Replacement Theory is Not a Theory ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

Education

Replacement Theory is Not a Theory

Self-loathing liberals despise anything which they even remotely suspect somehow disparages minorities, and that includes all white people

Published

on

In 2015, Sue Payne, a conservative radio host, was inadvertantly included in internal White House phone call representing the “Task Force of New Americans.” This endeavor was led by Cecilia Munoz and was comprised of 16 members of the Obama Cabinet. The Obama-Biden administration had planned to initiate a “country within a country.”

Obama goal was to quickly grant citizenship to 13 to 15 million illegal aliens. As these “new Americans” came forward, the communities where they would be placed would be designated as “receiving communities.” As these “new Americans” came out of the shadows, existing U.S. citizens would be pushed into the shadows.

It was emphasized that the newly minted “Americans” must be informed of “the benefits they are entitled to” and that they would “navigate not assimilate.” Fortunately these plans did not materialize.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Antifa is back in force

Fast Forward to the Present

Jimmy Fallon announced to his studio audience one night that the white population of the U.S. had declined 8.6% in the last ten years, to which his audience responded with boisterous laughter and applause. He was shocked but sought to hide it.

Fallon has said, “The results of the 2020 census just came out. For the first time in American history the number of white people went down,” upon which the predominantly Caucasian audience responded with “glee and elongated clapping.”

Interesting reaction to that,” Fallon said. Interesting? More like bizarre. How can a plethora of white individuals, not merely those in attendance that evening, but rather untold millions across the nation loathe themselves so completely, that they revel in seeing their numbers drop? Do Japanese wish to see their numbers decline relative to the country’s overall population? Do Chileans? Finns? Jordanians? Tunisians? Tucker Carlson is completely correct on this topic and, as such, is the favorite target of the demented Left.

The Left is Giddy

To be sure, Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, and the ultra-obnoxious Steven Colbert have catered exclusively to ‘progressives’ for upwards of eight years. Progressives populate their audiences, and progressive ‘elites’ dominate their guest spots.

Amazingly, non-hispanic whites in the U.S. today represent only 57.8% of the population, their lowest percentage ever and down from above 80% a mere two score earlier. Is this a cause for celebration? At the Washington Post, uber-RINO columnist Jennifer Rubin joyously greeted the data, citing it as it “fabulous news.”

Concurrently, if you even hint that the demographic decline of white Americans might prove to be unfavorable, you’ll be demonized as a dangerous individual. However, if you seek the elimination of people based on their skin color, and they are white people, this is perfectly okay. Indeed, it’s delightful. It’s entirely progressive! Let us all rejoice!

Self-Hate Abounds

The self-loathing that untold numbers of white liberals have for whites in general is mind-boggling. They have been taught — actually, brainwashed — to regard their ethnicity and skin color as invariably detrimental to society. To them, by virtue of their birth alone, they represent an extreme cultural blight.

This enormous group, tens of millions strong, is comprised largely of Democrats who also happen to comprise the core of cancel culture. These self-loathing guardians seek to financially and politically cremate any person, place, thing, or idea that they regard as offensive to others and, paradoxically, that aren’t necessarily directly offensive to themselves.

Why do white liberals act this way? They are self-appointed care-takers of what they believe is social fairness, justice, and equanimity. At the same time, it’s eye-opening to discover that most minority individuals are flummoxed by what whites seek to cancel, merely because the white majority thinks it offensive to select minorities.

You dislike The Cat in the Hat? On January 21, 2015, Michelle Obama invited The Cat in the Hat characters to the White House to read to young students as part of her ‘Let’s Move, Let’s Read!’ initiative. She noted, “Pretty much all the stuff you need to know is in Dr. Seuss.”

Windmill Jousting

Did anybody in attendance that day, Ms. Obama included, regard these characters to be portraying racial stereotypes? Was anybody offended, insulted, or outraged? Newspaper accounts and photographs indicate that just the opposite was true.

So when did The Cat in the Hat and other Dr. Seuss books, and his various characters, become ‘racist’ as not a single word changed, in any of his books? The quick answer: Self-loathing liberals despise anything which they even remotely suspect somehow disparages minorities.

Ironically, these same self-loathing liberals feel morally superior to everybody else. Thus they exhibit an odd psycho-social phenomenon that researchers will be studying for decades, if not centuries, to come: How individuals, programmed en masse to hate themselves, decided to despoil any aspect of our culture that they believe does not meet their ‘standards.’

Stranger Than Fiction

These obtuse standards become entrenched as part of liberal, Leftist, unassailable doctrine and spread via the internet like kudzu. And who among them can tolerate debate of official doctrine?

Those on the right observe this phenomenon with incredulity. How do so many people so thoroughly come to hate themselves, especially for phantom faux pas (i.e. that they haven’t committed)?

As they proceed with their many forms of boycotts, doxxing, and ostracism, and deepen their embrace of cancel culture, it’s difficult to predict when the dam will break. Self-loathing whites, you see, glean positive strokes and virtue signals from one another. They are giddy to be accepted as a member of the ‘morally superior’ strata of humankind.

Self-loathing liberals are hell bent on their ‘righteous mission.’ Each one knows to the marrow in his, her, or its bones that unquestionably they are on the ‘right side’ of history, when in actuality they are on the maniacal side of cultural and social suicide.

– – – – –

 

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.


