It begins with Shelby Steele’s insights in “The Content of Our Character”… “Whites lack the authority to say what they see…facts have to be denied if the facts can be accused of “insensitivity” to blacks…the vacuum in white authority is cancerous…the public schools are all but devastated, universities are stunted by ideology, corporations are more unctuous than churches, the media are more unctuous yet and American politicians of left and right speak in barren clichés.”
John McWhorter in “Losing the Race” makes similar observations. He lists three mainstream notions which are keeping American blacks apart-- I will make the point later that blacks aren’t the only ones.
So, when a person or group thinks of himself as a victim, he removes himself from the usual moral constraints of mainstream culture. “…if I’m abused, I’m entitled to live by my own rules” – usually at the cost of those doing the “abusing” – even if no personal infraction has happened.
Got a list of people or groups who have aspired to and achieved victim status? Sure you do. Blacks, homosexuals, Jews, Christians, workers, welfare recipients, females, Hispanics, illegals, legals, unionists, government employees, and postal workers. Now take this list and substitute that name or group for “black” in McWhorter’s list. An almost perfect fit can be found for nearly every aspirational group claim.
Therefore, for “them”, at some level, they will seek exemption from equality before the law. They are victims therefore they are virtuous; therefore they are “entitled”— to something (usually) at the expense of the rest of us. And if you resist their claims of a victim-based entitlement you are a bigot.
It is interesting that employers know this about under-performing employees they are about to fire for cause. If the relationship is coming to a bumpy end, the former employee is told to vacate the building ASAP – often under security escort. Why? Same logic. If the employee feels aggrieved by the relationship or severance, he feels exempt from the usual ethics of the business culture and he can rationalize doing much damage to the “old boss” on the way out the door.
In the late 80’s Marshall Kirk wrote a book called "After the Ball: How America will Conquer its fear a & hatred of Gays in the 90’s" It’s the tactical textbook of the homosexual lobby describing the techniques intended to work the rest of us over.
How? "Portray gays as victims of circumstance and oppression, not as aggressive challengers. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will not be inclined to refuse to adopt the role of protector…we must forego the temptation to strut our gay pride publicly to such an extent that we will undermine our victim image."
“Our effect is achieved,” wrote Kirk, “without reference to facts, logic or proof…"
Get that part? “…without reference to facts, logic, or proof…”
It worked. Just ask the Boy Scouts.
If Victimology doesn’t work, if moral persuasion doesn’t work, if facts reason and logic doesn’t work, then just take over the organization from the inside and then lie your arse off.
Just ask the NAACP.
Homosexuals didn’t like the fact that the old NAACP resisted redefining marriage. The NAACP didn’t appreciate the homosexual lobby using the politics of victimology to achieve it. However, the homosexual lobby simply joined the NAACP, took over the reins and changed the organization to make it pro-homosexual. Problem solved.
Here’s what happened to the Boy Scouts.
This is a direct quote from the Arizona Jewish Post: “Jewish Scouting leaders are taking a vocal role in efforts to pass a historic resolution that would partially lift a ban on gays in the Boy Scouts of America. In a meeting of the National Jewish Committee on Scouting in February, members voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution lifting the BSA’s longstanding ban on gay members. Now the Jewish Scouting group is working to shore up support for a resolution to be voted on at the Boys Scouts of American’s annual convention in Dallas later this month (it was held and the resolution was affirmed to permit gay membership) that would prevent the Scouts from denying membership to anyone younger than 18 on the basis of sexual orientation.”
“…NJCOS Chairman A.J Kreimer says the proposed compromise is a deeply flawed one. The notion that a gay Scout would be expelled upon turning 18, or that a gay rabbi might be barred from hosting a Scouting unit at his synagogue, is ‘untenable’.”
“Still, as one of the oldest BSA charters and the sole representative of a major religion, the NJCO, which was founded in 1926, has been forced to rebuff opponents of gay inclusion who try to sway the Jewish Scouts by quoting biblical passages.”
“I respond by saying until you tell me you keep kosher, don’t try to tell me you read the Bible in its entirety and do everything it says,” said John Lenrow, BSA’s Northeast Region Ex. VP for NJCOS. (National Jewish Committee on Scouting)
Well, that’s a false standard, especially by Jewish standards. “Keeping kosher” cannot be compared to the biblical prohibitions again sodomy. “Keeping Kosher” refers to maintaining dietary laws of the Old Covenant while laws against sodomy were part of the ancient civil code. These are clichés which are served up by liberals to re-write the social script of society at large, and now are being successfully used to bully the Boy Scouts.
How did they do it?
They joined an organization which was built upon western tradition and Christian ethics, then re-wrote the rules to conform to their liberalism. And, as you can see, by lying their arses off.
For the record, try selling the notion of “gay rabbi” to the orthodox Jews in Israel. You might want to invest in a stone proof helmet and Kevlar vest.
