Go catch an SJW or a neo-Marxist academic type. Do not use violence, but you do need to fully corner them for this one. Once you have this hypothetical lefty contained, ask them this simple question: what is the end goal? What, pinko, is supposed to be the final form of your ideology?
If you hang around these types enough (and I do), you realize very quickly that they fall into two camps: 1) those who operate purely on emotion, and therefore know very well what they are against but are less certain about what they stand for, and 2) those who believe that the United States can easily mimic the laïcité and engorged welfare state of Western Europe. This latter type seems unhip to the fact that Europe is whiter than the U.S., and in order to enjoy the benefits of, say, a Norway or Denmark, an ethnically homogeneous is a prerequisite. Democracy in general needs a homogeneous society to achieve anything resembling stability.When countries grow more diverse, anarcho-tyranny reigns. That is currently the street-level state of affairs in many parts of the United States.
If you need any evidence that a more multi-colored America is headed for hell, look at Latin America. Costin Alamariu is right when he says that America’s politics are starting to stink of Latin American jungles. This should not be too terribly surprising in that Latin and North America both have their origins in the settler colonialism of Western Europe. However, the Anglo-Celtic nations of Canada and the United States have long maintained their cultural separation from Iberian offspring like Mexico and Argentina. With good reason, too.
South of Texas, violence, whether it comes from state or non-state actors, is the norm. Corruption is endemic in all nations except for Chile (which we all know enjoyed the privilege of a military junta), while racial grievance politics are the alpha and omega of discourse.
Despite what American left-wingers will have you believe, a nation with a white minority does not mean that white power gets relegated to the dustbin of history. Mexico is sixty-two-percent Mestizo (a mixture of European and Indian blood). Its current president, Enrique Pena Nieto, would get called a “cracker” on the streets of Baltimore. The same can be applied to the President of Peru, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski. Ditto Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia.
Because of their hold on executive, economic, and social power, the whites of Latin America are often the punching bag of economic populists, most of whom support some brand of Maoist socialism. The sad tale of Venezuela and the growth of "Bolivarian socialism" has much to do with colored resentment against the country's whites. Until very recently, Marielle Franco conformed to Latin America's left-wing monstrosity of Marxian race mongering.
The reason that last sentence is in the past tense is because Franco, a black lesbian activist from the Brazilian slums, died on March 14th. The member of the Socialism and Liberty Party (whose emblem is a smiling sun) was gunned down after leaving a round table discussion for the Young Black Women Moving Power Structures group. Two gunmen fired nine rounds into Franco’s car, hitting her three times in the head and once in the neck. Very soon thereafter, the Brazilian media began lionizing Franco as the country’s version of Martin Luther King.
Glenn Greenwald pissed all over the parade by writing in The Intercept about how, like King, Franco was far from a color-blind peacenik. King, a scumbag of monumental proportions with connections to American Communists, supported Affirmative Action and espoused radical black nationalism near the end of his life. Franco was of a similar disposition. For her, being black, a single mother, gay, and from the flavela defined her identity. Once armed with a Master’s degree in sociology, Franco became a mate-sipping Alinsky who constantly marched against police brutality. As Greenwald lovingly gushes, Franco lived the life of a “true radical” who wanted to subvert Brazil’s power structures. This, of course, means displacing Brazil’s ruling white minority.
The life and death of Marielle Franco is Exhibit A of why America’s multi-racial experiment will fail. Franco’s primary goal was to upend Brazil’s ruling hierarchy, who, for all their faults, have kept some semblance of order in that mess of a country. Similarly, Franco’s death, which many have already speculated came because she made an enemy of Brazil’s corrupt and thuggish police officials, shows that anarcho-tyranny, which exists only in low trust societies, has no problem liquidating its enemies. One creates the other, you see.
It should also be noted that Franco’s PSOL party has ties to the American media complex and international financiers. Jean Wyllys, the great gay hero of the party, is best known for winning the Brazilian version of Big Brother. Wyllys' hero is Harvey Milk. His main enemy is Brazil’s Catholic culture and the “anti-intellecutalism” of the country’s right-wing. Sound familiar?
Look, there is no end to this disgusting morality play called post-modernism. Even though Brazil has no clear racial majority, its non-white population (excluding is sizable Japanese population) still bellyaches about being “oppressed.” The same will eventually happen in the United States. Talented minorities like the Baltic Germans or the Chinese of Indonesia have existed ever since the formation of the modern state. Inequality is simply the natural state of things.
What the Franco saga should tell us is simple: the forces that we are fighting are international, dedicated to destroying the last tattered remnants of Christendom, but are also almost hopelessly rudderless. They know what they are fighting against, but have no clear definition of their end goal. That makes them dangerous, for malcontents never settle down to a life of tranquility. Give them all they want; they will just keep asking for more.