The "White Supremacist" Canard

The Tactical Professor has a very well thought out reaction to the recent shootings, but the long and short of it is that the best response (legislatively speaking) is to do nothing. He explains:

In numerical terms, the probability of being involved in a ‘mass shooting’ is so small a possibility that it’s not even worth considering in our daily lives much less for making public policy. There were more one-on-one homicide victims last year than in all the so-called ‘mass shootings’ of the 20th and 21st Centuries combined. I feel sorry for the victims of active killers but no more so than for the Dekalb County murder victims who annually outnumber ‘active killer’ victims but who get about one minute of news coverage every few days.

(Underline added). He has a lot more to say, so read the whole thing.

     Besides, the media and politicians have latched onto a false narrative. Herschel at The Captain's Journal observes:

      As for the Dayton shooter, not only was he a socialist, he was a Satanist and member of a band called “Pornogrind” which released songs about raping and killing women.

The Daily Mail is reporting today that "Dayton shooter Connor Betts described himself as a 'leftist' who hated Trump, wanted Elizabeth Warren for president and was PRO-gun control, his now-suspended social media accounts show." A recent girlfriend of the Dayton shooter has also indicated that he suffered from mental problems. In fact, according to the article, "[t]he pair met in a community college class and Johnson said they bonded over both having mental illnesses." And, I would add, the Betts was an Antifa sympathizer, if not an actual member, although perhaps that is being repetitive.

     Herschel also notes this about the El Paso Shooter.

      He wanted universally guaranteed income, something no one committed to liberty wants because it always means taking it away from someone else.  Or in other words, thievery by the power of a badge and gun.

This point is not lost on everyone. I saw the following in a New York Post article this morning:

       Like the Christchurch killer, Crusius espoused an anti-capitalist, anti-people radical green ideology. He rails against farming, oil drilling, plastic, paper towels and “consumer culture.” He sounds like Jay Inslee:

      “My whole life, I have been preparing for a future that currently doesn’t exist.”

      He justifies murder as “the logical step … to decrease the number of people in America using resources.”

And while media reports are quick to report that Crusius was inspired by the Christchurch shooter, I have yet to see anyone explore the logical consequences of that. And by that, I am referring to the Chirstchurch shooter's desire for civil war in the United States, and his specific selection of weapons designed to inspire wholesale gun confiscation, which will be the modern version of  "the Intolerable Acts." Crusius weirdly described in detail the weapon he chose, as well as the shortcomings of it and its standard ammunition. It seems reasonable that he acted as he did also with the intent of wanting to spark a civil war.

      What makes the El Paso shooting so suspicious is that it ties so neatly into the recent Leftist proclamations and FBI warnings about "white supremacists." In her article at American Greatness, "What’s Really Behind the ‘White Supremacy’ Terrorism Scare," Julie Kelly explains that "[t]he anti-Trump forces, now stripped of their Russian collusion ammunition, have invented another imaginary threat they hope to weaponize against the president: The public menace posed by 'white supremacist' terrorism." She continues:

      Unironically, the whole ruse is being pushed by the same people who foisted the Russian collusion hoax on the American people for three years in the hopes of prompting President Trump’s impeachment and removal. The political agenda behind this manufactured white supremacy crisis is equally sinister because its specific purpose is to influence and undermine the 2020 elections.

       The “white supremacy” canard is intended to further demonize Trump; falsely defame his supporters as white supremacists; and pressure nervous voters into defeating Trump and Republican candidates next year. The strategy is as cynical as it is pernicious.

She also notes that there is no evidence of increased white supremacist activity:

      There is no systemic threat posed by white supremacy. Domestic white terrorists are not the same as, let alone worse than ISIS Jihadis. There has been no massive “surge” in white supremacy activity, as I wrote in November. These groups remain fringe, disorganized, and unrespected.

      In his Senate testimony last month, FBI Director Christopher Wray was intentionally vague when questioned by Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) about the supposed rise of white supremacy.

       “In terms of number of arrests, we have, through the third quarter of this fiscal year, had about, give or take, a hundred arrests in the international terrorism side, which includes the homegrown violent extremists,” Wray explained. “But we’ve also had about the same number, again, don’t quote me to the exact digit, on the domestic terrorism side. And I will say that a majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence but it includes other things as well.”

       Some version of what you might call white supremacist violence? Even giving Wray the benefit of the doubt, that means the FBI investigated roughly 50 or so cases of some version of white supremacy. Not exactly solid evidence to justify a law enforcement, political and media war against white supremacy.

What this really about is coming up with a new stick with which to beat opponents about the head, now that the old accusations of "racism" or "racist" have become old and worn out.

       What should frighten every American is that the emerging proposals to mitigate “white supremacy” include a jaw-dropping array of strong-arm tactics that will, in short order, violate the free speech rights of millions of Americans as the government and news media malign anyone they identify as sympathizing with “white supremacy.”

      If these measures are enacted, they will give legal and political cover to social media platforms to ban Trump officials, his supporters and perhaps even the president himself—they may extend to anyone in the Republican Party. Guns will be confiscated, careers ruined, and reputations irreparably destroyed. It will be the Kavanaugh hearing and show trials on steroids.

      Conservative news and opinion outlets such as this one could be placed on some kind of watch list, or worse, shuttered altogether simply for challenging immigration policy or defending the president. Private companies and financial institutions could be warned against doing business with the Trump campaign or Republican candidates and lawmakers. Donors could be censured under the guise of aiding and abetting a domestic enemy.

      MSNBC already is advocating on behalf of taking that path: “Because you keep writing checks to this president, it’s on you . . . because you are funding this white supremacist campaign . . . It is your money that is funding this white supremacy,” claimed Joe Scarborough on Monday’s show.

      Pending approval of a catalog of harsh policy prescriptions, the Democrats, the news media and NeverTrump Right will continue openly to brand any voter planning to reelect Donald Trump as a white supremacist. The social shame will be as destructive as any measures that could be taken by any law enforcement agency.

In other words, the Left and the Progressives are rebranding "white supremacy" to refer to anything they don't like.

      That the Left will take such a strategy is not surprising. I recently cited to an article by C.B. Robertson called "On the Coming Civil War." He makes a good point in that article:

The Left’s investment in minorities united by their opposition to whites means that more immigration will lead to a permanent victory for the Left. If the Right manages to stem the flow of immigration, or reverse it, then it will win a permanent victory over the progressive Left. The permanence of victory and the high stakes of the game mean that no strategy will be off the table, so long as it works.

And so anyone opposed to the Left's victory is a "white supremacist".