Right on cue, the Leftosphere has taken its next evolutionary step. They have decided MLK’s “content of their character” is NOT the end game. Instead, they have opted for retribution: “Down with Whitey.” (I’m not even kidding.)
An Alternet article, picked up by Salon (which falls somewhere left of Lenin) has put out a call to action. Even hellfire and brimstone preachers can’t touch their level of hyperbole. It opens with the line, “The future of life on the planet depends on bringing the 500 year rampage of the white man to a halt”.
It goes on, “His widespread and better systems of exploiting other humans and nature dominate the globe. The time for replacing white supremacy with new values is now.” From there, it goes on in predictable directions.
Like most irrational ideas, however, it is long on emotion and short on detail. It fails, for example to define the great utopia he proposes as an alternative reality. So we can’t measure it against what we’ve already got. Nor does it offer more than a vague generalization about what (exactly) he means by this deadly danger. Is he frustrated by Poland? Sweden? Probably not.
Most likely, he’s voicing disgust with America specifically, and the Anglosphere generally. Pointing out the very diverse cultures that make up both America and the Anglosphere, however, would probably be lost on him.
He is aggrieved with white people, specifically. After generations of universities expressing disgust with “dead white men”, this is hardly surprising. But why?
He mentions slavery as one of the great evils. And yet, slavery is still practised today. Although not by the culture he decries, of course, it exists. But that is not what most concerns him.
He mentions racism (in a very narrow sense) while saying nothing about entire people-groups singled out for extinction because of their language, tribe, or religion.
He hates the last 500 years of “white” influence. Think about the scientific, philosophical, technological and even political change over that period. Medicine. The rise of Democratic institutions. Individual rights and freedoms. Women’s suffrage. The Industrial Revolution. Travel. Trade. Everything.
He lists a few things he hates about “whites”. (Discounting any contribution by other cultures that helped shape this.) He lists nothing favorable about them. What might prompt that?
His main premise is easily refuted, too. White men (meaning Anglosphere, and America) want to dominate and destroy the world, so he says.
Ironically, Great Britain, the Commonwealth, and America spent countless of their own so-called “white” lives in WWII. That war cost Great Britain so much of its wealth and so many lives of its citizens, that they lost their position of international prominence.
Their enemy? Ironically, The Nazis.
The “whites” he has accused have spent their lives, wealth and treasure destroying the very thing they are accused of being.