Though some are starting to wake up to the on-going dictatorship of the Black Lives Matter proletariat on the streets and the structural Marxism inherent to its cause, it seems most of America still can’t cave fast enough to the revolutionary narrative upon which its “burn it down” anti-Americanism is premised.
This narrative isn’t just being normalized in our schools and promoted by the media, professional sports, and politicians on the left and the right, it’s being codified into law — including but not limited to “criminal justice reform” legislation. The pending anti-lynching bill (S.3178) is no exception.
When I first heard about the U.S. Senate bill entitled Justice for Victims of Lynching Act (JVLA) — the House version can be found here — I thought Washington had finally given us cause for celebration. But what took them so long? What changed?
Progressives (mostly Democrats) still holding to the tenets of their late Revolution, flat-out refused at least 240 times since 1901 to pass any legislation mentioning “lynching.” And what exactly do they mean by lynching? Turns out there’s a lot more to it than the “awareness and proper recognition of the victims of lynching” that happened at the hands of the KKK.
The very first words of the bill read: “To amend title 18, United States Code, to specify lynching as a deprivation of civil rights, and for other purposes” (emphasis mine). Being that lynching is already a crime and at minimum attempted murder — therefore, already a deprivation of both individual rights and human/civil rights — the only possible reason for this bill to even exist is “for other purposes.” So, what are they?
Sec. 2 (13) of the JVLA: “Only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad.”
With that statement, the full-blown collectivism of “human rights” is being codified as part of the legislation — twice actually, as Sec. 2 (15) mentions it again. And the cost for this inclusion may be higher than we realize, as it was within the context of a “human rights crisis” that a UN Panel has determined that “Past injustices and crimes against African-Americans need to be addressed with reparatory justice” as a “matter of urgency.”
Sec. 2 (14) of the JVLA: “An apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged.”
Aside from the irony of progressives demanding America apologize for the sins of their own progressivism, what might this “new understanding” entail? Again, as we’ll soon see, it might encompass much more than you think.
Sec. 2 (16) of the JVLA: “The National Memorial for Peace and Justice, which opened to the public in Montgomery, Alabama, on April 26, 2018, is the Nation’s first memorial dedicated to the legacy of enslaved Black people, people terrorized by lynching, African Americans humiliated by racial segregation and Jim Crow, and people of color burdened with contemporary presumptions of guilt and police violence.”
This should come as no surprise as it originated from the Equal Justice Institute (EJI), the organization that opened both “The Legacy Museum: From Enslavement to Mass Incarceration” and “The National Memorial for Peace and Justice” specifically mentioned in the bill. The Equal Justice Institute is where we learn that “lynching reinforced a narrative of racial difference and a legacy of racial inequality that is readily apparent in our criminal justice system today.”
If this were actually true, it could only mean that our legal system as it exists today is still “readily” enforcing the white supremacist narrative of the KKK. It’s from EJI founder Bryan Stevenson that we learn the “ideology which set up white supremacy in America” was in the three-fifths clause of the Constitution.
While speaking on an Equal Justice Institute panel, Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow, spoke to the revolutionary ends this narrative and its “truth & reconciliation” are meant to achieve (video link here):
“…we can’t have reconciliation without truth…we have been unwilling to face the truth in this country…perhaps reconciliation isn’t possible without reparation. But…beyond truth beyond reconciliation even beyond reparations…this isn’t just the work of…improving this nation, this is the work of birthing a new nation….And as Brian Stevenson has eloquently stated, you know ‘slavery didn’t die it evolved.’ And part of the work that we have today is putting slavery, the mindset that birthed slavery, the political and economic forces that gave rise to slavery, allowing that to die…and participating in the revolutionary birth of a new nation.”
To which she adds (@24:00):
“Not only do I hope that we will continue to count those who were lynched, but we will demand a much better accounting of those who are being lynched in the modern age by our police departments and by our law enforcement today.”
It doesn’t come much plainer than that. Truth, reconciliation, and even reparations are not the end; they merely mark the beginning of the end of America as founded and the beginning of the “revolutionary birth of a new nation” to take her place.
Under such a revolutionary narrative, what’s to prevent the “Actual or Perceived” aspect of this anti-lynching legislation from “perceiving” any and all enforcement of old America “white supremacist” laws, including the protection of private property, as a prosecutable lynching? The answer is “nothing.” And at that point, their revolution will have been won.
Nevertheless, the closer we get to election day, the more “conservatives” will be looking for an opportunity to jump on this revolutionary bandwagon to grab a handful of votes.
Joe Marshall was born and raised in the Finger Lakes Region of Upstate NY. He is a married father of two grown sons, an outdoorsman, a landscape contractor, a former stock car owner and driver, a certified 4H firearms instructor, and a retired New York State corrections officer.
Joe is the author of the book, Last Call for Liberty
