Posted on 08/03/2018 7:36:18 AM PDT by Liberty7732
As the story surrounding Sarah Jeong’s anti-white shamefulness unfolds it only gets worse, and it goes directly to the bifurcation of our country that comes from the stew of leftist hierarchy identity politics, anti-Americanism and a now openly dishonest and partisan media.
The progressive defense of the Times’ hiring a bigot, particularly by the media, is an awesome display of the power and terror unleashed through the hierarchy of identity politics, because a different writer hired by the Times in February found to be using gay slurs was fired within hours. But not only is Jeong not being fired, the wagons have tightly circled across the media landscape.
Yes, because in the poisonous identity hierarchy, lesbians are far more aggrieved and therefore have greater rights and power than whites, which are at the bottom of the hierarchy — seriously, this has been taught on college campuses around the country for years — there is a built-in, intended and defended double-standard. Want to know the reason for the rise of the Alt Right and white nationalism? Read on.
As is now well-known, the New York Times this week announced the hiring of Sarah Jeong to sit on their editorial board and write editorials. This board forms the newspaper’s daily opinions. About 30 seconds after the announcement, Twitter exploded with some of Jeong’s breathtakingly hateful and bigoted tweets against whites and white males. She is Korean-born and the Times must have known of these.
We have to have a quick and ugly sampling, from roughly 2014-2015, so hardly ancient writings:
“Dumba** f***ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”
“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins”
“oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men”
“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. This was my plan all along.”
“White people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”
“#CancelWhitePeople”
There’s more from the Times’ new bigot. For normal Americans, these tweets are a gasp, and surely spelled her doom. When the Times announced the hiring of Quinn Norton in February, it was discovered that she had used the gay slur “fag” and “faggot” repeatedly. She herself is a lesbian and gay rights activist, and was using the term toward other gays on Twitter in the same way that blacks use the N word with other blacks. It’s all quite despicable. The Times high moral code forced it to fire Norton within hours of announcing the hiring.
But a funny thing happened with Jeong’s anti-white bigotry tweets. The Times’ high moral code is not kicking in to fire her, and much of the media, all of the left-wing media, is defending the Times’ keeping Jeong onboard. In fact, publication after publication is attacking the “organized conservative Twitter trolls” and urging the Times to stand firm.
The Washington Post blames conservative media — not Jeong:
“Without evidence that they had any bearing on Jeong’s extensive body of work, which includes a book she wrote about online harassment, these statements could have perhaps been unceremoniously dismissed as insignificant. But after conservative media seized on the story Thursday, they ignited a firestorm of debate…Jeong’s episode has also raised complicated questions about the stubborn nature of harassment that women of color face online.”
I’m waiting for the Post to write about what Michelle Malkin endures daily. She’s Filipino. Or maybe Candace Owens. She’s black. But they’re conservative, so again…meh.
The Huffington Post called on the Times to just ignore the critics:
“The proper way to respond to a bad-faith troll campaign like the one the right-wing internet is waging on Sarah Jeong, the newest member of The New York Times editorial board, is to not respond at all, to not even listen in the first place…But ignore the trolls you must. This includes the gleeful, snickering chuds who strip old tweets of their context and send them back out into the world. And this also includes the establishment figures like Ari Fleischer and publications like the National Review, the folks wailing about an Asian woman’s “anti-white racism,” as if there were such a thing.”
There’s more of the identity politics. Racism isn’t racism. Only whites can be racist. Minorities by this new definition, cannot be. Because whites are at the bottom of the aggrievement scale. This is how the new bigot thinks.
The huge tech site The Verge, encouraged newsrooms everywhere to stand against the hate — not Jeong’s, mind you, but the hate of those who are calling out her tweets and the Times’ hiring of her.
“…as the editors of The Verge, we want to be clear: this abusive backlash is dishonest and outrageous…journalists have been increasingly targeted by people acting in bad faith who do not care about the work they do, the challenges they face, or the actual context of their statements…it’s time other newsrooms learn to spot these hateful campaigns for what they are: attempts to discredit and undo the vital work of journalists who report on the most toxic communities on the internet.”
Jezebel magazine was ticked the Times responded at all, thinking they should have ignored the outcry as other media outlets encouraged:
“The trolls have largely concerned themselves with Jeong’s fairly innocuous tweets about white people.”
Their meaning of “innocuous” is different from mine.
The Cut considered her tweets harmless:
“Many of Jeong’s tweets that the right dug up dated back five years, and were harmless jokes about conservative white people.”
But “fag” used by a gay person toward other gay people was so harmful as to be a firing offense? Yes. Identity politics. She was the wrong kind of bigot — if one at all. Jeong is the right kind of bigot.
The list of defenders goes on and on. Jeong will not only keep her job and take her place in the pantheon of modern progressive regressives on the Times’ editorial board, she will become a hero on the Left. Worse, though, is that more people will be emboldened to think and talk hatefully like her — as long as their bigotry is correctly targeted. That is the lesson between Norton and Jeong.
And I’m sorry to say that “correctly targeted” means at white people.
Hence the rise of the alt right and white nationalism — two small but dangerous movements — is actually just more identity politics driven by the left. Bigotry begets bigotry. A few short decades ago, we were trending away from the day of the bigot.
Again, all of this ends really, really badly if there is not a sea change in the culture.
“I, like the founders, believe God created all men (meaning human persons, male and female) equal.”
Thus you and the “kooky white nationalists” that you detest are equal. You and Hitler are equal. Or you and Einstein are equal. Or you and LeBron are equal. And there are no differences between you and your wife.
This preposterous notion of equality has caused and is causing most of our problems, including the expectation of equal outcomes, after all if we’re all equal we all should have the same things. If not it’s because somebody is racist, sexist, homophobic, capitalist...
The fact is that the insipid notion that we’re all equal (or created equal) flies in the face of the most obvious of realities - THAT WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT.
And thank God he did that. What a depressingly boring world it would be if we were all equal.
I can hear you now. “I don’t really mean “equal” when I say equal”
OK, so what exactly do you mean?
(more on the rest of your comment later)
“Thus you and the ‘kooky white nationalists’ that you detest are equal. You and Hitler are equal. Or you and Einstein are equal. Or you and LeBron are equal. And there are no differences between you and your wife.”
Equal does not mean one and the same. It means we all have equal, autonomous, inalienable, natural rights as human beings.
This equality does not mean we all own the same amount, we all posses the same attributes, or that we are all guaranteed the same outcomes. Rather, the outcomes and consequences of our choices are different because the same natural laws apply to us all equally.
I get neither the same outcome or consequences of my actions as Hitler or Einstein because I am neither of these men, nor have I committed mass murder, nor figured out the mathematical nature of time and space.
The consequence of true equality is not that people can not be born into different statuses, but that there are no intrinsic classes of people. There are no royalty to whom laws should be applied differently or who are entitled to rule over others. And even in the days of legal slavery, there were no free people who could not lose their freedom. Nor were there those who were born into slavery (or poverty, or sickness, or being orphaned) whose status in life could never be changed because of the class they were born into.
The real damage to the UC system was done in the time period from when boomers went to college - the 60s - and their taxpaying years into the early 2000s.
https://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2017/10/a-brief-history-of-uc-tuition
Tuition was free until 1980 and was only $3000 by 2000. Room and board has worsened at a faster rate.
Exactly.
We need common sense media control.
What in the world is that?
A North Korean propaganda poster?
Make no mistake, the media loathes the First Amendment just as much as they do the Second. Maybe even more so.
"Freedom of speech" exists only up to the point that you say something they disagree with and then they'll shut you down.
The press are not in any measure defenders of the First Amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.