|
|
|
Looking at the shambles around us, it is hard for
young people to believe that anything has improved
in any area since the 60s. But I remember that back
then a debate would consist of liberal Republicans
arguing on television with liberal Democrats. Things
were so bad that liberal propaganda was declared
to be a public service, AND NO ONE PUBLICLY DISAGREED.
Television is still solid leftist propaganda, but
they don't brag about it any more or call it public
service-type "messages." It is now called
propaganda when it is mentioned.
Back in the 1950s and 1960s, movies and television
shows would have "social messages" in
them. These "social messages" would call
for integration or peace with the Communists. A
"social message" would explain to us that
what we called criminals were actually innocent
victims of society.
Some New York writer would appear on television
and tell us how he tried to get "social messages"
into his work. He would chide others for not having
enough "social messages" on television.
Everybody would agree with him.
It was taken for granted that we were all to feel
grateful for these "social messages."
Back then, though no one else seemed to question
this, I was absolutely puzzled by it.
"Why," I wanted to ask, "Are we to
be grateful that someone puts his political propaganda
into my television entertainment?" But, as
I say, no one on the talk shows ever asked this
question. It was just something that was supposed
to be good for us.
Today, I am in the same quandary when it comes to
all the media urging people to do me a big favor
and vote. Why on earth should I want somebody to
vote? Why is a disinterested person doing the country
a favor by staggering to the polls and casting a
mindless vote? You see almost no one protesting
this nonsense, though I know it makes no sense to
any of us. We were the same way back then about
those "social messages."
Younger people cannot imagine what a relief it is
to have any nationwide means by which to criticize
the left.
There is one nice thing about speaking for truth
that has long been suppressed: the more avenues
that open up to us, the more the old ones which
are locked in by liberals lose the power to prevent
Americans from telling each other the truth. As
Lake High says, "If you're not on the Internet,
you're not in politics."
We are getting new avenues also in the explosion
of cable channels. And the Internet and cable help
each other. Back in the old days, even if we could
have brought up points on the Internet, the three
major networks and PBS could and would have ignored
us. But today,
with so many cable outlets and so many competing
talk programs, there is less and less time between
the buzz on the Internet and public discussion.
Meanwhile all this is killing network news, which
means it is destroying one of our deadliest enemies.
Information technology is our friend, and it's moving
faster all the time.
|
|
Conservatives whine and they cry about
how biased the press is against them. Then they
do exactly what the liberals tell them to, and the
bias just gets worse.
So they whine some more, then do exactly the same
thing again.
One after another, conservatives denounce "Racism."
They scream and they yell at anybody who is further
right than they are about white people. They shriek
"racist" and "Nazi" at anyone
the left does not approve of. They say that if they
cut enough "racist" throats, those sweet,
fair liberals will see that they are not racists
and approve of them.
So what would any sane person expect to happen?
The minute you denounce everybody to your right
on race as a "Nazi," the liberals start
denouncing YOU as a Nazi. After all, it was YOU
who made the screaming of Nazi so legitimate.
Justin Raimondo is a columnist I had begun to enjoy
reading. But like so many others, he suddenly went
into hysterics with a wild attack on a major portion
of the right that is just what the leftists ordered.
Raimondo just let out a poisoned-pig shriek about
how anybody who wants to limit immigration or has
any concerns about immigration and integration is
not merely a racist, but a NAZI -- or at least a
Nazi sympathizer (http://128.121.216.19/justin/pf/p-j120400.html
December 4, 2000).
It turns out that one of the people he says is working
with these "Nazis" is David Horowitz.
Horowitz is a Jew, but when these nutcases start
shrieking Nazi, no factual information can get in
the way.
This Raimondo character considers himself a libertarian,
but he has no interest whatsoever in anything but
racial heresy. He indicates that anybody who doesn't
go after the minority vote -- which is just a code
word for pandering to the left -- is some kind of
Nazi or in collaboration with Nazis.
Worst of all, Raimondo specifically identifies any
belief in racial purity with Nazism.
Why are so many self-proclaimed "libertarians"
interested only in a person's stand on race and
not on his stand on FREEDOM?
It is not a person's stand on race that makes him
a Nazi. That is what liberals want us to say. It
is one's stand on FREEDOM that makes one a totalitarian,
either Fascist or Communist. You can be a perfectly
good right-wing totalitarian with no racial views
at all. Franco of Spain and Salazar of Portugal
followed a policy of "assimilacion," the
intermarriage of whites and blacks to form a single
fascist nation.
It is not racial or economic theories that make
one a Nazi or a Communist. Willy Brandt was a Democratic
Socialist and a leading anti-Communist as mayor
of West Berlin. The point is not his economic theory,
but the fact that he was for FREEDOM against TOTALITARIANISM.
Practically every congressman and senator before
1960 disapproved of racial intermarriage, including
that civil rights hero, Harry Truman. Following
Raimondo's logic, the army that invaded Normandy
was Nazi, because it was segregated.
Liberals love that kind of talk on the right, because
it makes their own witch-hunts and denunciations
successful. But the Raimondos of the world think
that it makes the right safe from being accused
of "racism" if they shout the word loud
enough. It never works.
All it does is make it that much easier for liberals
to denounce all of us.
|
|
|
Home
| Current Articles | Article Archive | About
Bob Whitaker | Contact Bob | Links
| Privacy
Policy
|
|
|