The following is adapted from a lecture delivered at Hillsdale College on March 30, 2021.
‘Critical race theory is fast becoming America’s new institutional orthodoxy. Yet most Americans have never heard of it—and of those who have, many don’t understand it. It’s time for this to change. We need to know what it is so we can know how to fight it.
In explaining critical race theory, it helps to begin with a brief history of Marxism. Originally, the Marxist Left built its political program on the theory of class conflict. Marx believed that the primary characteristic of industrial societies was the imbalance of power between capitalists and workers. The solution to that imbalance, according to Marx, was revolution: the workers would eventually gain consciousness of their plight, seize the means of production, overthrow the capitalist class, and usher in a new socialist society.
During the 20th century, a number of regimes underwent Marxist-style revolutions, and each ended in disaster. Socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million of their own people. They are remembered for their gulags, show trials, executions, and mass starvations. In practice, Marx’s ideas unleashed man’s darkest brutalities.
By the mid-1960s, Marxist intellectuals in the West had begun to acknowledge these failures. They recoiled at revelations of Soviet atrocities and came to realize that workers’ revolutions would never occur in Western Europe or the United States, where there were large middle classes and rapidly improving standards of living. Americans in particular had never developed a sense of class consciousness or class division. Most Americans believed in the American dream—the idea that they could transcend their origins through education, hard work, and good citizenship.
But rather than abandon their Leftist political project, Marxist scholars in the West simply adapted their revolutionary theory to the social and racial unrest of the 1960s. Abandoning Marx’s economic dialectic of capitalists and workers, they substituted race for class and sought to create a revolutionary coalition of the dispossessed based on racial and ethnic categories.
Fortunately, the early proponents of this revolutionary coalition in the U.S. lost out in the 1960s to the civil rights movement, which sought instead the fulfillment of the American promise of freedom and equality under the law. Americans preferred the idea of improving their country to that of overthrowing it. The vision of Martin Luther King, Jr., President Johnson’s pursuit of the Great Society, and the restoration of law and order promised by President Nixon in his 1968 campaign defined the post-1960s American political consensus.
But the radical Left has proved resilient and enduring—which is where critical race theory comes in.
WHAT IT IS
Critical race theory is an academic discipline, formulated in the 1990s, built on the intellectual framework of identity-based Marxism. Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, over the past decade it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions. It has been injected into government agencies, public school systems, teacher training programs, and corporate human resources departments in the form of diversity training programs, human resources modules, public policy frameworks, and school curricula.
There are a series of euphemisms deployed by its supporters to describe critical race theory, including “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion,” and “culturally responsive teaching.” Critical race theorists, masters of language construction, realize that “neo-Marxism” would be a hard sell. Equity, on the other hand, sounds non-threatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. But the distinction is vast and important. Indeed, equality—the principle proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, defended in the Civil War, and codified into law with the 14th and 15th Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—is explicitly rejected by critical race theorists. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression.
In contrast to equality, equity as defined and promoted by critical race theorists is little more than reformulated Marxism. In the name of equity, UCLA Law Professor and critical race theorist Cheryl Harris has proposed suspending private property rights, seizing land and wealth and redistributing them along racial lines. Critical race guru Ibram X. Kendi, who directs the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, has proposed the creation of a federal Department of Antiracism. This department would be independent of (i.e., unaccountable to) the elected branches of government, and would have the power to nullify, veto, or abolish any law at any level of government and curtail the speech of political leaders and others who are deemed insufficiently “antiracist.”
One practical result of the creation of such a department would be the overthrow of capitalism, since according to Kendi, “In order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anti-capitalist.” In other words, identity is the means and Marxism is the end.
An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination, and omnipotent bureaucratic authority. Historically, the accusation of “anti-Americanism” has been overused. But in this case, it’s not a matter of interpretation—critical race theory prescribes a revolutionary program that would overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.
HOW IT WORKS
What does critical race theory look like in practice? Last year, I authored a series of reports focused on critical race theory in the federal government. The FBI was holding workshops on intersectionality theory. The Department of Homeland Security was telling white employees they were committing “microinequities” and had been “socialized into oppressor roles.” The Treasury Department held a training session telling staff members that “virtually all white people contribute to racism” and that they must convert “everyone in the federal government” to the ideology of “antiracism.” And the Sandia National Laboratories, which designs America’s nuclear arsenal, sent white male executives to a three-day reeducation camp, where they were told that “white male culture” was analogous to the “KKK,” “white supremacists,” and “mass killings.” The executives were then forced to renounce their “white male privilege” and write letters of apology to fictitious women and people of color.
This year, I produced another series of reports focused on critical race theory in education. In Cupertino, California, an elementary school forced first-graders to deconstruct their racial and sexual identities, and rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.” In Springfield, Missouri, a middle school forced teachers to locate themselves on an “oppression matrix,” based on the idea that straight, white, English-speaking, Christian males are members of the oppressor class and must atone for their privilege and “covert white supremacy.” In Philadelphia, an elementary school forced fifth-graders to celebrate “Black communism” and simulate a Black Power rally to free 1960s radical Angela Davis from prison, where she had once been held on charges of murder. And in Seattle, the school district told white teachers that they are guilty of “spirit murder” against black children and must “bankrupt [their] privilege in acknowledgement of [their] thieved inheritance.”
I’m just one investigative journalist, but I’ve developed a database of more than 1,000 of these stories. When I say that critical race theory is becoming the operating ideology of our public institutions, it is not an exaggeration—from the universities to bureaucracies to k-12 school systems, critical race theory has permeated the collective intelligence and decision-making process of American government, with no sign of slowing down.
This is a revolutionary change. When originally established, these government institutions were presented as neutral, technocratic, and oriented towards broadly-held perceptions of the public good. Today, under the increasing sway of critical race theory and related ideologies, they are being turned against the American people. This isn’t limited to the permanent bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., but is true as well of institutions in the states, even in red states, and it is spreading to county public health departments, small Midwestern school districts, and more. This ideology will not stop until it has devoured all of our institutions.
FUTILE RESISTANCE
Thus far, attempts to halt the encroachment of critical race theory have been ineffective. There are a number of reasons for this.
First, too many Americans have developed an acute fear of speaking up about social and political issues, especially those involving race. According to a recent Gallup poll, 77 percent of conservatives are afraid to share their political beliefs publicly. Worried about getting mobbed on social media, fired from their jobs, or worse, they remain quiet, largely ceding the public debate to those pushing these anti-American ideologies. Consequently, the institutions themselves become monocultures: dogmatic, suspicious, and hostile to a diversity of opinion. Conservatives in both the federal government and public school systems have told me that their “equity and inclusion” departments serve as political offices, searching for and stamping out any dissent from the official orthodoxy.
Second, critical race theorists have constructed their argument like a mousetrap. Disagreement with their program becomes irrefutable evidence of a dissenter’s “white fragility,” “unconscious bias,” or “internalized white supremacy.” I’ve seen this projection of false consciousness on their opponents play out dozens of times in my reporting. Diversity trainers will make an outrageous claim—such as “all whites are intrinsically oppressors” or “white teachers are guilty of spirit murdering black children”—and then when confronted with disagreement, they adopt a patronizing tone and explain that participants who feel “defensiveness” or “anger” are reacting out of guilt and shame. Dissenters are instructed to remain silent, “lean into the discomfort,” and accept their “complicity in white supremacy.”
Third, Americans across the political spectrum have failed to separate the premise of critical race theory from its conclusion. Its premise—that American history includes slavery and other injustices, and that we should examine and learn from that history—is undeniable. But its revolutionary conclusion—that America was founded on and defined by racism and that our founding principles, our Constitution, and our way of life should be overthrown—does not rightly, much less necessarily, follow.
Fourth and finally, the writers and activists who have had the courage to speak out against critical race theory have tended to address it on the theoretical level, pointing out the theory’s logical contradictions and dishonest account of history. These criticisms are worthy and good, but they move the debate into the academic realm, which is friendly terrain for proponents of critical race theory. They fail to force defenders of this revolutionary ideology to defend the practical consequences of their ideas in the realm of politics.
POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT
No longer simply an academic matter, critical race theory has become a tool of political power. To borrow a phrase from the Marxist theoretician Antonio Gramsci, it is fast achieving “cultural hegemony” in America’s public institutions. More and more, it is driving the vast machinery of the state and society. If we want to succeed in opposing it, we must address it politically at every level.
Critical race theorists must be confronted with and forced to speak to the facts. Do they support public schools separating first-graders into groups of “oppressors” and “oppressed”? Do they support mandatory curricula teaching that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism”? Do they support public schools instructing white parents to become “white traitors” and advocate for “white abolition”? Do they want those who work in government to be required to undergo this kind of reeducation? How about managers and workers in corporate America? How about the men and women in our military? How about every one of us?
There are three parts to a successful strategy to defeat the forces of critical race theory: governmental action, grassroots mobilization, and an appeal to principle.
We already see examples of governmental action. Last year, one of my reports led President Trump to issue an executive order banning critical race theory-based training programs in the federal government. President Biden rescinded this order on his first day in office, but it provides a model for governors and municipal leaders to follow. This year, several state legislatures have introduced bills to achieve the same goal: preventing public institutions from conducting programs that stereotype, scapegoat, or demean people on the basis of race. And I have organized a coalition of attorneys to file lawsuits against schools and government agencies that impose critical race theory-based programs on grounds of the First Amendment (which protects citizens from compelled speech), the Fourteenth Amendment (which provides equal protection under the law), and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which prohibits public institutions from discriminating on the basis of race).
On the grassroots level, a multiracial and bipartisan coalition is emerging to do battle against critical race theory. Parents are mobilizing against racially divisive curricula in public schools and employees are increasingly speaking out against Orwellian reeducation in the workplace. When they see what is happening, Americans are naturally outraged that critical race theory promotes three ideas—race essentialism, collective guilt, and neo-segregation—which violate the basic principles of equality and justice. Anecdotally, many Chinese-Americans have told me that having survived the Cultural Revolution in their former country, they refuse to let the same thing happen here.
In terms of principles, we need to employ our own moral language rather than allow ourselves to be confined by the categories of critical race theory. For example, we often find ourselves debating “diversity.” Diversity as most of us understand it is generally good, all things being equal, but it is of secondary value. We should be talking about and aiming at excellence, a common standard that challenges people of all backgrounds to achieve their potential. On the scale of desirable ends, excellence beats diversity every time.
Similarly, in addition to pointing out the dishonesty of the historical narrative on which critical race theory is predicated, we must promote the true story of America—a story that is honest about injustices in American history, but that places them in the context of our nation’s high ideals and the progress we have made towards realizing them. Genuine American history is rich with stories of achievements and sacrifices that will move the hearts of Americans—in stark contrast to the grim and pessimistic narrative pressed by critical race theorists.
Above all, we must have courage—the fundamental virtue required in our time. Courage to stand and speak the truth. Courage to withstand epithets. Courage to face the mob. Courage to shrug off the scorn of the elites. When enough of us overcome the fear that currently prevents so many from speaking out, the hold of critical race theory will begin to slip. And courage begets courage. It’s easy to stop a lone dissenter; it’s much harder to stop 10, 20, 100, 1,000, 1,000,000, or more who stand up together for the principles of America.
Truth and justice are on our side. If we can muster the courage, we will win.’https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/critical-race-theory-fight/?utm_campaign=imprimis&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=121792381&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9MbG_CCSTOxYtkWZIAJ6rPkKi91EAgHQcSl9wvcQk7Duk9NL0XocHqKLjJPQq52cC63XkDVbJoesoZn8_BAitcX85Vog&utm_content=121790319&utm_source=hs_email
Here in Australia who knows when normality will again allow us to fly overseas again? As hard as they (whoever ‘they’ are) made it to go through airports before the China virus one wonders how hard it will be after? Are you going to get a China virus Passport? I am not! Well, that’s not really the reason for this article but this is. We belong to United Airlines Mileage Plus program and received the following email today. These corporations, United included, must be led by Earth worshipping pagans who seem to think we humans can save the earth! There is only one Saviour and He came over two thousand years ago and died and rose again to not save the earth but to save sinners!! Whatever, we do in our daily living is NOT going to save the earth! Oh, I also wasn’t aware that these pagans not not only have Earth day but now they have EARTH MONTH! Well, anyway here is the email from United.
