- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

Choosing evil in Ferguson -- and elsewhere

During the Civil Rights Movement, there were essentially two messages (or paradigms) being offered to black Americans. One was that of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., which demanded social equality for blacks and envisioned an America in which ethnicity was a non-issue with regard to opportunity, social interaction and human relationships. The path was nonviolent civil disobedience.

The other message was that of militancy, if not the outright militancy advocated by radical organizations such as the Black Panther Party, a militancy wherein peaceful resistance and civil disobedience were viewed as weak, ineffectual paths to equality. Perpetual mistrust of whites (despite the millions of those who were advocating for blacks’ civil rights) was encouraged, as well as cynicism, bitterness and anger over the past mistreatment of blacks.

This line of thinking was most famously advocated by Malcolm X, the black activist who was slain in 1964. Prior to his pilgrimage to Mecca, his stock in trade consisted of such phrases as “The common enemy is the white man,” to whom he often referred as a “blue-eyed devil.” He apparently met white, blue-eyed Muslims when he went to Mecca, so he began to moderate his Anglophobic rhetoric a bit.

After Malcolm’s death, some black nationalist organizations such as the Black Panther Party made good on the violence, however. While they claimed to want equal rights, their actions made it clear that they were far more interested in seeing “white America” burn.

Since most Americans at the time still adhered to Judeo-Christian, Western concepts of human decency, they embraced the tenets of Dr. King’s message over the idea that militant blacks had a right to murder and mayhem as reparation for blacks’ collective suffering.

There is an exception to this, a very important one that explains why the state of race relations is as it is today in America.

As I have discussed before, there were those who had certain motivations for advancing the idea that despite all of the changes that have taken place regarding worldviews and institutions in America with regard to race relations, America remained an institutionally racist nation. For some it has been a monetary issue; for others it has been one of political power, whether we’re talking about Marxists or less radical statist elites.

In any case, this idea was successfully advanced and inculcated into the worldview of many black Americans in the years since the Civil Rights Movement. Thus, there are millions of blacks in America who, even if they purport to be adherents to Dr. King’s message, cling to the cynicism, mistrust and, yes, even the hatred in which the 1960s black nationalists simmered. They have been taught to believe that blacks will never be able to trust whites on any meaningful level, because (as those in the Nation of Islam actually teach) whites are genetically predisposed to oppress other ethnic groups. Never mind that Africans, Arabs and Asians have historically oppressed and enslaved far more individuals than Europeans have – in fact, they’re still at it.

It is of the utmost importance to understand that the first message, as represented by Dr. King, was positive, or good, and that the other was negative, or evil. When I speak of evil, I mean that you can take it as good, old-fashioned spiritual evil, or (if you prefer) you can take it as a malicious fostering of the baser human instincts that bring us to the point where we are willing to do harm to each other, destroy our neighbors’ property and commit random acts of violence out of anger.

Now, I realize that the moral relativism advanced by the political left in recent years has tended to negate concepts of good and evil in the eyes of some, but the ambivalence we see expressed in our society right now (such as apathy toward the Islamic State’s butchery in Syria and Iraq) is a stellar object lesson in how this has manifested.

A similar lack of value for human life is exhibited by the members of black street gangs, who kill each other like young black men are going out of style. Is it because gang members are manifestly evil, irredeemable subhumans? Of course not. Just like the jihadis who are committing incomprehensibly heinous acts of barbarism in the Middle East, they have simply given themselves over to the twisted absolutes of evil.

Marxism is evil, and while we’re at it, it bears mentioning that there are several decent documentaries that detail the participation of Marxist operatives in the transformation of black street gangs in the 1960s, including “Crips and Bloods: Made in America.” The Marxist overtones that were folded into the black gang mentality is not something the aging founders (those who still live) and older former gangbangers even try to hide.

All of this gave rise to the thug culture, which has gained so many young black adherents, even if they aren’t gang members. The hallmarks of thug culture are belligerence, cynicism, antisocialism, disrespect for authority and hedonism. Factionalized and in conflict with themselves as well as their fellow blacks, adherents to the thug culture are certain that whites can’t be trusted, let alone white authority figures.

Keeping black youth confused and factions within the black community fighting amongst themselves neutralizes any hope of unity therein, and the hatred and cynicism toward whites in the black community overall neutralizes any hope of reconciliation with mainstream society, which is perceived to be “run by whites.”

It’s a vicious cycle, but it is integral to the “divide and conquer” strategy of this administration. The fact that it results in human suffering and death is of no concern to them whatsoever.

Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact [email protected].