To modern Regressives (who call themselves Progressives or Liberals), the epithet of “racist” is even more condemning than calling someone a “Nazi” or a “fascist.” We hear it a dozen times a week on news shows, at protests, and even from politicians.
But of course, they need to have SOME reason for making the accusation – and making it stick at least among their own kind. Even if the reason(s) are far-fetched and not amenable to logic or reason.
Not all of these factors are, of course, shared by lovers of liberty (libertarians and free-market anarchists). But enough are to make it a foregone conclusion that ANY lover of liberty is condemned by Regressives as being virulent racists.
Here’s a list!
- If you considered the guy in the White House between 2009 and 2017 to be a bad president.
- If you do not very loudly and frequently condemn the last guy in the White House (2017-2021) as a racist, homophobic, sexist nutjob.
- If you do not excuse people for committing crimes when they are people of color (because after all, it is society’s fault).
- If you stand up for people who are of politically-incorrect races or nationalities, like Brits, Koreans or Afrikaaners.
- If you don’t believe that anyone who makes a profit did so by stealing it from poor people of color.
- If you believe that it is fine to name a disease after the location where it originated or was discovered, and don’t applaud renaming “monkey pox” to “M-pox.”
- If you are opposed to government-funded abortion, transgender conversion/surgery, and providing ob/gyn services to physical males, and don’t support universal single-payer healthcare.
- If you are opposed to border controls by the FedGov (or States) – or fail to support the power of any other nation or alliance to have border controls.
- If you are opposed to “illegal immigration” or “illegal immigrants” into the US. OR if you believe that immigrants (legal or not) should be generally law-abiding, peaceful, and accountable for their own actions. Except of course for people from Canada or Japan or Taiwan or Scotland.
- If you believe that admissions to institutes of higher learning should be color-blind, and based on merit, and if you believe that tests like the SAT and LSAT are valid ways of admitting students.
- If you do not believe that posting bond when arrested is a racist-inspired requirement created as part of the racist civilization that began in 1619.
- If you believe that imprisonment is not appropriate for crimes which are frequently committed by people of color. (Because, again, society made them do it, and society is of the devil, if not actually the devil.)
- If you do not believe that most of your income belongs to the government to redistribute to other people, especially people of color and those who are activists for people of color.
I admit, some of these things require a certain mental twisting to understand.
Maybe an example will help.
It is racist to advocate that people of color (especially blacks and Hispanics) should be able to easily buy and own guns. Why? The Regressives KNOW that guns are evil and KNOW that households with guns are more like to kill those in the household. Therefore, the only reason gun-lovers want to let people of color have guns is that so they will kill each other and slow their population growth. In order to delay the inevitable reduction of Americans of Northern European descent to a tiny minority. So to believe we have a right to keep and bear arms is really an expression of racists that want to kill people of color directly or by getting other people of color to kill them.
Any action which is now seen (even decades or centuries later) as negative towards people of color means that the person did that or said that is a racist. For example, although the mostly-revered Abraham Lincoln freed black slaves, because he also caused Dakota warriors to be executed, he is a racist and ultimately must be cancelled. Just as the once-honored progressive academic and POTUS, Woodrow Wilson in in the process of being cancelled. (And no doubt, Heinlein will be too, as he named one of his major characters after Wilson.)
Of course not. Because their understandings and claims are irrational.
But now you know!