‘This Earth Month, we have a lot to celebrate at United. We’ve committed to being 100% green by reducing our carbon emissions 100% by 2050 and have invested in ground-breaking technology to make our goal a reality. But there’s still a long way to go. And today, we’re launching an industry-first effort that has the potential to play a significant role in the global fight against climate change.
The Eco-Skies Alliance program is a new way for companies to join United in our investment in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), the fastest and most effective way to reduce emissions across our fleet.
We’re already the largest airline purchaser of SAF in the world, and today, big brands like Deloitte, DHL Global Forwarding, HP Inc. and Siemens will join us to purchase the emissions reductions from approximately 3.4 million gallons of SAF this year. That’s enough to fly travelers over 220 million miles. By joining forces, we’re demonstrating what companies can achieve when they come together for the greater good.
At the same time, we know our customers are looking for ways to do their part, so we’re giving you an easy way to participate and take action. Right now, you can make a personal contribution for our purchase of SAF. Since strong federal and state policy leadership are essential to making change happen, you can also get involved by connecting with your elected officials to advocate for policies that could make air travel more sustainable.
This is just the beginning. We expect to add more corporate partners to our Eco-Skies Alliance program this year, and we’re planning to give you even more visibility into the carbon impact of air travel — including easy ways for you to help contribute to real, scalable solutions.
As the Eco-Skies Alliance program continues to grow, we’ll keep connecting the world while ensuring it has a bright, sustainable future.’ (An Email from United)
1John 5:11,12 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
After all that has occurred in the past twelve months do you trust your government and especially anything connected with the China virus?
‘Several prominent physicians, doctors, Sons of Liberty Media Health and Wellness expert Kate Shemirani, her colleague Dr. Kevin Corbett, and I have postulated that the current experimental mRNA injection for coronavirus, aka COVID-19, could alter one’s genetic code or DNA. Bill Gates stated it, which was included in my video “Human Genome 8 and mRNA Vaccine” on Brighteon.com. It is one reason the term “experimental human genome altering mRNA injection” has been used to describe the jab being foisted onto the mostly unsuspecting public. While many in the media, Dr. Anthony Fauci and his merry band of chronic liars, and “fact checkers” have declared this claim as false, a video of a TEDx Beacon Street talk by Tal Zaks, chief medical officer of Moderna, Inc., one pharmaceutical company manufacturer of the experimental mRNA technology injection, confirms mRNA injection for COVID-19 can change your genetic code or DNA.’https://thewashingtonstandard.com/bombshell-moderna-chief-medical-officer-admits-mrna-alters-dna/?fbclid=IwAR1sfNpbUenuWB8wwx3T8OGPYmdo271xVAZFlNa1CUMLcaii9aV1xlEHnK0
‘Woke green European politicians love to lecture us in Australia about how Europe is ‘transitioning to renewables’. And woke green Australian politicians and our leftist media parrot the Europeans. But it’s all a conjob. Only 15% of Europe’s (EU 27) total energy supply comes from ‘renewables’. However as Bjorn Lomborg points out, while the public has been brainwashed into thinking ‘renewables’ means wind and solar power – the vast majority of Europe’s ‘renewable energy’ comes from Biomass (that’s wood). Wind and Solar provided just 2% and 1% of Europe’s energy in 2019.And yet, we’ve had people in Australia fooled into believing the delusion that in a few short years we can run our entire economy on Chinese solar panels and wind turbines. The world is laughing at us.’https://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP
‘In August 1967, a viral haemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola hit the quiet university town of Marburg in what was then West Germany. The case fatality rate of over 20 per cent wasn’t quite on a par with the Black Death, but it was bad enough. Luckily, the initial outbreak affected only twenty-five people and was quickly contained, so total cases were limited to thirty-one and total deaths to seven. Germans, it seems, have a healthy aversion to contact with the body fluids of dying relatives, and hospitals were sufficiently well-equipped to safely handle infectious patients oozing their insides out. One laboratory technician did however fall sick after he cut himself during an autopsy on a patient who had died of the disease. Accidents will happen, even to Germans.
