The S-Word is not the new N-Word
Jan 17, 2009 Opinion
Christopher J. Lee, a professor of history at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, had an article about the racist undertones of the word “Socialist” published by the Christian Science Monitor. In it, he attempts to enforce the growing myth that “Socialist” is really code word for “Nigger” and that any disagreement with this perception automatically makes you racist. Never one to standby and watch history be expediently rewritten for the sake of Federally-dictated morality, I had contacted him about his bout of intellectual dishonesty.
The Email
The problem with history specialists is the problem with all specialism: Adaptation renders models obsolete. When new data is discovered, the specialist seeks to reshape the information within the context of his field. The specialist then becomes dependant upon such results. Therefore, when new events occur that are outside the realm of specialist’s interpretation, the event becomes the foundation of mangled predictions. Outsiders then question the reliability of the specialist. The specialist then has to make a choice: continue along the comfortable lines of established protocol and doctrine regardless of what results it may generate or begin the long, annoying process of refactoring to stay relevant.
Our History with Socialism
Most Leftwing historians are either wildly ignorant to the Venona Project or viciously opposed to it. The Project reveals the names, acts, and dates of nearly 49% of White House interactions with the Soviets since the our involvement in World War II. The most important of these people is an economist named Harry Dexter White. He was the senior U.S. Treasury department official under the Roosevelt administration. White was also a Keynesian. No, I stand corrected, he was more than a Keynesian. If you look up any picture of John Maynard Keynes, chances are, you will find the picture of the rather tall Keynes hunching over with a wry overly-expressed smile facing a man in glasses with his arms folded. The man in glasses is Harry Dexter White. Both men pulled serious influence at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference. White also had an overarching hand in the creation of the IMF and the World Bank serving as a director. (Appointed by Truman after being warned that White was a Communist agent) If you are unfamiliar with Keynes, this little snippet from his End of Laissez-Faire from 1926 (http://www.panarchy.org/keynes/laissezfaire.1926.html) should help put his objectives into perspective. This document serves as the klaxon call for a unified front designed to promote the ideals of Keynesian policy… the same policies we call “Socialism” today.
White had been in direct contact with the Soviets before, during, and after WWII. White had managed to issue the Morgenthau Plan to the Soviets before issuing it to his own subordinates, appoint all sorts of pro-Soviet sympathizers into positions of power without ever having to answer to anyone for approval, and even stopped Chiang Kai-Shek’s request for a $200 million dollar loan to help the Nationalists take on the Soviet-funded Marxists in China. This isn’t Right-Wing neoconservative nonsense. Time Magazine did a report on him back in 1953. (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,860101,00.html)
Comintern was very real, very effective, and managed to infiltrate the highest levels of not only our government, but served as the foundations of the international governing bodies that we live under today. The same governing bodies that your specialist field of African history should hopefully be fully versed in. (specifically the IMF, the World Bank, and the trillions in foreign aid Africa has received since that 1950s)
How Socialism was inflicted on others
The Soviet’s favorite method was to provide funding and material support to those at the lowest rung of a social order within a state they aimed to subvert. (Maoist China being the most successful result of this doctrine) By 1955, Khrushchev managed to take advantage of the African Independence movement and merged the perception that post-colonialism and Marxism are naturally sympathetic with one another. As a result, the Soviets had lavishly provided military support and aid for African nations. (Ethiopia, Angola, Mozambique, and South Africa as the crown jewels of Soviet intervention) Institutional artifacts of this effort still remain, such as the People’s Friendship University of Russia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples%27_Friendship_University_of_Russia)
Combine this with the African-American addiction to voting for the then highly-suspect and very pro-Stalin Democrat (80% of the African American vote since 1933 and still holding!) and it’s not hard to make the conclusion to see how modern African-American unrest could be attributed to long-term and highly-successful Soviet agitation. (I’m sure it didn’t help that the Black Panthers were running around with Mao’s Little Red Book in hand)
A Request to Refactor
To say that a person of your learning can single-handedly attribute all relationships between African-American unrest and Socialism as nothing more than “racism” calls your ability to research your own field into severe question. To continue to whine about Joe McCarthy without so much as mentioning Alger Hiss or Harry Dexter White reveals how heavily your political bias influences your conclusions. If you’d rather manufacture pseudo-psychological conditions such as “racial entitlement” as your method of integrating new data in your specialist logic instead of refactoring your logic to properly represent the data, then help me understand your preferences.
Tags: african liberation, history, leftwing, liberal, liberation theology, pravda, pro-russian, revisionism, socialist