Time to take the Red Pill, part 5/5
More and more Americans are waking to reality. Time to welcome them over to a big tent GOP focused on isolating and defeating the insane authoritarianism of Wokeism.
Picking Up Where We Left Off
Finally—and these really are the final entry in my red pill series—here are two early turning point pieces in which I finally felt comfortable addressing a GOP audience as “my people.” The first was a piece I wrote for the Republican Jewish Coalition directed towards Jewish voters sitting on the fence prior to the 2010 midterms. The second is a comment on the Tea Party and the GOP following those midterms.
I hope you’ve enjoyed these (1, 2, 3, 4) blasts from my past. My basic point is that red pilling is a process. We need lots of new voters to come over to the side of reality—and of sanity. Let’s do everything in our power to make them feel welcome.
From October 2010:
The March from Indulgence to Equality
“I have a dream,” intoned Martin Luther King, Jr. “that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Millions of Americans shared that dream. The wave of openness, tolerance, and increased integration that has carried the country for nearly five decades has served us well both as Americans and as Jews. The doors that King helped pry open for those who had been left out by race stayed open for those of us whose had been kept out by faith.
But the linkage between Jews and the civil rights movement runs deeper than mere self-interest. Jewish Americans played important leadership roles in the struggles for civil rights and civil liberties, and our successes have long played important roles in the Jewish American psyche. Social justice, due process, equality, and fair play were all critical Jewish values long before they became critical American values. Furthermore, America’s Jews arrived at these struggles well versed in Jewish history. Nations that define their citizens by their differences invariably attack their Jews. Long term security and safety for any ethnic community requires an integration that transcends ethnic differences. So it is no surprise that the overwhelming majority of Jewish Americans—including a solid majority of those (like me) who voted against Barack Obama—took great pride when King’s dream of a color-blind nation gave rise to the reality of our first black President.
Many have noted that the mere fact that America elected a black president does not mean that the struggle for full equality and integration is over. Not only does the legacy of discrimination still linger over some descendants of slaves, but our constant national rebirth through immigration guarantees that each generation will bring new “minorities” into our midst, each arriving to escape a unique blend of discrimination and deprivation. Rather than resting on our laurels for having transcended the most obvious and pernicious divide in American history, then, we must challenge ourselves to find the best ways forward.
Are we, as a nation, continuing to move towards universal equality? Will our current path fulfill King’s dream of a world in which skin color—along with any other attribute of ethnic origin or faith—truly is irrelevant? And as we head to the polls in November, we must further wonder—which party is best poised to take us there?
When it comes to fostering civil equality, Democrats and Republicans can both point to partially proud histories. The Republican Party, after all, was born as the anti-slavery party, and for the first century of its existence led the way in all struggles for civil equality. Even as recently as the 1950s and 60s, it was Republican Chief Justice Earl Warren who gave Congress the space to enact (and the Justice Department to enforce) sweeping legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—neither of which could have passed without significant GOP support. With those landmark laws, however, LBJ seized the issue for the Democrats. The GOP, to its lasting shame, more-or-less acceded.
Over the past few years, however, we have witnessed a quieter shift. Republicans have moved far beyond the racial politics of the 1980s and 90s, as our two black Republican Secretaries of State demonstrated. There is no indication that racial politics plays any role in today’s GOP.
Meanwhile, something frightening has occurred on the Democratic side of the aisle. Politicians, operatives, and thinkers of the left seem intent upon manufacturing racial and ethnic strife. Their assembly line has become predictable. Some qualified member of the sensitivity police finds a perceived slight, decries the perpetrator, and then offers to sell them an indulgence. This sensitivity industry has become a big business and an important Democratic constituency. Yet every step that we take towards becoming a country in which content of character, and only content of character, is what matters, imperils its health and the livelihood of its professionals. The election of President Obama was a warning shot across the bow. They have responded with two parallel attempts to foment racial tension: one focused on African Americans, the second on Muslim Americans.
Nancy Pelosi decided that Tea Partiers seeking fiscal restraint could only be Nazis. Two Congressmen facing opposition on health care claim to have heard vile racial epithets, but there is no corroborating evidence. President Obama called a Cambridge police officer “stupid” for arresting a prominent black Harvard professor with scant reason to believe that the officer had done anything improper. The NYT’s Maureen Dowd confessed that she could not hear anyone criticize President Obama without appending the word “boy”—and therefore attributed racial motives to his critics. Arizona’s citizens, frustrated at the lack of federal enforcement of immigration laws, have become racists in the eyes of the press—and human rights violators in the eyes of our own State Department.
For the first time in many years, these accusations have failed to raise much passion beyond the leftist base; to most Americans, the nonsensical nature of the allegations is obvious. Perhaps in part because of the waning power of manufactured racial strife, increasing portions of the left have invented the new and dangerous myth of “Islamophobia,” (from which their wisdom and sensitivity alone can save us). In their telling, bigoted Americans are rising up to discriminate against our own peaceful Muslim citizens. But precisely the opposite is true. Americans have remained steadfast in our commitment to welcoming and integrating Muslim immigrants and citizens. Statistics show roughly eight anti-Semitic attacks for every anti-Muslim attack, and few Jews today consider the U.S. a hotbed of anti-Semitism. Jewish institutions—synagogues, JCCs, schools—have heightened security measures, much as black churches have had to do within recent memory. Few if any American mosques have ever needed similar measures. The facts simply cannot sustain the story that the left would like to tell. And so, in the eyes of the left, Juan Williams’s anodyne comments about struggling to get beyond the uneasiness he feels when sharing a flight with Muslims in traditional garb gets equated with Helen Thomas’s directive to get the Jews out of Palestine and back to Poland and Germany, or Rick Sanchez’s rant about Jews controlling the media.
