I don't normally go out of my way to call attention to the products of dubious journalism, lest they receive unmerited attention, but occasionally exceptions have to be made. "Anchor babies, the Ground Zero mosque and other scapegoats," penned by Matthew Yglesias and published on Aug. 8 by the Washington Post, is a quintessential example of Orwellian Ministry of Propaganda fare, so surreal in its assumptions that its absurdity is scarcely to be believed, especially to those who do their level best to avoid the Post altogether. It is also a prime example of the composition of progressive racial orthodoxy, which is illustrated very effectively and at several junctures in this piece.
It definitely bears mentioning that Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress, which is, for all practical purposes, a Marxist think tank and the current headquarters of avowed communist and former Obama czar Van Jones. This speaks veritable volumes to the subversive, anti-American bent of the publication; no other conclusion can reasonably be drawn.
Progressives wear their cravenness, arrogance and conceit as unconsciously as someone with a giant nose goblin they have yet to detect clinging to their upper lip. The patronizing, imperious mien employed by intellectual elites (and shamelessly evidenced in Yglesias' piece) in the face of manifestly juvenile, inane logic would inspire uproarious laughter were it not for the fact that the aforementioned intellectual elites have had such success in swaying public opinion across the board.
Advertisement - story continues below
First of all, this writer begins with accusations of "vitriol" and "xenophobia" most casually, as if, taken as given, they provided license for his subsequent excursion into paranoiac fantasy. The troublesome topics at hand, those being anchor babies, the Ground Zero mosque and other so-called scapegoats, haven't been addressed with anything resembling vitriol by those luminaries cited by Yglesias (Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin among them). Neither is there any evidence that the protestations regarding anchor babies (or illegal immigration at large) nor the Ground Zero mosque (or radical Islam at large) have their roots in xenophobia.
Yet, here it is: another stellar example of how progressives resort to invective when they have no cogent argument with which to sway the public against their opponents' contentions. Given that the establishment press (of which the Washington Post is most assuredly a part) isn't reporting on how terrifying, dangerous and squalid life in border states has become, obviously the stark reality of the murder, kidnapping, gunfights, rape and robbery occurring there is unknown to their audience. Therefore, there is no more reason to focus on our border with Mexico than there was five years ago.
And given that, there can't be anything other than the irrational, unfathomable and unwarranted hatred of little brown babies driving the push for border control.
Advertisement - story continues below
Considering the fact that Mr. Yglesias and his friends in the establishment press, the entertainment industry, socialists and Islamophiles in Congress and other prominent progressives have transformed the paralyzing horror of Sept. 11, 2001, into a hazy recollection (and redirected liability onto America itself), why, there can't be any reason other than mindless bigotry for objecting to a harmless house of worship and "cultural center" being built in downtown Manhattan, right?
Anyone who has been reading this space with any regularity is aware that I've had a lot to say pertaining to race lately. As I have asserted here and elsewhere, the twisted dynamics in play vis-à-vis the politics of race are by no means confined to the relationship between American blacks and whites. The number of recent disturbing instances that illustrate the political left's willingness to make the U.S. a "Shariah-compliant" nation exemplify the perverse (and, I submit, racist) condescension of the left and their racist, anti-American (read antiwhite) sentiments.
Motivations aside, the result in an operative sense will neutralize the Constitution; in the practical sense, it will subject Americans to harmful, retrograde and barbaric culture – as will the left's determination to allow parts of America to become as the society represented in the film "The Book of Eli" – starting with the Southwest and our inner cities.
As is becoming apparent to more and more Americans – for which I am eminently gratified – the core affliction is progressivism itself. It is this "communism lite" that has insidiously and incrementally brought us to the place where radical politicians and intellectual elites can expound upon the virtues of abiding doe-eyed, bearded Babylonian primitives and bloodthirsty, psychopathic mestizo savages without fear of being ridden out of town on a rail or beaten in the streets for their affront to our liberty and plain good sense.