The Dreyfus Affair in France, 1894-1906, was similar to many recent controversies in America, such as Haven Monahan, Ferguson, Trayvon, Duke Lacrosse, and others going back to Al Sharpton promoting Tawana Brawley’s gang rape hoax against white cops in late 1987. A patriotic French Jewish Army officer was unjustly accused of treason, and society soon divided up into acrimonious camps debating his case. Eventually, the facts became clear, poor Major Dreyfus was released from Devil’s Island, and the winners who backed Dreyfus’s innocence pushed through massive political changes at the expense of the losers.
It wasn’t just that the anti-Dreyfus right was wrong about one case, it was that they looked like they suffered from systemic biases that encouraged them to misunderstand these facts and promote an injustice. So, the side that turned out to be wrong on the facts paid a heavy political price: the famous 1905 French law on Separation of Church and State, which established France’s tradition of laïcité that Marine Le Pen defends vociferously today, was a consequence of the losers making themselves look bad.
Comments to Steve Sailer:
* I’d add that what’s going isn’t just anti-white, it gains tremendous tactical advantages from its amorphousness. It’s anti-Core, pro-Fringe, so it can shapeshift to meet most objections.
* The powers that be will use tragedy to their advantage when it serves an end they desire, and will ignore it when it does not.
The Dunblane Massacre was used to justify massive limits on the right to bear arms in Britain.
The far costlier and deadlier 9/11 attacks were not used to justify curtailing Muslim immigration to the West, which seems to have only accelerated since 2001.
* Since the Dreyfus Affair is trotted out endlessly to show … well … the innate perfidy of gentiles, especially conservative ones, it’s an excellent judo move to demand repeatedly–whenever any of these Maoist tantrums is debunked–that the same label of perfidy be attached and the same political consequences due for the folks if the same perfidy and same political consequences due for the folks who pushed the Duke rape case, Trayvon!, Ferguson, UVA …
* Noam Chomsky once said that the true right would only rise in this country if they had a leader who couldn’t be bought. Chomsky was frightened of that ever happening. But, it’s true. As long as the standbearers of Conservatism are wh^res who willingly concede cultural issues to the Left due to economic compromises, nothing will stop these people, nothing.
Many of our political, economic and media leaders are part of a bipartisan social club. That really contributes to elite immunity. It’s hard to destroy a man if your kids go to school with his. Or if you marry his niece, sort of like Arnold and Uncle Ted.
This insular, bipartisan, elite culture is increasingly cut off from the mass, and they have little or no empathy with them. A point made time and again by Charles Murray is that many of these people or their spawn have no idea what it’s like to have a job that makes a body part ache at the end of the day. With such people can we be surprised that they push the notion about Latinos doing jobs Americans won’t?
What is needed is ruthless, driven actual traditionalist leadership on the political or media front. We need more Charles C. Johnsons to go after these people where they live. Note how scared they are of him.
We should take heart whenever there are stories about increasingly confrontational personal disputes in Congress.
* The never-ending conversation about what’s now called ‘The Dreyfus Affair’ is primarily about shaping memory. This overblown ‘affair’ is a modern teaching opportunity. The lesson? If you suspect Jews of disloyalty or wrong-doing, then you are probably wretched and evil yourself. In fact, you might even suffer from a psychiatric disorder. Why? Jews are humble and virtuous (Ann Frank), unjustly accused (Dreyfus), overwhelmingly brilliant (Einstein) and conspicuously benevolent (Jewish philanthropy). These are the dominant moral messages which dart incessantly throughout our media-saturated universe. Thinking otherwise might mean you’re an ‘anti-Semite’, which is very very BAD.
So while Americans are reminded about victims like Dreyfus, Ann Frank, the Israeli athletes (Munich) and of course The Holocaust, lessons involving the Rosenbergs, the Bolsheviks, US immigration policies, AIPAC’s unstoppable machinations, America’s ‘unfortunate’ War on Iraq (or Syria or Iran or Palestine) never receive the same focus or moral singularity. This is no accident. There are Jewish fingerprints all over these ‘lessons’, some of which disappear altogether. This is grand, media-driven political theater, dressed up as self-governance.
Unfortunately, these most important victims often write the script, edit the story, direct the actors, and produce the program.
* When are we going to be grown up enough to admit that a majority of lynching ‘victims’ were in fact perpetrators of some rather serious crimes? That lynching was not mere violent racism, but in fact a system (inferior though it may be) of justice?
* Yes read about Black Albinos in Africa and marvel how fairly they respect their disabled countrymen. Black Africans positively *SHRED* these poor people, tearing them literally limb from limb; it’s beyond sickening. Since it’s only a question of albinism, we know that the difference in this dyad are truly only skin deep and yet this is how they treat their brethren who differ from themselves in only one respect: white skin.
* How many blacks have been killed by the KKK over the past 50 years? Maybe a dozen, if that.
How many blacks have been killed by other blacks over that time? Hundreds of thousands.
How many whites have been killed by blacks over that time? Tens of thousands.
But for the media, it is the specter of lynching that interests them. In the recent article Steve posted about Otis Byrd it said:
There is no more powerful image in the South than that of a black man’s body hanging from a tree. Though the practice of lynching reached its peak during the 19th and early 20th centuries, the idea continues to haunt, explaining in part why the case of Otis Byrd has captured the nation’s attention.
Given the facts above we should ask why do they consider that the most powerful image of the South? The answer is because it is most useful image for them. And what is it useful for? For promoting anti-white bigotry, which is the rock upon which their whole worldview is founded and their deepest moral principle.
Like Steve says it is also the “KKKrazy Glue” that holds together their “coalition of the fringes” (which is another nice term that clearly explains the left’s strategy, more so than the clumsy and opaque term “cultural marxism”.)
* The number of actual Ku Klux Klan members in the U.S is so miniscule that even The Communist Party USA has a larger membership than the KKK.
Communist Party USA has over 20,000 members. Compare that to the KKK which is estimated to have only about 5,000 members.
Yet the Left Wing media wants us to believe that there is a Klan member on every street corner in flyover country.
In the U.S you are more likely to bump into a Communist than you are to bump into a Klan member.