Black Lives Matter
BLM organization’s website shows that the idea of protecting black lives and seeking justice is merely a vehicle to advance a different, radical set of ideas. The organization is more dedicated to gaining political power and remaking America according to Marxist ideology. Two of the group’s three co-founders are even “trained Marxists,” according to one of them. And it shows. The group’s platform includes planks unrelated to improving black lives, like trying to get the U.S. to divest from Israel, which it calls an “apartheid state” while accusing Jews of committing genocide against Palestinians. The organization also has called for dismantling the family, saying, “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.” The breakdown of the black family and the rise of single-parent households is one of the root causes of poverty, crime, drug abuse and poor educational achievement in many black communities. Why would anyone who’s supposedly working for black progress want to tear down the very thing that helps to achieve it?

Critical Race Theory Illuminates Democrats’ Master Plan To End Honest Elections In America

from TPPF,

How rights are viewed—individual or collective—explains today’s sharp disagreement over the rules for running elections, both in Congress and in states considering election integrity bills. Democrats—specifically the dominant extremist variety—view rights through the collective lens of race. Critical race theory (CRT), based in Marxism, is essential to understanding their objectives. CRT holds that personage is irrelevant and the immutable trait of race is paramount. Thus, by definition, all politics are “identity politics”...

The late Fordham Law professor Terry Smith argued in his book, “Whitelash: Unmasking White Grievance at the Ballot Box” that the Electoral College and the U.S. Senate needed to be changed to make them more democratic. Smith claimed evidence of racial voting behavior in the 2016 presidential election—the election immediately following Barack Obama’s two election victories. He then suggested courts could be enlisted to determine when voters were improperly biased by race and then impose remedies, of the kind one supposes would “fix” the “wrong” election results.

The bitter historical irony here is that John C. Calhoun, the congressman, senator, and vice president who was an ardent supporter of slavery, would agree with the idea of race determining political outcomes. His theory of concurrent majorities was adopted by CRT adherents and their proto-founders decades ago. Majorities within identifiable groups determine a concurrent majority—the operative word here being “groups.” Recall President Bill Clinton’s failed nomination of Lani Guinier to be assistant attorney general for civil rights in 1993. Guinier specifically took issue with the concept of voting as an individual right, not a group right. Her views are now mainstream among Democratic Party leadership. This core belief renders compromise on the conduct of elections impossible because too many Democrats believe elections must serve the purpose of rectifying racism rather than merely serving as a vehicle for public choice in representation. In this construct, elections aren’t even partisan; rather, they’re racial. Elections, therefore, must have a predetermined result—they must bend the arc of history towards racial justice (as continuously redefined by the Vanguard of the Woke).

More From TPPF:

365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )