I am going to explain the logic of the left in this article. So I need to preface it with some facts about myself and my thoughts.
I am a white male. Possibly a shitlord.
I believe that no matter what the law says, there is no such thing and cannot be such a thing as a hate crime. I do not buy into the idea that someone should be punished not just for committing a crime but also what they were thinking while they were committing it. People should be punished for their actions and not their thoughts.
With that out of the way, normal people have already lost the frame of the conversation. Was the torture of the white Trump supporter at the hands of these teens a hate crime? That’s the wrong question entirely. We shouldn’t even be discussing it, as this discussion validates the existence of hate crimes. Just 20 years ago the debate was on whether there should be such a distinction of hate crimes. The left won that, and the question people are asking proves it.
And that got me thinking to how the left wins so much, time and time again. And it’s a simple strategy. Here it is:
Make a statement that sounds neutral and get people to buy into it. Brand the opposition as fear mongerers, racists, sexists, etc. Only years after the statement is generally accepted, you then move the goal post and clarify what the statement really means in the context of current events, which is now no longer a neutral statement. Then group anyone who now disagrees with the nazis, fear mongerers, etc.
Let’s apply this theory retroactively.
The statement is, “There should be an additional penalty for crimes committed on victims based on their race.” The current events of the time where this statement was uttered and debated were you had some white people literally tie a black man to the bumper of a truck and then dragged him to his death. Normal people were appalled at this behavior, and it was racially motivated. Many accepted that an additional punishment was warranted. (At the time, I didn’t.)
Fast forward to today. Black Lives Matter supporters kidnap and torture a special-needs white Trump supporter, and you have people saying that it’s not a hate crime, and the thing is, they are correct. Because they define a hate crime as solely whites committing crimes against minorities.
Had they mentioned that 20 years ago, the public sentiment would have been much different.
We’ve heard for decades that diversity is great. But today it’s clear that diversity does not include white males.
One day it won’t include white females, either. The left’s current definition of Diversity means Diversity cannot include ideas from right-wingers, but the future definition is up for interpretation in the future.
We’ve heard that we live in a rape culture and we must stop rape. Women must be protected at all costs. But rape threats against Melania Trump are OK for some reason, and those feminists who condemn rape threats against Melania are seldom heard. Rape threats against feminists, real or imagined, are the actual issue.
We’ve been told that we shouldn’t hate gay people for being gay. In fact, they should have the same freedom to come out of the closet with no repercussions. The statement, “What two consenting adults do behind closed doors is none of my business,” is easy to agree with.
But then they want to get married, and marriage is the domain of the church. But we voted for freedom and gay marriage now exists. OK.
Then the gays want to literally parade their lifestyle and debauchery in public, and if I don’t support that, because I don’t want to see it, and I don’t want my kids to see it, I’m a nazi that wants to kill gay people. If I don’t want to bake a cake in the shape of a dick, then my cake bakery is libeled and slandered and I receive death threats. The reasonable statement has been changed, and the civil and social penalties that used to be associated with being gay now apply to me because of my beliefs and my inaction.
Because it was never about what two consenting adults do behind closed doors.
Modern liberalism is a big old bait-and-switch.
In 1965, Ted Kennedy said:
“First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same…
Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset… Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia…
In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think… The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”
2000-2015: Let’s make the Mexican illegals legal. This started under W. Bush, by the way.
2016: Build the wall! Let’s enforce our laws!
2016 is a direct outcome of 1965-2015. Those opposed to building the wall? Racists, uncaring bigots. Trump supporters! Worst thing you can possibly be.
Here’s another one. Throughout my lifetime: “Women deserve equal pay for equal work.” But just point out that at a very high level, the pay gap is due to individual choices that men and women tend to make differently (women go for more part-time jobs, men are more likely to work an oil rig in North Dakota and die at work in general) and they paint you as a misogynist who just wants to rape and impregnate women and sentence them to the kitchen.
The left has made some absolutely amazing strides over the past 50 years. But they push things too far, over and over, and they will never see that because they won’t admit to the tacit lies they tell to begin with.
That’s why hate crime can only be committed by whites. And it’s always been that way; they just never explicitly said it until recently. Remember that, and anything that leftists say about this incident and all future hate crimes (and anything about race in general) will make complete and total sense.