nettles, of his devastated mother and of Blacks grieving his death. But that was it.
Why the cover-up? It’s simple. The Times didn’t want to admit the truth: that James Dixon is Black. And in fact, I have sympathy for him. The Times reported that a few days before his encounter with Vaughn Nettles, Dixon had been “deeply embarrassed when two transgender women approached him while he was doing pull-ups on a scaffolding at 138th Street and Eighth Avenue. Not realizing they were transgender, he flirted with them, he said, and was teased badly by his friends.”
In other words, Black transphobia primed Dixon to react violently when something similar happened: Dixon approached and flirted with Nettles without realizing his true sex. When Dixon discovered the truth, he became angry and beat Nettles into a coma. That was wrong, but completely comprehensible: Black culture is violent and retributive, and Nettles had tried to trick him. As Dixon said: “I don’t care what they [transgender people] do. I just didn’t want to be fooled.” This was in fact a double tragedy for the “black community,” as liberals like to call it. One young Black man, Vaughn Nettles, lost his life and another young Black man, James Dixon, has badly harmed his own life, because he pleaded guilty to “first degree manslaughter” and is now serving twelve years in jail under a plea deal.
No Nuance for the NYT
But the New York Times couldn’t admit such “nuance” in the story. The transgender Nettles was the saintly victim, the transphobic Dixon was the evil victimizer. That’s why the Times did not reveal that James Dixon is Black. His race does not fit the Narrative of minority worship, whereby all vice is assigned to the White majority and all virtue to minorities.
Minority worship also explains why Jussie Smollett perpetrated his hate-hoax in 2019. There are vast rewards for victimhood in modern culture (making it a great career-move for Fauxcahontas to claim victimhood as a Native American). But being the victim of a hate-crime earns one even more stripes, and many enterprising folk therefore set out to manufacture hate-crimes for themselves. Hate-hoaxes have been happening for decades, repeatedly fooling liberals who pride themselves on their razor-sharp scepticism and intellectual sophistication.
They’re deluding themselves, because they’re not sceptical or sophisticated at all. Instead, they’re credulous and superstitious. As Steve Sailer has often pointed out, liberals are very familiar with the concept of hate-crime, but “the concept of a ‘hate hoax’ has been successfully kept out of the mainstream mentality.” At least until now.
The martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence
But even genuine “hate-crimes” can be hate-hoaxes in an important sense. Minority worship also flourishes in Britain, whose patron saint in 2019 is not St George but St Stephen, the Black teenager murdered by a gang of White racists in London in 1993. The martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence, overseen by the anti-White Jewish liberal Dr Richard Stone, is a hate-hoax in the sense that it advances a vast lie. According to the Lawrence cult, vicious and hate-filled Whites are an ominous and ever-present threat to the lives and well-being of virtuous and love-filled minorities.
This is the opposite of the truth. Minorities like Blacks and Muslims murder, rape and otherwise harm far more Whites than vice versa. Dark-skinned Muslims are still a minority in places like Rotherham, Huddersfield and Oxford, for example, but they have raped thousands of White girls since mass immigration was first imposed on the White British by our corrupt and hostile liberal elite. Meanwhile, liberal newspapers like the Guardian wring their hands over the knife-crime in London that claims so many young Black lives. But who is committing the knife-crime? Other young Blacks. The cult of Stephen Lawrence makes the problem worse, because it accuses the police of “institutional racism” and makes them reluctant to enforce the law against non-Whites. The cult also supplies part of the answer to the Riddle of Rotherham. Why did the police and Labour council ignore the horrific crimes being committed against White girls under their noses? Because the criminals were non-White and therefore sacred. When reality contradicts dogma, liberals are in no doubt that reality must give way.
But liberals too can fall victim to the truth-denying, lie-promoting ideology that rules the modern West. Ilhan Omar is a Somali Muslim woman whose election to Congress in 2018 was greeted with shrieks of joy, not least by the Jews who see Muslims like Omar as “natural allies” in the fight against White Christian culture, history and traditions. But then Omar spoke an inconvenient truth, pointing out that Jewish wealth (“It’s all about the Benjamins, baby!”) brings Jews disproportionate political influence and control. This time she invoked shrieks of outrage, not of joy. Omar is an unintelligent Black grievance-monger, but she has experienced the power of Jewish ideology in the same way as the great White scientist James Watson. In January 2019, Watson was once again condemned and punished for pointing out that Black failure has its roots in Black genetics, not in White racism.
The sickness and the solution
What happened to Omar and Watson proves that America is presently ruled by a very sick political ideology that punishes truth-tellers and rewards liars. Jussie Smollett tried to take advantage of that ideology by presenting himself as a victim of “white hate.” His story was ludicrous from the beginning, but he received the full support of powerful liberals like Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders. They wanted “Justice for Jussie” because his identity as a Black-Jewish homosexual automatically elevated him to sainthood. And how could a non-White saint tell lies about being the victim of White hate?
Very easily, it turned out. But those powerful liberals will not suffer any penalties for their credulity or for their eagerness to believe the worst of Trump-supporters. Indeed, their only regret will be that the truth about Smollett’s hoax has emerged. And they will be more determined than ever to keep America’s borders open and new Democrat voters flooding in. You can find the same liberals and the same love of open borders throughout the West. Liberals know they don’t have reality, sanity or morality on their side, which is why they want to import Third-World foot-soldiers to win their war on the West.
Jussie Smollett’s hate-hoax involved one Black-Jewish homosexual and two Black Nigerians. That makes it a perfect symbol of what is wrong with the West and how the West can be put right. Minority worship needs to end and non-Whites need to return where they belong.