Left-Facing Roof

[level_head]

Because Dylann Roof was decidedly leftist in his thinking (manifesto here), he is being blamed upon conservatives. Leftists, following Marx and explicitly advocated by Marxist “critical theory,” view everything in terms of race. They are so far lost in this mindset that they strongly believe, against all evidence, that Constitutional conservatives

Comments

[ext_1399643]

I took the time to scan some of Dylann Roof’s writings. They don't sound like the writings of someone who is crazy, just wrong. Someone was taking all those pictures of him. I wonder if that is the author.

Understandably, there is a certain fascination with murderous characters such as Roof, but I don’t seem to be subject to it. However, I suppose now that the corporate news media has grown so bold in its selective reporting we no longer have a choice. We have to know and report the misrepresentations.

Thanks.

[level_head]

This horrific murder, against people convinced not to be able to defend themselves, is being used as a weapon against America. The Pope is being used as a weapon, too - not just the global warming bandwagon jumping, but his statement that anyone who makes or invests in weapons can no longer call themselves Christian.

And yet it seems that the Vatican has invested in weapons for the Pope's guards. He strikes me as more "elite socialist" than "inspirational religious leader" - though the Left finally has a Pope that gives them hope.

They adore the fact that the Pope considers the US Constitution's and Declaration's notions of God-given rights to be very wrong, and a denial of Americans' duty to social justice and the state. As his spokesman put it:This doctrine not only puts individual rights on a pedestal above all others but also actively denies any claim by society to hold individuals to account for their behavior toward others, other than to respect their liberty. In today’s America, the very idea of virtue has been privatized,

[deckardcanine]

In a way, that's actually very conservative: The Church was most powerful back when humanism trumped individualism.

[level_head]

But it is "conservative" in an old-world sense, which is pretty much the opposite of what the term means in America. Here, we are trying to conserve the break from the old world and the triumph of a limited, constrained government created at the consent of the governed.

The opposite of monarchies ... and the Catholic Church of the time.

===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

[prester_scott]

I don't buy this. Yes, racists gravitate toward collectivist and authoritarian thinking, so they would be better classified as socialists i.e. the Left, than as libertarians i.e. the Right. But when I read that manifesto I don't see a liberal Democrat any more than a conservative Republican. He's a White Nationalist, albeit an unorthodox one. He says so.

The Left will try to pin this crime on the Right because propaganda, and beneath that, nihilism, is the very air they breathe. But it is not appropriate for the Right, committed to truth, to lie in its service. I don't like the whole "The Democrat Party was pro-slavery and started the KKK" meme, because although that is historical fact (or nearly...I could be wrong, but I doubt the Democrat Party formally instituted the Klan), it is irrelevant 150 years later -- plus, not required in order to show the modern Left is friendly to racists -- plus it's ineffective and thus pointless. Painting Roof in the colors of our political enemies is likewise.

[level_head]

Well, does the (paraphrased) "I hate America" "everything is race" "kill the Jewish identity" "my race is the most important thing in my life" not sound like a group on one side of the political debate in particular?

The only reason that the left thinks that conservatives are all racists is that they've been telling themselves this, on the news, on radio, on all their social media, for years.

The new current story seems to be that this cretin was "radicalized" by seeing the Confederate flag. From his own writings, he was radicalized in the aftermath of the Zimmerman/Martin case, and evidently went looking at Confederate memorabilia some time after that (along with Rhodesian and South African and other symbols that meant "racism" to his new-found sensitivity).

If I have something wrong here, please point it out; I will fix it. But you have implied that my post here is an "inappropriate" attempt "to like in [the] service" of "propaganda" and you quoted arguments that I did not make.

My intent was to tell the truth in an effort

[prester_scott]

Well, does the (paraphrased) "I hate America" "everything is race" "kill the Jewish identity" "my race is the most important thing in my life" not sound like a group on one side of the political debate in particular?Maybe, maybe not. Briefly stated, just because many Leftists are racist does not mean all racists are Leftists. That is unless you want to widen the net of "Leftist" so far that it encompasses groups that are in no way political allies with one another. I very much doubt the people hanging out on Stormfront are loyal Democrats

[richardf8]

I quite agree with Prester_Scott. Painting Roof as a Liberal makes no more sense than painting him as a Conservative

[prester_scott]

Their declarations that Roof is forgiven by them and by God, and their invitation to him to repent are symptomatic of that universalism I spoke of before. It is a theology that deprives God of the right to fulfill His role as Judge of all that lives.

This is way off base. Universalism doesn't require repentance of anyone -- all are simply accepted. I suspect what you mean is that the representatives of this church offered forgiveness to Roof seemingly without seriously appreciating the depth of his sin and the seriousness of divine judgment.

You may be right, but this doesn't make them Leftists, any more than being racist makes Roof a Leftist.

[level_head]

It strikes me as incongruous that the group that specifically favors individual rights and limited government, and famously "just wants to be left alone," would be the progenitors of a condition where "the individual has no rights."

When the Left attacks gays/blacks/women because they are conservatives, conservatives defend them. Those conservatives do not attack leftists because they are gay or black or female, though they certainly attack leftists because of policy issues. Thus, conservatives give every evidence of being the "party of tolerance" while not actually being a political party per se.

I tend to use "progressive" rather than "liberal" for most American leftists, as that name they adopted for themselves more than a century ago, rather than usurping and reversing the sense of "liberal" that had previously been well understood.

How did you get to the idea of "enforced particularism"? The phrase is new to me.

===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

[john_j_enright]

Thanks for your post. I hadn't read much yet about this jerk's outlook so this was enlightening.

[level_head]

You could pick out parts and portray this fellow either way - but the "racist" part that is used to identify him as a "conservative" only works because conservatives are vilified as racists by the Left including the establishment media. That was what annoyed me about all of this.

===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

[anonymous]

This is probably the biggest load of nonsense I've ever read.

[witteafval]

It's no more nonsensical than you are courageous, Mr. Anonymous.