Posts

Why a Leading White Supremacist Endorsed Joe Biden

White supremacist Richard Spencer is back in the news again for endorsing Joe Biden, which means that I am once again being inundated with furious messages from morons who cannot distinguish between Richard Spencer and Robert Spencer. Because of that common confusion from people who apparently think the Watergate president was Robert Nixon, I am reluctant to write about young Richard (not Robert!), but this time it’s important to consider: why would a man who has been widely reviled as a neo-Nazi, and is open and unapologetic about his racism, endorse the candidate of the party of Antifa and Black Lives Matter?

While Leftists have frequently tried to tie Richard Spencer to President Trump and his followers, portraying his advocacy of a “white ethnostate” and the complete separation of the races as the true heart of Trump’s program, the real Richard Spencer tweeted on Sunday:

Competent for what? It is reasonable to conclude that Richard Spencer reckons that a President Biden will move the United States closer to his goal of segregation and everlasting enmity between the races. There is growing support for just the kind of segregation Richard wants, not among the pro-Trump conservatives that the establishment media has tried hard to link to him, but among the leftists who share his choice for the 2020 election. The day after Richard endorsed Biden, a New York University student group calling itself Black Violets demanded an “Exploration Floor” in a dorm that would be open to black students only. “NYU is a predominantly white institution, making it very difficult for Black students to connect or find community, especially when incidents involving racism occur,” Black Violets explained. “It is not about exclusion, but rather creating a space where Black students can feel included.”

Not about exclusion, that is, except for the exclusion of anyone who isn’t black. And who is every last member of Black Violets going to vote for? There is no doubt about that: all of them, except a few who vote for even more open socialists, will go for Biden in a bloc.

NYU officials, meanwhile, said they were open to fulfilling Black Violets’ demand, and that it wasn’t really segregation, no, not at all, if you just squinted a bit and tilted your head to the side, then it didn’t look like segregation at all: “A story claiming that NYU is implementing ‘racial segregation in its dorms’ is false and misleading. The University strongly supports the goals of diversity, and of creating an environment that is welcoming, supportive, and inclusive for students of color and students from marginalized communities. However, NYU does not have and will not create student housing that excludes any student based on race.” Sounds as if they’re standing firm for sanity, until they further explained that they were considering establishing the Black Violets’ “Exploration Floor.” It’s not segregation when they do it, you see.

And who are these anti-segregation segregationist NYU administrators voting for? Why, Biden, to a man, woman, and trans. Moreover, as Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster demonstrates, Biden’s Democratic Party has a long, sorry history of promoting segregation and racial injustice. Contrary to the conventional wisdom among America’s miseducated youth today, there was no “party switch” resulting in Republicans becoming the party of racial discrimination while the Democrats became the party of racial justice. Rating America’s Presidents shows that the Republicans’ support of civil rights has been consistent and unbroken, while the Democrats’ embrace of it was cynical, self-serving and partial, epitomized by Lyndon Johnson’s derisive sneer that with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “I’ll have those n—-rs voting Democratic for two hundred years.” In light of all that, it’s no surprise that Richard Spencer would feel at home with “liberals.”

The positions of the two parties today are quite clear. Once that black student group at NYU gets its black-only living area, the other student housing at the university will be more predominantly white. No one will be more pleased by that than Richard Spencer, one of the foremost representatives today of the idea that a man should be judged by the color of his skin, not by the content of his character. Two other major proponents of that idea are Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran: Video depicts destruction of Capitol, Washington Monument, “People everywhere are chanting ‘Death to America’”

Pennsylvania: Muslim migrant tells feds he wasn’t in jihad group, posts on Facebook pics of himself in it

Black Lives Matter Spray Paints “Free Palestine” Outside Kenosha Synagogue

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why are the loudest proponents of ‘tolerance’ and ‘peace’ so frequently ugly, hateful people?

