As a political conservative, I am tired both of suffering the indefensible in Donald Trump’s tweets and sound blurbs, as well as suffering the misunderstandings, over-reactions, and insults of the left when we don’t hear the same intent and meaning in what Trump often in-eloquently says.
Even the fact that he has done well with court appointees from a pro-life perspective (perhaps), the economy (arguably, it may be temporary, floating on debt and speculation), foreign policy (again, arguably, but not clearly good or bad), and annoying liberals (stellar job), these do not override the problems with his personal life, sexuality (adultery and promiscuous are still a sin), slimy friends, and unedited outbursts of clumsy, sometimes offensive words.
I do not defend those, but I don’t spend my time attacking him either because, quite frankly, there are plenty of liberals and conservatives doing that, sometimes rightly so.
But one of my ongoing peeves with modern progressivism is the constant exaggeration and purposeful twisting of facts to suit their political agenda.
Despite real abuses and systematic injustice towards minorities, or sexual dangers on college campuses, or global warming, or racism in general, disagreeing with or attempting to balance those narratives with differing or fuller pictures is often met with character assassination and accusations of racism, sexism, or being anti-science.
Such insults are part of the increasing incivility of our times, and lead to suppression and violence instead of understanding and compromise.
This often skewed and narrow interpretation and exaggeration of events is easily seen in the progressive reading of Donald Trump’s most recent tirade against a handful of vocal progressive Congresswomen. Let’s look at his statement and consider where “race” is a worse understanding than “ideology.”
2. What Trump Actually Tweeted
President Donald Trump
“So interesting to see ‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly……”
“….And viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how….,” he added, “….it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!”
First, note that there is no direct reference to race at all. The closest he comes is referring to countries. Now, outside of the US and the UK, most countries in the world are defined by language and ethnicity, even in some of the more racially homogeneous, progressive western nations in Europe. So this could be seen as a reference to ethnicity, but in context, I doubt this is the case.
3. Countries – ethnicity or ideas?
When Trump refers to failed countries, is he referring to people or ideas? The fact that two of these women are Muslim, and the entire group is pushing Socialism, both of which produce failed states and endless ethnic civil wars, makes it obvious that what he is insinuating is that those who espouse these ideologies, foreign to successful Western thought, ought to take them back to the places where they have failed and not try to ruin us with their bad ideas. “Go prove your bad ideas where you brought them from first” is what he is saying.
This echoes the biblical requirements for church leadership, and the ending admonition (note Trump does not meet these qualifications)
If anyone wants to provide leadership in the church, good! But there are preconditions: A leader must be well-thought-of, committed to his wife, cool and collected, accessible, and hospitable. He must know what he’s talking about, not be overfond of wine, not pushy but gentle, not thin-skinned, not money-hungry. He must handle his own affairs well, attentive to his own children and having their respect. For if someone is unable to handle his own affairs, how can he take care of God’s church? 1 Timothy 3: 1-5
It doesn’t matter that some of these women were born in the US or foreign born – it’s what they represent that matters. And what they represent to conservatives are bad ideas, foreign to western success and liberty.
4. Ilhan Omar (Islamism, Socialism, Anti-Zionism)
In the case of Rep Ilhan Omar (D-MN), probably the main focus of his remarks, she is a Somalian immigrant. As an immigrant from a nation destroyed by Islamo-socialist government and war, Ilhan Omar represents the two ideologies that, in the conservative narrative, are the most pernicious and destructive to Western success and freedom.
Two decades of Islamo-socialist leadership could not prevent the Somali Civil War:
In July 1976, Barre’s SRC disbanded itself and established in its place the Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party (SRSP), a one-party government based on scientific socialism and Islamic tenets. The SRSP was an attempt to reconcile the official state ideology with the official state religion by adaptingMarxist precepts to local circumstances. Emphasis was placed on the Muslim principles of social progress, equality and justice, which the government argued formed the core of scientific socialism and its own accent on self-sufficiency, public participation and popular control, as well as direct ownership of the means of production. While the SRSP encouraged private investment on a limited scale, the administration’s overall direction was essentially socialist. 1
Naturally, modern progressives conflate religion (Islam) with ethnicity, so see this as an ethnic attack. But in reality, it is an idea system, and a destructive and failed one at that.
4.1 Minnesota Somali Enclave a Terrorist Recruitment Center
Even worse, the district Omar represents is well known to Homeland Security as a center for violent Islamic recruitment. 2
More men and boys from a Somali American community in Minneapolis have joined – or attempted to join – a foreign terrorist organization over the last 12 years than any other jurisdiction in the country.
