The Doctor must be behind it! I sense the vicious doctrine of egalitarianism, Hade!
Doctor Who, The Sun Makers 1977
In my last post on the seeming willingness of Democrats to condone behavior against their foes that they would condemn if experienced by their friends I noted how familiar the arguments of those on the Democrat left sounded to the points their party forefathers of the nineteenth century made when explaining why a particular group of people were unworthy of the protections of law and culture.
While some on the left may not believe it right to comparing the arguments and attitudes of an Alexander Stephens in his famous crossroads speech or the majority opinion in Scott vs Sandford to their own, the objection fails due to their quite understandable mistake of seeing these arguments purely in terms of race rather than in terms of the real game here: social structure.
One of the distinct differences that social structure or caste brings is status. How one reacts to different behaviors and what actions can be permitted is based upon where you exist in the structure.
Here are three current examples of this:
The people we cover, we move in their world, but it is their world. You can’t live like them. You’ll never keep up.
The Paper 1994
Last Sunday David Gregory, while hosting NBC’s Meet the Press was interviewing Wayne LaPierre of the NRA held up a 12 shot magazine clip during a confrontational moment of the interview.
Meet the Press is shot in DC and these items are strictly banned with a stiff penalty for possession. NBC made it a point to ask permission of the DC police to bring in the studio, and the DC police refused yet Meet the Press and David Gregory felt unrestrained by this refusal.
As Stacy McCain put it:
in full knowledge that possession of a 30-round magazine is illegal in D.C. — where Meet the Press is recorded — David Gregory and NBC willfully violated the law just so Gregory could dramatize his anti-Second Amendment lecture to the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre.
NBC acknowledged directly the validity of the law by their request to the DC police, their ex-post-facto to provide ATF cover for their actions implicitly acknowledges the legal violation.
Yet the argument of the press is not a question of facts it’s a question of intent. Howard Kurtz laughingly states:
I don’t think Gregory was planning to commit any crimes.
I beg to differ, Gregory planned to possess an item in a location where it was prohibited by law.
If it was you or I or anyone else who possessed said device, the law would take it’s course but David Gregory is one of the elites of the media profession (not some grubby member of the Breitbart Crowd like James O’Keefe) as Noah Rothman puts it:
If the post-Newtown debate over gun control has shown that the media is somewhat out of touch with average Americans, the Gregory episode has revealed that they do not see themselves as average Americans.
He is not an average American, he is a member of a different distinct class, Bill Jacobson on the WCRN Morning Show’s case and Glenn Reynolds arguments not withstanding as far as the media is concerned David Gregory is a courtier to the king beyond these petty rules and laws that an O’Keefe, Jacobson or DaTechGuy must follow.
“I — I couldn’t take a blow, sir. I suppose I’ve been too long with gentlemen”
Among gentlemen a blow could be wiped out only in blood; among the lower orders a blow was something to be received without even a word.
C. S. Forester: Hornblower and the Hotspur 1962 p 301
Sen. Daniel Inouye, who represented Hawaii in congress since statehood, died this week at the age of 88. Inouye served with distinction during World War 2, losing an arm, his death meant that governor Neil Abercrombie had to appoint a new senator for the seat and selected Lt. Gov Brian Schatz who flew back to the Washington with President Obama to be sworn in as Senator.
Not three weeks earlier Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina announced his upcoming resignation. Governor Nikki Haley in response appointed newly re-elected GOP congressman Tim Scott to the Senate seat. Scott will be the only African American member of the United States Senate and the first Black Senator from the south since 1881.
Yet while the appointment of a black American to the Senate by a female Republican governor of color has elicited responses like this…
MSNBC: Tim Scott, don’t be a token senator
Black Voices News: No reason to celebrate Tim Scott
The NYT: The Puzzle of Black Republicans
…the appointment of Brian Schatz a White Male to the Senate over Rep Colleen Hanabusa by another white Male to replace the longest serving minority in the Senate in US history has not produced a murmur of objection by the MSM.
To supporters of the GOP on the right this contrast might seem unjust but for the media and left Mr. Schatz’s and Mr. Abercrombie status, established by their political persuasion, provides the necessary imprimatur for their choices. That status means their actions are unworthy of complaint while the critique of Mr. Scott & Mrs. Haley, they are to be received without even a word.
Is that you reading Kizzy?
I follow several people of the left, some that I have met, some that I haven’t and some simply because the mood struck me. One of these people is a lady by the name of Reda St. Cyr.
I know nothing about Reda than what I’ve seen on twitter and what is in the description above. As she lives in Nevada that is unlikely to change. We’ve occasionally had disagreements over the NRA, over show ID to vote and other issues over twitter, but I know absolutely nothing else about her.
Yesterday we tweeting concerning Guns & the NRA when a subject that is a pet peeve of mine came up, the slaughter of inner city blacks that is ignored by the media and by those who march. At the end of the conversation she tweeted something I found telling:
It is the confusion that is of note here. I’m sure Ms. St. Cyr is a nice and reasonable woman and is thought so in her community but like Q on WCRN who sees the Tea Party as totalitarian see the GOP as a force for wrong. She, unlike Q, can not wrap her head around the idea that a seemingly nice fellow could be a Republican, and even stranger that such a fellow could make a public argument to support GOP or NRA beliefs. It’s a source of expletive generating confusion. Why it’s as unbelievable as an illiterate reading scripture.
All of these examples, point to a different caste, a caste that lives under a different set of laws then beneath them, a caste where behaviors are not to be questioned, a caste that reacts with amazement when a member of a lower order displays traits that they would expect from their fellows.
In short this is Feudalism, and they are the lords…well almost. as I’ll explain later.
P.S. I have an emergency bleg up to cover some expenses (oil), details are here, any help would be most appreciated.