Not physically ugly, but ugly deep in their souls. Georgetown University professor Christine Fair happened upon neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, who is not me, at a gym and began berating him. The gym then revoked Richard Spencer’s membership. I have no regard for Richard Spencer, as often as I am confused with him (even in the comments at National Review on this piece, some clown says that the article should have highlighted Richard Spencer’s remarks on white nationalism, not his criticism of Islam; in reality, he is the one who writes about white nationalism, and I am the one who writes about Islam, and we are two completely different people): he has more than once demanded that I reveal my “real” name, as he is convinced that I am secretly a Jew who has changed my name to fool good white folks like him.

So while I have nothing but disgust for Richard Spencer, I have even greater disgust for Christine Fair, who in this incident showed herself to be more of a Nazi than Richard Spencer could ever hope to be. Like the Nazis, she wants those whom she hates destroyed, full stop. Just destroyed. She doesn’t want them to be able to speak in public. She doesn’t want them to be able to hold memberships in gyms. She doesn’t want them to be allowed to live in the city she lives in. She doesn’t want them to breathe. This is quintessentially Nazi behavior, and is in direct contradiction to the principles that make a society free.

While Richard Spencer is indeed a Nazi, albeit in a different way from how Fair is one, and there is no excuse for that, as long as he is not breaking any laws he has as much right to be in that gym as Christine Fair has. But not as far as Christine Fair is concerned. She has apparently not reflected upon the precedent she is setting, or on the possibility, as remote as it is, that one day her views could be out of favor, and she could find herself getting poisoned, and forbidden to speak, and screamed at by campus fascists, and driven out of gyms, and the like, and that a healthier and freer society allows for the freedom of expression and doesn’t persecute or hound those whose ideas are unpopular or even unarguably obnoxious.

National Review writer Jeremy Carl brings me into this because I have been on the receiving end of Fair’s wrath before, and have found her to be a shockingly rude, unkind, angry, and remarkably unpleasant individual — all while she preens as an exponent of “tolerance” and “peace.” Carl is a bit hasty, in my view, to accept the claims of my critics without evaluating those claims or my work on their merits, but his anxiousness to distance himself from me is perhaps understandable in a piece that appears in the publication that Ann Coulter so famously observed years ago was run by “girly men.”

I would happily debate Jeremy Carl, or Christine Fair, or any serious analyst on the nature of Islam or any of the assertions I have made in my work, and I am confident that the claims about my work that Carl so readily embraces here would, in that event, be proven false. It’s certain, however, that neither Carl nor Fair will agree to debate me, and so that is that. Whatever the undeniable flaws of Carl’s piece, he is dead-on about the Left’s increasing authoritarianism and thuggery. Mark my words: I won’t be the last enemy of the Left that Leftists will try to kill.

Addendum: I just noticed that in her hate screed against Richard Spencer in the Washington Post, Christine Fair cites as factual the thoroughly discredited study claiming that “right-wing extremists” pose a greater threat than Islamic jihadists. This is what an academic is today: not a thinking individual, but a propagandist for the hard-Left.

Georgetown University professor Christine Fair

“Liberal Bullies Threaten Free Speech,” by Jeremy Carl, National Review, May 24, 2017:

…Let’s stipulate that Richard Spencer is a man who has embraced values that are anathema to America’s, and that his vision is quite obviously not one that conservatives or Republicans share. But Fair publicly claims that Spencer’s very presence in the gym, because of his political views, creates an oppressive environment, which is a much more dramatic and potentially dangerous claim. If you are still cheering on Professor Fair, consider the case of another Spencer — Robert Spencer (no relation to Richard), a persistent critic of political Islam and a favorite of Steve Bannon and other figures in the Trump administration.After he spoke to a large audience last week in Reykjavik, Iceland, a leftist approached him as he was dining with companions and managed to slip a combination of MDMA (“Ecstasy”) and Ritalin into his drink, causing him to become ill to the point that he was hospitalized. Fortunately, police seem to have identified the perpetrator. But despite Spencer’s relative prominence and the dramatic nature of the crime, this political poisoning attracted almost no attention from the mainstream media.

As Spencer put it ruefully, “The lesson I learned was that media demonization of those who dissent from the leftist line is a direct incitement to violence. By portraying me and others who raise legitimate questions about jihad terror and Sharia oppression as racist, bigoted ‘Islamophobes’ without allowing us a fair hearing, they paint a huge target on the backs of those who dare to dissent.”

Spencer, the author of two New York Times bestsellers on radical Islam, is certainly controversial — and has his fair share of critics even on the right. But one should be able to be controversial without being poisoned. In the wake of the bombings in Manchester, are critics of political Islam really the people who should be beyond the pale of civil discourse?

hat does all this have to do with Professor Fair? Well, it turns out that Robert Spencer too has had his share of run-ins with Professor Fair, who according to Spencer called him a “lunatic” and likened him to Charles Manson while “refusing (of course) to debate me on questions of substance.” Robert Spencer says he has never met Fair in person, which has not saved him from being a repeated target of Fair’s ire.

Very well, you may say, but Spencer’s harsh and cherry-picked criticism of Islam may have stirred up legitimate anger — there’s no reason to defend him.

Well, how about Asra Nomani, a liberal Muslim immigrant woman, former Wall Street Journal reporter, and Georgetown professor who committed the mortal sin (to Christine Fair) of voting for Donald Trump and then writing a piece in the Washington Post explaining her decision. In response, she was brutally harassed by Professor Fair on Twitter for the better part of a month. As Nomani subsequently wrote to Georgetown in a formal complaint against Fair: “Prof. Fair has directed hateful, vulgar and disrespectful messages to me, including the allegations that I am: a ‘fraud’; ‘fame-mongering clown show’; and a ‘bevkuf,’ or ‘idiot,’ in my native Urdu, who has ‘pimped herself out’ . . . this last allegation amounts to ‘slut-shaming.’”

But while a quick perusal of Fair’s public statements reveals her to be an extreme case, a virtual parody of liberal intolerance, she is hardly the only liberal behaving badly. In just the past year, many conservatives, libertarians, and other assorted right-wingers, from Ann Coulter to Charles Murray to Heather Mac Donald to Milo Yiannopoulos to Ben Shapiro, have been shouted down and prevented, often by violence, from sharing their views, most often on America’s campuses. And so far, almost without exception, those universities have declined to give any significant punishment to the perpetrators. It is all well and good for conservatives to point out that there is a yawning gap between the Richard Spencers of the world and the Charles Murrays and Heather Mac Donalds. But for the Christine Fairs of the world — and an increasing number of her ideological soulmates on the left — they are all the same. None should have the right to speak — and increasingly, they are not even free to lead private lives free of harassment and threats. All of the people named above have been called “Nazis,” “white supremacists,” and similar epithets. If the Right, through silence, decides it’s okay to harass or physically attack Richard Spencer because he is a “Nazi” (a video clip of an Antifa member sucker-punching Spencer has become a favorite Internet meme on the left), they should not expect that the punchers will stop at Richard Spencer — or Robert Spencer, or even Asra Nomani. If we won’t fight for the free speech of those who anger the Left, no matter how distasteful we find their views, because we are afraid that the Left will wrongly ascribe their views to us, then conservatives are little more than feeding red meat to the ravenous left-wing lion in vain hopes that they will be the last ones eaten. And the lion is getting stronger and hungrier.

In his comments on Fair, written long before his poisoning incident, Robert Spencer wondered, “Why are the loudest proponents of ‘tolerance’ and ‘peace’ so frequently ugly, hateful people?” It’s a question the Left doesn’t want to answer — and too many on the right, afraid of being labeled as bigots by the most intolerant voices on the left, are scared to even ask.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s temporary immigration ban

UK: Manchester mayor Andy Burnham says jihad mass murderer was “not a Muslim”