Remembering this Date in 1964

60 years ago today a man who received both his Masters and Ph.D. by massively plagiarizing, who was a serial adulterer, and whose chief lieutenants were known Communists gave his “I Have a Dream” Speech in Washington DC. (Yes, that speech was plagiarized as well. As was his famous “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”)

A few months later on January 6, 1964, Martin Luther King Jr. (real name — Michael King) had experienced a long day. He spent the morning seated in the reserved section of the Supreme Court, listening as lawyers argued New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, a landmark case rising out of King’s crusade against segregation in Alabama. The minister was something of an honored guest: Justice Arthur Goldberg quietly sent down a copy of Kings account of the Montgomery bus boycott, “Stride Toward Freedom,” asking for an autograph. That night King retired to his room at the Willard Hotel. There FBI bugs reportedly picked up 14 hours of party chatter, the clinking of glasses and the sounds of illicit sex–including King’s cries of “I’m f–ing for God” and “I’m not a negro tonight!”

Martin Luther King was having sex with three White women, one of whom he brutally beat while screaming the above mentioned quotes. Much of the public information on King’s use of church money to hire prostitutes and his beating them came from King’s close personal friend, Rev. Ralph Abernathy, in his 1989 book, “And the walls came tumbling down.”

Judging King on the content of his character we can only conclude that he was a beast.

But y’all go ahead and celebrate him and his pukey speech.

Darrel Dow Demonstrates that Rev. Toby Sumpter is Either Stupid or Evil

My good friend Darrel Dow (co-author of the anthology “Who is My Neighbor”) posted this on a social media site. I though it so good that I am reproducing it here.

The reason the headline says that Rev. Toby Sumpter is either stupid or evil is because if he is saying this stuff and knows it is not true he is evil. On the other hand if he is saying this stuff and doesn’t know better then he is merely stupid (ignorant, dumb, idiotic, torpid, jejune, moronic, etc.) Now, I can’t know which one of the two it is. I guess I hope that Old Toby is just stupid. I’d hate to think he is evil.

I’m posting this because, frankly it makes me angry that Old Toby is leading people astray like this. People who don’t know any better listening to Old Toby on this podcast just walk away thinking, “Yeah, Rev. Sumpter is clearly correct,” when in point of fact he is either stupid or evil.

Anyway, below reproduces Darrell giving Rev. Sumpter a facial.

Begin Darrel Dow;

On a recent Cross Politics podcast, Toby Sumpter made the observation that our Founders thought of themselves as “descendants of Adam” and not “White people.” Is that true? Did our Founders believe that race and ethnicity were unimportant, that we are all merely “image bearers” and “sinners”?

I’ll provide a sampler to help evaluate the claim. Note that I could have pulled MANY more quotes. I begin with Revolution Era figures and also provide a number of citations from later figures. Again, this could go on almost indefinitely.

Let us begin with legislation offered in the state of Virginia by Thomas Jefferson which was designed to define citizenship in the commonwealth.

“Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any alien, BEING A FREE WHTE PERSON, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, on application to any common law court of record, in any one of the states wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law, to support the constitution of the United States, which oath or affirmation such court shall administer; and the clerk of such court shall record such application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a citizen of the United States. And the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of such naturalization,”

In a letter, Jefferson explains his concern with having too many German immigrants and the need to disperse them (Benjamin Franklin held this same view.)

“Although as to other foreigners it is thought better to discourage their settling together in large masses, wherein, as in our German settlements, they preserve for a long time their own languages, habits, and principles of government, and that they should distribute themselves sparsely among the natives for quicker amalgamation, yet English emigrants are without this inconvenience.”

Letter to George Fowler
Sept. 12, 1817

Alexander Hamilton who disagreed with Jefferson on many important questions in the life of the early republic, agreed with him on the debilitating consequences of immigration.

“The opinion advanced in the Notes on Virginia is undoubtedly correct, that foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners. They will also entertain opinions on government congenial with those under which they have lived, or if they should be led hither from a preference to ours, how extremely unlikely is it that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism? There may as to particular individuals, and at particular times, be occasional exceptions to these remarks, yet such is the general rule. The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”

 

Benjamin Franklin likewise on this subject,

“[T]he Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably [sic] very small… . I could wish their Numbers were increased…. But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country, for such Kind of Partiality is natural to Mankind.”

“Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc.”

Giving more of the context from Franklin

“Which leads me to add one remark: That the number of purely white people in the world is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes are generally of what we call a swarthy complexion ; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English make the principal body of white people on the face of the earth. I could wish their numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, scouring our planet, by clearing America of woods, and so making this side of our globe reflect a brighter light to the eyes of inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we in the sight of superior beings, darken its people? why increase the sons of Africa, by planting them in America, where we have so fair an opportunity, by excluding all blacks and tawneys, of increasing the lovely white and red? But perhaps I am partial to the complexion of my Country, for such kind of partiality is natural to Mankind.”

– Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, etc.

Here is the language of the Naturalization Act of 1790, which the FIRST CONGRESS passed.

“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States .”

James Madison endorsed colonization and indeed later ran the colonization society.

“To be consistent with existing and probably unalterable prejudices in the U.S. freed blacks ought to be permanently removed beyond the region occupied by or allotted to a White population.”

Abraham Lincoln (who also supported colonization).

“I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”

 

Stephen Douglas is quoted as saying;

“For one, I am opposed to negro citizenship in any form. I believe that this government was made on the white basis. I believe it was made by white men for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and I am in favor of confining the citizenship to white men—men of European birth and European descent, instead of conferring it upon negroes and Indians, and other inferior races.”

End Dow

Now, Old Toby may not like that these words were once said but in manifestly demonstrates that his numbskull insistence that our Founders thought of themselves as “descendants of Adam” and not “White people,” is just well beyond the boundaries of ridiculous.

And remember, what has been provided here is just a sampling of the avalanche of quotes that could be reproduced in order to embarrass Old Toby, were he capable of being embarrassed.

If you doubt this, find a copy (if you can) of Achord & Dow’s book, “Who is My Neighbor.”

Now, here’s the real question. Will Old Toby recant and repent on his Cross-Politic podcast?

A Couple Observations on Marxism

A key thing to keep in mind about Marxism in all its forms — whether economic or racial — is its faith dynamic. Marxists have, as an article of faith, that their famed materialistic dialectic along which history putatively runs and progresses will eventually yield Utopia. The key thing here is that if asked how that happens they cannot answer that question. It is a faith article. Perhaps the greatest Marxist article of faith. Their faith teaches them that should they keep working the work of their materialistic dialectic (what they fancy as History known by “science”– i.e. — Scientific Gnosticism) that eventually will end with the result of Utopia. However, to repeat, they cannot tell you how their dialectic will eventually yield Utopia.

It is akin to the Christian who will tell you that life ends in heaven. If you ask a Christian how they know that will happen they will point to their Holy Book and say, “I know because that is what God tells me.” It is an article of faith. In the same way the Marxists believes that as long as they walk in the sanctified Marxist life by working the work of the dialectic the end result will be Utopia and they know this because the holy writings of Marx and their later prophets tell them that.

But, if one doesn’t share their faith, its all so much bull-skubala.

All of this is one reason why Marxism is called a Christian heresy.

Don’t miss the fact that this means that Marxism, in all its varieties (Critical Race Theory, Economic Marxism, Cultural Marxism, etc.) is a Religion, every bit as much as any religion you’d like to name.

____________

“As a simple piece of first advice for pushing back against Critical Race Theory, then, ‘stop assuming it has good intentions.'”

James Lindsey
Race Marxism — p. 254

One of the truths I learned in Undergrad was that it is not possible to negotiate with Marxists because one can only trust the Marxists to be Marxist. The came is true with Race Marxism. These people are not like you. They can not be trusted, they can not be given the benefit of the doubt, and they can not be negotiated with. They can only be conquered because they are lizard people.

Give not one inch to these people and that includes their fellow travelers and their useful idiots. This includes our current addlepated clergy who are toting water for the Cultural Marxists.

Folks, you must take a war footing with the Marxists (and keep in mind in many respects “We’re all Marxists now”). No compromise. No surrender. Your goal should be to defeat them with the Gospel understanding if they do not repent they must be crushed and utterly defeated.

Once you understand who they are, do not even debate them. If you do debate them you must do so as a presuppositonalist. You can not defeat these people if you allow them their presuppositions as the standard for argumentation. Debating them, should it happen, must happen by forcing them to accept your presuppositions. If you do not do that you will lose every single time. Once you understand who they are you are better served just mocking the hades out of them and their ideas.

These people (especially the epistemologically self-conscious ones) are slippery as snakes. They purposefully misuse language, using linguistic deception, so as to confuse their opponents. They have no interest in a honest debate. Their motto is to win at all costs and as such that needs to be our motto also when dealing with these people.

Critical Race Theory as Religion, and the way it Evangelizes

“In CRT every individual is to be induced with CRT. In service of this monomaniacal goal (predicated on a bad article of faith) every institution, particularly those dedicated to the production of culture, must be turned into a tool that raises a critical consciousness of race. The objective is simple. Every convertible person must be converted, and every position of power and influence must be occupied by someone whose consciousness has been awakened. Understanding this mentality makes almost everything Critical Race Theorists do immediately comprehensible, no matter how bizarre. It’s all about creating converts and installing them into positions of power where they will not have accountability (holding them accountable would be racist). They do this by seizing the means of cultural production and repurposing them to evangelize Critical Race Theory.”

James Lindsey
Race Marxism — p. 225

We are living in a time when this evangelism (actually propaganda) is ubiquitous. In the photos that come in our Alma Mater magazines that obviously go out of their way to put the only minority in a sea of white faces in the center of the photograph, to the films and TV which push inter-racial marriage and the Queer agenda, to every government agency and corporate training time with their pushing of White guilt, to 99% of American pulpits and churches implicitly or explicitly teaching that Jesus loves inter-racial churches more than he does churches that are obviously racist because their attendance is 100% white, to the push for inter-racial adoptions because that really pleases Jesus, to the sports world which refuses to hold affirmative action spots for white athletes the way the rest of the world has to follow the affirmative action paradigm in the other direction, to the ACT, SAT, LSAT, and MCAT tests that give one extra points on the test merely because one is a minority, to the law enforcement world where the lie gains traction, despite whole books proving the contrary, that Cops are especially dangerous to minorities, ad infinitum we are propagandized and evangelized into the Critical Race Theory faith.

And if that doesn’t get the job done then there is the economic threat of being visited with Cancel Culture because one doesn’t share the CRT faith. Propaganda thus moves from manipulation to coercion and extortion. Finally, if one refuses to be converted by the above means there is the final option of the modern inquisition where Mao’s maxim is applied; “power flows from the barrel of a gun.”

Oh, and let us not forget the evangelistic aspect that includes the force of law. Here we find the recommendation of one Ibram X. Kendi (born Ibram Henry Rogers) that encourages legislation to work as a evangelistic tool for CRT;

“To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals. The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with “racist ideas” and “public official” clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won’t yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.”

In all actuality this idea is a “anti-white” bill and is part of the goal to make the religion of CRT cover America.

Now, understand that it is the above for which the WOKE preachers are stumping. Every time Sumpter, or Brito, or Clark, or Wilson, or Sey, or Strachan inveigh against Christian Nationalism or Kinism or insist that “race doesn’t really exist,” this is the religion they are pushing.

Now, I freely admit that they may not be epistemologically self conscious about that but that does not negate the fact that they are CRT snake oil evangelists and so are doing the devil’s work.

A Resurfaced Technique From The French Revolution’s Terror Stage

In Revolutionary France during the time of Terror it was called denunciation;

“Denounce the crimes, denounce the criminals, a double award awaits you: the voice of your conscience, for denunciation is a virtue: and a legitimate reward, for the National Convention is just and desires that each virtuous act should be a means by which the sans culotte may improve his lot… “

December 1793 Commission Temporaire
Ad hoc revolutionary authority installed in the city of Lyon after the Federalist revolt

In China during the time of Mao’s Cultural Revolution it was called “Struggle Sessions,” or denunciation rallies. These were were violent public spectacles intended to shame and humiliate people for “wrong think.” These sessions also became opportunities for people to demonstrate their patriotism. It was so bad it was not uncommon for even children to turn in their parents, or spouses to turn in their mate.

Today in America it is called “Virtue signaling.” We see it when CREC ministers (Sumpter, Wilson, Brito, Hemmke, etc.) denounce Kinists. We see it when Dr. Moanin’ Owen Strachan denounces Dr. Stephen Wolfe for Wolfe’s support of Christian Nationalism. We see it when the Steve Hemmke denounces Darryl Dow by writing a pitiful review of a book Hemmke never read, we see it when Rod Dreher denounced Thomas Achord despite Achord’s previous kindness to Dreher’s family. These new struggle session are breaking out everywhere.

What we are finding in our current Evangelical/Reformed version of the struggle session is those who are not sufficiently WOKE, per the standards of their Cultural Marxism and CRT are denounced for their thought crimes. Usually it comes in the version of “Racist,” or “Kinist” or “Anti-Semite.” The effect of it all is to force the modern church culture in the West to align with the worldview of WOKE-ism.

The only way to triumph over this insanity is in the name of Jesus Christ and by His authority to return their denunciations and so denounce them as traitors to Jesus Christ and Biblical Christianity. By the means of the Word of God accompanied by necessary deductions from the Word of God these people need to be stopped from filling out their roles as Soviet Commissars. These thought police must be eliminated.

In the words of John Moody

“We don’t have to be “kind and gentle” to wolves, false teachers, and those betraying the church and openly compromising with the wicked.

Love them like God does, enough “to shatter their teeth” if necessary to stop their evil.”