by J.B. Shurk, American Thinker: The more I see of Tim Walz, the more I realize he’s just a fatter, whiter version of Kamala.  They both laugh at inappropriate times.  They both say weird things.  They both yearn for a communist America.  They’re both on the wrong side of the IQ bell curve.  If we lived in a society that […]

from Judge Napolitano: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

  Caste paintings emerged as a product of the complex social and racial hierarchies among European, Indigenous, and Black inhabitants of the Americas following colonization. These cuadros de castas were an attempt to impose racial and socioeconomic categories on Mexico’s increasingly heterogeneous society. Casta paintings highlighted the growing dominance of mestizos—people of mixed Spanish and Indigenous ancestry—in a society where Whiteness was symbolically and practically linked to social mobility. While casta paintings ultimately fell out of fashion, the legacy of mestizaje has important implications for current debates about race, culture, and identity.   Limpieza de Sangre: Spanish Racism in the New World  An anonymous casta painting featuring a list of sixteen castes, 18th-century Mexico, Museo Nacional del Virreinato. Source: Mexico’s National Institute of Anthropology and History.   When the Spanish colonized the Americas, they divided society into two social classes: nobility and everyone else. Indeed, the introduction of hierarchical power structures is Spain’s most enduring legacy in the region. In the Americas, Spanish limpieza de sangre—blood purity, or Whiteness—became the defining characteristic of the aristocracy.   This supremacist power structure was recorded by German natural scientist Alexander von Humboldt towards the end of the colonial period. Of his travels in the New World, Humboldt wrote, “Any White person, although he rides his horse barefoot, imagines himself to be of the nobility of the country.” Accordingly, Indigenous and Black communities were relegated to the status of plebeians.   According to Claudio Lomnitz-Adler, the imposition of racialized social frameworks was not a Spanish invention exclusive to the Americas—rather, it represented a transposed European ideology of blood purity, where an absence of Jewish or Muslim blood defined a Christian’s value and role within Spain’s hierarchical society. In other words, it was an ideological continuation of the Spanish Inquisition in colonial Mexico. By tying race to class, the Spanish colonial government enforced its social power and exercised full control over access to resources, rights, and socioeconomic opportunities in the Americas.   Defining Mestizaje, Categorizing Race From Spaniard and ‘Return Backwards’, ‘Hold Yourself Suspended in Mid Air’ (De español y torna atrás, tente en el aire), Juan Patricio Morlete Ruiz, 1760, Source: Los Angeles Co. Museum of Art.   Around the time of the Mexican War of Independence, a large group of racially mixed people emerged in Mexico—the result of increased intermarriage among the region’s three racial groups. By the end of the 18th century, approximately a quarter of Mexico’s population was made up of people with mixed ancestry. In response, Spaniards and criollos (Spaniards born in the Americas) created castas to distinguish themselves from other communities based on Whiteness.   The increasingly heterogeneous characteristics of 18th-century Mexico challenged Spanish beliefs about blood purity and power, leading the aristocracy to create exaggeratedly complex castas designations to categorize human racial diversity. In addition to terms like mestizo (Spanish-Indigenous), mulato (Spanish-Black), and zambo (Black-Indigenous), Mexico’s racial lexicon also included terms alluding to multi-generational mixing and ambiguity—for example, the racial category no te entiendo (I don’t understand you). By the end of the 18th century, racial taxonomies listing between fourteen and twenty mixtures were commonplace.   According to historians like William Taylor and María Elisa Velázquez, the concept of race in 18th-century Mexico extended beyond skin color to include socio-economic status, culture, and family relationships. Despite Spanish ideas about blood purity as a prerequisite for power, many White elites with Indigenous ancestry nonetheless maintained their high socioeconomic status. As such, the European push to visualize and categorize racial stratification can be understood as an attempt to justify colonial beliefs about power and control in an increasingly mixed society—albeit in ways that were fundamentally incompatible with reality.   Castas and Race in the European Imaginary From Spaniard and Morisca, Albino Girl (De español y morisca, albina), by Miguel Cabrera, 1763. Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.     In addition to maintaining hierarchies of power, the Spanish obsession with the impossible task of classifying racial mixing represents mainstream European thought and its interest in categorization based on observation. Prior to the conquest of the Americas, Western ideas about who inhabited the world’s faraway lands mostly revolved around monsters, pygmies, and mythological creatures. In the wake of the colonial period, European fascination with the characteristics of people, flora, and fauna in the New World drove demand for information and materials about different castas and their customs. As a result, casta paintings from Mexico became popular imported artifacts in the galleries and halls of European nobility.   The first casta paintings to arrive in Spain depicted the exoticism and natural abundance of the Americas—both common themes in the European imagination. Concerned with how they were perceived abroad, the authors of many early examples of casta paintings took great care to fill their works with details conveying the colony’s immense wealth. Clothing held particular significance for early casta painters, who chose to depict nearly all racial groups in luxurious dress—regardless of their socioeconomic status. This desire to emphasize wealth and abundance in the colonies represented the Mexican aristocracy’s need to negotiate with the European imaginary, as opposed to Mexican society itself.   In contrast to early examples, casta paintings produced after 1750 deprioritized depictions of colonial wealth across all sectors of society. Instead, later series used clothing to differentiate between socioeconomic classes, likely reflecting the Mexican elite’s concern with maintaining stratified power hierarchies in an increasingly heterogeneous society. Given that a person’s status and access to resources were determined by their race, increased racial mixing threatened to overrun colonial power structures. As a result, post-1750 casta paintings used clothes to connect race with socioeconomic status, representing a shift towards the prioritization of the Mexican aristocratic gaze over European perceptions.   Scientific Racism in 18th-Century Mexico: Limits & Implications From Spaniard and Mulatta, Morisca (De español y de mulata, morisca), attributed to José de Ibarra, 1730. Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.   The terminologies and depictions that emerged from the casta system in the mid-17th century were reflections of the basic colonial principle that Spanish or White blood was superior. In the European worldview, categorization was necessary to emphasize White supremacy over Black and Indigenous peoples—viewed as regressed versions of human development. Known as scientific racism, this strategy sought to establish a link between a person’s biology and their socioeconomic status. Nevertheless, changing demographics in the Americas made it increasingly difficult to assign status solely based on race.   In 18th-century Mexico, racial mixing and resulting shifts in wealth distribution blurred the boundaries of a society previously stratified according to race. Increasingly, individuals could transition from one racial or social category to another. Families from previously low-ranking racial classes began to accumulate significant wealth, entering elite society through the purchase of certificates of legal Whiteness known as gracias al sacar. By the end of the 18th century, Spanish blood was no longer an exclusive guarantee of superior social standing.   Unsurprisingly, elite members of 18th-century Mexican society frequently manipulated racial identities for pragmatic reasons. For example, higher-status individuals with mixed racial backgrounds often chose to emphasize their distant Indigenous ancestry to evade tribute payments, using symbols like clothing, hairstyle, and language to bolster their claims of Indigeneity. On the other hand, some Black people adopted Indigenous or Spanish customs and identity markers to distance themselves from their African ancestry and elevate their social status.   Ultimately, the erosion of race-based socioeconomic indicators generated significant anxiety among Mexico’s White elites, who feared losing control of the population and their privileged position in society.   From Mestizaje to La Raza Cósmica: Latinx Identity in the 21st Century Daniela Lopez Carreto leads her classmates through the Sinte, a dance originating in Guinea, West Africa. Image by Jonathan Custodio. Mexico, 2018. Source: Pulitzer Center.     The emergence of casta paintings can be understood as a visual manifestation of aristocratic anxiety about loss of power and control—an attempt to avoid the cognitive dissonance of European beliefs about race while creating order out of an increasingly diverse society.   As mixed-raced people increasingly gained power in 18th-century Mexico, White Spaniards and criollos alike sought to remind both the Spanish Crown and Mexican society that the rules still applied. Further, by placing Spaniards at the top of stratified social categories, they sought to reinforce the supremacy of Whiteness and normalize social hierarchies as part of the natural order of things.   While the casta paintings and their corresponding categories eventually fell out of mainstream use, they left an enduring legacy that continues to influence sociopolitical and cultural dynamics in the present day. The concept of mestizaje or racial mixing, which frames Latinx identity as a blend of European, African, and Indigenous racial and ethnic groups, is commonly used to describe Latin American society in the 21st century.   For instance, Mexican philosopher Vasconcelos incorporated mestizaje into his famous 1925 essay La Raza Cósmica (The Cosmic Race), in which he argued that a new race would emerge in the wake of European colonization. This new race, according to Vasconcelos, would one day build a new civilization known as Universópolis. During a speech to the National Council of La Raza in 2008, Senator Barack Obama invoked la raza cósmica, calling it “a term big enough to embrace the notion that we are all a part of a greater community.”   Afrocolombian drummers and singers participate in a rueda in San Basilio de Palenque. Colombia, 2008. Source: UNESCO.   However, concepts like mestizaje and la raza cósmica have been heavily criticized by several Indigenous and Black activists from Mexico and other parts of the Americas. These activists point to an enduring legacy of European hegemony that fails to acknowledge the preservation and resilience of unique Afro-Latino and Indigenous identities.   According to activist and educator Dash Harris, appeals to the value of one race emerging from a geographic region made up of more than 20 nation-states encompassing hundreds of ethnolinguistic identities are impractical and inevitably center Whiteness at the expense of other racial categories.   Harris points to language and policies enacted at the political level to “improve the race” as dangerous modern-day manifestations of the casta legacy, where Indigenous identities are erased and “Black identity is collateral damage in White Latin American nation-building.” For Harris and other activists, acknowledgement of the diversity and resilience of Black and Indigenous cultures in the Americas is long overdue.   The Legacy of the Cuadros de Castas   A casta painting depicting a ‘sambo’ child, product of a relationship between a Black man and mixed-race woman, attributed to Cristóbal Lorenzo for the Museo Nacional de Antropología in Madrid, 1771-1776. Source: ResearchGate.   In the present day, Mexico’s population reflects its long history of settler-colonialism, displacement, and complex racial politics. While casta paintings fell out of style long ago, the legacy of mestizaje continues to impact discussions by politicians and philosophers about who and what kind of citizens belong in the State.   The push to organize society according to racial hierarchies defined by proximity to Whiteness remains deeply rooted in the racist anxieties of Spanish and criollo elites. Nonetheless, Black and Indigenous communities continue to disrupt Euro-centric frameworks of power and control by defining themselves outside of terms like mestizo or Latino and emphasizing diversity over hierarchical assimilation.

Watch a deer casually snack on a snake in a surprising encounter captured on video! Continue reading…

Vice President Kamala Harris' running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, ignited volcanic outrage after being seen aggressively yanking his disabled son's hand while parading him on stage at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. A chilling viral video clip shows Walz violently pulling the hand of 17-year-old Gus as...

Deranged people, in and out of government, have created an unsustainable new normal. Thanks to incessant fear-mongering and diabolical hatred from the Democrat-dominated establishment, a new cerebral pathology has taken hold. As a result, former President Donald Trump must remain cognizant of lunatics who threaten him and the people around...

Dear “Evangelicals for Harris,” who have become drones, emotionally invested in Kamala’s campaign: I understand that some politicians—ex-Republicans (or soon-to-be-ex) like Adam Kinzinger and Geoff Duncan—really believe that the best path foward for the GOP is to side with Democrats for a cycle or two. These people have no future in the GOP, despite the fact that Duncan wrote a book called “GOP 2.0”. I read it: a repetitive, turgid tale filled with prescriptive self-righteousness, written by man whose epiphany struck him from his one ride in The Beast with then-President Trump. Duncan declined to run again for his post as Lt. Governor of Georgia, while Gov. Brian Kemp ably led the state, while managing to stand against Trump at the same time. To Mr. Duncan, I say: there’s value in doing your job versus bloviating. It’s David French’s job to bloviate—a bit more cogently—for the New York Times and other outlets. French was doing his job when he said it’s time to vote for Kamala Harris to save conservatism. He’s not wrong that the Republican Party, as it is right now, is no vehicle for the advancement of conservative values. In fact, I’d say the GOP is dead, if the GOP was indeed a living thing. Political parties are not living things—a better analogy is that they are edifices, or small cities with buildings of varying size and purpose, all grouped together and linked by proximity, funding, and population of people who use them. The GOP, as it stands, has been taken over by MAGAtown. Its biggest skyscrapers are run-down shambles featuring gilded penthouses, all emblazoned with the name “TRUMP” at the top. It will take more than a splash of fresh paint and some spackle to repair the GOP. So here’s what I’m seeing. Conservatives who noticed the new management of the GOP and fled found themselves outside any organization, without a city, so to speak. The only thing they knew is that MAGAtown, spread wide and far, would be like the alternate future in “Back to the Future Part II” where Biff Tannen’s vision was realized; in fact, writer Bob Gale explicitly based that on Donald Trump in 1989 (dude’s a prophet, even with the Cubbies, but not flying cars). A number of conservatives who want a city not welcoming to thugs and homeless freaks, gamblers and self-promoters, went wandering, and finding no rest, settled on the only place with the lights on: Democrats who at least offered a jug of water to parched tongues, rightly pointing at MAGAtown and calling it “weird.” Now, about “weird.” Let me go back to my original point. I know who and what Donald Trump is. I’ve written well in excess of 100,000 words about Trump. I won’t bore you with another recap. He’s Biff, okay? It’s all true. But he’s built a very bright, gaudy city that’s attractive to people who see progressive, urban, elitist American liberalism for what it is. The American progressive movement at its core is statism: the belief that a citizen’s primary responsibility is first to the state—the government, represented by federal primacy—next to the community (represented by very small but loud racial and identity groups like trangenders), and last to family. Of course, actual liberals—the ones privileged enough—don’t live this way at all. They put their family first, then their neighborhood (NIMBY, anyone?), then their principles, which they can afford to have. The single mother, struggling to feed her kids, is a wonderful trope, but the mom herself doesn’t care who pays her grocery bills: the church, a charity, or the government—as long as she feeds her kids. There’s also the drug addict whose only desire is to get the next fix. There’s the homeless, mentally ill person who rejects all societal norms. It’s easy for rich, elitist, bicoastal liberals to put all these “freedoms” on a pedestal and treat them equally, because they can generally live on a different plane of existence from them. In general, everyone lives for their own self-interest, apart from grace, charity and the noble acts of conscience flowing from good souls. So it’s fine for politically homeless conservatives to believe that the GOP is derilect and decrepit, and the Democrats at least have something functional. Fine, let them vote for Kamala. But they shouldn’t enjoy it. But what I’m seeing is an emotional investment in Kamala Harris and her campaign from many of these conservatives, and that’s dangerous. Blighted neighborhoods, you see, are still populated with people who live in them. The GOP is a monster of blight, taken over by slumlords and demagogues—some are cultists—who require their tenants to worship their masters. But even blighted neighborhoods can be revived, and the residents deserve the dignity and respect humans owe to each other. The accounts online who mock Tim Walz’s eighteen-year-old son Gus for his emotional outburst on Wednesday night are truly awful, but many (most?) of them are bots, run by malicious AIs owned by enemies of America. The ones who are real people are either shrill seekers of relevance and fame (Ann Coulter, anyone?) or gross gargoyles who spend too much time cheering on the Tate brothers (who are sexual predators—no links, Google it if you care to but I recommend against it). It’s easy to get angry at these online trolls, but keep in mind, most MAGA supporters are not very-online. They might get their news from Newsmax; they might indulge in Alex Jones (neither are healthy news diets), but they are regular people, and your physical neighbors. The Golden Rule is to treat others the way you want to be treated. The Biblical command is to love your neighbor as you love yourself. Even the progressive core belief wants you to invest in your “village.” Politically, we inhabit different villages, even different cities. I believe, because the GOP is dysfunctional and bereft of its most effective managers, that Donald Trump will lose in November, and Kamala Harris will win. The Democrats just have the organizational and managerial advantage this time, and unless events overwhelm, they’ll prevail in the election. But we, the conservatives who used to inhabit the GOP, will still be here after Harris takes office, and we will have to live with our MAGA neighbors. Our police officers, our sheriffs, our mayors, city council members, business owners, retirees, pastors, elders—all of them will still be here. Some of them went to the January 6th “Stop the Steal” rally. Some of them will believe election denier conspiracies this year. Some of them will still listen to conspiracists online and on television. There are two dangers of emotionally investing