The Fifth Column(ist): The very definition of sick edition

After a short break, our resident Fifth Columnist is back on cracking form, demolishing Left-wing dependency tactics, political correctness, and the will of the American Left to portray the Right as violent...

by Ed Kozak on 7 May 2013 17:46

It’s been a little over a month since I, your favourite trenchant traditionalist, last put fingers to keys to discuss liberal tomfoolery, and what a month it has been.

I do apologise for the long silence, but as you might imagine, The Death of St. Maggie did not exactly put me in the best of writing moods, neither did the major terrorist attack on American soil one week later.

T.S. Eliot was surely right. But, even in the cruelest days of April, the leftists were there, in the press and on television, saying the silliest of things and giving me a thing or two to smile about. That’s something, I suppose.

* * *

Honestly, if the year 2013 should be noted for anything, it should be as the year when left-wing commentary became indistinguishable from conservative satire of left-wing commentary.

I saw shameless twits declare their happiness at Thatcher’s passing, with much the same exaggerated and violent vocabulary my friends and I have used whilst imitating stereotypical Thatcher-haters (honi soit qui mal y pense). I saw a left-wing ‘intellectual’ on CNN actually advocate the disturbingly fascistic idea that folks need to stop believing their children are theirs - that kids are and ought to be communal property. These leftists are certainly a strange breed, to think they not only have a right to kill their own unborn children, but to also raise your living ones.  

And of course, literally seconds after I said half-jokingly to a friend soon after the Boston bombing that, ‘I bet the lefties are praying a right-wing crazy did this’, Salon.com published an article stating that we should all hope the bomber is a white, right-winger. You just can’t make this stuff up.

And, while we’re on the subject of lefties saying things that could have been written by conservatives wanting to make fun of lefties, can we all pause and appreciate the Democrats’ latest claim that climate change will force women into prostitution. The utter hilarity of this claim aside, I’m racking my brain as to how, let alone why, a party whose members generally advocate pre-natal infanticide, giving birth control to young teenagers, and sex as a purely pleasurable exercise with no deeper moral or social purpose would have a problem with prostitution. Go figure.

Perhaps, as with healthcare, they can’t stand the idea of someone profiting from something they believe should be free.

* * *  

So, I recently had an interesting conversation with an Australian. I understand political correctness is the order of the day, but I hadn’t realised how bad things have become. Turns out the terms ‘Aborigine’/’Australian Aborigine’ are no longer acceptable nomenclature down under for describing Australia’s indigenous people.

In fact, the look I got when I said the word aborigine was so negative I initially thought the Australian misheard me and believed I used the slur, ‘Abo’. How ridiculous, that a word which means literally ‘one of the original inhabitants of a country or region’ is considered an offensive term to describe Australia’s original inhabitants. It’s even more absurd considering the new, preferred term is evidently ‘Indigenous Australian’, itself an unnecessarily complicated synonym of the word aborigine.

* * *

I live in rather rundown, predominantly African-American neighborhood in Brooklyn, on a block where (less than a decade ago) violent, often gang related crime was once a regular occurrence.

Whilst it has certainly become a safer area, there are many who would insist it has yet to become a particularly nicer area (no gentrification here, folks), and that may very well be the case. What always strikes me, however, is how well-mannered and pleasant most of the local residents are.

I’m much more likely to see people holding doors for those behind them on my block than in the neighborhood I work in – Soho – the swanky, lower-Manhattan neighborhood that functions effectively as an open air shopping mall for rich people.

Seriously, in my neighborhood people still greet each other on the street – I even saw what I can only assume was a crack-head hold the door of the local metro station open for an old woman and then proceed to help her carry her groceries.

It might surprise some that despite the widespread family breakdown, periods of high crime, and pervasive high-unemployment, this community should still exhibit strong signs of the civility mostly absent in wealthier, “whiter” Manhattan.

It shouldn’t. For one thing, unlike the majority of their Manhattanite neighbors, these people are still largely church-going. Also, given that over the last century American higher ‘education’ has become little more than leftist indoctrination, their relative lack thereof seems to have spared them silly notions like the idea that holding a door open for a woman is sexist.

And of course, this is the real tragedy of these modern, liberal United States.

For all its promises, the modern welfare state brought little more than the family breakdown, crime, and unemployment that plagued neighborhoods like the one I now call home. Meanwhile, the welfare state’s authors and most vocal proponents – wealthy, white Lefties – are spared the devastating effects of their ideological baby. Most of the people I grew up with were wealthy white Lefties. Most of them are unlikely to have a child out of wedlock (none of them had children whilst teenagers). Most of them are likely to get married and start stable, traditional families. Most of them received a good education and have relatively well-paying jobs. And time after time they go to the polls and vote for politicians and policies that deprive their less-wealthy, less-white neighbors of any chance to achieve these same things.

That is, to my mind, the very definition of sick.

 

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus