It is becoming increasingly difficult to discern where political correctness has drawn the line on racism these days, with a wide ranging and ever-mutating list of rules to be followed in order to clear your name.
And, unless you’ve been living in a cave for the last decade, you are already a racist. It’s inherent in all of us, according the lunatic fringes on the left side of American politics, where you will always be considered guilty until proven virtuous.
It’s the democratic version of the oldest story of the Bible, in which you are all inherently sinners and only the Progressive Prophet of the week can truly save you. This is precisely how American democrats retain what little power they have, by creating a savior of The State, and allowing their followers to subscribe only to that visage of divinity. You have no free will, according to the left, because, with free will you could sin again. Just relinquish control to a Clinton or an Obama, and allow them to be your own personal democratic deity.
Of course, this is no way to treat anyone, let alone the constituents from whom you wish to gain confidence and trust. This is an oppressive system at best because, unlike religion, this salvation is based solely on the desires of the wicked, not the unending glory of true faith.
And, like any good political cult, the democrats have a way to make you squirm under their magnifying glass of social justice. It’s called political correctness, and it is being handled like a six-shooter aimed at the feet of Marty McFly.
The comparison, while certainly a bit silly, is a powerful one: The left’s use of political correctness is represented by the six shooter being handled by our villainous wretch, Biff Tannen. They’ve got a limited amount of ammunition, always delivered in exactly the same method, and always rotating in the same direction.
Why, in the movie, does our antagonist not simply raise his weapon and deliver the fatal blow to McFly’s midsection? Simply because such action would immediately put him in the wrong. He would no longer have the upper hand, legally or morally, and would still find a similar fate to McFly.
The difference would be that Tannen’s fate would come after weeks of scandalous character assassination for the entire public to be made aware of.
In many ways, the empathy that would come to McFly is far more advantageous than the anger aimed at Tannen could ever be. McFly comes out ahead at the end of this, dead or not.
And that is why the left won’t simply stride into the total neo-Fascism that they are constantly flirting with: They would then be revealed as the monsters that they truly are. Instead, they simply endanger and not maim.
Marty McFly’s moonwalk in the clip is what the social justice warriors have compelled all of the world’s realists to learn. They’ll cozy up to the idea that they should vanquish their foes, but they simply won’t do it. Instead, they aim for embarrassment, and the possibility of keeping the realist right wing under their oppressive thumb of shame.
It is better, after all, to fight the enemy you know instead of the enemy you don’t.
So political correctness is a tool of oppression, first and foremost, and when weaponized as it has been in America, it is apt to spread.
One example of the spreading of this weaponized thought control comes to us from the European Union, where Syrian migrants have become an enormous lightning rod of controversy.
Leftists within the EU and its leadership are leaning heavily on the idea of political correctness in their mandating of member nations to accept a certain number of these refugees, who are attempting to seek asylum due to a raging civil war within Syria. In order to persuade the otherwise unwilling nations, the EU mucky-mucks waged a campaign of shame against those supposedly sovereign nations who are rightfully concerned about the addition of a culturally distant populace to their established nations.
Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia has all been mercilessly shamed in the European media for their unwillingness to simply allow the EU to mandate their national identity into forced diversity.
So, what happens when this political correctness is applied retroactively? South Africans are learning that lesson as we speak.
To understand what is occurring in South Africa, we need to have ourselves a little refresher on Apartheid.
According to Wikipedia, Apartheid “was a system of institutionalised racial segregation and discrimination that existed in South Africa between 1948 and 1991. It was based on white supremacy and the repression of the black (African, Coloured and Indian) majority of the population for the benefit of the politically and economically dominant group, Afrikaners, and other Whites.”
During Apartheid, 85% of the nation’s farms were owned by white farmers, as if to illustrate the point. Now, 33 years after the end of Apartheid, that number has dropped to 73% – a number that the South African parliament felt wasn’t nearly acceptable.
That’s where the idea of retroactive political correctness has come in the form of unabashed racism masquerading as reparations.
“White South African farmers will be removed from their land after a landslide vote in parliament.
“The country’s constitution is now likely to be amended to allow for the confiscation of white-owned land without compensation, following a motion brought by radical Marxist opposition leader Julius Malema.
“It passed by 241 votes for to 83 against after a vote on Tuesday, and the policy was a key factor in new president Cyril Ramaphosa’s platform after he took over from Jacob Zuma in February.
“Mr Malema said the time for ‘reconciliation is over’. ‘Now is the time for justice,’ News24 reported.
“‘We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land.'”
And, as if we believed that this weren’t ugly enough, the next step could wind up being something far more serious altogether.
“Mr Malema has a long-standing commitment to land confiscation without compensation. In 2016 he told his supporters he was ‘not calling for the slaughter of white people – at least for now’.”
This is the face of radical political correctness without any sort of relativity to reality.
South Africa could be just the beginning of such vitriol as well. There is no reason to believe that this sentiment will remain contained to this modern nation, especially in a world where news travels faster than it even occurs.
What could be next of the leftist ideologues who are now empowered by the success of this radical never racism in South Africa? Will African Americans in the United States attempt another push for reparations, to be paid from the descendants of Europeans who may or may not have even been on the continent during the horrific practice’s residency.
Or will ISIS soon begin suing the families of drone operators in the U.S. who stealthily incapacitated their terror-inducing patriarchs?