The Deluded Class Warfare of the American Right

Imagine the following:

In Managua, Nicaragua, a wealthy businessman returns from a trip to New York. This businessman is one of a small but influential population of Nicaraguan Jews. Slightly after his return, a neighbor reports citing two individuals — one apparently an American tourist, the other of unknown race — attempting to break into this Nicaraguan Jew’s home.

The police are dispatched. The lead officer forges a police report, and falsely reports that the caller cited two Jews breaking into homes in the neighborhood. The policeman also notices the Jews are wearing Jewish skullcaps, and also falsifies his report to indicate the caller reported the burglers wearing כִּפָּה, or kipas.

The Jewish businessman — well known in the neighborhood — informs the policeman there was no break-in, and asks him to leave. The policeman then illegally enters the Jew’s home, and demands identification. The businessman provides it. The policeman demands another form of identification. The policeman demands it. The businessman asks for the policeman’s numero de identification. The officer becomes angry, and orders the businessman outside. The businessman — fearful of this officer who has already broken into his home and (albeit unknown to him) would soon falsify a police report — initially refuses. The policeman changes his tone, and (falsely) explains that this could be cleared up through radio communication, which is not working in the house.

The businessman complies.

The officer arrests the businessman.

This is what happens to Jews in Nicaragua! the terrified businessman shouts to passers-bye. Fortunately, locals take pictures of the scene, preventing further falsification of the scene by the officer. The offficer’s superiors immediately apologize, and drop the charges. Outraged by this armed assault by a rogue officer on the laws & rights of Nicaraguans, the President of the Republic condemns the “stupid’ actions of the officer, while praising all those who helped defuse the situation.

In peasant towns across the countries, angry locals note that the businessman is a wealthy Jew, and thus has benefits (wealth and the Jewish community) they do not. Many left-wing commentators darkly note that granting rights to the right and Jewish means that their rights may be ignored.

Some commentators even point out that the businessman, who makes $75,000 per year (an astronomical figure by Nicarguan standards) will be consoled by his money, and so no one should mind if he is falsely arrested, now and then.


Sadly, this happened. In America.

The American Right (who are just as focused on class-warfare as the Latin Left) are making arguments identicals to these hypothetical Nicaraguan yahoos. Consider the hateful and idiotic comments made by many of Shannon Love and other loons at Chicago Boyz.

Now consider how this will effect the country.

If Nicaraguans really supported the judicial lynching of a wealthy Jew because he was wealthy, international businessman would be leary of entering the country. Similarly, businessmen from overseas need to think twice about entering the United States, if crimes against them will be excused because they are wealthy.

The American Right is more focused on persecuting their imagined enemies than economic growth or Constitutional rights.

The American Right is just as dangerous to our country as the Nicaraguan Left is to that republic in Latin America.

Right-wing extremists, such as Shannon Love and other lunatics, should be excluded from American politics in general, and the conservative movement in particular. The founder of modern conservatism, William F. Buckley, wisely coordinated a cordon sanitaire to keep deluded extremists like Ayn Rand and the John Birch Society from infesting the Republican Party.

Now that the Republican Party is in the minority, it is uniquely exposed to the dark, class-warfare, grievance-based machinations of racists, class warriors, and other enemies of our nation.

Conservatives purged our movement of the Right once before. We can do so again.

15 thoughts on “The Deluded Class Warfare of the American Right”

  1. Followed with dismay your recent interactions at Chicago Boyz and came here to avoid the rampant confusion in the comments there, only to find a post with even more willful fabrications on your part.
    You’ve got your head stuck completely up your ass on this one. You’re so far off the mark you’re not even wrong; rational discussion is not possible.
    So very sorry to see this in you.

  2. As a quasi-liberal and reluctant Democrat, one may expect me to lick my chops while I set amused at the deterioration of the American conservative movement, but it seems that the birther movement might drive me to assist in your political purge. Even if the present situation is strategically in my favor, these rightist are too stupid and dangerous to ignore.

  3. Much of the post-war consistency of the Republican Party (and internal chaos of the Democratic Party) came from the GOP’s successful expulsion of the Right, and the Democratic Party’s inability to purge the left.

    Both extremes are enemies of the middle. They both wish harm to our Constitution. They must be defeated.

    Thank you for your support!

  4. Sorry Dan

    You are as wrong on this as when you were ranting for a dangerously irresponsible US reaction to the Russian invasion of Georgia.

    How about this as a more likely scenario. Dr.Gates just got back from China on a 30 hour flight. He walks with a cane because of a hip problem. Does he take pain medication for his hip? How much sleep did he get on that flight? How jet lagged was he? How many free drinks did he have on that flight(assuming he flew first class)?

    Also consider that Dr.Gates has a very comfortable career that depends on the existence of racial animosity. Unlike almost everybody else in the United States, Dr.Gates would see the emergence of a color blind society as a disaster. For him the end or racial tension and prejudice would be like a gold miner seeing the end of the vein that he has been digging.

    A cop got a report of a possible break in in a neighborhood that has experienced a number of break ins. The reason that Dr.Gates had asked the driver to help him shove the front door open is because it had been damaged when the house had been broken into by burglars a while back. The cop would have been derelict in his duty if he had not investigated. That includes going into the house. The cop says that he tried to give Dr.Gates his name and badge number twice but that Dr.Gates would not stop yelling long enough to take the information.

    It is pretty common for cops to arrest people who are drunk and release them with the charges dropped when they sober up.

    If you would like to see an example of racial prejudice in modern day America, here is a better example.

    http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/0470FEB3219207458625760B001142AC?OpenDocument

  5. Mark in Texas,

    Thank you for your comment.

    It’s been more than a week since Shannon Love promised to defend his comments [1], so I thank you for stepping up for him.

    I hope your next comment is on topic without the misdirections.

    To discuss Russia’s invasion of Georgia, please comment in an appropraite thread. [2]

    I had not discussed the possibility that Crowley’s report is a result of an incompetent inability to mention material facts of the case, such as the ones you hypothesize, that would have supported his actions. The appropriate place for such speculation would be the open thread. [3]

    Therefore, I will keep to your race war speculation, which is the relevent portion of your comment.

    Also consider that Dr.Gates has a very comfortable career that depends on the existence of racial animosity. Unlike almost everybody else in the United States, Dr.Gates would see the emergence of a color blind society as a disaster. For him the end or racial tension and prejudice would be like a gold miner seeing the end of the vein that he has been digging.

    I am not sure in what sense this is true. Dr. Gates is a tenured University Professor at Harvard [3], which gives him even more academic liberty than most tenured academics. Further, his current project appeared to involve a biography of Yo-yo Ma, for which he traveled to Beijing. Unless China has a large and disenfranchsed class of black violinists, your claim seems senseless.

    Rather, it appears that when you that his “very comfortable career… depends ont he existence of racial animosity,” you mean something closer to “he discusses racial issues in American in a controversial manner.” Well, true. so do you. So?

    [1] http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/8425.html#comment-325323
    [2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/08/08/why-http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2009/07/06/open-thread-xviii.htmldid-russia-invade-georgia.html
    [3] http://aaas.fas.harvard.edu/faculty/henry_louis_gates_jr/index.html

  6. According to your link, Dr.Gates is director of the African and African-American Studies department at Harvard. This is a fairly important position in the Harvard food pyramid. Without researching the matter I am going to assume that it is a more important position than the director of the Scottish and Scottish-American studies department in prestige and political power at Harvard even though the number of Americans of Scottish ancestry is at least as large as the number of Americans of African ancestry.

    I seem to recall that in the early 1970s there were a number of Vietnamese Studies departments at various US universities when the US was still involved in a controversial war there. Since that time, those departments have been merged into Asian Studies departments for the most part if they still exist.

    Dr.Gates prestige at Harvard depends on Americans of African ancestry being regarded as significantly different than Americans of Scottish ancestry or any other ancestry. If that difference were do diminish and eventually vanish in the minds of most Americans, Dr.Gates department would get less funding and he might have to teach more than one intro class and one graduate seminar. He might not have the luxury of time to write a biography of Yo Yo Ma and his “Do you know who I am?” stunts might draw blank stares from academics and intellectuals as well as Cambridge policemen.

    That is what I mean.

    Discussing racial issues in a controversial manner does not yield me any financial or social benefits, although the psychic benefits of debating the subject with you make it worthwhile.

  7. Mark in Texas,

    Thanks for the comment.

    I agree this is a worthwhile discussion!

    Certainly Gates’s prestige depends on the existence of a racial ‘problem’ to begin with. Likewise, Crowley’s prestige depends on the existence of a crime ‘problem’ to begin with. To an extent, this raises doubt on both of their statements.

    Therefore, assuming that both Gates and Crowley had reason to paint a favorable picture for themselves, we are left with internal consistency: Crowley has repeatedly contradicted himself, while Gates has not.

  8. Well, we are left with a lot of other things besides internal consistency. We have Dr.Gates’ history of belligerency with other police and Crowley’s excellent record, as well as the numerous testimonials to his good character.

    We also have the fact that President Obama tried to defuse this situation and make it go away shortly after, in community organizer mode rather than post racial President mode, he took a cheap racism shot. I am presuming that the President of the United States has access to better information than either of us and concluded that continuing to claim racism in this case would not be in his political interest. I am also presuming that if there had been evidence of racism, or even a policeman overstepping his legal bounds, it would have been in President Obama’s political interest to keep it going.

  9. Mark in Texas,

    Thanks for the comment.

    We have Dr.Gates’ history of belligerency with other police

    Do you have a link for this?

    and Crowley’s excellent record, as well as the numerous testimonials to his good character.

    I wonder what is Crowley’s record of baseless arrests (that is, arrests that are dropped or dismissed)?

    Your last paragraph is irrelevent to the actual event. Obama’s reaction is clearly guided by politics. The idea that the Obama spin machine calculates its decision based on an in-depth examination of Constitutional law, as opposed to his place in the polls, is unlikely.

    or even a policeman overstepping his legal bounds, it would have been in President Obama’s political interest to keep it going.

    Obviously this is absurd. Poll numbers do not move in line with Constitutional law. There’s no reason to think they would, or that Obama’s political team sees his role as enforcing proper procedure on beat cops.

    Your faith in Obama here is inexplicable.

  10. Gates’ history:

    http://www2.turnto10.com/jar/news/local/article/ri_trooper_made_note_on_gates_speeding_ticket/20779/

    Just because arrests are not prosecuted does not mean that they are baseless. In some cases the police may decide to defuse a situation by removing one or more of the participants before things escalate due to high emotions and or intoxication. Once the emotions cool and the BAC drops, people are often let go without prosecution. Do you think that things would be better if the jails and courts were kept busier with these sorts of cases?

  11. Apologies,

    Gates’ history:

    I thought my “history” you meant something serious, like breaking into someone’s house, falsifying a report, or so on. Being insufficiently differential to a public servant is hardly a crime. Though corrupt cops often try to make it one [1,2]

    In some cases the police may decide to defuse a situation by removing one or more of the participants before things escalate due to high emotions and or intoxication.

    I am sure this is true.

    I really hope people will go to prison for this.

    We don’t live in a dictatorship like the People’s Republic, where the chengguan go around arresting people who annoy them. We live under a constitution with rights given to us by God. The police have the power to make arrests with probable cause that a crime has occured, not because they are annoyed at an individual.

    I am surprised — truly shocked — that so many people so easialy give up our Constitutional rights. We have fought wars to defend the Constitution, and so easily people will give them up.

    Do you think that things would be better if the jails and courts were kept busier with these sorts of cases?

    Not sure what you mean here. Do I believe things would be better if the police acted according to the law? Yes. Indeed, criminals should go to prison. This is true whether or not they wear a badge.

