In a recent interview with Rolling Stone magazine, marginally talented loudmouth rock icon Bruce Springsteen excoriated Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, calling him a “moron” and accusing Trump of offering “simple answers to very complex problems.”
Statements like this in the context of addressing political issues always make me laugh, because this convention is not only fallacious, but by design cultivates the perception amongst the public that they’re not capable of wrapping their enfeebled brains around such concepts, which are best left to the savvier, albeit profoundly corrupt ruling class. Springsteen, in his boundless ignorance, aids in perpetuating a belief that promises to dramatically reduce the chances of any of his fans ever realizing his level of success in any endeavor.
In actuality, the best answers to political problems are always very straightforward ones; comprehending the problems themselves is quite simple, really.
Escalating racial tensions that have come to the fore over the last eight years, and particularly over the last several months, have taken on special significance in light of the current election cycle. While the languid campaign of Hillary Clinton continues to regurgitate the same nebulous, failed remedies for the malaise affecting black communities and the institutional racism allegedly so pervasive in America, the political left has maintained that Donald Trump is an ardent racist despite the lack of any such charges having arisen against Clinton’s Republican challenger throughout his decades in the public eye.
It’s been established that the spike in racial tensions is a device of the Obama administration, which has systematically fueled the fires of racial animosity through Barack Obama’s opportunistic, inflammatory rhetoric. Policies telegraphed via Obama’s radical sympathies and pre-White House associations with radical black political organizations served to embolden militant blacks and set the stage for the tragic comedy that began to unfold almost from the day Obama was inaugurated. White House coordination with these groups, whether clandestinely or through government departments (like the actions of Eric Holder’s Justice Department in Ferguson, Missouri, following Michael Brown’s shooting by a police officer) aided the process.
Grossly embellished accounts of alleged racism proffered by groups like Black Lives Matter, the press, the administration and such gems as NAACP chapter heads being funded by and shilling for former Nazi collaborator and leading globalist George Soros effectively nurtured a climate of racial antipathy that now rivals periods in the 1960s’ civil rights movement.
As we have seen, leftist activists, politicos and the press seized upon the shooting of an armed black man in Charlotte, North Carolina, by a black police officer last week. This resulted in blacks in that city rioting over several nights, citing race-based police brutality. How the shooting of an armed black man by a black police officer reflects race-based police brutality has puzzled a great many people, but it should not be altogether surprising given the agenda in play. If the actions of George Zimmerman (who was neither white nor a law enforcement officer) could be characterized as reflecting race-based police brutality after he shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense in 2012, then why not the actions of a black police officer? In this age of the truth having no bearing on the argument at hand, the fact that Keith Lamont Scott was killed by a black cop and not a white one is but a pesky, irrelevant detail.
As a result of the foregoing, conservative pundits from every sector of media have weighed in with in-depth analyses of recent events in this vein, as well as their potential effect on the upcoming election. Somewhat frustrating from the perspective of a desire to see a de-escalation of racial tensions and an increasing understanding of the designs of the left vis-à-vis race relations has been the shallow, obtuse approach of many of these conservative interests. Starting from scratch as it were, in their attempts to identify and analyze pertinent race-related issues I identified and analyzed some time ago in my book “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession,” they are actually forestalling a widespread understanding of the left’s objectives pertaining to race.
Earlier this week, my WND colleague Mychal Massie detailed the real reason for the Charlotte riots. Others noted the fact that while blacks were rioting in Charlotte over an incident in which an armed black man was shot by a black cop, the case of an unarmed black man shot by a white cop in Tulsa, Oklahoma, during the same week generated comparatively little public outcry.
While some put this down to election-cycle politics, I believe that this phenomenon can be explained in part by the left’s desire to reduce the efficacy of police departments in areas where there are large black populations. In so doing, more and more such communities will begin to resemble cities like Chicago and Detroit, where blacks are being gunned down by other blacks in staggering numbers, and law enforcement is hamstrung. Thus, the chaos, fear and resentment in black communities can be handily perpetuated as leftist politicos continue to deliberately misidentify the causes and conditions.
Election season politics notwithstanding, the most precise appraisal of the racialist demagoguery we are currently witnessing is that it reflects the left’s efforts toward cultural balkanization (with the objective of coalescing political power through the action of discrete minority groups), fomenting civil unrest (with the objective of necessitating police-state protocols) and the standardization of police policies and procedures to favor the leftist paradigm (with the ultimate goal of nationalizing police departments themselves).
You see, Bruce? Not so complex after all.
Article posted with permission from Erik Rush.