in the Harris campaign. The first is that this leads to a desire to punish the GOP for being taken over by MAGA. The desire is expressed in voting “D” all the way down, and potentially handing both houses of Congress to Democrats along with the White House. Don’t be surprised when Democrats use this to enact all the things they have promised, which are not conservative values. When the pregnancy crisis center you support with your donations and time is made illegal, and those who continue to work there are subject to prosecution or lawsuits, that’s the city the Democrats are building. When the next health crisis occurs, and your churches are censored or prohibited from meeting, and your pastor’s sermons are examined by government officials for “misinformation,” that’s the city the Democrats are building. When your neighbors are investigated and some of them cancelled, their First Amendment rights trampled (and the ACLU cheering it on), that’s the city the Democrats are building. You don’t want to live there, do you? Handing over the federal government, and the states, to one-party rule is never a good thing. Under Barack Obama, nearly 1,000 state legislature seats moved to Republican. Now look at what that accomplished: it enabled many states to support the MAGAtown takeover, and make the GOP into a blighted, decrepit vision of Biff Tannen’s Pleasure Palace. One-party takeovers are never a good idea, even if the parties themselves live for that dog-catches-car fantasy. Getting emotionally swamed into the Harris campaign can lead to a top-to-bottom D takeover that will take a generation to unwind. Also, there’s the Jacobin factor. Those who still live in MAGAtown might be wrong to you, but they live there because they see no better, more attractive place to live. They might not have the financial, educational, or cultural wherewithall—I’ll say the word, privilege—that you have. They may not see the world the way you see it, but that doesn’t make them worthy of punishment. The city the Democrats are building will encourage you to pursue vengeance against your neighbor. The unity Kamala Harris seeks is not the Golden Rule. It’s the statist progressive vision favoring the privileged. It’s easy for people with law degrees, paid mortgages, and well-adjusted kids living in two-parent homes, stocked fridges and reliable cars to tell folks how evil conservatives who support Trump are. It’s easy to use the powers of the state to criminalize supporting the actual criminal (Trump is a convict, officially). The Biden administration did not have to order the FBI to pursue over 1,000 cases against January 6th protestors. Yes, go after the leaders, but I’d have pardoned the rest. That’s unity, that’s forgiveness. The division sowed in the last four years—again, by both sides here, along with the online attacks from our adversaries—makes it dangerous to get emotionally invested and swarmed around the Harris campaign. The desire to become a Jacobin, a useful drone of vengeance, against your own neighbors and family, exhibiting a smug righteousness, doesn’t help to rebuild the GOP. It doesn’t help to build a political city or party that promotes values conservatives believe in. It does destroy the hope of revival, post-MAGA. It plants the seeds of suspicion, paranoia, and hatred. It ignites the flames of feuds that will continue for a generation or more. It takes hammer and tongs to a vision of conservatism that echoes George Washington’s scripture quotation: “but they shall all sit under their own vines and under their own fig trees, and no one shall make them afraid.” Rabid progressives who have pushed the Democrats toward a statist vision, culminating in Kamala Harris, who likely will be our next president, make me very afraid. MAGA makes me afraid too, but in a different way. Moving out of the MAGA city and settling into the Democrats’ city, getting comfortable and emotionally invested in their victory, makes me afraid that those who dwell there too long, like Lot in Sodom, might not want to leave. Don’t swarm around Kamala. Don’t cheer her victory. If you must, hold your nose and cast your vote. My brother said that this, and all that will follow, is “the balloon payment for the House of Trump.” Perhaps it is, and perhaps the GOP deserves to inherit the broken windows and black mold-infested empty skyscrapers it enabled. But I don’t intend to cheer when the lights go out in MAGAtown. Those are my people who will live there in darkness. Before you go after the Republicans who refused to “cross over,” keep in mind that these are the people who will be first with a shovel to rebuild. Don’t be a Jacobin. Don’t dwell in Sodom. Don’t gloat. Love your MAGA neighbor, even when Harris wins. Signed: Not Voting for Harris, Steve Follow Steve on Twitter @stevengberman. The First TV contributor network is a place for vibrant thought and ideas. Opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of The First or The First TV. We want to foster dialogue, create conversation, and debate ideas. See something you like or don’t like? Reach out to the author or to us at ideas@thefirsttv.com.