The mystery illness came to be known as Marburg Disease, back in the days when it was still socially acceptable to name diseases after the places where they first appeared. Its source was traced to a batch of African green monkeys that had been shipped from Uganda for use in polio research. At the time, it was uncertain whether Marburg Disease had originated in Uganda, or the monkeys had become infected en route. That’s because the monkeys had flown to Germany via Heathrow, and thus their trip was inevitably held up by strike action. During their involuntary two-day layover, they came into contact with animals from around the world, their British handlers, and the local rats, raising the possibility of cross-infection. Consider that the next time you fly through Heathrow.
The Lancet was the first medical journal to publish a paper identifying the cause of Marburg Disease, going to press with an explanation just three months after the first victims fell ill. True to form, they got it wrong, blaming a bacterial agent. Slower, more careful research revealed that the real cause was a virus.
What was known at the time, and has now been known for more than half a century, is that Marburg Disease escaped from a biological laboratory. But you wouldn’t know that from the World Health Organisation website entry for Marburg Disease, or even from the Wikipedia page. The Australian Department of Health is more forthcoming, noting that the laboratory workers had been exposed to tissue samples from monkeys, but draws no particular conclusions from that fact. And why should they? Question the safety of one laboratory, and you question the safety of all.
A decade after the Marburg release, the virus behind the infamous 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic (the one that killed an estimated 50 million people) escaped from a Chinese or Russian laboratory. It caused some serious illnesses in young people who had no immunity, but it was quickly contained via vaccination. More recently, the SARS virus—the original one from the 2003 Hong Kong outbreak—has been accidentally released from labs at least six times: once in Singapore, once in Taiwan, and four times in China. The Chinese releases all occurred at the National Institute of Virology in Beijing. Those repeated accidental releases prompted the French government to help China establish its first “biosafety level 4” virus laboratory in … Wuhan.
If you want an independent investigation into the origins of our current coronavirus pandemic, Ms Payne, you’ll have to do it yourself. You certainly can’t expect a straight answer from the virologists at the World Health Organisation. First, they’re virologists, and as such they have an overwhelming professional interest in believing that biological laboratories are absolutely safe. Imagine the future of virological research after an admission that an accidental lab release had infected more than 100 million people, killed 2 million (and counting) and cost the global economy some US$28 trillion. “Oops, I did it again” doesn’t begin to cover it. The counter-narrative that legions of brave, dedicated, sorely underfunded virologists were the only ones able to save the world from coronavirus armageddon is much more attractive.
Second, they work for the World Health Organisation.
There is a certain class of well-travelled, university-educated internationalists who know all about their own countries’ politics and are smugly wise to the mendacity of their own countries’ politicians, but who nonetheless romanticise the intergovernmental organisations to which their own countries belong—and to which their own countries’ politicians retire to enjoy tax-free salaries for purely nominal work in sophisticated global cities. When the worldly writers behind the BBC’s Dr Who needed good guys with guns to defend Earth from cybermen in 1968, they couldn’t very well turn to the imperialistic British Army of the Malayan Emergency and the Mau Mau Revolt. Instead, they seconded Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart to the United Nations Intelligence Taskforce, reporting to a global headquarters in Geneva. Half a century later, when the internet censors at Google, Facebook and Twitter needed an authoritative arbiter who could be trusted to rise above national politics to provide definitive information on the coronavirus pandemic, they turned to the World Health Organisation.
A United Nations agency based in Geneva, the ambitiously-named World Health Organisation is located on the legacy campus of the old interwar League of Nations. It’s a prime gig, especially for doctors (and almost-doctors) from the less salubrious countries of the developing world. The current director-general, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, was awarded a PhD in community health from the University of Nottingham in 2000. That was after his youthful service on the politburo of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, at the time labelled a terrorist organisation by the United States. A senior cabinet minister of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front government that ruled Ethiopia from 1991 until a split in 2019 kicked the Tigrayan people’s liberators out, Tedros won the international contest to become Director-General of the World Health Organisation in 2016.
That’s the man overseeing the world’s investigation into the origins of the coronavirus. Well, at least Donald Trump disliked him, so he can’t be all bad. And Joe Biden restored funding for the organisation he leads, so he gets the “return to normalcy” seal of approval. And the World Health Organisation is based in Switzerland, which after all has a rock-solid reputation for transparency.
Although Tedros won his position on the back of African votes, he is widely perceived as “China’s man” in an organisation that China has dominated since 2007. It’s lucky for him that he’s somebody’s man, since he probably won’t be able to return to Ethiopia any time soon. The current government of Ethiopia has (without offering any evidence) accused Tedros of procuring weapons to support the current rebellion in Tigray. Until they got booted out of the government, the Tigrayans were China’s client group in Ethiopia, which under Tigrayan rule was transformed into China’s Belt & Road hub for African investment and infrastructure. China even built (and bugged) a new $250 million headquarters building for the African Union in Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa. Ethiopia’s current prime minister, the charismatic young Nobel Peace Prize-winner Abiy Ahmed, seems inclined to take the (Chinese) money and run—leaving Tedros the bill.
That’s politics. And so is the coronavirus investigation. The only people who will be held accountable for unleashing the coronavirus are Batman and Donald Trump. Biological research laboratories will come out winners because they have to come out winners: after all, who can protect us against the next viral pandemic but our heroic virologists? And maybe it really was just a coincidence that the currently pandemic coronavirus happened to jump from bats to humans in a city where the only live bats are those kept for research purposes at China’s only coronavirus research centre. Stranger things have happened. Like the coincidence that the world’s virology community didn’t happen to mention to the press that Wuhan hosted China’s only coronavirus research centre until “conspiracy theorists” and the Falun Gong finally broke through the mainstream media interdict.
The vaccine is close upon us, and the virus will pass. Right now, it is impossible to guess where or when the final coronavirus death will happen, but it will. Smallpox has been found on Egyptian mummies, but it was eventually conquered. The world’s last smallpox death occurred in a university hospital in Birmingham, England. It resulted from an accidental lab release. The woman who was infected didn’t even work in the lab; she was a photographer on the next floor, apparently infected via a shared ventilation shaft. The only remaining officially acknowledged samples of smallpox are now stored in secure laboratories in Atlanta and Novosibirsk, though other samples keep popping up, forgotten in storage lockers or hidden in bioweapons stockpiles. Does China keep smallpox in its biological laboratories? No one knows. We can only hope that we don’t find out.’ https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2021/03/who-virologists-would-say-that/
Genesis 11:1“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.”
‘After suffering a stroke, a man in Baltimore suddenly began speaking with a Scandinavian accent. Though he had no experience with languages other than English, he suddenly sounded Nordic and appeared unfamiliar with English! In the weeks after the stroke, his speech gradually returned to normal. After three and one-half months, he again spoke with no trace of accent.
This affliction is real. It’s called “foreign-accent syndrome.” It’s a rare condition in which a brain malfunction causes speech to sound as if the speaker has a foreign accent. Americans have also reportedly developed apparent German, Welsh, Scottish, Irish and Italian accents.
Scientists say the fact that speech follows certain patterns in this way suggests something about the way the human brain is wired. A growing number of studies and experiences – such as “foreign-accent syndrome” – suggest that humans have been programmed with much more than just language ability. Some of the unique features of specific languages may actually be programmed into our brains.
The Bible tells us that everyone on Earth spoke the same language until God confused the languages of rebellious people at Babel. “Foreign-accent syndrome” suggests that many of the detailed characteristics of language may have been originally wired into the brain. It also helps us see that language is more that just noises to which we have given meaning. Language is God’s gift.’ https://creationmoments.com/sermons/an-accent-on-language-ability-2/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=an-accent-on-language-ability-2&mc_cid=b04cfc19c5&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
When a political party calls itself the ‘Conservative Party’ such as the one in the UK says they are doesn’t mean they really are. This is the same thing we in Australia are facing, fake conservatives. Now, personally, I wouldn’t do what this councillor did but he got his point across! The Greens and Labour in the UK are simply puppets of the Left and the CCP to which the so-called Conservative Party seems to be seeking to join as soon as possible. I say this for otherwise they would not have suspended Mr. Deacon for his Facebook post.
‘Mark Deacon, a conservative councillor in the UK, has been suspended from his role for posting an image of him wearing a dress in protest of the idea of a 6PM curfew on men following the murder of Sarah Everard. The councillor faced backlash for being “insensitive” to violence against women.
On Sunday, Deacon posted a picture of himself in a long black wig and floral pink dress. He said he would dress like that if a 6PM curfew against men was imposed.
“If the Green Party and some Labour party politicians get their way and impose this ridiculous 6pm curfew on men, then I’m going to wear my dress more often,” Deacon posted on Facebook alongside a photo of himself dressed as a woman.
He later deleted the post, caved, and offered an apology. However, Twitter user @Miss-Eastgate had already shared a screenshot, writing, “Plymouth City Council, really?”
The Conservative Party suspended Deacon, with the Conservative Group leader Nick Kelly confirming that an investigation will start “as soon as possible.”’https://reclaimthenet.org/conservative-councillor-suspended-for-post-dressed-as-a-woman/
Yes, he doesn’t look good in the dress but I get the point don’t you?
Do as I say, not as I do!
‘Throughout 2020, countless companies issued statements on racial inequality in the United States. However, many of these same companies are complicit in slavery in China or the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It is increasingly clear that the U.S. must once more stamp out slavery wherever it resides.
In its “2020 List of Goods Produced by Child or Forced Labor,” the Department of Labor lists some forty countries that use forced labor, many in conjunction with child labor. This is not a short list. The products and countries listed include diamonds from Angola, electronics and clothing from Malaysia, pornography from Russia, carpets and textiles from India, and tungsten and tin ore from the DRC. The most shocking perpetrator of forced labor, though, is that of China.
Forced Labor in China Continues Unopposed
China’s forced labor produces artificial flowers, Christmas decorations, footwear, clothing, hair products, and tomato products, which are then shipped worldwide. Through a combination of child labor and forced labor, the country also produces cotton, electronics, textiles, and toys. Just glancing over this foreshortened list, it’s clear that countless American firms are implicated in the trade of slave-produced goods.
More specifically, the Department of Labor estimates that some 100,000 Uighurs—a predominantly-Muslim ethnic minority that lives in the Xinjiang region in Northwest China—may be working in conditions of forced labor following their detention in “re-education” camps. Many Uighur workers are believed to have been forcefully transported by the Chinese state to other provinces to work, often under the guise of “poverty alleviation.” The Chinese government also subsidizes companies that move to Xinjiang or “employ” Muslim workers, which only encourages their exploitation.
“Save Uighur”—a project managed by the Chicago-based organization Justice For All—claims that some 83 companies internationally make use of Uighur forced labor. Too many of these companies are U.S. companies, including Abercrombie & Fitch, Calvin Klein, Cisco Systems, General Motors (G.M.), L.L. Bean, Nike, The North Face, Polo Ralph Lauren, Skechers, and Victoria’s Secret.
Over the course of 2020, Abercrombie & Fitch, Calvin Klein, Cisco, General Motors, L.L. Bean, Nike, The North Face, Polo Ralph Lauren, and Victoria’s Secret issued statements about racial inequality in the United States. To be clear, every company listed above as benefitting from forced labor in Xinjiang—except Skechers—issued a statement against racial injustice in 2020. Every statement emphasized the need for equity, the importance of safety for all people, and the responsibility each company was assuming to address racial injustice. Apparently, these companies’ promises to combat inequality are only applicable within the United States.’https://thechicagothinker.com/companies-that-tout-racial-justice-at-home-have-a-slavery-problem-abroad/
If you perchance do not believe the UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF) are not committed communist, socialist Leftist’s working to destroy freedom loving capitalist’s this video should prove it to you! This video is the WEF’s favorite man, the CCP’s Xi Jinping speaking at the WEF’s most recent Davos love fest!
If you cannot stomach watching the whole thing I understand.
 | Kevin S. on Will Sam Horn Be Going Back to… |
 | Scriptural Vision on Christians & Critical Race… |
 | whatyareckon on Is the China Virus Jab Sa… |
| Scriptural Vision on Is the China Virus Jab Sa… |
 | PA Pundits - Interna… on Paying for Another Man’s… |
