Amerika

Back in the late 1980s, in diversity-forward minority-majority places like southern Texas, it became clear that diversity would never succeed and it was the fault of no one. In the same way, it was clear that we were not controlled by Illuminati, but by self-deceiving democracy.

The realities of life are rarely as exciting as the sexed-up, vivid, and symbolically interesting stories we tell each other to make sense out of situations too complex for everyday thinking.

And so, very little falls into the nice easy categories that are like hot sugared donuts to our minds, easy to digest and providing an instant polarized jolt of calories and dopamine. So there must be a good guy, a bad guy, a conspiracy, and a savior.

Reality is more gritty and nuanced. For example, many of us from the South feel a great deal of compassion for Black people. We think they got a raw deal. We cannot imagine that they will ever love this country, since it enslaved them and then discriminated against them.

We cannot imagine how they could ever love this country. There will always be an asterisk: life here is good, but * remember slavery, remember Jim Crow, remember the LA Riots, or whatever. They do not get a clean connection to love for their host nation.

Many of us have a great deal of sympathy for this position. How does one ever love a nation, when mono-ethnic nations alone prevail, and the founding group is different from the diversity groups? Anyone outside the founding group is doomed over time, no matter what we say or do.

Martin Luther King Jr was not a good person. He was allied with Communists, and participated in rape in addition to faking his way through life:

Newly released documents pertaining to FBI surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., include deeply disturbing and potentially explosive allegations about the slain civil-rights leader’s extramarital sexual activities, and that he was present in a hotel room during an alleged rape. But some historians caution that there are reasons to doubt the claims.

The new information was unearthed by David J. Garrow, the Pittsburgh-based author and historian who won the Pulitzer Prize for biography for his 1986 book “Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.” Key findings were published online and in print Thursday in “The Troubling Legacy of Martin Luther King,” a 7,800-word article in the conservative British monthly Standpoint.

Pulitzer-winning author and historian David J. Garrow lives in Pittsburgh. Garrow is a former professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He has made a life-long study of King and the FBI’s obsessive spying on him.

A cynic might say that King became important because what he preached resonated more with White people than Black people. He pitched an easy answer to the race relations crisis, which was to buy off Blacks and give Whites an easy answer.

White guilt after all leaves Whites still in control: they admit some wrongdoing, pay out some money, and then continue to run everything. This is the quiet “racism” of the Leftist which enables them to still be in control, and for the whitish to replace the White.

They ignored blatant plagiarism by King, and if experience of political correctness is consistent, probably authored much of his work for him:

Recent scholarship by the Martin Luther King, Jr., Papers Project of the King Institute has revealed that as a student at Crozer and Boston, King frequently appropriated the words of other writers without proper attribution. Volumes I and II of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr., have demonstrated that while his bibliographies contained the authors and books that he drew on in his own compositions, his papers often lacked the footnotes and quotation marks that identified his use of these sources in his text. His habit of plagiarizing others’ work, intentionally or not, can be found in the various drafts of his dissertation. King borrowed from several secondary sources without proper citation, including a dissertation written by fellow Crozer student Jack Boozer for DeWolf three years earlier, and a review of Tillich’s Systematic Theology written by one of King’s former professors.

Why would they undertake this effort? King offered a simple good-versus-evil worldview which did not demand changes to the status quo, only subsidies for Blacks. White people treated it like an HOA: write a check, laugh it off, and demand more power for having accepted it.

Even more, he fit into the ideology of the era of the world wars, which held that someday world federalism and international socialism would eliminate the constant war of the have-nots against the haves, and the good life could return.

No one wants to admit it now, but MLKjr was a communist community organizer:

Capitalism ​“has brought about a system that takes necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes,” King wrote in his 1952 letter to Scott. He would echo the sentiment 15 years later in his last book, Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?: ​“Capitalism has often left a gap of superfluous wealth and abject poverty [and] has created conditions permitting necessities to be taken from the many to give luxuries to the few.”

In his famous 1967 Riverside Church speech, King thundered, ​“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

And in an interview with the New York Times in 1968, King described his work with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) this way, ​“In a sense, you could say we are engaged in the class struggle.”

He is celebrated as a symbol because Black Americans hope for a point at which their experience is recognized. Instead, they got a race guilt huckster who wanted to do what benefited the White bourgeois experience and the dominant ideology.

As the era of Total Remigration dawns, we are revisiting the Black experience: nothing can make it better. The presence of Blacks in the West is cruel to both the founders and Blacks, who are kept captive in a society that once enslaved them.

Contrary to what King said, this situation cannot be fixed. You cannot feel at home in a society designed for a different group, with laws for that group, whose historical founding is anchored in members of that group.

Blacks will always feel alien here, no matter what we do, just like all the other diversity groups. Diversity is cruel and alienates people from their cultures and tribes, which leads to blatant frauds like King being celebrated as heroes when they were in fact appeasers.

Tags: civil rights, communism, diversity, martin luther king jr.