Groomers, Looters, And Other Progressives
‘Live not by Lies ‘
The logic of identity-politics liberalism inexorably leads us to support them, regardless of whether we like or not
I spoke to a young conservative in Canada last week. He said it was almost impossible to get his family to see how messed up the culture has become. They refuse to believe him when he tells them the truth about what the groomer Left has been doing. They are unable to accept that such a thing could be happening. It is easy to understand why someone would reach that conclusion if they, like many older people, get all their news from the mainstream media. This serves mostly as a Narrative Curator. It functions to keep normies, such as those of that man’s parents, from understanding what the Left is really doing to us.
Remember when everyone was told it was racist to object to Drag Queen Story Hour and that it was a matter sexually grooming children. Now we are in Phase Two. The drag queens don’t read to children, but perform for them. Lo, look at this video from a “family-friendly” drag event yesterday in Chattanooga, at the WanderLinger Brewery. Watch this clip where a little girl touches the crotch a male drag performer. To explore:
At what point can we call this grooming without backlash? Answer: never. I don’t believe there is a point at which the Left would condemn any of these. You might have seen the other day the clip in which Spain’s progressive Minister of Equality said that children have the right to have sex if they choose it. This represents the ultimate goal of today’s Left. Do I believe that anyone but a small number of left-wingers believe that? No! It is because the Left-wing policy and discourse leaders have no enemies and no limiting principle. In her important new book The Case Against The Sexual Revolution, the English feminist writer Louise Perry — no conservative she — writes:
When you set out to break down sexual taboos, you shouldn’t be surprised when all taboos are considered fair game for breaking, including the ones you’d rather retain. Foucault and his associates claimed that children shouldn’t be forced into sex. They claimed that some children develop sexual desire earlier than others. Therefore, the claim was not that consent is irrelevant but that children can sometimes consent to it. They correctly pointed out that paedophiles, a stigmatized sexual minority, suffer greatly from the taboo against them. Their project was therefore not a deviation from the progressive path, but rather logically in line with it. The principles of sexual liberty do, I’m sorry, continue to march inexorably towards that endpoint, regardless of whether we want them to.
Perry is not a conservative or a religious person. However, she has the common sense and recognizes that the Sexual Revolution’s principles have been detrimental to women, children, the elderly, and the vulnerable. This is why early Christianity was so radical in its views on sex and homosexuality. As I wrote in a popular 2013 essay in this space:
It is nearly impossible for contemporary Americans to grasp why sex was a central concern of early Christianity. Sarah Ruden, the Yale-trained classics translator, explains the culture into which Christianity appeared in her 2010 book Paul Among The People. Ruden argues that it is ignorant to view the Apostle Paul as a dour protopuritan who descends upon happy-go lucky pagan hippies and orders them to stop having fun.
Paul’s teachings about sexual purity and marriage were embraced as liberating in the sexually exploitive Greco Roman culture of the time. This included the exploitive especially of slaves, and women, whose value to pagan men was their ability to have children and give sexual pleasure. Paul’s Christianity was a cultural revolution. It restraining and channeling the male eros, elevating both women and the human body, and infusing marital sexuality and marriage with love. Ruden writes that
Christian marital was “as distinct from anything before and since as the command of turning the other cheek.” This is because Christianity was not primarily about redefining and revaluing homosexuality. However, a Christian anthropology gives sex a new meaning that requires a radical shift in behavior and cultural norms. The relationship between what people do with their sexuality and what the human person is in Christianity cannot be separated.
I hope you’ll get Ruden’s book. She is a Quaker and not a right-winger. She understands that early Christianity’s sexual taboos were necessary to establish a social order that protected those who are weak. Given our human nature, I don’t think it will be possible for post-Christian culture not to maintain these necessary civilizational taboos. The perverts and groomers who run “family-friendly” drag shows, radical left politicians, and woke capitalists (I’m thinking of WanderLinger, the Craft Beer That Made Grooming Famous(tm),) are likely to prevail without a genuine religious revival.
Will the local media report on it? Nope — unless it’s to publicize how Chattanooga bigots are attacking this delightful diversity-celebrating event, and diversity-supporting business. It’s all about supporting The Narrative.
It’s obvious that this mob was black. Many of the videos of mobs looting and ransacking stores are made with black faces. This is not a fake; it’s real.
But our media refuses to see this reality. Blacks cannot be victimized, they cannot be victimizers. So that’s the story. Wes Yang’s Twitter commentary on the clip above reveals:
He’s right. We can only thank the cameras that captured examples of police brutality towards black people. A healthy society must be able to recognize this kind of behavior in order to improve its own policies. We should also be aware of the fact that cameras can capture criminal and anti-social realities that don’t fit into a progressive narrative. The media will occasionally air discussions about “food deserts” that are found in predominantly black cities. A “food desert” refers to an urban area where supermarkets are scarce or non-existent. This drastically reduces the availability of food for local residents, especially when fresh fruits and veggies are not available.
The most common progressive explanation is “racism”. I met an executive from a large supermarket chain a decade ago at a social event. He asked me why food deserts exist. It was shoplifting, he said. It was not a good idea for a business like his, to avoid black neighborhoods unless they were losing money or the cost of doing business there was too high. He said that shoplifting made it too expensive to open supermarkets within urban black neighborhoods.
Nobody talks about that. If he had known that he was speaking to a journalist, that man would never have said it. When I went to the Apple store in my hometown, I thought about this and noticed something new: two off-duty sheriff’s deputy officers standing guard at the entrance. I asked a sales associate about this, and he explained that it was to protect against mobs that ransacked Wawa. It hasn’t happened at this particular store, but it has happened in other Apple stores.
