Adventures in interpretation: Negroes with Guns edition

Out of curiosity checked out what Kevin Drum had to say about the Heller ruling. He doesn’t really elaborate much on his own view, except to doubt that the threat of confiscation swayed anyone outside of an “extremist fringe” (whatever that means: chances are, your fringe ain’t my fringe…). As is usual with blogs of the more tolerable “progressives”, the comments got overrun by walking statist-liberal stereotypes, one of whom sneered the following in response to a comment by a proud “armed socialist”:

Dr. Morpheus: I’m still a socialist, but I’m an armed socialist.

That worked out real well for the Black Panther Party.

I guess on a superficial level you can say his sarcasm was correct — the Panthers dissolved, and no longer exist except as a stolen name slapped on a group that has nothing to do with them. But considering the reaction to the Black Panthers and their enthusiastic embrace of the right to bear arms, wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that the image of armed left-wingers — and armed BLACK left-wingers at that — struck a nerve, revealing what the real fear of the political elite was?

Call it tinfoil-hattery if you wish, but I don’t think it’s far-fetched to consider whether the mainstream “liberal” embrace of gun control rose from the tender sensibilities of the political elite being offended by the above scene. Ironic, when you find out who first agreed with them on preventing that from happening again, and realize that before then the precedent for disarmament in the U.S. was set in the Jim-Crow era south…

To put it another, simpler way: if the “latte-sipping limousine liberal” slur were not a right-wing tool for portraying themselves as populists, but a comment by the anti-state Left that amounted to shorthand for questioning their “people power” bonafides in light of crap like this, I’d actually agree with its use.

Advertisements

About b-psycho

Left-libertarian blogger & occasional musician.
This entry was posted in fevered barking, law. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Adventures in interpretation: Negroes with Guns edition

  1. Pingback: Pages tagged "elaborate"

  2. Jeremy says:

    To put it another, simpler way: if the “latte-sipping limousine liberal” slur were not a right-wing tool for portraying themselves as populists, but a comment by the anti-state Left that amounted to shorthand for questioning their “people power” bonafides in light of crap like this, I’d actually agree with its use.

    Exactly. Actually, Dylan Waco made a good point about conservatives and this kind of black nationalism:

    The truth is that conservatives, traditionalists and other “small is beautiful” folks, can only dream of an authentic black nationalist getting anywhere near the White House. While black nationalism has its ugly and unrealistic side (the obsession with reparations for slavery, topping the list), the reality of the matter is that the basic program and dominant themes of black radicalism would be a marked improvement for our society. Small bands of self-reliant families, that are reflexively opposed to the corporate cartel class and the big government welfare statism of the modern world do not endanger whites, America or White America. Conservatives who know nothing about black nationalist and black power movements have created a “black radical” straw man, without understanding what in fact such radicalism has historically represented. That the same people who rant about the dangers of an Obama presidency, regularly cite Booker T. Washington as an appropriate model for black Americans, is a telling example of how clueless many of these people are (Obama is above all a globalist. Washington was a conservative black nationalist).

    More demonstration of what we already know: popular, white conservatism is incoherent, defined by using whatever means necessary to achieve de-facto white supremacy, to the extent they think it’s achievable.

  3. b psycho says:

    It’s amazing actually just how easy it is to convince conservative whites that any politically active black is a radical, especially when you contrast their image with what it would mean in practice. Even if black nationalism DID mean what they thought it did, that’d just be reason for them to be glad that Obama wasn’t part of that, instead of acting like he is. In light of what his campaign really means, there should be a lot more “Obamacons” than there actually are.

    In relation to Dylan’s point about black nationalism: there was a quote I remembered of Rothbard co-signing a comment Malcolm X made. Lost the original source, unfortunately.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s