Jeff Davidson is the world's only holder of the title "The Work-Life Balance Expert®" as awarded by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He is the premier thought leader on work-life balance, integration, and harmony. Jeff speaks to organizations that seek to enhance their overall productivity by improving the effectiveness of their people. He is the author of Breathing Space, Simpler Living, Dial it Down, and Everyday Project Management. Visit www.BreathingSpace.com for more information on Jeff's keynote speeches and seminars, including: Managing the Pace with Grace® * Achieving Work-Life Balance™ * Managing Information and Communication Overload®



 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Business

Justice, not ‘Social’ Justice, Improves Society

If we ignore existing laws simply in favor of what we want, society will soon break down

Published

on

Thomas Jefferson wrote that, “The most sacred of the duties of government is to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens.” The hallowed duty to fulfill the promise of justice for all remains, or ideally should remain, as the guiding ideal for the people we elect to government.

A friend of mine recently commented that the ‘social’ justice movement in America is alive and well, and that great things have been happening. However, when you put any word in front of the word ‘justice,’ the true meaning of justice is altered. Social justice is some group’s attempt at righting what they consider to be wrong.

I asked my friend for an example of social justice and was told that power lines being installed near poor neighborhoods instead of wealthier neighborhoods was a prime example. I then explained that that was not an issue related to ‘social’ justice but to justice itself.

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Antifa is back in force

Express Lanes for Redress

This is not 1860, or 1960. Today, many avenues exist for illuminating any issue of merit. Locally, there are zoning boards in every municipality, city councils usually with members on the left and the right, town hall meetings, public forums, newspapers, local television stations – a variety of entities that can be brought to bear to examine an issue and to forge some type of equitable redress if needed.

To be sure, no form of political government is anywhere near perfect or even equitable, much of the time. Democracy is difficult, but all other forms of government are worse.

In a democracy, or representative republic, such as we have in the U.S., you can’t go off half-cocked and do exactly what you want because you think that a particular law is bad. You have to work to change the law, to change policies, to address inequities within the framework of democracy, and within the bound of the justice system.

A Sanctuary for Whom?

Consider the phenomenon of sanctuary cities. For a sanctuary city to exist, one has to have a mayor, an alderman, city council members,  and other committee members, including those whose were elected as well as as appointed, to believe that what they’re espousing is right, while ignoring what has been passed into law. This ruling class thus usurps that which a majority of citizens rely upon each day.

A sanctuary city, by definition, is a city that is breaking the law. The Left will rationalize that ‘social’ justice requires breaking the law and that not all laws are good laws. True: not all laws are good laws. Laws, nevertheless, were passed as a result of a process in place for tens if not hundreds of years.

If laws routinely discriminate against one segment of the population versus another, then by all means work to change the law. When you insert catchphrases into the mix, such as ‘social’ justice, what that actually means is that you have another viewpoint of an issue. Further, you deem that your view and your actions are more meritorious than whatever came before them.

Vigilantism isn’t Pretty

Years ago, by exhibiting such behavior, you would be called a vigilante. Vigilantes are a self-appointed group who engage in policy enforcement without having legal authority, usually because they deem the legal agencies to be inadequate.

We dwell in a society where the media is distinctly liberal, and even leftist – as we have witnessed with big tech, the big TV networks, nearly all newspapers, and, unfortunately, a variety of government agencies. Thus, those advocating for ‘social’ justice have the wind at their backs. Yet, they violate the rights, and votes, of half the population and perhaps much more.

Welcome to My Two Cents

Any one of us could offer a long list of social issues that we’d like to change. If we decide, willy-nilly, to start ignoring existing laws in favor of what we want, how long will it take before society breaks down completely? Taking the law into your own hands is the essence of what it means to be a vigilante. Vigilante-dominated societies are not healthy. Many of their residents live in constant fear.

Taking the law into your own hands is an ill-advised shortcut to seeking what you want without working through the system, however imperfect the system might be. This country, any country, does not need more vigilantism.

– – – – –

 

Continue Reading

Education

Texas School District Says Enough is Enough

Published

on

school
Photo by MChe Lee on Unsplash

BREAKING: The Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District in North Texas voted last night to:

1) Ban the teaching of critical race theory. 

2) Wait until students are in the fifth grade to teach them sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: Antifa is back in force

3) Ban boys from playing in girls’ sports.

4) Encourage the use of pronouns that align with student’s biological gender and require them to use restrooms and locker rooms that align with their biological gender.

5) Require that library materials be posted online and readily available for review by parents.

6) Not teach The New York Times “1619 Project”.

7) Implement a strict process for reviewing library books, so as to allow To Kill A Mockingbird and disallow Daddy, Papa, and Me and others.

It seems nearly incomprehensible that a school district would have to vote on measures like these. In fact, to many thoughtful Americans, it seems utterly Orwellian. How can truths about gender and the proper use of pronouns suddenly seem controversial rather than commonsensical?

Why does it seem radical to return power to parents and reaffirm biological reality? Or to keep boys from dominating girls in sports? Or to let students read revisionist history and propaganda about their nation on their own time? Why teach something that cannot withstand even the lightest objective criticism? 

Perhaps the school district’s 4-3 vote is a sign that there’s hope, that the pendulum has reached its arc and is beginning to move back toward truth and reality. Maybe the radicals are on the run.

No matter what, kudos to North Texas educators for pushing back against the absurdity and reaffirming responsible education.

Continue Reading

 

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Jesus, Master of Influence

Chris Widener, speaker and best selling author of The Art of Influence, teaches that Jesus is the master of influence. In sixteen sessions you will learn from one of the most influential communicators how the life and teachings of Jesus Christ is the best model for how to become an effective influence that can change people’s thoughts, beliefs and actions.

LEARN MORE

Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending