by Ilana Mercer
How does one distill the worldview of the Democrats vying for their party’s presidential nomination? Outrace each other on racial righteousness? End Anglo-America? Welcome the World? Evict the unborn? Speak Spanish; English is your second language? All the above—and worse.
On display, again, during the second in a series of Democratic primary debates, were the racial (read anti-white) dynamics. Genial uncle Joe Biden bowed and scraped to his multicultural rivals, whereupon they set upon him like a flash mob; a multicultural mugging, Pat Buchanan called it.
Race—more accurately, anti-white politics—is the Democrats’ cri de coeur. They have no other passion other than hounding and excommunicating others for what are thought crimes—for thinking, speaking or tweeting in politically unpleasing ways.
But practicing ageism gives these social-justice warriors no pause. Leading the purge of the party’s elders was Eric Swalwell, a nasty bit of work who had mercifully dropped out after the first round of debates, late in June. At the time, Swalwell had called on older Democrats to “pass the torch.” “[I]t’s time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans.”
“If we are going to solve the issue, pass the torch. If we are going to solve climate chaos, pass the torch. If we want to end gun violence and solve student debt, pass the torch.”
Swalwell obviously imagined such ugly sloganeering was a winning strategy. And who can blame him? However, other than a writer for the cause at The Atlantic, the representative from northern California galvanized nobody with his call to expunge Democrats in their dotage. “The Millennial Left Is Tired of Waiting,” intoned said writer. That magazine is packed with verbally incontinent Millennials, all poised to torch deviationists.
Mr. Nasty is gone, and Democratic voters are, so far, sticking with the safe bet: looks like the party that habitually denigrates white America is hoping that the next U.S. president is an old, white American. Are these hypocrites suggesting that there’s something confidence-inspiring about this much-maligned cohort?
The women on the stage, the lovely Tulsi Gabbard and the well-mannered Marianne Williamson excepted, alternated between the roles of shrew, scold and bully (of old, white men, naturally). Following Kamala Harris’ lead, the insufferable Kirsten Gillibrand mooed about an old Biden op-ed in which he had warned that women entering the workforce would imperil the family. Who will write the chapter about women like Gillibrand who enter politics and imperil the nation?
For comedic relief, consider the choreography that must have gone into positioning the oddball candidates, striding onto the Fox Theater stage in Detroit. One could hardly place mini-man Pete Buttigieg—boy, has the military lowered its physical requirements—alongside candidates who’d stare down at tiny Pete from vertiginous heights.
Height, however, did nothing to increase a tall Democrat’s stature. The group’s pathological, self-immolating progressivism was the great leveler, although an unspoken pack hierarchy was certainly apparent among the candidates. Naturally, that pecking order was racial. The culturally more exotic candidates—Harris, Booker and Castro—were the undeclared top dogs. The commonplace, palefaced Democrats were the political underdogs, with less street cred. The first round of Democratic debates, aforementioned, saw the Spanish supremacists quickly separate themselves from the English-speaking plodders.
Indeed, disunity and discord were everywhere apparent in these Democratic duels. Separation is the operative word in Rome, and beyond, in the provinces. It’s Spanish vs. English; melody vs. maniacal ululation. I am referring here to the dissonant renditions of Christian hymns and patriotic songs.
If only symbolically, even the music spoke to the nation’s disunity. “America the Beautiful” and “Amazing Grace,” first, by Detroit’s Perfecting Church Choir, then, by Flint City Wide Choir, were jarring, atonal productions.One expects a melodic, musical rendition of a much-loved, shared oeuvre.
The over-crowded Democratic field rabbited on in unison about Trump’s racism and their own grand plans for state-run everything. Most significant were the contradictions. Bernie Sanders lamented that 500,000 Americans live on the streets, but saw no inconsistency in inviting the world’s poor to settle the same streets.
The same “quality” of contradiction came from Kamala Harris. In response to Tulsi Gabbard’s evisceration of her record as a fair prosecutor, Harris later told an adoring press gaggle that “people want public safety.” She was not going to shy away from her record in providing it. How does “public safety” jibe with Harris’s open-borders promiscuity? Oh, I forgot. Anyone marching 1000 miles to jump America’s southern border is, by definition, not a criminal, “reasoned” Bernie, below.
Prosecuting illegal aliens is “a crisis of cruelty”, alliterated Buttigieg. Decriminalize border crossing, bayed the rest. Illegal crossing should be a civil-law infraction, never a criminal violation. Immigrants are America, crowed Amy Klobuchar. Anyone who walks 1000 miles to the U.S. is no criminal, seconded Sanders. How can such an insane bunch of sell-outs talk about a “sane immigration policy”?
