Despite evidence, Ferguson cop still called ‘racist’

Michael Brown

Bestselling author Jack Cashill is back with his most timely book yet, “Scarlet Letters: The Ever-Increasing Intolerance of the Cult of Liberalism Exposed.”

And Cashill, a WND columnist, is pulling no punches over what he calls the unholy rise of progressive neo-puritanism.

As in old school puritanism, worshipers achieve a sense of moral worth simply by designating themselves among “the elect” – no good works required.

To validate that status, they heap abuse upon the sinner lest they be thought indifferent to the sin, he says.

Rather than simply cataloging the neo-puritan assaults on reason and liberty, “Scarlet Letters” illustrates how the progressive movement has come to mimic a religion in its structure but not at all in its spirit while profiling brave individuals such as Clarence Thomas, Aayan Hirsi Ali, Camille Paglia and many lesser known truth-tellers who have dared to take a stand against this inquisition.

Released by WND Books, “Scarlet Letters” shows in detail how an allegedly “liberal” movement has become what can only be described as bizarrely punitive and inquisitional.

Exclusively at WND, you can read here the second chapter of “Scarlet Letters”:

“The Scarlet R: Racist”

By Jack Cashill

Katherine Ann Porter had been duped, badly. In her memoir, The Never-Ending Wrong, published on the fiftieth anniversary of the execution of convicted murderers Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Porter told how this came to be. As the anarchists’ final hours ticked down, Porter had been standing vigil with other artists and writers in Boston. Ever the innocent liberal, Porter approached her group leader, a “fanatical little woman” and a dogmatic Communist, and expressed her hope that Sacco and Vanzetti could still be saved. The response of this female comrade is noteworthy largely for its candor: “Saved . . . who wants them saved? What earthly good would they do us alive?”

This was 1927, just five years after Margaret Sanger predicted “ignominious punishments for the capitalists,” and already the scarlet R for racism was replacing the scarlet C for classism as the most grievous affront to American progressives. To this day, it remains so. As their predecessors did with Sacco and Vanzetti, neo-puritans today falsify narratives and manufacture outrage, inevitably in pursuit of some goal. That goal might be as grubby as enriching a race hustler or as grand as turning a presidential election, but rarely is it about justice, and always there is someone to accuse.

THE RACIST, REPRESSIVE CAPITALIST STATE

Nearly a century after Sacco and Vanzetti’s demise, crowds stood vigil outside the Ferguson, Missouri, police station, waiting to hear whether a grand jury would indict Officer Darren Wilson for the shooting death of black eighteen-year-old Michael Brown. In the crowd were many protestors as naïve as Porter had been. Also in the crowd were leftist agitators eager to see Wilson go uncharged. After all, what earthly good would Wilson do them in jail?

The Soviets called the practice “framing” – that is, taking a small kernel of truth and rewriting the history of a person or an event around it. In Ferguson, that small kernel was the testimony of Brown’s partner in crime, Dorian Johnson. Immediately after the shooting, Johnson told all who would listen that Brown raised his hands to surrender before
Wilson shot him dead in a Ferguson street. The story could not withstand the least bit of scrutiny.

“It seems hard to come to any other conclusion,” the Washington Post finally conceded some months later, “than that Dorian Johnson’s version is simply made up.” The Department of Justice eventually came to the same conclusion. “There is no evidence upon which prosecutors can rely to disprove Wilson’s stated subjective belief that he feared for his safety,” read its March 2015 report. In fact, Brown attacked Wilson in his car and then charged him when told to stop. For the agitators, however, Johnson’s kernel trumped Wilson’s testimony, the corroborating testimony of a half dozen black eyewitnesses, the forensic evidence, and the cautious judgment of a multiracial grand jury. Even while Brown’s body lay sprawled on Canfield Drive, activists were rehearsing his neighbors in the “Hands up, don’t shoot” gesture. With the help of an obliging media, this thoroughly corrupt iconography swept the world.

The seeds of Ferguson were planted ninety years earlier when Joseph Stalin took control of the Soviet apparatus. More of a realist than Lenin, Stalin had no delusions that either the international propaganda arm of the Communist Party, the Comintern, or the fledgling Communist Party in America could inspire a workers’ revolution in America. He focused his American efforts instead, wrote author Stephen Koch, “on discrediting American politics and culture and assisting the growth of Soviet power elsewhere.” For the Soviet experiment to prevail, the American experiment had to yield. The world had to see America through fresh, unblinking eyes, not as the great melting pot, but as a simmering stew of racism and xenophobia.

In 1925 the Comintern found just the victims of American injustice Stalin was looking for in Sacco and Vanzetti, a pair of Italian anarchists justly convicted of murdering an Italian American payroll clerk five years earlier. While their capital murder case worked its way through the appeals process in the Massachusetts courts, the Comintern ginned up a worldwide frenzy around the fate of the convicted killers. “Spontaneous” protests sprang up seemingly everywhere. Europe’s great squares – in London, Paris, Rome, Berlin – filled with sobbing, shouting protestors, declaiming the innocence of the immigrant martyrs and denouncing the vile injustice of their persecutors.

The reaction to the Ferguson grand jury decision was eerily similar. Despite Wilson’s transparent innocence, hundreds gathered outside the American embassy in London with signs proclaiming “No justice, no peace” and “Solidarity with Ferguson.” In Berlin, protestors waved signs that read, “Ferguson is everywhere.” In Ferguson, outsiders took to the streets, chanting red standards like, “The only solution is a communist revolution,” and, “Turn your guns around and shoot the bosses down!” In Oakland, California, meanwhile, angry mobs shut down the freeways, chanting, “Indict, convict, send these killer cops to jail!” Whereas once the international left contented itself with claiming the guilty innocent, neo-puritans were prepared to claim the innocent guilty, a darker turn altogether.

For progressive activists, Officer Wilson’s innocence mattered no more than did Sacco and Vanzetti’s guilt. Nearly seventy years after the pair’s execution, a California attorney stumbled upon some letters that Upton Sinclair, the esteemed socialist author of The Jungle, wrote in 1927, the year the pair was executed. The letters showed Sinclair knew the duo to be guilty even before he published Boston, his epic novel about the case. One letter from Sinclair to his attorney, John Beardsley, told of how Sinclair had met with Fred Moore, the anarchists’ attorney, in a Denver motel room.

Moore “sent me into a panic,” wrote Sinclair. “Alone in a hotel room with Fred, I begged him to tell me the full truth. . . . He then told me that the men were guilty, and he told me in every detail how he had framed a set of alibis for them.” As Sinclair made clear in this and other letters, he went ahead and wrote his book about the convicted anarchists as though they were innocent. “My wife is absolutely certain that if I tell what I believe,” Sinclair confided to a friend that same year, “I will be called a traitor to the movement and may not live to finish the book.” Sinclair finished the book, and the myth lived on. The fact that America was successfully “framed” as a nation that casually executed innocent shoemakers and fish peddlers because of their ethnicity did not trouble Sinclair enough to come clean.

Comparably, no amount of solid evidence in the Michael Brown shooting would spare Wilson his scarlet R. “Whatever the Grand Jury decides,” CUNY professor of history Deirdre Owens tweeted, “the people have indicted Darren Wilson and the racist, repressive capitalist state he represents.” Or, as Chauncey DeVega wrote on AlterNet, “The absurd, unfathomable, and fantastical story which Wilson spun out of the whole cloth in order to justify killing an unarmed black teenager combines the deepest and ugliest white supremacist stereotypes and fantasies about black folks’ humanity.”

For all the competition, the scarlet R for racism remains the most damning and enduring letter in the neo-puritan catalog. This is so because progressives routinely trace racism to what Barack Obama, among many others, has called “this nation’s original sin of slavery.” Although slavery has been a feature of almost every economy in almost every era of human history, only America positioned itself as the land of the free and the home of the brave while tolerating it. To reconcile its stated principles with its reality, the nation endured a brutal civil war. That war effectively ended slavery in America, but a century of Jim Crow and a half century of retelling horror stories undid the exculpatory value of the war’s human sacrifice. The result was a lingering sense of guilt, especially among those who shaped public opinion. In turn, their repeated professions of the nation’s past sins led to a broad questioning by the young and alienated of America’s founding principles.

Sensing an opportunity amid this loss of moral authority, progressives chipped away at those principles and challenged standards on any number of fronts – family, faith, love, marriage, language, literature, education, entertainment. For all their moral relativism, however, progressives more than held the line in one area. America, observed Shelby Steele, became “puritanical rather than relativistic around racism.” Progressives may have abandoned Christian content, Joseph Bottum argued in an insightful 2014 essay, “The Spiritual Shape of Political Ideas,” but they carried forward the spiritual infrastructure of Christianity. “How else can we understand the religious fervor with which white privilege is preached these days,” wrote Bottum, “the spiritual urgency with which its proponents describe a universal inherited guilt they must seek out behind even its cleverest masks?” From the neo-puritan perspective, one wrong word, one off-color joke, one garbled explanation stripped away the surface bonhomie and showed the racist, satanic soul beneath.

Click here for your copy of “Scarlet Letters.”

from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2015/11/01/despite-evidence-ferguson-cop-still-called-racist/

from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2015/10/31/despite-evidence-ferguson-cop-still-called-racist/