YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #virginia #freedom #police #humor #history #liberty #crime #animalbiology #thanksgiving #lawenforcement #pilgrims #happythanksgiving #rushlimbaugh #thanksgiving2025 #raccoon
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
New Posts (Home) ChatBox Popular Posts Reels Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

The Lighter Side
The Lighter Side
1 y

100 Times Improvement in Sight Seen After Gene Therapy Trial for Disease That Deteriorates Vision in Childhood
Favicon 
www.goodnewsnetwork.org

100 Times Improvement in Sight Seen After Gene Therapy Trial for Disease That Deteriorates Vision in Childhood

Patients with an inherited disease that caused them to lose much of their sight early in childhood experienced a quick return of vision after they received gene therapy. The new treatment addressed the genetic mutation that caused their vision’s deterioration, letting them see 100 times better than before. Some patients even experienced a 10,000-fold improvement […] The post 100 Times Improvement in Sight Seen After Gene Therapy Trial for Disease That Deteriorates Vision in Childhood appeared first on Good News Network.
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Famous TikToker and Boxer with 23M Followers Endorses President Trump
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Famous TikToker and Boxer with 23M Followers Endorses President Trump

It was a big night for President Donald Trump over in Vegas. The crowds poured out to show their support. And among the supporters was Bryce Hall. Hall is the TikTok sensation with 27 million followers…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Progressive Sex Symbol Doug Emhoff Says Kamala Harris Has Become Bad*ss
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Progressive Sex Symbol Doug Emhoff Says Kamala Harris Has Become Bad*ss

As we reported earlier, it was Catherine Rampell who published a piece in the Washington Post calling second gentleman Doug Emhoff a "progressive sex symbol." This was after it was revealed he'd impregnated…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Trump’s Last Charge for the Republic
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Trump’s Last Charge for the Republic

Dan Proft Commentary View the full transcript below In three weeks, when JD Vance squares off against Field Marshall Tim perhaps he can tie together the last decade of American politics in a way Trump…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

President Joe Biden Snaps at Reporter Again
Favicon 
yubnub.news

President Joe Biden Snaps at Reporter Again

Occasionally we are reminded that Joe Biden is still president. On Friday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer visited Biden at the White House to talk about a number of subjects, including the idea of…
Like
Comment
Share
YubNub News
YubNub News
1 y

Pope Francis Urges Catholics to Choose the “Lesser Evil” Between President Trump and Harris
Favicon 
yubnub.news

Pope Francis Urges Catholics to Choose the “Lesser Evil” Between President Trump and Harris

Pope Francis has weighed in on the upcoming U.S. election. He’s urging Catholic voters to choose the “lesser evil” between President Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. Harris, with her support for…
Like
Comment
Share
Classic Rock Lovers
Classic Rock Lovers  
1 y

What was the first band Fleetwood Mac’s bassist John McVie played in?
Favicon 
faroutmagazine.co.uk

What was the first band Fleetwood Mac’s bassist John McVie played in?

The beginning of remarkable journey. The post What was the first band Fleetwood Mac’s bassist John McVie played in? first appeared on Far Out Magazine.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Kamala’s Words Mean Nothing Against Hamas
Favicon 
spectator.org

Kamala’s Words Mean Nothing Against Hamas

A man who was a student once at New York’s Yeshiva University wrote of attending a Talmud class taught by a European-born rabbi who was a fine scholar and an excellent teacher. The rabbi had called upon him to explain a certain complex argument in the text, and he had offered his answer, which reflected his own preparation and intelligence. The man tried to recreate the teacher’s distinctive English as he set down the rabbi’s response to him: “You’re right, you’re right, you’re a hundred prozent right … but you’re wrong.” Harris’ party indulges in a flood of words that are meant to sound good but only hang out a welcome sign for Hamas’s malevolent agents of apocalypse. The rabbi’s response is steeped in the understanding that, as one Hebrew proverb puts it, the action is the main point. One can make many arguments, this way and that, and remain on a treadmill. Even worse, we can make endless rationalizations for things that, were we not entranced with the idols of our own thoughts, we would recognize as foolish or worse, certainly not worth further thought. But we are fascinated with our own ability to spin thoughts and develop the arguments that come from them. Were we not held to something higher than home-made abstractions as our ultimate aim, we could spend our entire lives bowing to the work of our minds. Sometimes, our fascination with thoughts and words is appropriate. Speech defines us as humans. It is a divine gift that, as Rabbi Yishmael put it 1,900 years ago, that “the Torah speaks in human language” — God is gracious with His gift of language and uses it to share His wisdom and purpose. It is, however, that very divine language that tells us at the very beginning of Genesis that the world is itself divine speech. So language is both within us and without us, and if we are to be whole in God’s gift, we must not allow a rupture to develop between the inner and the outer, the words as they are in our minds and the words of creation enwrapped within the world. (READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin: Tucker Carlson Gives Credibility to a Hatemonger) Our abstractions must constantly adjust themselves to better reflect the concrete reality they aspire to model. If we don’t hold them to that task, they can bring us to spectacular failure.  There is no more searing example of such failure than the appeasement of Hitler. The British Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, was so sure that his thoughts and words could determine reality, that he said in 1938 to Hitler’s special envoy that he would like to see “the Führer entering London at the side of the English King amid the acclamation of the English people.” After Hitler had already consumed Austria, accepted Chamberlain’s gift of the Sudetenland, and then, despite his signing an agreement that Chamberlain declared to mean “peace in our time,” swallowed the rest of Czechoslovakia whole, and now was demanding that the city of Danzig be given to him, the British ambassador to Berlin advised his government that the demand was “not on the whole unreasonable.” Media was then flexing its muscles. Not unexpectedly, those who work in media are prone to this intoxication with unhinged words more than most. Perfectly precious is this incident recounted by Piers Brendon:  The Director General of the BBC suggested that “it would be a good idea to relay to Germany ‘the famous song of the nightingale’ in Bagley Woods as a token of Britain’s peace-loving intentions.” The song of the nightingale is beautiful. Peaceful intentions are lovely. The goal of peace is just fine. But the reality was that the Nazis already had found a way to include love of the outdoors and of beauty with their industrial barbarism. In the Nazi world, beauty was co-opted. Auschwitz and other centers of slavery and factories of death had their own orchestras, which augmented the savagery rather than dispelling it. Kamala Harris’ statements on Israel and Hamas are only another updated version of words and ideas thoroughly detached from concrete reality. She began with something real: a true and honest condemnation of Hama’s orgy of torture, rape, and massacre on October 7. She then pivoted, as she had done just a few days before, and with barely a breath, and her characteristic condescending tones, insisted that the casualties in Gaza have been too many and that the war must result in a Palestinian state — the famous “two-state solution.” Not the utter defeat which is the only way to destroy entrenched Nazism, but a state ready to be run by the same people that participated in or cheered the hideous orgasmic spree of October 7. How lovely! Just like the nightingale’s song in Bagley Woods. And the orchestra playing in Auschwitz. The True Nature of Hamas Hamas is not a musician’s union. It is not a righteous cause, though it uses the language of religious morality to describe what they do. Nazis as well successfully portrayed their vile program as moral and right.  