In a field distinguished by its ruthlessly radical mindset, one can understand how E-Warren—let’s jazz up the senator from Massachusetts a bit—has been described by TV’s activist anchors as strong and powerful. Compared to the other candidates and the sob stories they foisted on viewers—Michael Bennet tethered his family’s history to the Holocaust; Gillibrand squealed about her daughter’s EpiPen—E-Warren is The Man.
When E-Warren says to expand immigration, we listen. Especially when she bolsters her words with that signature muscular move of hers: make the hair flaps covering her ear tips quiver. Yes, E-Warren is The Man among the Democratic conga-line of cretins.
One thing is clear: while constituents have ranked immigration as a top issue for 2020, the Dems’ take on the issue was to speak to the need to pry the borders ever wider. Clearly, we have a sovereignty problem, not a humanitarian problem. We Americans have no representation.
In line with their political loyalties, every single one of the candidates practically sang from the one hymn sheet, a lot of it in Spanish: “We have to do more for families looking for a better life.” And they were not speaking of American families.
Duly, Julián Castro had memorized the name of a child and father who drowned attempting to break into the USA illegally and recklessly. If “drowning exposes the risks of illegal crossing” is a true statement—and it indubitably is—then every American murdered by an immigrant exposes the risks of mass immigration.
But of the sons and daughters of Angel Moms, Castro had no memory. If Mayor Castro can’t spare a thought for the many young Americans dead by illegal aliens, you ask, how about a word of sympathy for an American dog?
Spare a thought, will you, Mr. Castro, for poor little Estrella? She was a helpless mutt, raped to death by a constituent of yours, an illegal alien by the name of Fidel Lopez. What viewers and voters got from Castro amounted to drain and dry that Rio Grande! Level the land to ease the passage of Central America into North America. Let them come in their millions, no, in their billions. Decriminalize crossings. Disband ICE. Deify DACA. Deny no asylum claim. Table a marshal plan for Central America. Immigrants are Americans, only better and more inspiring. “We want more refugees”—so said the nogoodnik who runs my state, Washington.
John Hickenlooper chimed in by calling ICE agents kidnappers and child abusers. An Hispanic anchor, during the first round of debates, even bad-mouthed Obama’s proud record of 3 million deportations. “Migrant kids who do not have proper claims will be repatriated,” roared Barack Obama, back in the good old days.
All the above served only to cement the old white guy’s lead in the polls. Ordinary Democrats prefer the doddering Joe Biden to demonic females and their housetrained hombres. Certainly, only media is charmed by Ms. Harris, who is an insufferable scold, with an annoying nasal twang for a voice.
When all is said and done, not even Democrats wish to be governed by the likes of Kirsten Gillibrand and Kamala Harris, who rage as though permanently on the rag. However this circus ends, let’s hope that regular Democrats continue to be put off by the rude displays coming from the demented, intersectional, social-injustice succubae overcrowding the democratic primaries.
Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly, paleolibertarian column since 1999. She is the author of Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011) & The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June, 2016). She’s on Twitter, Facebook & Gab. New on YouTube:“America Belongs To The World; It’s Everybody’s Home.”
The Democrats have a political investment in voters “of colour” who do “not look like” the others, and who do not share their Anglo mother-tongue, but who can “blame” the latter for real or imaginary disadvantages, and seek “reparation” by quota and “compensation” through tax. Endless immigration, “documented” or otherwise, is a source of continual recruitment and political power.
Opposition to this process – even if supported by individual Republicans “not of colour”, i.e. of Native American, Black Slave or Asian Immigrant “heritage” – is automatically denounced as “far right extremism” = “white nationalism” = “white supremacy” = “race hatred” = “neo-Nazism” = “Nazism” = “Nazi terrorism” = “genocidal mass-murder”. Of course, one can rely on “occidental” bloggers (whether incorrigible madmen or infiltrated moles) to promote and perpetuate this narrative.
The problem arose mainly with the “Western Marxist” policy in the USA during the 1960s, using South Vietnam and South Africa, to fabricate a revolutionary movement to bypass, or work against, stubborn, patriotic and relatively comfortable workers by hand and brain, by explicitly and collectively politicising “students [future teachers & media folk], women [future feminists, abortion fangirls, birth-strikers], sexual minorities [“gays”, lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, pan-amorists], ethnic minorities and migrants” (disabled added later) against nationhood, family values and traditional religion; plus “no platform” anywhere for critics.
Such people have been preparing for a “racial” conflict and, in the event of another crisis of capitalism, mobilization of “direct action” – “march, strike, burn, occupy”. What do they cares if Biden turns out to be the US Kerensky so long as north America and western Europe end up as “multiracial” socialist states?