The anti-white nature of liberalism is made even clearer

The Black Congressional Caucus has made it clear: no whites allowed, even if they are sympathetic Democratic congressmen with many black constituents who share the Caucus’s agenda.

Jeremy G., who sent me the piece, writes:

I think this is really the important part of the article:

Cohen [the newly elected Democratic congressman from Tennessee who sought to join the Caucus] remains hopeful, though, that he can forge relationships with black members in other ways.

“When I saw the reticence, I didn’t want anyone to misunderstand my motives. Politically, it was the right thing to do,” he said. “There are other ways to gain fellowship with people I respect.”

I suspect Cohen is Jewish. Imagine if he had been kept out of a Christian club? Would he have responded with, “There are other ways to gain fellowship with people I respect”? It is this response that is amazing me. How can a serious liberal respect people who have brazenly violated important liberal principles of non discrimination by race? Its because there is a higher liberal principle at work here: the elevation of and pity for the low. I think this is the driving force for much of liberalism.

This is the same type of reaction I get from liberals when I talk about the genocide against white farmers in South Africa. Well, they say, South African blacks have it just as bad or even worse. I get the same response when I discuss all the whites discriminated against by affirmative action. So long as there is a group of people lower than us, whites are compelled to sacrifice our interests and humanity for their benefit.

I agree entirely with Jeremy and have the written the same myself: what drives liberalism is not the desire to eliminate discrimination, but the desire to raise up blacks (and other minorities). Ending discrimination was only a mean to advance that aim, and was dropped the moment when it had advanced that aim as far as it could (namely, after the passage of the civil rights laws of the mid 1960s).

This real aim of liberalism, the raising up of blacks, is also the real basis of Brown v. Board of Education. The decision said, if blacks are being put down psychologically or left materially behind by some practice, then it’s a violation of the 14th Amendment, period. The basis of the decision was not discrimination or unequal treatment violating the Separate but Equal Rule of previous 14th Amendment jurisprudence (since the plaintiffs and the Court accepted the defendants’ position that the segregated black schools had the same quality facilities as the white schools); the basis of the decision was that the segregation made blacks feel inferior, as supposedly proved by black girls’ preference for white dolls over black dolls.

Jeremy writes:

I’m sure many of the more radical liberals are quietly looking forward to the day when they can proudly and publicly inform every white American that the true purpose of our existence on this earth is to satisfy the never ending needs of the ever expanding underclass. This is the liberals’ transcendant experience. How uplifting and inspiring.

Van Wijk writes:

Jeremy G. said: “So long as there is a group of people lower than us, whites are compelled to sacrifice our interests and humanity for their benefit.”

Liberalism was created with many trump cards. Any minority or “disenfranchised” group possesses one, so that these groups essentially have carte blanche when it comes to their own behavior. Yet even as liberalism has given them such immensely powerful ammunition, the groups themselves are not liberal.

Blacks, for instance, don’t give a damn about white liberals, and they don’t much care for homosexuals either. They care about the power and authority that blackness wields. So as majority whites transfer their power to these non-liberal groups, liberalism itself diminishes as the groups begin to vie for power with each other. So it is that liberalism contains the seeds of its own destruction.

Perhaps this is why white liberals say that they want absolute equality, but what they really want is the death of the West by any means necessary. They have a bizarre but intense desire to cease to exist.

LA replies:

As I wrote in the preface of The Path to National Suicide, liberalism is not only destroying the majority culture and peoplehood (which of course it wants to destroy), but, by doing so, is destroying liberalism itself (which it presumably does not want to do).

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 24, 2007 11:34 AM | Send