EssaysNews

Let’s Have Fun Destroying Dinesh D’Souza: Revised and Expanded

Serial racemixer and fleecer of conservatives Dinesh D’Souza

D’Souza’s latest “anti-racist” book is so moronic that only a boomer conservative on multiple painkiller prescriptions could stomach it. Let’s take it apart every time it’s mentioned on social media.

by Hadding Scott

DINESH D’Souza’s narrative about how the Democrats are “the real racists” or, lately, “the real fascists,” or even “the real nazis,” is so full of holes, and so easily refuted, that it can be hard to understand why anyone could really be taken in by it.

At least, it is hard to conceive of how somebody with a memory extending back to the 1970s could be taken in by it. In the 1970s, before Trotskyite Jews calling themselves “Neoconservatives” had acquired much influence, conservatism had not yet been entirely redefined as the demand for free markets and less government (which is actually liberalism, not conservatism).  The pro-White motive in conservatism, therefore, was much more conspicuous a few decades ago. For anybody who remembers that, D’Souza’s contention that segregationists were leftists is such obvious balderdash that it requires no refutation. Certainly, Rush Limbaugh, born in 1951, knows enough that he cannot genuinely take D’Souza seriously in this — yet he plays along.

Nonetheless, there are sincere people, all of them I suppose too young to remember politics before Reagan, who are not just playing along but really have been deceived by D’Souza. Because they are sincere, they can be persuaded.

I have had some success in convincing followers of Dinesh D’Souza on Twitter that he has been lying to them. If somebody says that D’Souza’s book is excellent or interesting, I respond that it is a stupid book. Alternately one could say that it is a very dishonest book. Thereupon there is a reaction of incredulity and a demand for an explanation. Now a discussion begins. These are the points that I have used. (I believe that these blurbs are all short enough to be copied and pasted on Twitter.)

Eugenic Sterilization and Party Affiliation

D’Souza hides the fact that eugenic sterilization was promoted mainly by Republicans: the first five governors to sign eugenic sterilization into law in 1907-1911 (in IN, WA, CA, CT, NV) were all Republicans.

Twenty out of thirty-two governors who signed eugenic sterilization into law were Republicans.

The picture that Dinesh D’Souza tries to paint, is that Republicans were always conservative and non-racist, and Democrats were always leftist and racist. If eugenic sterilization was mainly a Republican cause, then his picture is messed up. That happens to be the case.

Dinesh Hides Republicans behind the word “Progressives”

D’Souza selectively avoids calling eugenicist Republicans by their party affiliation and calls them “progressives” instead. When D’Souza talks about “progressives” he is usually talking about Republicans.

In fact, the label “progressive” was particularly associated with Republicans like Theodore Roosevelt. D’Souza carefully avoids mentioning this.

Dinesh D’Souza has laid a booby-trap for Republicans with this book. If they follow his lead by noisily condemning eugenic sterilization, it is only a matter of time before somebody points out that it was supported first and foremost by Republicans.

Segregationist Democrats were Conservative

There used to be conservative Democrats. D’Souza pretends that segregationist Democrats were leftists when in fact figures like Senator James Eastland (Democrat, Mississippi) were regarded as extremely conservative.

Conservative Democrats were not liberal like you, Dinesh. They tried to conserve the community school, states’ rights, individual rights, freedom of association, public morality, and law and order.

Would you like to explain, Dinesh, what was conservative about federally mandated school-desegregation and forced busing? It looks like left-wing tyranny to me, and that was the consensus among White people in the South. Conservative Democrats opposed this left-wing tyranny.

Eugenic Sterilization and the former Confederacy

The eugenicist movement was weaker in the former Confederacy than in the rest of the country.

While 32 out of 48 (67%) of the United States enacted eugenic sterilization laws, only 55% of former Confederate states enacted such laws, compared to 70% of the other States.

Eugenic Sterilization and Racial Segregation

17 states had mandatory racial segregation. Of these, only 9 (53%) enacted eugenic sterilization laws. 16 states prohibited racial segregation: Of these, 11 (69%) enacted eugenic sterilization laws. There was no relationship between racial segregation and eugenic sterilization laws.

Out of 32 states that enacted eugenic sterilization laws, 23 of them had no mandatory racial segregation.

In fact, states with mandatory racial segregation were somewhat less likely to enact eugenic sterilization laws, compared to states without racial segregation.

Southern Segregationist Voters Migrated to the GOP

White Southern Democrats started voting for the GOP because Richard Nixon in 1968 and 1972 seemed to oppose forced busing. This method of winning the segregationist vote for the GOP, called Nixon’s “southern strategy,” was devised by Kevin Phillips.

Dinesh D’Souza tries to obfuscate the well known fact that most Southern segregationists switched to the GOP by putting the focus on segregationist politicians, of whom very few switched parties.

Very few segregationist politicians changed parties, because the Democratic Party continued to be dominant until 1980. Politicians like Senator James Eastland (who died in 1979) would have been less influential in the GOP. But those segregationists were conservative!

The Big Switch that Dinesh D’Souza Denies

As it turns out, what D’Souza calls “the nazi roots of the American left” are, on the one hand, “progressive” Republicans, and, on the other hand, conservative Democrats that have now migrated almost entirely to the GOP.

D’Souza pretends that those “progressive” Republicans and conservative Democrats were the same group. Furthermore, he wants us to believe that they were all left-wing Democrats. Clearly, none of them were left-wing Democrats!

The racial attitudes represented by the two parties can be roughly gauged by the Senate’s vote on a holiday to commemorate Martin Luther King. While overwhelming majorities of both parties voted for the holiday, only 4 Democrats — but 18 Republicans — voted against the holiday.

Dinesh D’Souza Recycles Cultural Marxist Propaganda

Dinesh D’Souza’s attack on Andrew Jackson as a “racist” would instantly be recognized and reviled as Cultural Marxist propaganda if it were not clothed in Republican partisanism.

These are points that any sincere person should be able to grasp without much difficulty.

One could also dispute D’Souza’s assertions about fascism, but because it is a more obscure subject your interlocutors will find the argument harder to follow.  Therefore it is better just to point out the misrepresentations about American political history.

One young woman asked me if there were another book that I could recommend to her, perhaps one that refutes D’Souza. I told her that I was writing that book.

* * *

Source: National-Socialist Worldview

For Further Reading

Previous post

Who Should Have Power? Who Will Have Power?

Next post

Who Killed Ebba Åkerlund?

1 Comment

  1. November 20, 2017 at 11:27 pm — Reply

Leave a reply

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

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.