Jackboots

Some Facebook friends were apparently somewhat exasperated by my post of the image below. I suppose one could interpret the reference to “jackboot” as a little over the top. One might also read Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal For Preventing the Children of Poor People From being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country, and for making them Beneficial to the Publick and think it also more than a little over the top.

The difference is that 289 years ago when Swift's essay was published the world wasn't replete with sensitive snowflakes. People of generations past understood hyperbole as a literary tool to emphasize a point.

It's not that this has gone completely out of style now—but hyperbole is only allowed by the intelligentsia, the elite among us who determine politically correct speech.

On one hand…

Consider, say, Sarah Jeong, who repeatedly tweeted about killing men, and joked that, even if only “bad men” were killed, that would still include all men. Another typical tweet was, “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?” Or how about, “Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.”

Hyperbole?

Maybe we should also note Kathy Griffin's little comedic stunt with the severed head of Donald Trump on the heels of yet one more in a long line of Muslim terrorist beheadings in the news. I could go on and on, but you get the point.

On the other hand, consider Quinn Norton. Never heard of her? She was also hired by the NY Times, but within hours was fired when she said she had friends in the past who were neo-Nazis. She also said at the same time she did not agree with their views. She had also used some anti-gay slurs in tweets and on one occasion used the N-word. She said in an interview, making an apology, “I was trying to make a point, but something else would have made that point better. So, also not my best tweet.”

As stated above, Quinn Norton was unceremoniously sacked within hours. And where is Sarah Jeong today? She's still at the NY Times, still receiving her salary, still making rude comments about white males. Note the difference. Sarah Jeong posts tweets that target an acceptable class for derision: males. She doesn't need to apologize or retract her statements because according to the elites who control the media, lambasting males, especially white males, even going so far as to call for their extermination, is always and everywhere perfectly acceptable. On the other hand, making some anti-gay statements or admitting that you might be friends with some who hold neo-Nazi views, even after stating unequivocally that you disagree with those views, gets you fired from your job.

All that is predicated on the assumption that Jeong and Griffin are indeed using hyperbole to make a point. With that said, I'm willing to entertain the notion that they are not using hyperbole.

Kill All the White People?

Is the band Type O Negative using hyperbole in this rap “song?” The “lyrics” are:

Kill all the white people.
Kill all the white people.
Then we'll be free.
we'll be free.

Kill all the white people
Kill all the white people,
Kill all the white people
Kill all the white people.
Then we be free
Then we be free
We be free.

Kill them all men
Kill them all.
Then we be free
Then we be free,
Then we be free
Then we be free.
Then we be free
Then we be free,
Then we be free
We be free.

Ooh power
Black power
Destroy white boy.

Maybe this sentiment isn't mirrored by all the elite among us who determine political correctness, but male-hating, white-hating, tradition-hating, and European Culture-hating are all in vogue and perfectly acceptable. In fact, among the self-styled intelligentsia these sentiments are almost de rigeur.

But mention jackboots, for all practical purposes a symbol of Nazism, in relation to what some see as a prescient symbol of what awaits us in the future when our previously European civilization has been destroyed and socialism rules the world, and the liberals get their panties all in a bunch. Most people, ignorant of history and economics, don't know that Hitler was seen as a savior not only by the German people in the 1930s, but by economists and political leaders throughout the Western world. He was hailed as an economic genius by the politicians of Europe and America. Hitler was a proponent of Keynesianism—the driving economic theory at work in the US and Europe today. His economic policies were praised by FDR. He took Germany from the depths of hyperinflationary depression to the strongest European economy in less than a decade. 

And those jackboots? By the time the German people awoke to what was happening within their country, it was too late. They had been concentrating on their own problems—no work, not enough food for their children, no coal to heat their homes, humiliated by being held responsible for a war they didn't start, and having a large part of German territory taken and redistributed to other countries by the Allied powers.

People of the United States today seem to be concerned primarily with safety and security and being taken care of cradle to grave. Having had the religion of multi-culturalism drummed into our heads for the last two generations, we are being lulled into a dull stupor. Diversity is strength; multiculturalism is the hallmark of an advanced, just society; constant warfare protects the peace, there are an unlimited number of genders…

We've forgotten what built this nation and are willing to sacrifice our birthright for a bowl of pottage. The future leaders of this country are fully in favor of socialism, even full-out communism.

They don't realize, because they know nothing of history, that the promises of socialism come hand in glove with an authoritarian government. Whether they outfit their police with jackboots is purely a matter of fashion. There is no other way. Socialism must, by definition, take from producers and give to non-producers. The philosophy appeals to the majority because of human nature—jealous, greedy, and inclined to do no more work than absolutely necessary. The principles of what we used to call the “Protestant Work Ethic” have been forgotten; most of the populace sees nothing wrong with “redistribution.” After all, those who have more than I must have gotten it either by luck or screwing someone out of his rightful property. (That assumes we even believe in private property at that pointa dangerous assumption.) Oh, and of course the capitalists who control government encourage this disparity, so screw them.

That same ignorant populace also fails to recognize two inalterable facts of government: First, that government doesn't give anything to anyone that's not first taken from someone else. Second, and more important, there is of necessity a balance in the universe. The implications of this dictate that for every degree of the possibility of failure the government “safety net” minimizes, it must equally minimize the possibility of success on the other side of the equation. As more and more protection from the exigencies of life is demanded, the balance can only be maintained by implementing rules and regulations that constrict the opposite, productive side. Nobody fails, but nobody succeeds. With no success to take from in order to give to the growing underclass, the government trough dries up, the people revolt, and we're back where we started. 

So, is the image of a jackboot on someone's face really so far off the mark? I hope it's hyperbole, but honestly, I fear it's not. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.