The Jewish leader claimed that homosexuals can’t be excluded on the basis of the Bible any more than we should exclude somebody for eating the wrong thing or mixing their fabric choices. This is rubbish. Jewish dietary and ceremonial laws had no civil penalty. If you violated a dietary law, the worst thing that could happen to you was that you could be sent away from the table, or you would not be invited to eat with observant Jews. If you violated the purity laws, you could be sent away from the community until you got your act together. Violate the sodomy laws and you would be invited to leave the planet, one rock at a time.
The liberal Jews know all this stuff--and that they are borrowing these techniques from Saul Alinsky and the rhetoric from that West Wing rant which is still making the rounds on YouTube.
The irony here is that here you have biblically illiterate Jews misstating the laws of Moses and making their own spiritual heritage an object of ridicule. Minimizing their own history, they ridicule Christians for adopting their abandoned ethics.
Liberal Jews are indistinguishable from any other kind of liberal—actually rejecting the concept of God-given laws as a source for ethics or civil law. They find even the concept of God-given law or laws derived from it to be repugnant. The other irony is that the Boy Scouts once was something of a Christian group associated with the YMCA organization. God and Country wasn’t an-all-of-the- above, one-size-fits-all deity. It once was a Protestant organization, so much so that Catholics refused to join it until they could run their own Catholic versions.
So, gradually, non-Christians, Mormons, Jews, homosexuals all found their way into the new “inclusive” BSA. And what was once a character-building organization is now a multi-cultural cesspool. The original charter and goals have been re-scripted by the new bosses.
The cultural vacuum left by weak-chested Christians has been filled with whatever movements which have more passion and zeal to evangelize for their causes—culture liberals, liberal Jews and the homosexual lobby. And as we just demonstrated, (sometimes) they are the same people.
From a recent AP news story, “Vice President Biden thanked Jewish leaders for helping change American attitudes about gay marriage and other issues. Biden says culture and arts change people’s attitudes. He cites social media and the old NBC TV series ‘Will and Grace’ as examples what helped change attitudes on gay marriage.
Biden says, quote, “Think—behind all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry.”
Biden says the influence is immense and that those changes have been for the good.
Biden was speaking …at a Jewish American Heritage Month reception hosted by the Democratic Nation committee. He says Jewish values are “an essential part of who Americans are.”
Many Americans, especially Christians, have a romantic view of modern Jews, thinking of them as God’s chosen people. They are exempted from the normal societal critiques because of their victim status.
Tied to end-times eschatology, Christians see modern Jews and Israel as a special people and special place, worthy of support, subject to nearly automatic affection and affirmation. These attitudes are routinely exploited, big time.
We must acknowledge that it is indeed easy to demonstrate victim’s status for Jews. The Holocaust was real. The ghettos were real. The pogroms were real. The massacres were real. The dhimmitude was and is real.
For blacks, victim status is easy to achieve. Slavery as an institution was all too real. The institution died violently, but its legacy endures.
For homosexuals, victim status is part of their identity politics aspirations. The behavior by which they wish to be defined has been stigmatized and until recently was illegal. By asserting victimhood, homosexuals have achieved class protection nearly everywhere, leveraging victimhood toward universal marriage status for same gender couples.
But, if one points out the toxic nature of liberal secular Jews politics upon our social fabric, the observer is opened to charges of anti-Semitism.
Or, if one points out or criticizes the self-destructive social pathologies of many American blacks, the observer will be open to the Al Sharpton treatment—race baiting.
If one expresses open skepticism for the aspirational claims of the gay lobby, the observer is open to charges of homo-phobia and bigotry.
Fill in your own blanks about feminism, open borders advocates, etc. Same result.
What’s the ultimate point?
Return for a moment to the issue of Jews, the Boy Scouts and same gender marriage—the forms of propaganda employed can only be effective upon a very dumbed down and willfully ignorant public. This generation of Americans, including American Christians, is no exception. If you are a Christian who finds yourself softening your critique of liberals who advocate toxic ethics, business or sexual, because they are Jews, then you are a mark.
If you are a taxpayer who finds himself backing off stating “what you see” as Shelby Steele observed, you are a mark.
If you are a parent who thinks the Boys Scouts really should be open to sexually confused kids or that marriage should be offered to people of the same gender because a secular Jew trashes his own holy book, then you are a mark.
If a Jew is a scumbag, he isn’t less of a scumbag because he is a Jew. If you pull your punches and don’t say what you see, because some hustler might falsely label you anti-Semitic, then you are a mark.
If a black is a scumbag…
If a white is a scumbag…
If a Christian is a scumbag…
If a Republican is a scumbag…
If an immigrant is a scumbag…
The list goes on and on. By the way, if you say to yourself, “Well he may indeed be a scumbag, but he is OUR scumbag.” You aren’t a mark, you are an enabler. And YOU are a scumbag.
The same point applies to any identity politics movement, racial, gender, or religious movement. The same point applies to all the issues as well-- to banking, foreign policy, the definition of marriage, international relations, pornography, Hollywood or aberrant Supreme Court rulings, etc. It’s ok to say so. It is not ok to not “say what you see”.