    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_cop
    [2] http://hiddenunities.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/race-baiter-or-not-the-media-misses-the-point/

  12. I have been trying to understand why you seem so emotionally invested in your view that Officer Crowley is lying and that he violated the constitution. I was thinking that it had something to do with the fact that you have spent your adult life in academia where contempt for police is more common than not but you have frequently demonstrated a willingness to think in ways that are outside the conventional wisdom for the academic community so that did not seem the most likely explanation.

    Your mention of China, however, seems to point to a more likely cause.

    I thought that my question was pretty obvious but I apologize if I was unclear. Let me attempt to rephrase is in a way that is less likely to be misunderstood: Police sometimes arrest people in order to keep a situation that is not so bad from turning into a bad situation. For example, if an individual is behaving erratically due to intoxication, mental illness or emotional state, police will often act as “peace officers” rather than “law officers” and arrest that individual before the individual who is arrested precipitates a situation where someone is hurt. One of the things to keep in mind is that ever since Thomas Szaz succeeded in changing the mental health care system in the United States into the current situation where many mentally ill people live on the street until they freeze to death or they wind up in prison, the police are the people who have to deal with them far more often than any other public official. It is not unusual for the police to release the individual the next day after the situation has calmed down and the arrested individual has sobered up, is no longer agitated, or is no longer acting crazy.

    Now here is the question part — Do you think that it would serve any good purpose if every individual who had been arrested in those circumstances were to be brought to trial after the potential danger had passed? What good purpose or purposes would be served?

    Is that clear enough? I can probably try to state the question in greater detail if you like.

  13. Mark in Texas,

    Thank you for your comment.

    Your first paragraph of it is an extended ad hominem monologue which is hardly worthy of response.

    Except, of course, to the extent it ascribes to be assertions I have not made. Specifically, that Officer Crowley is lying. I do not know if he is. Certainly, it is true he has contradicted himself. That is, at one time or several, he has told material untruths. Now, these may be the result of an intention to deceive. Or he may be forgetful. Or he may have been (as Shannon Love implied) so filled with hate that his emotions overwhelmed him.

    All of these raise questions about his competence to be a polcie officer. Only one or two indicate a moral failing.

    Your third paragraph defends the practice of arresting people without probable cause, and your faith asks me if I believe all individuals arrested without probable cause be brought to trial. The answer is obvious: individuals should not be arrested without probable cause. Officers who knowingly arrest individuals without probable cause should be prosecuted.

    Your broader point appears to be this: As long as we do not adequately care for the mentally ill, should be transform the police into an armed militia to defend the peace?

    Now, I am sympathetic to such an approach. To maintain the pattern of obscure refernces to China, Chinese cities are famously peaceful and citizens famously are not protected by their Constitution. More directly, four years ago I wrote: [1]

    In network-centric war, politics, and faith, super-empowered leaders use technological networks to order subordinates around efficiently. Especially when the technological network is fast, secure, and everywhere, network-centric strivers can be very powerful. In Iraq, the American military removed Saddam from power in three weeks. Network-centric struggle is summed up by one word: faster.

    But if a problem cannot be solved quickly, network-centric solutions are foolish. NCW was great for destroying Iraq in three weeks, but is unable to restore it in three years.

    Network-centric solutions win wars, but not peaces.

    When we give distant courts the ability to put someone’s name on a magic list, we are doing network-centric policing. We are super-empowering judges and juries to disempower individuals.

    You want to end pedophile attacks on your children? Move society to netpolicing — give every man a gun, and make it clear that “honor killings” will not be prosecuted. Super-empower individuals.

    In short, a response such as “Sgt. Crowley’s actions were un-constitutional, he lied about them to cover-them up, and both his actions and his cover-up were actions consistent with a regrettable but ultimately necessary need to keep the peace.” I’m not sure I agree with that, but it is far better than, say, the incoherent ramblings at Chicago Boyz.

    [1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2005/07/09/failure-of-net-centric-policing-super-empowered-locals-or-super-empowered-courts.html

Leave a Reply

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