Our Israeli correspondent MC weighs in on the Black Lives Matter phenomenon and associated battlefronts in the Culture Wars.
The new Untermensch (and some old ones, too)
Black lives may matter, but not, it seems, if they are either Jewish or if they are still happen to be in the womb. So it is now official: there are certain classes of people who are less equal than others; and, of course, snowy is one of them. But this time the pigs are in trouble, too, and it is the black sheep who rule.
‘Untermensch’ was a German word used by the Nazi party to describe people that they did not like: Jews, Slavs, gypsies and others. In the Nazi parlance it is much more nuanced than just the literal translation of ‘less than human’. It also implied ‘dangerous’ in a eugenic context, as in polluting the ‘Aryan’ phenotype . They also did not like Africans, Asians and Muslims, but for political reasons had to pretend to accommodate them. Africans were not really relevant and the Japanese and ‘Palestinians’ had to be treated as allies for political reasons.
To clarify the above , I use ‘Palestinian’ in its modern context, but in WW2 one might have called them Pan-Arab Nationalists, followers of Haj Amin Al Husseini, an ardent Nazi and founder of Fatah and the PLO (now the Palestinian Authority).
Because of the confusion between political ‘left’ and political ‘right’, there is a problem of nomenclature with BLM. It is a race-based movement, very similar to the Nazi movement but lacking the nationalism of the Nazis, or rather, paying heed to a ‘Nation of Farrakhan’, where Louis Farrakhan is a kind of race-based cult using the name of Islam as an image enhancement.
In the USA the ‘woke’ movement is using race, and particularly skin colour, to divide the American people, whereas the Communists traditionally used class, which was only relevant in Europe. This flexibility demonstrates just how close Nazi socialism and Communist socialism are.
So the USA now has a pseudo-Nazi political religion which is currently as untouchable as a First World War trench system, surrounded as it was by the old barbed wire upon which it is all so easy to get oneself hung.
The German Nazis showed how easily democracy could be destroyed by an extreme party which, because ‘the ends justify the means’, could lie, cheat and steal in order to exploit democratic vulnerabilities, and thus end the democratic process and replace it with tyranny. Democracy requires that participants to be willing to defend democracy by undemocratic means if necessary, but that the participants believe in the overall benefit of democracy.
The particular vulnerability that the Nazis exploited was that the role of Chancellor and of President could, under the Weimar constitution be held by one person, thus giving the one person, in this case Adolf Hitler, plenipotentiary powers to dismiss the Reichstag and rule by executive decree.
The US Constitution is a lot more difficult to crunch, and the separation of powers inbuilt into the system means that no one person can hold ultimate power. But we are seeing before us a wholesale attempt to bring down any form of constitutional government and replace it with a one-party system. Although the Democrat Party appears to be the vehicle for this, hijacking the Democrat party has been part of the process.
The vulnerable points of the Constitution are the respective roles of the Supreme Court and the role (or non-role as the case may be) of the media as the established major critic of balanced government policy and the purveyor valid information to the people.
The SCOTUS has become a pseudo-legislative body now, unchallenged in freely ‘interpreting’ the legislation of previous governments into unintended areas. Supreme Court justices should be guided by the intentions of the legislators in their interpretations of law, but when the ‘interpretation’ generates new law then there are consequences. It should then in the hands of the media to bring these consequences before the people and lead dissent if appropriate.
If we consider Roe vs Wade, the intention was to legalize abortion in a certain very narrow context, but the unintended consequence has been the use of abortion as a form of mass birth control, particularly for African-American women and their often fatherless offspring. Indeed, it seems that black lives don’t matter when in the womb, and that women can use their ‘right to choose’ to trump anything racist cops can achieve in their supposed killing games. These sad infants are a new addition to the league of the Untermensch whose lives are forfeit in the name of progress.
But we also have another new Untermensch group to add to the politically religious coliseum. Once more the white Judeo-Christian must face the wild beasts. The coliseum was built by Jewish slaves using monies taken from the (re-)conquest of Judea and Samaria and the sacking of Jerusalem. So Jerusalem was moved to Rome and the upstart Jerusalem (the Christianity described in the Acts of the Apostles) heresy was stamped out.
Very few Roman Christians, those to whom Paul addressed his Letter, survived the purges of Nero, and as Rome burned the mobs annihilated the believers.
Familiar? Churches burning and desecrated. Read the news. (Oh! But not the mainstream, you will not find it there.)
Criminals of any race or colour have an increased likelihood of a violent encounter with the authorities. George Floyd and Trayvon Martin were petty criminals, both prone to violence, and therefore both more likely to be damaged by an encounter with either victims prepared to defend themselves, or the police whose job it is to protect those who cannot defend themselves.
Most cops are a huge benefit to the communities they serve, but Martin and Floyd were not.
It is here that we need to get a sense of proportion. Some political elements are trying to bring down the democratically-elected government and will politicise any event that they can use to further their cause, and this is where a democracy may have to defend itself in a non-democratic manner.
Criminals, almost by definition, are Untermenschen in the real sense. They cannot be trusted not to be self-serving and to see the bigger picture of community. They will use their own email server to hide nefarious activities or fly to secret islands for underage sexual encounters. A few might even steal the odd packet of fags (in the English sense, of course) from the 7-11.
Bonnie and Clyde had to be dealt with unconstitutionally. They were ruthlessly exploiting the system, and had placed themselves outside of the law. When humans become rabid, they too have to be stopped by whatever means are at hand.
In Chile, Pinochet managed to stop the rabid socialist wolves of Allende who were destroying Chilean democracy. He did it by using the same tactics as the Communists, to howls of self-righteous dismay and finger-pointing.
In the same way, supposedly insane Muslim jihadists therefore pose a terrible problem. They, too, are an occupation force and aim to bring down democracy; their very religion incites them to violence against the unbeliever and to conquer the world for Allah (Mohammed). Those child rapists in Rotherham in the UK are now back in the community, the same community where their victims are trying to recover. They are supposed to be deported back to Pakistan, but the lawyers are making a packet by delaying and delaying, and once the crims are on the plane, the revenue stream (of public money) dries up — can’t let that happen, can we?
In the meantime, (mostly) young white girls are also a new Untermensch group. Their Muslim assailants are placed above the law because they are a politically desirable divisive force which can assist in the fragmentation of decent Christian society.
In a democracy, there is one law for all, but that one law has to be applied evenly across the board. A friend in UK had his Canadian wife deported. She had not committed any crime, but she was considered to be a wife of convenience (my friend had cancer and was in long term care so they were not co-habiting…). Canadians can be deported; Pakistanis cannot. I am sure it makes sense to somebody somewhere.
Essentially one becomes an Untermensch when one ceases to receive the in-vivo protection of the legal system. The ‘law’ is still there, but equality before the law fails. In the USA of today the in-vivo law has failed as it did in Rotherham (UK), because the idea of ‘racism’ is now a more important consideration than any idea of equality before the law.
So what is ‘white guilt’ that it should negate equality?
Actually, white guilt is a tool, like a splitting wedge. I learned in my young teens a bit of forestry, and the easy part was always bringing the tree down; we then had to dispose of it. We used a set of small splitting wedges and a maul to split the trunk into usable pieces.
In felling the tree of state, it is fairly easy to bring down the tree, it was done in 1963 when President Kennedy was assassinated and the US policy on Vietnam was reversed. But the stump and the trunk were left in place.
This time the wedges are out, and the maul is ready. The ‘white guilt’ wedges will be honed and walloped to split and destroy. With the fanning of the ‘white guilt’ flames the tree of civilization can be reduced to ashes, to become just another dead commodity like a VHS tape.
So why are whites guilty? Is it because they exploited non-whites? Are African Americans better off than their counterparts in West Africa? White guilt is a lie. The same lie that the Nazis used when they claimed that the German army was not defeated in 1918 in order to justify their own coup d’état.
The Hundred Days Offensive saw the German armies rendered ineffective, Pershing’s Americans, and the effective use of tanks saw the allies ready to advance to the Rhine. But this particular WW1 campaign is largely ignored and the Nazi narrative, that of Lions led by Donkeys and the ‘stab in the back’ is the now-accepted ‘history’. Foch, Haig and Pershing won a convincing victory. Ludendorff was under treatment for ‘battle stress’ and Hindenburg was accused of talking nonsense, and sometimes bursting into tears. The vaunted German army was convincingly crushed.
The figures speak for themselves.
But if you shout the lie loud enough and long enough it becomes the de facto truth, and such is the idea of white guilt.
Slavery is and was wrong. There is no doubt about that, but our forefathers (eventually) put an end to it, despite it being the normality of the time. Do they get any credit for this act, an act that cost many young white men their lives? No, because white guilt is a lie and a tool to bring back that same slavery our ‘guilty’ forefathers gave their lives to eradicate. Yah brought the Jews out of slavery, and the Exodus, with its abolitionist overtones, is a central tenet of Christian belief.
Most African Americans were enslaved by Muslim Africans and associated Arab slave traders, not by white men. They were taken to the barracoons of West Africa, and shipped to other places. The lucky ones were shipped to the USA, particularly by Yankee Traders. Others were not so lucky.
So why are we so willing to become yet another new group of Untermensch for the sake of not being seen to be guilty of ‘racism’? What the @#$% is ‘racism’ anyway? It seems to be whatever woke Democrat politicians want it to be. Could claiming false Cherokee heritage in order to claim victim status be racist? No, not for a woke Democrat, so run for President anyway.
Racism? Dunno — it’s all illogical. It seems to me to be based upon a horrific ignorance (or disbelief) of history. Our leaders may have changed the names and the places, but the malevolent intentions are the same. Communism is about slavery. Nazism was about slavery. The object was to enslave (or exterminate) all those not part of the ruling clique (you and me that is), and then use them as cannon fodder to conquer the world. Communism’s aim was to pull down Christianity and its associated capitalism. The Nazis wanted to establish an alternative to Christian capitalism, a third way alternative to Anglocentric domination. Similar aims, different wording.
Islam, too, seeks a religious third way and associated world domination — is there really any difference? We are all in danger of becoming Untermenschen if we are not prepared to defend our rights.
When there is no morality, then the ends justify the means, and democracy can no longer stand because democracy is all about what the losers do. Do they go into opposition until next time? Or do they seek to bring down the victors by fair means or foul?
History is never simple, Communists preach ‘revolution’ but what they really mean is a return to the warlord culture that is the normality of history. Might is Right and the strong (ruthless) can enjoy ruling the not-so-strong. The only real revolution in recent history was the Protestant Reformation, where, for a few hundred years, the rule of law was established in an ever-growing sector of the world, thanks to colonialism and imperialism. White guilt needs to be replaced by a sense of Christian achievement (with a little help from the Jews, of course) — so why does skin colour matter?
MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.