WHITE traitors against America?

An interesting post from www.badeagle.com about WHITE traitors to the U.S. This follows this post about a very interesting book which describes the dangers America currently faces.

Red Dawn V: The Moral Imperative
by David Yeagley ·

“I’ve been wronged!” is the battle cry of the liberal. It has been my definition of Communism from the beginning, that, and “You owe me!” Ann Coulter has developed the same theme as the “victim” mantra. This is apparent in her book, Treason (2003), and was absolutely emblazoned in her book Godless: The Church of Liberalism (2006). In Godless, Coulter demonstrates how “invulnerability” was an element added to the “victim” concept. Chapter 5 of Godless is entitled, “Liberals’ Doctrine of Infalibility: Sobbing Hysterical Women.” Liberals must create a victim whose integrity and authenticity is invulnerable. The victim must be sacrosanct. Their actual, natural vulnerability is the key defense. Women, children, and Negroes make the best victims. When I mentioned my psychological principle of Communism (”I’ve been wronged”) to David Horowitz in 2001, he said, “Yes, injustice gives you a moral advantage in the argument.” In Treason, Coulter shows how this theme was employed to the max early on in American media.


Ann Coulter, in a recent and somber moment

Chapter 5: Victims of McCarthyism–The Liberals’ Mayflower.
Coulter says liberals against McCarthy painted the early 1950’s as a period of terror–worse than the Medieval plague. Anyone accused of being a Communist was victim, and one deserving of the most profound sympathy. And “the children” theme was already afloat, or modern liberals would have us know. A San Francisco Chronicle article (March 8, 1995) dramatized the effects on the children of those accused of being Communist. Reviewing Griffen Fariello’s Red Scare (1995), the Chronicle cites examples of children suffering great social disquietude because their parents were named as Soviet spies.

One by one, these testimonies chill us to the bone, making it cleaer what totalitarianism once looked like within our own borders.

Clearly, the ‘accusation’ of `McCarthyism is still used against patriotism, conservatism, and simple love of country. The delusive implication being Communists are the patriots, and patriots are the totalitarians!

Then Coulter says something, in passing, which is actually quite important. “Conservatives could never catch up with the outburst of liberal indignation.” She observes how conservatives seemed to have indulged liberals for the moment (having lack of experience in dealing with hysterical ideologues at the time), and then says, “The moment you concede some small point to liberals, they go to work building an enormous elaborate edifice on top of the first lie.” Coulter cites the case of the United Nations (brain child of Soviet spy Alger Hiss). Conservatives indulged it, thinking it’s worthlessness could not work positive harm. Coulter observes:

The next thing you knew, the U.N. was dominated by ludicrous despots in countries primarily known for cannibalism issuing lunatic declarations while Democrats and the media acted as if U.N. approval was a constitutional prerequisite to the United States acting in its self-defence.

Moral advantage, indeed. The U.N. finally induced “abortion” as a right under the American Constitution!

Similarly, having ceded the lie of “McCarthyism,” now no one is allowed to call liberals unpatriotic. Liberals relentlessly attack their own country, but we can’t call them traitors, which they manifestly are, because that would be “McCarthyism,” which never existed.

And so we see clearly how the liberal (Communist) game works. (It finally got a name in Orwell’s 1984–”doublespeak.” Making a word mean the opposite of what it really means. Like, saying, “I’ve been wronged,” when you are the wrong doer, or at least the one thinking wrongly.

McCarthy was essentially inquiring. He held hearings. He did not prosecute. The liberals turned this into a devastaing attact on American freedom, patriotism, and integrity. McCarthy was made to appear as a monstrous Medieval inquisitor, wreaking destruction on innocent, patriotic lives.

Hollywood–the idol of all media-minded human beings, where are enshrined all visions of human vanity, was most responsible for making the “Red Scare” a public phenomenon. Coulter reports that Michael J. Ybarra (in The New Republic) indicates that Joseph Stalin himself advised the “Hollywood Ten” in their congressional appearances. These mediocre “scribblers,” as Coulter calls them, were suppected of Communism, and called before the House Un-American Activities Committee. Senator McCarthy had nothing to do with it. But, of course, in time, with media magic, the Hollywood “victims” all came under the evil banner of “McCarthyism.”


Senator Joe McCarthy, 1908-1957

Then Coulter says who McCarthy’s real “victims” were. They were not

sympathetic witnesses, frivolous Hollywood screenwriters, or irrelevant blowhard college professors. They were elite WASP [White Anglo-Saxon Protestant] establishment policy-makers. Sedition always held a strange attraction for Ivy League types with three names, like John Steward Service, Harry Dexter White, George Catlett Marshall, and William Sloan Coffin

[Coffin was the chaplian of Yale University when I was there in the late 1970's.]

It is important to note that this is a recurring point of emphasis in Coulter’s writing. The traitors of America are in fact the sons of the Pilgrims, the descendents of the fathers. I’ve identified it as some sociological Oedipal Complex manifestation. It is simply too enormously important an observation to leave unnoticed. Coulter is unique and original in her identification of the social status of the traitors. In this context, any particular emphasis on the “Jewish” element in American Communism pales in comparison. Coulter continues:

They all liked one another, these Anglophile blue bloods. They went to Yale, played cricket, became Rhodes scholars, wrestled in the mud together at the Skull and Bones society, and went to parties where Dean Acheson was invariably a guest. They were well-born and looked good in dinner jackets. Protecting traitors was part of the bonhomie of the ruling class. It was as if the WASPs had developed some XXY chromosome that led to overt treason.

Then, in a moment of rare racial candor (!) Coulter confesses:

They had ruled magnificently for many years, but their blood had gotten thin. Angry ethnics like Joe McCarthy made much better Americans.

Who knows? Maybe Coulter would add another Irish family that came to prominence, which was close to McCarthy, and even a certain southern swarthy Mediterranean crowd that shared the same boot-legging business.

It seems that, after WWII, American identity was up for grabs. Different groups, ethnic or religious, seemed to emphasis certain elements in the American value system which suited their purposes. Who can tell how it is that American society has become the monstrosity it is today? From Coulter’s view, it seems that the lusus naturae evolved from the corruption of blue blood. I say it’s Freudian. Maybe it’s more Mosaic (Deuteronomy 32:15):

But Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked; thou art waxen fat, thou are grown thick, thou are covered with fatness: then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.