Tea Parties And The Last Gasp Of White Supremacy???

The White Conservatives who were protesting around the country at the Tea Parties were the sign of the last gasp of White supremacy and they are showing their fear of change. They know that their advantage in this society is ending and they are going to fight it.

Anytime there is a comprehensive agenda to extend social benefits to the poor and minorities in this country we see these type of protests from White people who seek to maintain their control over this society by keeping the class distinctions, the minorities at the bottom.

So was the paraphrased thoughts as heard on "The Friday Night Drum" on WRFG AM Atlanta, "Atlanta's Progressive Information Station".

Whereas it is common to hear certain Black people say that right wing talk radio has White racist talk on constant display - the group of Black leftist extremists that were assembled on this episode of "The Friday Night Drum" far exceeded any "racist talk" that I have heard said on commercial radio. Their spirited activism against this system called "American Imperialism" is soaked with racial hatred. In their view since they are doing a "good thing" of disassembling a racist system that has historically oppressed Black people - they are justified in their hateful tactics.

Whereas WRFG errors on the side of free speech and thus will not do anything to those people who cross the line and wallow into hate filled racial talk - the fact that this is an independent radio station and the people who were spewing racial hatred were unknown insures that those who typically monitor the airwaves for "White Racial talk" from Rush Limbaugh and alike will not expose these people.

Again - it is my conclusion that "hatred" is not an exclusive province of any ideology - left or right. They both make use of the same elemental tactics to draw upon their follower's emotions.


THE END OF WHITE SUPREMACY

The argument among some from the left (Black and White) is that the Tea Parties were a fight for White Supremacy.

I do not plan to argue against this claim. Instead I seek to inspect the plan forward for the left. From this the logic or lack there of will become clear.

TAXATION. This is what is under inspection.

Taxation Defined
noun: charge against a citizen's person or property or activity for the support of government


Taxation and Social Policy


In effect taxes represent the flow of money from the people or businesses to the government so that the government can perform its key functions.

The battle between left and right is about exactly what the government's responsibilities to its citizens are. Those who are progressive/left tend to seek to use the government taxation powers to provide an expansive social safety net. Thus concepts such as "Social Justice" speak to the obligation that the government has to care for the people. "People over Profits" makes the case that the needs of the people should trump any system that is in place which works to maintain the present misalignment of wealth distribution in the country.

Those who are conservative/right are often heard calling for "limited government". Whereas some hear this as anti-government - this should be better understood as LOCAL governance. With local governance comes the consequence of a community's aggregate policies and beliefs being made as the key determining factor in their lifestyle and standard of living.

In focusing on this last point - those who seek to define a plot of land to exclusively govern/manage and then maintain their responsibility for all that goes on within - there is a critical alignment between the culture/policies/tolerances within and the outcome that they seek to develop. To the outsider they risk being called "non-inclusive" since they error on the desire for specific ends rather than acceptance of diverse views.

By comparison the progressive seeks a more expansive domain for their ideology. They error on the side of tolerance and diversity. Any loss of productivity that is promoted as individuals fail to do tasks that can benefit their bottom line is ABSTRACTED because the central government has taken the responsibility for assuming a greater portion of the core elements that the individual might need focus upon.

These two schools of thoughts cannot exist in the same time and space as they are at odds with each other.

As I conservative it comes as no surprise that I would tend to view the conservative perspective as the better of the two. It forces those who seek to produce a certain standard of living to consider all that they allow to happen within the district that they control. In having the people aligned with this mission they are allowed to develop more acutely as there capabilities are needed to support this end.

I can also admit that if you happen to be on the "outside" of the conservatives domain - you can be shut out of their umbrella of protection. The error over time for the White conservative in America is that they did not start out with the assumption that every man is assured legal rights that must be respected before you prosecute your segmentation.

Don't get to happy yet progressives - for TODAY there has never been a greater example of the observance of the law by conservatives has allowed anyone who qualifies to purchase a house and live next door to them can do so without the discrimination of the past.

Thus it proves interesting to see with my own eyes the choice by various progressives to make use of this new tolerance and move right next door to their enemies in order to purchase into the environment that was created.

TAXATION AND POWER

The ability of a government to tax is akin to the ability of this same government to use force (military or police) and the ability to incarcerate.

Ironically those in our society who are averse toward using the other two powers of the government - seem smitten at using the taxation powers as a means of subduing their ideological and class adversaries.

Is there a better way to thwart a monied adversary than to take his money, regardless of where he runs in his attempt to hide the proceeds from his productive efforts?

As I listen to various progressives I often here their attacks on the "corporatists" in our country. These corporations seek to run over the interests of the people in this nation and thus the progressive sees the government - as the voice of the people - who stand against corporate powers. Where as indeed the government should be the honest broker who's interests is upon growth, stability, the elimination of fraud and the protection of private property - they would have the government to place its thumb on their side of the scale

It is critical to understand that when the Black Nationalists talk about fighting White Supremacy they seek to do so via the use of the government to place strictures upon corporate powers. THEY DO NOT have any plans upon making the Black community more ORGANICALLY PRODUCTIVE as their main course of acheiving this "equality".

The ironic truth is that CAPITALISM's growth is based on speculation and valuations. Those who bear risk and who leverage $1 bill into a multiplier generate wealth and also receive a bit of reward. In as much as the far left opposes such capitalistic exploits because those who are not positioned properly within the system - they in effect kill the goose that laid the golden egg which they seek to gain a portion of.

After years of reading "The Black Commentator.org" web site I have concluded that the can't possibly (or logically) call for the destruction of capitalism and corporatism because this is the key water source from which they seek to draw upon. Thus they are more smitten by a movement than they are the actual attainment of an endpoint.


THE SOCIALIZATION PLAN OF THE BLACK LEFT

I have heard Rep John Conyers say "political power comes prior to economic power".
Anyone who follows this blog knows that I have laughed at and attacked this line of thinking as being ridiculous - pointing to the hollow shells that Mr Conyer's city of Detroit and other cities are to prove this to be wrong.

I now say that it is ME who is mistaken.

You see I assumed that Mr Conyers was talking about taking local political control and then executing his own brand of CAPITALISM over these former employment centers and thus allowing them to prosper.

Clearly this is not what he was talking about.

Instead he and the leftist Black Establishment planned to use their local economic order (and regional power as well) as a stepping stone. Their real target is NATIONAL.

If they can take over national economic policies and allow the government to reign supreme in a centralized model then it is indeed true that by controlling the politics they control the economics.

In the past when they took political control of cities, counties and school districts and states - they did not factor in the presence of ECONOMIC FREEDOM. Thus the people and the corporations who disagreed with their philosophy picked up and moved elsewhere. In moving one inch over the political boundary that Mr Conyers and his ilk controlled - they could escape the taxation policies just the same. Scale these policies to the national level and - there is no where to run.

Thus the drive from the Black Progressive is NOT a drive for the organic development of more production among the districts where Black people live in our highest concentrations. Instead they seek to apply more centralized controls upon the conduct of commerce and finance in this nation so they can distribute these funds according to their notions of SOCIAL JUSTICE rather than MARKET VALUATION.

CAPITALISTIC HEIGHTS

In controlling the economy and suppressing capitalism the growth in the economy is also negatively influenced. As I mentioned earlier - leverage is a key component in capitalism. From leverage comes the multiplier effect. From this comes tax resources. The fall of Wall Street also meant the fall of tax revenues in New York and other areas that were dependent upon this flow.

In my estimation - The right to certain entitlements does not translate to the maintenance of a high standard of living. As equality is mandated as a birth right resources become diluted among the masses.

In effect the government becomes the net suppresser of growth in that it carves the top off of mountains that have popped up in one area, transporting the materials over to the valleys that are in existence elsewhere.

Those who believe in this system crave EQUALITY. Even if this equality is maintained at an average rate that is in effect LOWER than what capitalism has expressed - this government suppression of economic freedom is a worthy cause.