FBI stats show 45 Somalis left to join the ranks of either the Somalia-based Islamic insurgency al-Shabab, or the Iraq- and Syria-based ISIS combined. And as of 2018, a dozen more had been arrested with the intention of leaving to support ISIS. Both numbers are far higher than those of alleged terrorist wannabes who left or attempted to leave the country from other areas in the country where Muslim refugees have been resettled.
So why would we want ideas from that failed state, still failing in Minneapolis, to infect our national agenda? We would not. It has nothing to do with race, but concern over failed ideas.
5. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Socialism, Global Warming Hysteria, Immigration)
What freshman congresswoman AOC is best known for is her radical Green New Deal, in which she essentially proposes a socialist-light takeover of the government and private sector, motivated by fear of climate change.3
So what she represents, in the conservative narrative, is not some Latino ethnicity, but two “dangerous” ideological mistakes (lies) in one – socialism, and global warming. She also represents the sophomoric wisdom of youth – she is young and relatively inexperienced, and those make her bold proclamations all the more incredible, if not hubristic.
In addition, AOC has failed to condemn antifa violence, another concern of conservatives who see it as fascist suppression of free speech. Again, it’s about ideas, not race.
Tlaib is a first generation American from the West Bank of Palestine. What is most notable about her is that she is both Muslim and Socialist – seeing a pattern here? The same two failed ideas, invading America to potentially create the same mess we see in every Muslim majority nation, and every socialist nation, most recently, Venezuela.
Note that like Omar, she is a first generation or direct immigrant from a failed state, and potentially, if not actually presumes to foist those same bad ideas on us here in the free west. That’s how conservatives see her.
Additionally, her vitriolic and profanity-laced rants against the President are as disgraceful as they are popular among Progressives. Even worse, she is a vocal supporter of the BDS movement, a Palestinian political organization that pushes for economic boycott of Israel, but has also been accused of being founded on the idea that Israel should not exist. The argument over where anti-Zionism becomes anti-semitisim not withstanding, Tlaib represents, in the conservative mind, the objectionable ideas of Islam and anti-Israel sentiment, not any particular race.4
7. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) (Impeachment, Open Borders)
Pressley, one of the more experienced and arguably skilled Congresswomen of this bunch, is known mostly for her calls for impeachment of the president, as well as for the abolition of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).5
Admittedly, if you try to apply Trump’s “go back” quip to Pressley, who is African American, that would be racist. But since he is primarily attacking the immigrants and first generation Islamic women above, Pressley is merely caught up in the group identity, not really being seen as a foreigner with foreign ideas, but merely another “inexperienced” upstart. To Trump, and conservatives, she represents the forces that want to impeach the president, and an anti-law approach to immigration. Nothing more.
Again, you don’t see any direct racist words used by the President, so you have to use your narrative to interpret them that way. Perhaps, in the old-school anglo-centered view of many Trump’s age, she is seen as “not like us” due to her skin color, and therefore of “foreign” ancestry, he might have some subtle subconscious racism that allows him to group her in with these other recent immigrants. But that’s high speculation at best.
When you see these women as representing bad ideas, many of which have, as the president mentioned, ruined other countries, as well as the fact that some of these representatives recently came from actual foreign countries dominated by non-western, oppressive and racist ideologies, the racist trope begins to seem like just another purposeful misdiagnosis to suit the progressive, myopic racial focus.
8. Nanci Pelosi
Ok, Trump did not tell Nanci to go back, but he included her in his roast of these women. Does that mean he is anti white too? No, again, she represents the ideological opposition, the bad ideas pushed by progressives seemingly oblivious to the harm they have caused everywhere else in the world.
9. Insensitivity is Not Racism, but keep calling it that
Trump’s comments are often boorish, insensitive, untrue, poorly forged, easily misunderstood, or ignorant of modern sensibilities. But calling him racist, and more importantly, calling anyone who disagrees with your diagnosis as racist, is what maintains anti-progressive sentiments, not only among conservatives, but swing voters.
Casting aspersions on those who disagree with your highly interpreted understandings (“truths”) is an ignorant man’s way through the world. Even worse, when your interpretation is quite possibly wrong and serving your narrative, well, people stop listening. Crying wolf is the modus operandi of the modern left, and it will backfire. Because no one is listening anymore.
As a political conservative, I am tired both of suffering the indefensible in Donald Trump’s tweets and sound blurbs, as well as suffering the misunderstandings, over-reactions, and insults of the left when we don’t hear the same intent and meaning in what Trump often in-eloquently says.