Hamas was founded and continues to exist for the purpose of utterly destroying Israel the state and Israel the people. In language borrowed from Nazi propaganda, which was widely and approvingly read during World War II, they describe in their original covenant how all the great disasters of the world have been caused by the Jews. They intend, like the Nazis, to seek a final solution of this problem. Hamas is interested in a one state solution, stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, in which they envision about as many Jews as currently live in the Palestinian territories, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq — none (at least openly).  Perhaps Ms. Harris and her party envision the Palestinians rising against Hamas, willing and eager to live in peace and build prosperity with Israel. But a series of polls, taken by Arabs, not Jews, shows a steady 80+ percent support of Hamas. This holds true through the PA-governed areas as well. A great majority of Israelis wanted the two-state solution in the 1990s. That support was there in spite of the bloody Yassir Arafat being their negotiating partner, who spoke one thing to the West and when speaking to his people in Arabic, incited violence. It continued even as Arafat initiated the Second Intifada, incinerating families sharing meals in a pizza shop, commuters going to work on city buses, shoppers buying clothes in a mall, and on and on. Finally, the ultimate hawk, Ariel Sharon, delivered the entire Gaza Strip to the Palestinians in 2005 and withdrew every single Israeli soldier and policeman.  In response, in a free election, Gaza overwhelmingly voted Hamas in. And instead of peace, Hamas dug its tunnels and launched unending rockets day after day, year after year. And then October 7. In the real world in which we live, the one that God challenges us to face and to make better, this is the actuality. Harris’ ideas are no more realistic a way to deal with Hamas, Hezbollah than the methods of Halifax and Chamberlain were to deal with Hitler.  Hamas and the Chamberlain Treatment Churchill gave Chamberlain credit as a loyal countryman. He employed both him and Halifax in high-level positions in his National Government. We need not declare those advocating equally absurd policies today as guilty of anything more than negligence and foolishness. (READ MORE: Trump’s Vision Transcends the Party) When led with Churchillian clarity, even those people played a positive and important role. No doubt Harris and company might as well, but only if led by someone who sees reality more clearly than she does. She spins words, but she did nothing about the border, and as head of the Space Agency, she is leaving astronauts stranded in space. But the results of elevating wishful thinking to state policy is to send an RSVP to every narcissistic psychopath in control of a country, of which there are quite a few today.  Whatever his faults, and there are many, Trump gets this. He gets that words mean less than nothing if there are not deeds that assure that lofty ideas translate to policies that actually make the world better, disabling the hateful tyrants, and protecting and giving heart to those who believe in civilization and peace. This is the point that needs to be hammered home, as Harris’ party indulges in a flood of words that are meant to sound good but only hang out a welcome sign for the malevolent agents of apocalypse.  From now till November, that is our message — it is all about action. Four years of no Russian expansion, the only administration in the new millennium of which that is true. Four years of containment of Iran and all its proxies. Four years of near-total peace in the Middle East, after demolishing ISIS’s last strongholds. Four years of the lowest interest rates and highest employment and workforce engagement — at least until the China virus.  The action is the main thing. When not serving sound policy, talk is cheap and its results are reliably disastrous. The post Kamala’s Words Mean Nothing Against Hamas appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Immigration Control Is Smart, Not Un-Christian
Favicon 
spectator.org

Immigration Control Is Smart, Not Un-Christian

The current goings-on in Springfield, Ohio, and the surrounding area have captured national media attention. Stories of tens of thousands of immigrants, unceremoniously dumped by the Biden-Harris administration into a sleepy heartland town of barely 60,000, causing traffic accidents, clogging up welfare and social services, devouring the housing market, and leaving native-born American citizens homeless and financially overburdened — to say nothing of the rumors of household pets being feasted upon — have reignited the inexplicably-contentious debate over immigration and border control.   However, defending the home of your family, the nation in which your children and their children are to grow up and live … these things are assuredly Christian. Among the ranks of unrestricted-immigration apologists are those who cite some perverted form of Christian morality as justification for standing by meekly while one’s own nation is invaded. Social media in particular is crawling with folks spouting off variations of “If you struggle with letting immigrants into your country, you clearly haven’t let Jesus into your heart.” (READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: What Attacks on Catholic Churches Reveal About Society) Never mind that most of those trotting out these imbecilic cliches aren’t Christian themselves and wouldn’t dare to adhere to Christ’s teachings on, say, lust, divorce, adultery, or the Eucharist. What Is Demanded of Christians? Of course, the argument that Christian charity demands allowing corrupt regime elites to airdrop hordes of third-world insurgents into your neighborhood is imbecilic. In his treatise on charity in the encyclopedic Summa Theologiae, the great St. Thomas Aquinas explains that charity (or love) is subject to order, and that one actually has an obligation to love some people more than others — or at least before others: One’s obligation to love a person is proportionate to the gravity of the sin one commits in acting against that love. Now it is a more grievous sin to act against the love of certain neighbors, than against the love of others. Hence the commandment (Leviticus 10:9), “He that curseth his father or mother, dying let him die,” which does not apply to those who cursed others than the above. Therefore we ought to love some neighbors more than others.… We must, therefore, say that, even as regards the affection we ought to love one neighbor more than another. The reason is that, since the principle of love is God, and the person who loves, it must needs be that the affection of love increases in proportion to the nearness to one or the other of those principles. For … wherever we find a principle, order depends on relation to that principle. In other words, charity is ordered by God. While we do have an obligation to love all those made in the image and likeness of God, that obligation is strongest in a particular order: God must be loved first, followed by our own selves (not, Aquinas explains, in a selfish or miserly fashion, but in the matter of tending to our spiritual nature), and then followed by those closest to us, such as family, friends, and countrymen. Aquinas explains that “friendship among blood relations is based upon their connection by natural origin, the friendship of fellow-citizens on their civic fellowship, and the friendship of those who are fighting side by side on the comradeship of battle.” He concludes, “Wherefore in matters pertaining to nature we should love our kindred most, in matters concerning relations between citizens, we should prefer our fellow-citizens, and on the battlefield our fellow-soldiers.” Americans have an obligation to love their country and to love their fellow-citizens, even above non-citizens, just as a father has an obligation to love his wife and children above the homeless of his town; and if a father were to come home one night to find a homeless man in his own house, eating his food, and terrifying his wife and children, Christians would indeed agree that the father has an obligation — not merely a right or an option, but an obligation — to evict the intruder. Defending Your Home Is Christian The leftist mantra of multiculturalism — the lotus eaters’ droning that all cultures are good and worthy — is not so much a means of seeking out the good and the worthiness of other cultures, but of convincing the masses that all cultures are interchangeable, that all are one and the same. This is, of course, patently false. After all, the Haitian immigrants receiving government-funded benefits and renting two-story, multi-bedroom houses in Ohio wouldn’t agree that the crime-ridden slums they escaped from in their home country are equivalent to life in America. Different cultures have different attributes and customs, and those unique cultural attributes and customs are, at times, in need of defense. It is for this reason that Pope Pius XII wrote, “It is quite legitimate for nations to treat their differences a sacred inheritance and guard them at all costs.” (READ MORE: Trump Waffles on Florida’s Abortion Amendment) Demanding that corrupt bureaucrats not dump 20,000 immigrants from the third world into your backyard is not un-Christian. However, defending the home of your family, the nation in which your children and their children are to grow up and live and love and work and play, protecting and preserving the characteristics and customs unique to your nation and your region, these things are assuredly Christian. These things must, of course, be done with love, never with malice, but Christians do have an obligation to do them. The post Immigration Control Is Smart, Not Un-Christian appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
1 y

Black Anti-Communists Have Been Memory–Holed
Favicon 
spectator.org

Black Anti-Communists Have Been Memory–Holed

Reds: The Tragedy of Communism By Maurice Isserman (Basic Books, 384 pages, $27.99) Reds: The Tragedy of Communism opens with a warning aimed at the reader: the “history of American Communism requires the ability to weigh complex and often ambiguous evidence and judgments.” Author Maurice Isserman, a noted historian at Hamilton College, continues: “Be prepared to keep two opposed ideas in mind.” He advises those “unwilling to do so” to “put this book down right now.” The italics increase: The Communist movement helped win democratic reforms that benefited millions of ordinary American citizens, at the same time that the movement championed a brutal totalitarian state responsible for the imprisonment and deaths of millions of Soviet citizens. And,  The Communist Party USA was an advocacy group entitled to normal constitutional guarantees of free speech, and at certain times and places it was also a criminal conspiracy. Furthermore, “studying the history of communism should be neither an exercise in filiopietism, the excessive veneration of ancestors, nor of demonology, the classification of malevolent spirits.” Well, of course. (READ MORE: Boston Red Sox and MLB Impose Communist Struggle Session on Player) To his credit, Isserman relates the acknowledgment of Fred Beal, a union organizer found guilty of second-degree murder for deaths in a 1929 mill strike who had fled to the Soviet Union, there witnessing such horrors as “famine deliberately induced by the Soviet government” only to return because he would “‘rather be an American prisoner than a free man in Russia.’” Isserman even takes Communists, who turned a blind eye, to the proverbial woodshed. Others — including others on the non-Communist Left — saw clearly what American Communists indignantly denied, that life under Soviet Communism in the Stalin era was defined by pervasive fear of an all-powerful repressive regime that routinely and on a massive scale employed spying, denunciation, imprisonment, torture, and murder against innocent victims. Isserman describes the lure of luxurious travel for the apparatchiks and the schizophrenic reversals in Party directives, such as in the case of the Soviet-Nazi pact. He discusses John Dewey and Sidney Hook’s Committee for Cultural Freedom’s manifesto published in the May 27, 1939 issue of the Nation, which rejected the “totalitarianism” of Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union. He also discusses the “counterblast,” endorsed by 400 signatories, denouncing the “‘fantastic falsehood’ that the Soviet Union was in any sense comparable to the fascist powers” — hitting the newsstands three days after the German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact. He admits forthrightly that some Communists conducted espionage. Yet, also, as the opening directive states, “The Communist movement helped win democratic reforms.” The 1930s, the period of the Party’s “greatest influence,” “fought for such causes like unemployment insurance, social security, and racial equality.” Isserman is to be commended for refraining from insulting detractors, as Harold Meyerson did in reviewing Reds in the American Prospect and comparing the necessity of “screening out of reality we now associate with Fox News” to that of Communists. A Short Shrift to the Real Anti-Communists Still, Reds often does not model the even-handedness that its author lectures the reader to maintain. This is because the sources — polemical statements and memoirs, written by Communist activists (or their Communist ghostwriters), and scholarly books written by activist, Communist-sympathizing historians, provide most of the evidence. At the same time, the contributions of former Communists or sympathizers on the right, who wrote volumes on the subject, are given short shrift. Whittaker Chambers barely gets a mention, but uninfluential Party diarists are discussed at length. The focus is on strawman Joseph McCarthy and the “hysteria” of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. The McCarran Act’s requirement that “fifteen national and district Party leaders” register with the Subversive Activities Control Board is cast as an unjust demand for self-incrimination “as criminal conspirators and foreign agents.” An inordinate amount of ink is spilled on the sufferings of writers like Arthur Miller during the “postwar Red Scare” and on the aptness of the witch hunt analogy in his play The Crucible. When it comes to the fall of Communism, Mikhail Gorbachev is presented as the hero who hears the voice of the people and magically vanquishes communism. The naïve reader would think that President Reagan had nothing to do with it. The one mention of Reagan comes as criticism of his action as California Governor when he threatened to “cut the UCLA budget if [Communist Party member Angela] Davis continued to teach on its campus.” (READ MORE: A Witness Emerges From Another Communist Gulag) There is a mention of one ex-Communist who became a conservative, Frank S. Meyer, but the discussion is truncated. Meyer’s differences with the authoritarian structure of the party as revealed in his letter in 1943 to party chief Earl Browder is discussed. Isserman explains that “The Bolshevik model of a disciplined cadre organization excluded most ordinary Americans.” Meyer proposed a new kind of structure based on “‘traditional American concepts of democracy,’” which Isserman interprets as being “a lot like the British Labour Party, which he had joined all those years earlier in Oxford before becoming a