Uncategorized

A Thought From the Left: Who Gets to Define Racism?

CB-RacismWhile following a tweet thread related to the recent Twitter Deverfication scandal with Beritbart Tech Editor, Milo Yianniopoulos, I stumbled upon a Twitter account of someone who claimed to be a sociologist.  She is clearly a neo-feminist, among other things, and I actually got a headache as I reviewed her Timeline.  Once I got past the fear of sharing the same planet, let along country with this person, I simply had to call out the lunacy.

Among a litany of other insane comments which would give me blog content for the next few years, she stated that white people cannot define racism.  I almost let that go but then I kept circling back to it.  Based on what I could glean, she is probably a grad student, but I guess we’ll let her claim of being a sociologist go for now, but her comment opened up a floodgate of thoughts – the least of all being, that we as conservative have a obligation to engage with people who think like this because, in all honesty, they have gone unchecked for far too long.  Unless we’re talking about a hot-button issue that has polarized liberals and conservatives for decades, each side tends to keep to themselves – yet with social media, that has dramatically changed and we have to step up and start making an argument.

I hate to break it to my little pseudo-sociologist but racism was around long before Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci – it wasn’t something invented in the Colonies or even crystallized here – it has been around for millenniums.  I may be mistaken but I think that slavery existed in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Rome and Greece and as inconvenient as it is,  in pre-colonial Africa. While the left loves to make their narrative pliable and play-doh-like to fit their version of the truth, in this case there is no wiggle room.  Racism isn’t going anywhere.

Attempting to redefine racism as uniquely a black vs. white context is disingenuous and weakens the argument in question.  Racism isn’t new, it isn’t of American invention, it has been around and will always be around because at the heart of racism is power and the need for power and control over other human beings for your own personal benefit.  It has much more to do with an individual’s personality and life experience than it does the pigmentation of someone’s skin.

Yet arguing about the definition of racism and who can define it and who can’t is a liberal rabbit hole that they all seem to enjoy climbing into together because it apparently makes them all feel better.  The left has gotten so far gone with these that we now have spin-off of things like perceived racism, systemic racism, white guilt, white privilege and so many more.  It seems entertaining new ways to define it has become a hobby of theirs.

So does this mean that only women can define Feminism, not men?  (Which was actually another claim of this “sociologist”).

But, for fun, let’s follow this train of thought …

Who among women is better able to define feminism?  Does she just need to have that XY chromosome combination?  Does she need to be of a certain color? nationality? political affiliation? Does she need to have boobs? Boobs and a vagina?  What about Caitlin Jenner?

Based on this logic are the following assertions correct as well?

Only liberals can define liberalism?

Only conservatives can define conservatism?

Only communists can define communism?

Only fascists can define fascism?

So what about things like:

Ageism?  At what age do you have to be to be able to define ageism?

Sexism?  What sex do you have to be to define sexism?  (Again, the Caitlin Jenner question)

The more I read and attempt to grasp the rationale here, I come to one haunting conclusion, they need all of these definitions, phrases and terms to avoid the root of a problem.  The labeling, name-calling and accusations are nothing more than a ruse to avoid having a legitimate debate for fear of destabilizing their victim-ridden belief that they can fix all of the world’s ills and lead us all into an Utopian state.

For a group of people who claim they despise labels so much, they sure dedicate an overwhelming amount of time inventing them, defining them, redefining them and then, of course deciding who has the right to define them in their world view and who doesn’t.

But that would indicate a bias based on a prejudice …

Advertisements
Current Events, MSM, Politics

Has Twitter Crossed the Liberal Line? : Deverification Destroys First Ammendment

MIlo

Until a few days ago, I had no idea who Milo Yiannopoulos was.  As someone who supports gay rights and is a conservative, I should probably apologize to Milo for not know who he was … so, sorry, Bud!  But I know who you are now and you now have a new fan/follower.

Milo, a Brit by birth, is the often sharped-tonged Tech Editor for conservative news site Breitbart.com and has taken on some  savory topics as of late – which way well have had a hand in his recent trip to Twitter Jail.