Clearly, something is amiss. Histrionics of this sort cannot lead us further down the path of equality. Every step that we take towards becoming a color-blind society weakens the power of self-righteous leftists to sell indulgences. It eliminates a source of moral superiority, a source of patronage, and a cheap way to discredit those with whom they disagree. The biggest current struggle for civil rights is against those who persist in dividing us by ethnicity.
In his marvelous address to the 2004 Democratic convention, Illinois State Senator Obama reminded us that “there is no black America and white America, there is only the United States of America.” I cheered—along with most Americans—when I heard him proclaim those words. Less than five years later, we watched that same man prove himself right by taking the oath of office.
The overwhelming majority of Americans of every color, every faith, and every political affiliation, believes that our country becomes stronger when we minimize our differences. Today, we all share King’s dream. But the Democrats—at least under their current leadership—cannot take us there. Only on the Republican side of the aisle does content of character prevail. Voters—specifically Jewish American voters—committed to a meritocratic, color-blind, faith-blind America that builds, recognizes, and rewards strength of character must bear that in mind when we head to the polls next week.
From January 2011:
For a Robust Tea Party, Avoid Social Conservatism
There has been a lot of buzz the past few days about tension between the socially conservative and libertarian factions of the tea party. With the lessons of a first largely, but not entirely, successful campaign behind it, where should this acephalous grassroots movement turn? As a strong social libertarian whose comfort level with the GOP has increased as the party’s obsession with social issues has decreased, and as a voter who has been broadly and generally sympathetic to the tea party movement, I obviously have an opinion on the matter: stay away from social issues!
There are a number of sound reasons supporting this advice, only some of them utilitarian. From a personal level, of course, I find it difficult to support social conservatives, particularly vocal social conservatives. From where I stand, a socially conservative lifestyle is a fine choice with much to commend it. It is not, however, the only fine choice with much to commend it, and political attempts to coerce those who choose—and in many cases need—less conservative lifestyles fall somewhere between immoral and authoritarian. I support a strong national defense and pro-growth economic policies. It seems unwise to make voters like me feel uncomfortable voting for Republican candidates.
The massive swing among independent voters in the past few elections suggest that a large number of Americans—many likely situated with me—have not yet found a comfortable home in either major party. It seems unlikely that re-emphasizing social conservatism, a longstanding GOP mainstay, is the key to winning their allegiance. Perhaps the key difference between activists (of the left and right) and most other voters is that activists see social issues as moral absolutes, while most others see them as policy disputes. Three hot-button issues should drive the point home: gay marriage, immigration, and abortion (the perennial favorite).
On gay marriage, activists on the right see an assault on Judeo-Christian traditions; activists on the left see a civil rights issue akin to Jim Crow. Though each can cite facts to justify their positions, their arguments are not “merely” factual. They are tied to visceral beliefs about the nature of right and wrong, beliefs that are not easily compromised. Most voters, on the other hand, see the question as a policy dispute. While they acknowledge the facts that both left and right support, they also see partial validity in both of their positions. Most voters want fairness and equality, but remain squeamish about discarding longstanding traditions. Most voters seem ready for a bit of experimentation, in which individual states hold referenda or legislative debates on the extension of family law into non-traditional families. Pushing a moralistic agenda—whether through political purity tests or judicial fiat—is unlikely to appeal to such voters.
On immigration, activists on the right see a criminal enterprise undermining both our legal integrity and our economic viability; activists on the left see economic or political refugees seeking the rights of American citizens. Here, anecdotes tend to prevail over facts—and ample anecdotes support both stories. Most voters, though, reject these categorical extremes. Most voters recognize that we would like to adopt some but not all immigrants as American citizens; that we need to reform our rules governing who we admit to the country; that we need to strengthen our border security to enforce whatever set of admission rules we adopt; and that we are not going to commit mass expulsions of otherwise law-abiding illegal aliens. Here, activists on both sides seem detached from reality. Voters who understand the policy debate are unlikely to flock to either side.
On abortion, activists on the right see the murder of a newly formed human; those on the left see the enslavement of our female population. Most voters have a less draconian view of the matter. They see a potentially controversial form of elective surgery. Most voters believe that, in general, abortion should be legal, but that reasonable guidelines and restrictions do not constitute abridgements of a fundamental right. Most voters are also perplexed as to how the government’s refusal to fund abortions (or anything) can constitute an attack on a woman’s right to obtain a service that is still legally available. Here, perhaps more than on any other issue, the activists have already sorted themselves between the political parties. It is hard to see how either Republicans or Democrats could sway additional voters by re-emphasizing their well-known positions. Similar analyses are available on a full range of social issues.
The bottom line is that the narrower the focus of party (or movement) definition, the larger the potential of that movement. The tea party succeeded because it invited in all who agree that government had become too big, too expensive, and too intrusive. A shift on the “intrusive” issue will cause many to leave. Such a shift would be bad for the tea party, bad for the Republican Party, and bad for the country.
For more information about Bruce D. Abramson & American Restorationism, visit: www.BruceDAbramson.com
To learn more about how America’s elites destroyed the republic, see: The New Civil War: Exposing Elites, Fighting Utopian Leftism, and Restoring America (RealClear Publishing, 2021).
To learn more about the ideology driving today’s anti-American leftism, see: American Restoration: Winning America’s Second Civil War (Kindle, 2019).
To learn more about our work at the American Coalition for Education and Knowledge, visit us at https://coalition4america.com/.
To learn more about how I turn the ideas I discuss here into concrete projects that serve the interests of my clients, donors, and society at large, please e-mail me at bdabramson@pm.me.