Wednesday, October 22, 2008

"Socialist" Means "Black"?

Apparently one cannot criticize Obama on anything or use any sort of label to describe him without being accused of racism. Now "socialist" is a racist term? The selectively-historic imbecile who wrote the op-ed in the Kansas City Star has noticed that a few African-American leaders in the past were called "socialists," and concluded that it really only ever meant "black." Never mind, apparently, that socialism is a form of political economy, and a socialist is someone who supports this form of political economy. Never mind that most people associate socialism with Europe which, I am pretty certain, is the motherland of white people. To the extent that anyone of any race is a socialist or a Marxist, they are adopting a European idea as their own. It's really pathetic when you cannot criticize someone's ideas if they are a member of some minority group without being accused of being a racist. The Nazis would be impressed with how we have figured out how to censor any sort of criticism this way. Criticize a liberal's ideas, and you're a racist, a sexist, etc. Apparently only conservatives and libertarians can be criticized. Why are we on the verge of electing these wannabe tyrants?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm glad somebody else feels the same way I do regarding the mainstream media's rush to "protect" a minority group's member by inventing their own convenient definitions of common words. A socialist has nothing to do with race. In fact, a person of any race can be weak-minded and intellectually stunted enough to be a socialist.

John said...

He's right about socialism's "long and very ugly historical roots." I don't think Stalin and Pol Pot were black, though.

John said...

And Hitler, if you want to get technical.

Troy Camplin said...

Amen, brother.