Email of the Day...

Email from my Firearms instructor:

Who says our leftist media is agenda-driven and hopelessly  dishonest? NY Times editorialists, in attempting to describe the violent street-gang  problem that is currently consuming Wilmington, DE, Baltimore, MD, et al,  laughingly refer to unlawfully armed gangs of violent urban thugs as:
“street crews,”as if criminal gang-bangers were out there diligently filling  pot-holes!

With self-conferred titles like, “Shoot to Kill,” these “street crews”must stay busy!

It strikes me that referring to aggressive, sociopathic gangs as “street crews” represents a deliberate deception.

Instead of identifying and condemning violent criminals, NY Times editors (and leftist counterparts at Chicago Tribune, LA Times, Washington Post, et al) apparently find it requires much less effort, and personal honesty, to just wail  incessantly about “gun violence,”and the very existence of our Second  Amendment.

They are a disgrace!

" ‘Media’ is just a word that has come to mean ‘bad journalism.’ ” - Graham Greene

/Jon



 And my response:
 
Hi Jon,

Got your email today.

“Street Crews” will last just as long as it takes for people to understand that it actually means “urban thugs”. As soon as that happens they will find another “new” name for them. The “thing” will tarnish the name.

You can’t really clean up/alter/hide reality by calling it something else. That’s a failed tactic of the Left. Reality always eventually accrues to the word…not the other way around.

Negroes have been trying to defy this since the 50’s…with the various and continuous changes to what they demand to be called.

We’ve gone from nigra/nigger (nothing more than an old Southern pronunciation of “Negro”) to:

• Colored
• Negro
• Afro-American
• Black
• African American
• Person of Color

As soon as the name becomes too completely associated with the race, they feel the need to change it.

It is, in my opinion, a form of self-hate by the liberal/leftist “leadership” of the racialist movement.  As soon as a title is completely identified with its subject, it has to be changed to a new, fresh, “clean”, un-stigmatized, un-tarnished word.

It’s kind of sad. It’s as though they hate themselves so much, that they always want to call themselves by some name that doesn’t actually describe them—or is too closely associated with their real selves/looks/behavior/culture/language/history.

Meantime, Whites have just been called “White” the whole time. And we’re cool with it.

(This is NOT, of course, to disagree with your assessment that our “media” is hopelessly dishonest. They absolutely are. I just don’t think they’ll win at this in the end.)

/gun