(” These thieves really do well,” said he. He pointed out the display models and said that they were stolen, but not fully functional. They are only for display. They then sell them to passers-by who believe they are buying an iPad or iPhone. “)
These looters are often all-black mobs. Sometimes Latinos join in. Perhaps an odd white person, perhaps an Antifa type. But, unless I have missed some key videos — which maybe I have — black people are significantly overrepresented among looters. Why is this? The racist answer is that criminality is inherently a part of black people. This is a racist lie. This is what you get if the idea of law & order has fallen apart. There are many white criminals who were raised in housing estates in Britain and they all exhibit the same type of yob criminality. Law and order disappears when responsible fathers are no longer part of the social fabric. Young men don’t have a force to teach and compel them to channel their masculine aggression in socially positive directions.
We can talk endlessly about why this happened to black America, but the fact is, what you see above is something that ordinary people of all races will take into account when they make decisions about where to live, and where to invest. It is a historical fact that many urban areas burned out in the riots of the late 1960s did not recover economically. It was the sociological equivalent of investors discovering that their businesses were built on top of an earthquake fault. No one wanted to take on the risk of rebuilding and reopening businesses in areas where there was weak social fabric. This could lead to looting and rioting overnight, and the residents would be the ones to blame.
A Texas friend, who was passing through Baton Rouge a few years ago and stopped to visit me with his wife, emailed me recently after the random murder at LSU of a student on the edge in the black area of town. He wanted to know if the city government could do more to address this crime problem. He said that he was very uneasy about the dangers of coming through the city when he first visited it. I was also told the same thing by a Nashville friend, who stopped by with his family to see me on a roadtrip. Violent crime in Baton Rouge has been a problem for both the perpetrators as well as the victims. But, if Louisiana’s capital city is viewed as being a crime-ridden place, it will lead to its decline.
Not long ago, I had dinner in the company of a former juvenile court judge from this city. He was a liberal Democrat and told me that if your goal is to despair about the future Baton Rouge, you should spend some time in juvenile courts. He told me of a case where he brought before him a twelve year-old black boy, who had been convicted of a violent crime. His mother was also present at the trial of her son, and she was also in cuffs because they had to take her out of parish prison for the court session. He said that family, in the sense we all understand it for a generation, no longer exists for many black youth in our community.
Let’s talk about “white supremacy” in America and “whiteness”, which are the most serious problems facing black America and America as a whole. The Left does not have a model of discourse that can hold black Americans responsible for the problems in black America, just as it did with the drag queen/LGBT question. It can only be blamed on whites, according to the Left model. I know that there is a Right model which denies that structural racism or institutional racism are involved. I also reject this model! But “structural racism,” is not the Wawa being looted. “Institutional racism” does not cause the murder of people in cities at rates that have not been seen for many years. These are abstracts to most people. Reality is what causes people to be killed and their businesses to be destroyed.
If violent crime or disgust with grooming causes a large right-wing political backlash, you can bet that the media will tell you that this just shows how racist and bigoted our country has become. They can only see reality through this ideological lens. Recently in North Dakota, a middle-aged liberal man admitted to running over and killing a teenage Republican kid with his car because the kid was Republican. This story was reported on national news. You haven’t unless you watch Fox. We all heard about the white racist right-wing extremist who struck and killed an anti-racist protester in Charlottesville years ago — and we should have heard about it, because it was an abhorrent crime. It seems that the US media can only allow political violence to go one direction: Right to Left.
Last night I re-watched one of my favorite movies, The Big Short, Adam McKay’s riveting, extremely entertaining account of the insanity that led up to the 2008 economic crash. If you haven’t seen it in a while or at all, please do. It is very current, not only in terms of economics, but also culturally and in terms war-and-peace (Ukraine or Russia, etc.). The movie shows the bubble mentality of everyone involved in the financial system. They created a whole system based on fraud and lies, and then deliberately blinded themselves from what they were doing. They were all making too many dollars to see the truth. They knew everything they were doing and could see that they were exploiting hard-working people in packaging and selling garbage securities. But they did it anyway because it was great. The film’s protagonists were all real people, as Michael Lewis wrote in his non-fiction book. They all became very wealthy because they could see the truth, didn’t want to live by lies and made huge financial bets against it.
Here is a clip from the movie in which an older banker (played by Brad Pitt) chastises two young bankers he helped to make a big deal. Two younger bankers knew the system was going to crash and bet big on it. They know they will be rich and are happy for it. Ben Rickert, an older banker, slaps them about it:
I’m not sure what it would mean for America to “shorten” its culture in the face of the lies that the elites tell themselves about the situation — that is, the d ideological lies they tell themselves about race, gender, and sexuality that they expect us to follow, even though they are clearly false to anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear. To rephrase a line: The principles of identity-politics liberalalism do, I’m sorry, trundle inexorably toward collapse, regardless of whether we want them to. A social and cultural crash is certain to occur, likely triggered by the next economic crisis. There will be no room to say “I told you so” because of the immense damage that will have been done to people’s lives by these evil gender ideologues and criminals.
And for what? I can see why Wall Street people believed their exploitative lies. It was because they were getting rich. Why lie to ourselves about these things? Who benefits?
Get weekly emails in your inbox
Watch the Chattanooga video where the child strokes the crotch and pretends to be a woman at the Pride event. Then, tell yourself straightly that this isn’t grooming. I dare you:
I’m a journalist who specializes in investigative reporting and writing. I have written for the New York Times and other publications.