Writers for the venerable New Yorker magazine seem to have no greater joy in life than imputing racism to those who live west of 10th Avenue.
And what more target-rich an environment to practice one’s moral hauteur on than the police department of a working-class Midwestern town like Ferguson, Missouri?
As I observe in my new book, “Scarlet Letters,” New Yorker-style “progressives” have less interest in celebrating the many colors of the multicultural rainbow than they do in condemning those who resist the celebration.
The accusers insist that resistance is born out of hatred – of blacks, of gays, of immigrants, of Muslims, of women, of poor people, even, yes, of mother earth. “Hate” stands as the umbrella sin for all dissenters.
Hawthorne described his 17th-century ancestors as “being of the most intolerant brood that ever lived,” but his Puritans were the picture of tolerance compared to the progressive neo-puritans who flourish today.
I learned this firsthand when Rush Limbaugh took up my claim that Bill Ayers helped Barack Obama write his memoir, “Dreams from My Father.”
“This may not have been Limbaugh’s most racist insinuation of the campaign,” snarled New Yorker editor David Remnick. He cited others he liked less before concluding that our collective “libel about Obama’s memoir – the denial of literacy, the denial of authorship – had a particularly ugly pedigree.”
To sniff out the ugliness of Darren Wilson’s pedigree, the New Yorker sent Yalie author and NPR commentator Jake Halpern to the working-class suburbs of St. Louis where Wilson lives.
Lest the New Yorker readers think Halpern was about to write something nice about Wilson, the editors used the most shifty-eyed photo of Wilson they could find.
If that were not clue enough, they subtitled the piece, “Darren Wilson was not indicted for shooting Michael Brown. Many people question whether justice was done.”
You and I may not know any of those “many people,” but the people at the New Yorker, who consume even more disinformation than they produce, most surely do.
The problem for Halpern was that Wilson, who has been tested in ways Halpern never will be, left little evidence that he was the racist of the New Yorker’s fevered imagination.
So Halpern resorted to all the illiberal tricks of the progressive writer’s trade to hang a Scarlet “R” on Wilson whether he deserved it or not.
In one exchange, Wilson tells Halpern about a black mother whose sons disrespected her and disrespected him as well. “They’re so wrapped up in a different culture,” said Wilson.
Halpern leaped. “This sounded like racial code language. I pressed him: what did he mean by ‘a different culture’? Wilson struggled to respond.” Bravo, the Yalie had cornered the high school grad – at least in his own accounting.
To make his case, Halpern went rummaging through all of Wilson’s arrest records. He found four pedestrian stops – or “ped checks” in Halpern’s newly embraced police lingo – that troubled him.
So Halpern did what any good progressive would do. He took them to a female law professor at NYU for review. She told him the reports showed “questionable constitutional behavior” and painted “a familiar picture of contemporary law enforcement.” That was a shocker!
Halpern finally resorted to guilt by association to seal his brief against Wilson. It seems that Wilson started his police career in Jennings, Missouri. In 1973, Halpern tells us, someone wrote a racial slur on the bottom of a Jennings police report. No misprint, “1973,” 13 years before Wilson was born.
Jack Cahill’s brand new book illustrates how the neo-Puritan progressive movement came to mimic a religion in its structure but not at all in its spirit — order “Scarlet Letters: The Ever-Increasing Intolerance of the Cult of Liberalism”
Closer to home in 2011, an email circulated in Ferguson joking that a black woman who had an abortion was practicing good crime control. In an NPR interview, Halpern attributed this to the “egregious” racist attitudes among the Ferguson PD.
The Ferguson cops, however, were joking about what progressives like Halpern take seriously. In her definitive book, “Pivot of Civilization,” Planned Parenthood founder and New Yorker heroine Margaret Sanger explained why that joke hit home.
Sanger cited in detail the case of a “Negro woman” who had given birth to 16 children. By Sanger’s generous standards, all 16 of them appeared to be criminal or degenerate. They lived, as if they had much choice, in “a thickly populated Negro district.”
Sanger described this district as “the headquarters for the criminal element of the surrounding State.” Given the biases of the day, her audience would assume this woman to be more or less typical of her race, a symptom of the “sexual and racial chaos” that so alarmed Sanger.
It is no accident that the great majority of Planned Parenthood clinics border minority communities. It is no accident that black women are three times as likely to abort their children than whites. This is all part of the Sanger plan.
On the day Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown, abortionists killed more than a thousand black unborn babies. No one at the New Yorker offices cared a whit.
Yet for the last half century, we have allowed deluded snobs like Halpern and Remnick to dictate the nation’s morality. It is they who have gotten to define sin and determine who the sinners are.
It is time to start calling them out. Surely, in writing this patronizing, nit-picking bit of nonsense, Halpern deserves a Scarlet “C” for “classist.” He actually began a sentence on NPR with the words, “Darren Wilson is human but …”
Surely, in supporting Planned Parenthood, Remnick and his self-satisfied ilk deserve at the least a Scarlet “T” for “trafficking in baby parts” and quite possibly a Scarlet “G” for genocide.
Let the restoration begin.
Media wishing to interview Jack Cashill, please contact [email protected].