In a nutshell, taking a page from the IRS who attempted to take away access to conservative groups requesting non-profit status, Twitter has decided that the best way to silence conservatives on their site is to use mild character assassination.  Milo is still unclear, some 48 hours later, as to why he lost his powerful verification check mark on his profile. Milo has yet to be told specifically what landed him in Twitter Jail even after repeated attempts for clarification.

The check mark’s purpose is to merely confirm the identity of the account.  So, Twitter choosing to use deverification as a punishment for an unspecified terms violation is somewhat suspect because suspending someone’s account is the norm for them. The beauty in all of this is that it has backfired on them and this may well only be the beginning.

Yet, this is a questionable narrative for Twitter to take against a B-List conservative with some 140,000 followers.  While liberals staunchly sit on their platform of equality, freedom of speech, acceptance and tolerance – clearly these are tenets that only fellow liberals are allowed access to in the Twitterverse.  Conservatives need not apply.

By taking control of the playing field as it were and limiting who is allowed to wield their tenets, it shows a calculated flaw in their narrative by syncing the message to the spin of their world view they limit what the general public has access too and indirectly allows ill-informed conclusions to be made.  The liberal MSM here in the US and Europe has enjoyed control for the past few decades yet their recent blatant bias against conservatives has more than enough people taking a pause – which is very good.

Moreover, what this tells those intuitive enough to grasp the overarching story line is that liberals, here specifically Twitter, can’t make a legitimate argument against the conservative narrative so they just simply cut it off at the knees.  The classic case of taking their ball home because they don’t like the score.  It shows a weakness, an inability to argue their case, an inability to have a clear understanding of their point of view but feebly defend it because they don’t want to be proven wrong.

It is also important to note that an unverified Twitter account under the name Michael Margolis , (@Yipe) who claims to be an Engineering Manager at Twitter, was most likely the individual who reported Milo to Twitter’s Terms of Service. His Twitter tagline reads, “Engineering Manager at . RTs are official endorsements. Tweets definitely express the opinions of my employer.”  Margolis has, interestingly enough, delete all of the tweets related to this incident that supposedly happened on Friday 1/8/2016 and is believed to have been in response to a tweet that Milo sent out to a fellow (female) conservative where he writes, “You deserve to be harassed.”

The fact that the recipient of Milo’s joke was female, the feminists have blindly come out in droves in support of Twitter’s retaliatory response to free speech.  (Please tell me I am not the only one seeing the sarcastic irony here).  Which leads me to my favorite tweet of the day where Twitter user Terri Hoy schools Huffington Post’s Jessica Thompson for her pseudo-feminism.

Milo has not taken this deverification sitting down and he has rightfully taken his argument to anyone who will listen.  He has changed his Twitter account from @Yiannopoulos to @Nero and taken to the hashtag #JeSuisMilo, a spin-off of the #JeSuisCharlie hashtag which took hold in January of 2015 to show the importance of freedom of the press after a French paper was terrorized and 14 employees were killed in a terrorist attack at their Paris offices.

There is also another conversation taking place between Milo and the folks at @Recode in response to their take on Milo’s verification loss – which again can be equated to the punishment not fitting the crime because verification only confirms identity and nothing more.  It is interesting that Recode’s article refers to Milo’s employer Breitbart.com as “a tabloid.”  But we’re not supposed to read anything into that, are we?

Milo told @Recode:

“If Twitter has decided to make partisan political editorial decisions, that’s their prerogative. But they must be honest with the public about it. Otherwise they risk damaging their key users’ reputations with ‘unverifications’ and suspensions that give the false impression of harassment, abuse or some other kind of bad behaviour, of which of course I am not guilty.”

Sadly, the left doesn’t play that way, they would never come out and admit that they were playing partisan politics because their modus operandi has always been to hide in the vagueness of reality with ambiguity as their ally while they continually ask for forgiveness instead of permission.