Was the Civil Rights Movement Opposed to Identity Politics? Balderdash!
by Hadding Scott
THE SELF-PROCLAIMED conservatives of the Republican Party have a sickening tendency to try to minimize controversy by not challenging the sacred cows that the anti-White left sets up for us all. Thus we hear, for example, Rush Limbaugh speaking in reverential tones of “Dr. King” and “what Dr. King had in mind.”
Has everyone forgotten that the Republican presidential candidate of 1964 opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that the Republican president elected in 1968 had campaigned on opposition to forced busing — meaning continuation of de facto segregation?
Amnesia is the great enemy of conservatism. If we fail to remember where we were, if we fail to keep in mind what we were trying to preserve and what we were trying to prevent, we end up gradually adopting all the positions of our persistent enemies.
This has been the story of so-called conservatism since the Second World War and it is a tendency evident even in Tucker Carlson.
Last night I heard something very stupid on Tucker Carlson’s show. Tucker and his guest lamented the growth of “identity politics” and together declared that identity politics was never what the Civil Rights Movement was about.
Well, let me give you this red pill.
The NAACP — the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People — is more than 100 years old. It has identity-politics in its name.
The term “Black Power” was coined in the 1960s.
In the 20th century, the so-called Civil Rights Movement was alwaysaccompanied by identity-politics. It was about achieving gains for specific groups.
First the Blacks were mobilized against Southern Whites within the infamous Black-Jewish alliance, then Northern Whites were targeted too. Jewish Cultural Marxists would mobilize any group with a conceivable grievance against straight White males, and even create such groups by proselytizing deviance.
When I hear Tucker Carlson agree with Tammy Bruce that the Civil Rights Movement was opposed to identity-politics, it makes me think either that he is weak, or that he has no memory.
All of this genuflecting toward the Revrun Docta Martin Loofa King — the figurehead of the Civil Rights Movement — should be coming to an end now, with all the information that has been published about him.
We used to have identity-politics for White people in the USA, and we were not ashamed of it. We wanted to maintain a White majority and the Immigration Act of 1924 reflected that. A real conservatism would try to defend that status quo. It is the reason why Donald Trump was elected. The fact that we cannot even openly declare this purpose, and our acceptance of the premise that there is something shameful about it, makes this preservation of our country and our people very much harder to accomplish.
The real threat to the future of the United States is not from identity-politics but from the failure of the White population to practice identity-politics with sufficient vigor as to retain control.
* * *
Source: National-Socialist Worldview