PC and the race card

Socialists are not very bright, or they wouldn't continue to try to force the rest of us to live by a social and economic scheme that as failed everywhere it has ever been tried. Never doubt for a moment, however, that they aren't clever. Deception, half-truths, and lies are their weapons, but the premier tools of success for them are "political correctness" and the use of the "race card".

When ideas, concepts are being discussed between individuals or groups, it is sometimes possible to come to an agreement about what is true, or what is useful, about what is right or moral. Differences in how we see the world, in what we believe is right and proper, will often make it very difficult to come to an understanding of not only how the other person came to the conclusions they have reached, but also of what is actually acceptable in a moral sense. But understanding can take place, and once in a while they can even reach an agreement. However, debate must be open and fair, must not be turned into an attack upon the debater.

When socialists, who are calling themselves "progressives" these days, want to get you to accept their conclusions, their beliefs, as being right and proper, they simply forbid discussion. They do this by determining ahead of time what can be discussed and what cannot. By establishing their own rules of what is acceptable to speak about or believe. So they have foisted the concept of "political correctness" upon us, and have manipulated the debate to the point where many people have bought into their game.

It isn't politically correct to discuss Islam as a violent ideology, or muslims as the premier purveyors of terrorism across the globe, even though a dispassionate look at the facts will prove to the most ill-informed that both notions are true. It isn't politically correct for your child to wear an American flag on the frame of the bicycle he rides to school, or upon his jacket, or a notebook, but it is acceptable for the child of illegal aliens to run a Mexican flag up the flagpole at the same school. It isn't acceptable for a bank - on private property - to display a Christian manger scene, but it is acceptable to build a mosque mere feet from the scene of the greatest muslim terrorist act, its greatest triumph against Western civilization since Islam last conquered Europe.

If you attempt to argue with them, you are labeled an Islamaphobe, a "nativist", or - the nuclear option - a racist. Now, no one likes to be called a racist. When the race card is used in this fashion, it is very much like the question, "Are you still beating your wife?" There is no way to answer it without seeming on the defensive, without the impression that somehow there is substance to the accusation. Now the debate has shifted from discussing the real issues to wasting time defending yourself against an empty accusation. The Progressives love this. Now they no longer have to try to justify the unjustifiable.

I know that I am "singing to the choir" for some of you who might read this. However, I'm hoping to shed a little light on the process for those of you who haven't really given this notion much thought. PC has been so damaging to the conservative's ability to engage in meaningful debate with both independents and progressives, in the presentation of his or her beliefs, that for all intents and purposes such debate has ended. The progressives treat all debate that runs counter to their socialist agenda as an ad hominem attack, upon themselves or upon the minority groups they pretend to be concerned about (some are ignorant enough to actually think what they are doing will benefit those minorities, when more often it is damaging to them, but many of the more elite progressives who are consciously promoting socialism - like George Soros - know it is damaging and don't care. Think about how the welfare system separates minority children from their fathers.)

An otherwise bright young man I spoke with the other day listened while I explained my experience in law enforcement and the use of profiling to catch bad guys. That it made no sense to detain and pat down a 72-year old woman when the suspect who robbed the Stop&Shop was a 6'5" 350 lb male with facial tattoos and a leather motorcycle jacket. Knowing that all, or almost all, aviation terrorism has been committed (so far) by muslim males, what earthly sense does it make to pat down grandma, an elderly Roman Catholic nun, or your three-year old daughter? When I told him that profiling was simply turned into a dirty word by progressives, and that we needed to target muslims, particularly males (although that is obviously going to change, now that the terrorists know TSA won't grope under a burka), he said to me, "But isn't that racist?"

The media, his young friends (there are no species on Earth more gullible on social issues than the college student, reinforced by the garbage spouted by their socialist professors), and perhaps even his parents have taught him that any attempt to single out a particular group for any purpose whatsoever is "racist" (unless you are a Pigford recipient of tax payer largess. Google "Pigford".) Again, progressives want to shut down debate without the nasty mess of having to deal with facts, so they play the race card, when logic and reason scream that profiling, using rational criteria to identify your subject, is what works. Ask any cop (real cops, not your political police chief with his nose up the Federal butt, looking for those Federal dollars.)

Until conservatives force the issue, until they call BS on every attempt to shut down debate with the PC or race card, and make progressive answer to facts, not feelings, there will be no debate. We must refuse to even respond to their attempts to make any disagreement into an ad hominem attack, and force them to respond to the facts. So long as we play their game, we will lose, and so will America. Saul Alinsky, the President's philosophical god-father, wrote the rules that the progressives play by, and it is high time we stopped playing by his rules.