Sunday, December 06, 2015

No Country for White Men

Like most people, I listen to the public radio (NPR/KQED  San Francisco Bay Area) while commuting to work and back every day. On most days, the (obvious) liberal bias is annoying but on some days, the bias is so strong it leaves me frothing with frustration. The liberal narrative makes it appear as if all the problems in the world can be blamed on USA, and in particular, on its white population.

And I am not even white.

Sample some of the narratives in the recent times:
Black Lives Matter 
Of course they matter! But doesn't this movement sound exclusionary, at least a little bit. What if I substitute "Black" with "White", or "Christian". "White Lives Matter" is so Ku-Klaxian, the liberal media would have certainly been horrified should such an organization was forming anywhere - and rightfully so. But then why is saying BLM ok? Imagine being a white person being told in your face day-in day-out that "BLACK Lives Matter". Wouldn't a sense of frustration start building up - slowly yet surely.
Instead, can we look at the media and prominent black organizations to change the narrative to "All Lives Matter" - something that is more inclusive and that we can all associate with.

Shooting Tragedies
Am I the only one to have noticed a distinct difference between the media narratives describing different kinds of shootings. In case of police shootings, even though more whites die at the hands of police, the liberal media only wakes up when the headline reads "WHITE police office shot and killed a black...". To be clear, this is not an apology for the despicable murders some police officers seem to have committed from what we can see in videos circulating in the public media. But it begs the question - why does the liberal media wake up only in one situation. What about cases where blacks are murdered by blacks - something that accounts for the vast majority of black deaths? Why is there a near-zero outcry about crime rate of Chicago - a city governed by democrats since 1931, and that is now synonymous with crime and corruption. Isn't the silence of liberal media on utter failure of a once-great-city under the democrats incredibly dishonest at best and racist at worst? 

Ideological nut cases driven tragedies
This is where the liberal media really shines in their bigotry. Should the perpetrator be anyone other than radical islamists, they will make it clear in their opening statement that the perpetrator was a "". People start going crazy blaming gun-owners so much so they don't even want them praying for the victims.  However if there is the slightest hint of radical islamism at play, the great liberal media circus starts, with them doing every kind of gymnastics just to avoid stating the obvious. The latest tragedy in San Bernardino caught even the POTUS off-guard with his completely orthogonal and nonsensical response. 
How many times have we heard the line "let's be clear, a vast majority of muslims are peace-loving..." in an effort to not generalize the issue. And THAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO - Of course, we can't blame an entire community for the actions of a few nut-jobs. But why can't the liberal media follow the same standards when the shooter is a white gun-owner, in which case they seem ever so enthusiastic to generalize the entire gun-owning population. 

We are not going to have gun reforms by vilifying a large part of our population. 

Illegal Immigration
The left does their best to conflate legal immigration with illegal. As Douglas Murray put so eloquently, there is a big difference between the two - the law is on the side of one and NOT on the side of other. USA is still considered the land of opportunities by many, and it draws talent from around the world. However, to come here, most of them follow the laid-down process, a process that is lengthy, excruciating, and sometimes seemingly unfair. But following the process should be the ONLY way to get here. However the liberal media talks endlessly about the plight of illegals. The politically correct term I believe is "undocumented", as if it is merely an issue of documentation. Platitudes like "no human being is illegal" are thrown around. Of course that's true. Should we then invite about 30% of India's poor and nearly whole of Africa as well? The bastion of liberal hypocrisy, NY Times, has nothing but disdain for Indian IT workers affecting 250 jobs at Disney and yet their complete and active support for the 11 million illegals here. 

It is no wonder the liberal media can't get their head around Donald Trump's appeal (they have been predicting his demise for ages now). If you are a white guy, sick of getting liberal hypocrisy shoveled in your face every morning and evening, you would even consider a guy as blunt as Trump for President. 

I consider myself a liberal progressive, the kind that believes in freedom of speech, human and constitutional rights, less government, women's and LGBT rights, freedom of and from religion, environmental protection etc. Alas, today's "liberals" are mostly the leftists of yesterday's - an ideology that completely failed in the twentieth century and resulted in unspeakable misery for almost half of humanity. They are not progressives but regressives. The true liberals amongst us must speak up and claim the right liberal narrative. We cannot let NPR and NYT turn USA into USSR.

No comments: