The left acknowledges problematic black behavior sometimes, denies it other times.

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

Just trying to make more sense of this dual strategy that the left has.

Sometimes, the left will admit that many blacks act badly, but blame the behavior on 'the system of white supremacy'. For example, blacks commit more crime, but it's really because of poverty. Or, blacks don't tip well, but it's really because servers assume they don't tip and give them lousy service.

Other times, they simply deny the behavior altogether. Such as denying black-on-white violence. Or denying black abuse of social welfare programs.

What do you make of this dual strategy? What causes them to go one way or the other with it on different issues?

all 6 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It all depends on whatever narrative they're pushing at that particular time. They don't notice that they contradict the shit out of themselves, and if they do, they don't care.

This is a UK specific example, but I see this done a lot with the post-WWII mass immigration. The common (fictional) narrative is that non-whites rebuilt Britain after the war..... but they were simultaneously discriminated against by the "racist" public and no one wanted to employ them or serve them in businesses. The latter is actually true, to a large extent. There were "No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs" signs in the 1950s and construction companies didn't want to hire blacks or other non-whites, the only foreigners they took on were other white Europeans such as the Irish, Italians and Portuguese. It begs the question why the non-whites were ever imported in the first places. Really, no one asked for them.

I think in America you see this with whatever founding myth is the convenient talking point at that moment at that time. A project of white supremacy (muh slave owners, etc) vs the multiracial and multicultural melting pot.

[–]lothrop_evola 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The left contradicts itself on immigration so much it's ridiculous.

In the 1960s we were told that our high birth rates were bad for the environment and we should have fewer children. Now, we're told that our birth rates are too low and we need massive levels of immigration to keep the economy running.

Leftists say that they don't care about race and don't see skin colour. We're all the same. Yet, any region of Europe that is "too white" needs more immigration and more diversity. So apparently they do care about race and they do see skin colour.

Immigration to Europe is a punishment for colonialism. But it's also a great benefit because "Diversity is our Strength".

The key to understanding leftist ideology is reading about Postmodernism. The goal of the Postmodernist movement was to deconstruct and destroy the power structure of western civilization (read: heterosexual, white, male Christians). That's why we're relentlessly attacked at every opportunity without any concern for logic, truth or consistency.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

100% correct. I've often noticed those contradictions, they drive me crazy.

I've noticed it tends to be non-whites on Twitter and elsewhere in particular who claim mass immigration is "revenge" for colonialism, white shitlibs go on about diversity, etc.

I've also noticed the left are gradually abandoning "colourblindness" for overt anti-white rhetoric. The only people I see spouting "colourblind" nonsense is civnats and normie conservatives. Ironically, they get called racist for ignoring race.

Trump's Mount Rushmore speech was described as "racist" and "fascist".... I watched it, it was just civnat virtue signalling.

[–]marc_gee 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is hard for nonwhites to admit problematic racial differences are their fault because then they would feel less than others. So they blame the differences on whites. Nonwhites constitute a powerful voice in the midst of whites influencing many whites to agree with them. From there it's a snowball effect where more and more whites believe it until it is the dominant ideology.

[–]AFutureConcern 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you make of this dual strategy? What causes them to go one way or the other with it on different issues?

Their strategy is "applied postmodernism", or as we used to call it, "lying". They have recognized that the things the masses believe can be inconsistent, irrational and are determined by what people talk about in the media, in academia and in the schools. So they took control of these institutions, and now push whatever new lie helps them attain power.

They truly believe that words are "magic spells" that reinforce the "systemic racism" in society. So if you point out that black people are more violent, that reinforces a discourse in which black people are discriminated against because they are more violent. They don't care whether or not it is true. In a different situation, if you say that black people are suffering and need money because their areas are filled with violence, that's okay because it reinforces a discourse in which black people are handed more money.

[–]aukofthecovenantWhite man with eyes 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What causes them to go one way or the other with it on different issues?

Simple - can it be used to guilt-trip white people into supporting leftist policies? Example:

Sometimes, the left will admit that many blacks act badly, but blame the behavior on 'the system of white supremacy'.

White people who fall for this will feel guilt, thus making them more useful tools of leftism. Whereas:

Such as denying black-on-white violence. Or denying black abuse of social welfare programs.

No one wants to support violent criminals or welfare leeches per se. They can be duped into doing so for other reasons, but putting criminal violence or welfare fraud front-and-center is a losing strategy. So the left tends not to do it.

The thing to keep in mind is that blacks, being only ~13% of the US population, cannot get what they want in a straight-up vote unless its something that many (more than (50-13)/87 = 42.5% of) non-blacks will go along with. They have every incentive to whip up white sympathy, and unjustified sympathy will do if it produces votes.