Skip to main content

ESPN Host Calls Trump "White Supremacist" for Being White and Proud at the Same Time

ESPN host Jemele Hill labels Donald Trump a "white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself [with] other white supremacists."

She continues with her next tweet, "Trump is the most ignorant, offensive president of my lifetime. His rise is a direct result of white supremacy. Period."



First, Donald Trump's "rise" has far more to do with the real state of the American economy and the shift of the minority vote, a category that Barack Obama previously dominated in addition to that of civilian casualties by way of drone strikes, something the majority would surely describe as offensive.

Voters effectively expressed their preference for a non-establishment candidate by supporting Trump over Clinton.

White supremacy was hardly even a subject under consideration at the time of the election.

Suddenly, after a number of violent episodes between two wildly-abrasive and contentious groups who have far more in common than they would readily acknowledge, mainstream media has inundated their audiences, and clearly even their own staff, to accept that the actions of these few are somehow representative of a sociological shift and a new cultural zeitgeist.

As it turns out, both Antifa and the Neo-Nazi camp endorse the mechanism of government as the principal tool of righteousness, merely differing on how that tool ought to be exercised, and to what extent.

The relative palatability of the one over the other seems to spawn from the shortsighted, and often unstated, operating assumption that white people exclusively, and without exception, benefit directly from the transgressions of historical figures of identical complexion.

As it turns out, a majority of those white people are descendants of late-19th century, early-20th century immigrants who bore no involvement in the repugnant practices of their predecessors. 

Ultimately, a burgeoning segment of civilization has broadly committed to an endless discovery of fault with anyone whose ideological composition, or apparently physical complexion, stands at odds against the prevailing wisdom of unquestioning political correctness.

There is seemingly always someone else to blame for one's shortcomings, and if Donald Trump has indeed "risen" to any position of rank, it is incontrovertibly that of icon to those who prefer to mourn their misfortunes and worship their perceived, often imaginary, oppressors instead of taking personal responsibility over their own lives.

This ongoing bout appears only to support the notion that it is far easier to hate than to understand.

And in the world of entertainment, one of the two is far more powerful and appealing to the masses who prefer the comforts of emotion over the complexities of thought.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. Likewise, it was a war that would witness a five-fold increase in the number of civilians employed by the federal government, as federal gove

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

There is a great deal of substance behind the Keynesian motif, “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your prerogative, your axiom, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. Surely, any quantity or decided cash figure is relevant exclusively to the available produce yielded by its trade. The current valuation thereof, whilst unadulterated, corroborates a rather stable, predictable trend of expectations, whereas its significance wanes once reconfigured by a process of economic, fiscal or monetary manipulation.  Individuals, vast in their interests and their time preferences and overall appetites, are to be made homogeneous by an overarching system which predetermines the price floors, ceilings and general priorities of life. Of course, all of this exists merely in abstract form. However, the supposition proposed by those who champion the agenda of “basic needs” fails to complement the progress achieved by the abolition of presumed guilt by the sole mis

Cullen Roche's Not So "Pragmatic Capitalism"

In his riveting new work Pragmatic Capitalism , Cullen Roche, founder of Orcam Financial Group, a San Diego-based financial firm, sets out to correct the mainstream schools of economic thought, focusing on  Keynesians, Monetarists, and Austrians alike. This new macroeconomic perspective claims to reveal What Every Investor Needs to Know About Money and Finance . Indeed, Roche introduces the layman to various elementary principles of economics and financial markets, revealing in early chapters the failed state of the average hedge fund and mutual fund operators -- who are better car salesmen than financial pundits, Roche writes --  who have fallen victim to the group think phenomenon, spawning the nearly perfect positive correlation to the major indexes, and thus, accounting for tax, inflation, and service adjustments, holistically wiping out any value added by their supposed market insight.  Roche also references popular studies, such as the MckInsey Global Institute's report whi