Communist.” And this is where he leaves the discussion of one of the most important thinkers of the mid-20th century conservative movement. The reader needs to go to the endnote to even learn that “Meyer remained in the CP for another two years, encouraged by Browder’s decision to dissolve the Party in 1944. In the fall of 1945, he quit, becoming a leading conservative activist and intellectual, and a cofounder of National Review magazine” and the author of The Moulding of Communists: The Training of Communist Cadre (1961). Meyer became a pivotal figure in the movement, promoting “fusionism” — i.e., the fusion of the two conservative wings, traditionalism and libertarianism. He is one of many Communists-turned-conservatives who rethought the entire project of progressivism — big government, collectivism, and redistribution — and, in the process, advocated for a return to American founding principles. It would seem that a book about the American Communist movement would have at least a paragraph devoted to such apostates, no? In Highlighting Black Communists, Isserman Ignores Black Anti-Communists Isserman goes to the Earl Browder Collection at Syracuse University to get his quotations from Meyer’s letters. But in that same collection is a dossier on George S. Schuyler, the most widely read black columnist in America from the mid-1920s through the 1940s. Schuyler recognized the motives of the Communists from the time they first established their headquarters in New York City in 1919, which is what Richard Wright pointed out in The God That Failed: Blacks were recruited to be “street agitators” and suffer the blows from police. While Isserman recounts the work of black socialist labor organizer and activist A. Philip Randolph, he ignores the star writer who got his start at the Messenger, the socialist monthly that Randolph edited. While Randolph organized the Sleeping Car Porters union, the writer he had hired, George Schuyler, became the star columnist in the black newspaper he made number one in circulation, the Pittsburgh-Courier. George Shuyler portrait (Carl Van Vechten via Wikimedia Commons/ No Known Copyright) To make the case for the Communists’ civil rights advocacy, Isserman lauds the fact that Lovett Fort-Whiteman, as a delegate to the Fifth World Congress in 1924, “delivered a report to the Comintern audience including Joseph Stalin” that argued for the unorthodox position that black people “‘are not discriminated against as a class but as a race’” and “urged the American Communist Party to begin organizing among Black southern sharecroppers.” Instead of referencing Schuyler’s warnings to the black community at the time, as Fort-Whiteman, a former contributor to the Messenger, made his Soviet-funded recruiting tour, Isserman turns to Defying Dixie: The Radical Roots of Civil Rights, 1919-1950, a mendacious work by Yale historian Glenda Gilmore attempting to expiate her segregationist Southern roots by rehabilitating Communist agitators as the first civil rights leaders. Isserman does not mention Fort-Whiteman’s death in the Gulag. Gilmore does. The Communist-championing historian casts a death by starvation and beating (Fort-Whiteman had all his teeth knocked out) in a place where the temperature went down to 60-below in romantic terms and partly as his own fault (for being recklessly enthusiastic about Communism). She calls his death on Jan. 13, 1939, “an ordinary death for the place. Fort-Whiteman had not been able to meet the work quota; for this, he ‘was severely beaten many times’” and his food rations were greatly decreased. She imaginatively recreates his dying moments: Deep disappointments, crushing blows, starvation: It took them all to break Lovett Fort-Whiteman. Did he dream, there in a frozen hole [where he was forced to sleep] in the tundra, of hot nights on Sweet Ellum Street back home in Dallas? Of midday classes at Tuskegee, where sweating students performed the heavy work of uplift? … Or did he dream his own “dream deferred,” of bringing revolution to Chicago streets, equality to the South, and black liberation to the Kremlin? There in Kolyma no one mourned him, no one knew that he was the first African American Communist. No one knew of his eagerness, his recklessness.… In the final, perfect equality of the gulag, it mattered not a whit that he was a black man. The “perfect equality of the gulag”? Ironically, Gilmore writes that Fort-Whiteman “never allowed [himself] to be silenced.” Her book is among the most frequently cited in Reds. In the case of nine black boys and young men accused of raping two white women in Scottsboro in 1931, Isserman pushes the Communist propaganda line (of William Z. Foster, Howard Zinn, the Daily Worker, and other similar communist mouthpieces) that the defendants “would surely have gone to their deaths in the electric chair, except for one new factor, the presence, nearby, of Communist organizers.” His source again is Gilmore. Actually, the defendants would have gotten out of prison much sooner than they did had the Communists not forced the case away from the competent hands of the NAACP to exploit it for publicity and fundraising, as I describe in Debunking Howard Zinn. As Schuyler pointed out repeatedly in his columns and articles, the Communists sent agitators to disrupt NAACP meetings and stole money raised by church-going black workers for the defendants. They deliberately prolonged the case, for example, by not filing a bill of exceptions in time for a new trial and by making threats against the judge. The last two Scottsboro boys were not paroled until after 1944 — and that was only after the NAACP was allowed to rejoin the case. Walter White and W.E.B. Du Bois, two of the black members of the NAACP leadership, also denounced the Communists for trying to make the Scottsboro Boys into “martyrs” for their cause. And then there is Angelo Herndon, described by Isserman as a “valuable recruit” at the age of 18, “who joined the Party after reading a pamphlet about the Gastonia strike, and was drawn to its vision of interracial unionism. Herndon became an organizer and was arrested in Atlanta the following year, charged with promoting ‘insurrection,’ and sentenced to twenty years of hard labor. Herndon’s case, handled by the Communist-controlled International Labor Defense (ILD), drew considerable publicity, and appeals would go all the way to the Supreme Court, which invalidated the Georgia insurrection law in 1937.” Who benefited from Herndon’s involvement that led to time in jail? Did he find “interracial unionism” there? Isserman’s Sources Are Unreliable. That Hasn’t Stopped Widespread Praise. In my book, I refuted a similar presentation by Howard Zinn, who quotes from a 1937 publication put out by the International Labor Defense and League for Struggle for Negro Rights about how Herndon complained about how passages from the Communist literature that he possessed were read to the jury and about how he was asked, “’Did I believe in the demand for the self-determination of the Black Belt?’” The Black Belt was to be carved out of 11 Southern states, and as Schuyler pointed out in the NAACP’s Crisis, was intended to spark a civil war — the strategy by which communists came to power worldwide. (Isserman mentions the Black Belt on page 114, but only to quote Mark Solomon who claims that the issue “‘elevated the Black movement to an elevated position in the Leninist pantheon.’”) (READ MORE: The Spectacle Ep. 132: Venezuelan Fraud Is A Cautionary Tale For Americans) Herndon was actually recruited in Cincinnati and brought to Atlanta to lead marches that were intended to provoke violence and police “suppression.” Schuyler recounted in his 1966 autobiography, Black and Conservative, that “A Greenwich Village Communist woman” had attempted to recruit him for the same purpose. But he had “laughed aloud. So they got Herndon; he carried out his Red assignment, and he was promptly nabbed, jugged, tried and sentenced to the Georgia chain gang; then released on bail. Soon the Communists were parading him around the country at mass meetings that proved very lucrative.” Earl Ofari Hutchinson, too, wrote that Herndon was seen as just “another martyr,” to give “the Party greater visibility and stature among blacks.” Indeed, Herndon seemed to be naïve and compliant — just the kind of black man Communists were looking for. Browder, when being interviewed by Theodore Draper, called Herndon a “good boy” — although not a good Communist. Herndon did see the truth about Communism. By the end of the 1940s, he had returned to the Midwest to lead a bourgeois life as a salesman. Again, Isserman’s sources are unreliable: Herndon’s 1937 autobiography (written while he was still in prison); Black Liberation/Red Scare: Ben Davis and the Communist Party by Gerald Horne, an admitted communist-sympathizing activist-scholar; and, again, Gilmore. Far from being friends of blacks, Communists were their exploiters; as Schuyler learned from interviewing a black former Communist Party member, when it came to crunch times, blacks were the first to be fired by the Communists. The other group that Communists allegedly advocated for were workers. But while Communists and progressives may not have liked the Taft-Hartley Act, Schuyler did, for it opened up unions to black membership. As indicated in an article he wrote for the Guardian, Isserman seemed to have a certain group in mind: American communists in the 20th century included in their ranks people of talent, vision, and genuine idealism. Their tragedy lay in their willingness to subvert their own best instincts in their devotion to a flawed and irrelevant historical model, the Bolshevik revolution and the Soviet state. And in doing so, they helped set back for generations the opportunities for the emergence of a genuinely American left. May the new generation emerging on the left avoid their mistakes. Similarly, Steven Mintz at Inside Higher Ed wrote that Reds “should be required reading for today’s leftwing activists.” Students and casual readers of Reds will be left in the dark about those like Meyer and Schuyler who saw the fundamental flaws of Communism (and progressivism) and went back to American founding principles. Unfortunately, no balance in academia or publishing would allow readers such a perspective. George Schuyler and the other black anti-Communists have been memory-holed, thanks to generations of Communist-sympathizing academics and publishers. Mary Grabar, a resident fellow at the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization, began her research on George Schuyler there in 2011 and continues to search for a publisher for her biography of him. She is the author of Debunking Howard Zinn: Exposing the Fake History That Turned a Generation against America, Debunking The 1619 Project: Exposing the Plan to Divide America, and the forthcoming Debunking FDR: The Man and the Myths. The post Black Anti-Communists Have Been Memory–Holed appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 58938 out of 101098
  • 58934
  • 58935
  • 58936
  • 58937
  • 58938
  • 58939
  • 58940
  • 58941
  • 58942
  • 58943
  • 58944
  • 58945
  • 58946
  • 58947
  • 58948
  • 58949
  • 58950
  • 58951
  • 58952
  • 58953
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund