Speaker Pelosi – Enough is ENOUGH!

Bird of PreyThere comes the point where every person reaches their penultimate point.  They can take no more, stand no more, and allow no more abuses to be heaped upon them by others.  On 30 August 2021, when Speaker Pelosi (D), Speaker of the US House of Representatives, refused to show up, refused to recognize, and refused to participate in a moment of silence for the 13 service members lost in Afghanistan, my moment arrived.  I am thoroughly done, and I am here to describe what that means!

  1. I will not edit my diet to fit a “woke culture!”

CommitI love fried chicken, watermelon, BBQ ribs, and peanut butter and jelly sandwiches on white bread.  I have been eating this way my entire life; I will not change just because some dweeb is projecting their racism onto food.  Food cannot and should never be labeled as “racist.”  I love grits and fried eggs, with cheese and gravy, or biscuits and hashbrowns.  I am a huge fan of fried okra and pork.  I enjoy a bowl of hominy and honey with a bit of butter and cornbread.  Bring on the food, leave the politics on the porch!

  1. I will not disrespect every police officer just because some person gets shot.

Is there the potential possibility that a bad police officer could have slipped in and will abuse their power?  Absolutely, and it has been my displeasure to have met a couple of these abusive and detestable bastards in my time.  I call them out, just like I call out those who abuse their position in any other profession.  But, I am done with seeing every police officer branded as bad when a precinct somewhere else in the world makes a dumb call, makes a poor decision, or is Monday-Morning-Quarterbacked by a bunch of bureaucrats who never wore a badge.  I have met too many great and good police officers to see all of them slandered by the media and the politicians for the statistical anomalies that come with a demanding job and the political misfeasance that is part of the risks in their profession.Thin Blue Line

I will add another piece of important information to this list, fail to listen to a police officer and get shot; you have no sympathy from me, EVER!  A police officer demands to see your hands and has reason to believe their life is in danger; you need to listen and obey first, talk and spout stupidity later.  Acting on a police officer’s demands in executing their duties is called being a responsible citizen, the first job a person has to law and order in society.  As a citizen, you must listen to authority, even if you do not like that authority or disagree with that authority.  Hence, it is not the police officer’s fault if you refuse to do as instructed and get shot in the process.

  1. Rioters, Looters, Anarchists – You Are Terrorists, and I will treat you as such!

LICThere is no such thing as a violent protest.  You are either protesting (peacefully) after having obtained the proper permits and in accordance with the laws, or you are terrorists hell-bent on destroying society.  There is no middle ground, and I refuse to bend on this issue, regardless of the media’s claims!  When you begin looting, burning, acting violently, this is the time to call in the military.  The rules of engagement include returning violence equal to or greater than the violence shown to restore law and order: no police, military response, and open fire.  Law and order is the police’s job.  Terrorism is the military’s job, and those who survive receive a terrorist trial in a military tribunal.

  1. Consent of the Governed. Rejected!Patriotism

America is a Constitutional Republic (if we can keep it).  Speaker Pelosi, you have breached public peace and no longer deserve my consent to hold your title and office as Speaker of the US House of Representatives.  More to the point, until you are removed from office and held accountable for treason and other crimes, you are held in contempt and do not deserve any title.  Nancy, go home!  My consent to be governed has been withdrawn!  Take your president, the fraudulent and senile Joey and Jill, the useless Kamala, and your good buddy in the Senate Patty with you.  Fly commercial; I refuse you the right to use my taxpayer-funded transportation!

  1. Rights, freedoms, liberties all come with obligations and responsibilities!

Your “right to free speech” comes with moral obligations, responsibilities, and you are accountable for what you say.  The Supreme Court has made this clear in many a case law, and it remains incumbent upon the citizenry and the politicians to learn this lesson.  Screaming nonsense is not allowed, and a “college safe place” will not protect you from a genuine ass-whooping when behavior correction is needed.  Nancy, your vile and deprecating speech borders on treasonous and criminal as you have promoted violence on your political enemies, frankly that you have escaped the law is atrocious and needs rectification!  That you are third in line to become president means you are held to a higher standard, and that you have failed to live to that standard reflects poorly upon yourself, your party, and this country!  Well, as a citizen of this country, I reject you!The Duty of Americans

I reject the “Gang of Five” who have followed maliciously in your footsteps and prospered under your pernicious tutelage.  You have poisoned enough minds and hearts during your Congressional career, and it is time for you to be held accountable for your crimes, audacity, and reprehensive behavior!  You have dodged the obligations and responsibilities of your office long enough.  Since you have gerrymandered your congressional district to guarantee re-election ad nauseam ad infinitum, it is time the citizens outside your community hold you accountable in front of a judge and jury.

Knowledge Check!Nancy, you sent the military to Afghanistan.  You continued to send the military to Afghanistan as political decisions.  You hold the blood of the slain, the sweat of the military sacrifice, and the tears of the families, and you cannot ever shake this responsibility!  For you to act in such a deplorable manner is cause for removal and public shaming, at a minimum.  But with your ego and arrogance, simple public shaming will not teach the lesson you need to learn.  Thus, Nancy, I hope to be there in person when a judge hands down a sentence of guilty, and pronounces your punishment of community service in distinctive clothing, wearing a sandwich board declaring your crimes, and watch you pull weeds on a chain gang, scrubbing graffiti, and picking trash.  Then, maybe, will the enormity of your crimes come home to you!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Bigotry or Racism – Low Expectations For Thee Produce Problems for We!

Angry Wet ChickenA headline on YouTube today discussing the bigotry of low expectations in public schools has me fuming.  Having written multiple times about how it is racist, immoral, unethical, and illegal to treat people differently based upon the poverty of their parents, and in doing so hinder the potential of a learner, is criminal child abuse of the worst kind!  Yet, what do we find in the news, all but daily; lower expectations based upon poverty, race, religion, handicap, and so much more because of the inferior minds of the teachers and school boards.

What is Bigotry?

Knowledge Check!Bigotry is being obstinate and intolerantly devoted to one’s own opinion and prejudices; of course, bigotry also classifies one as believing in the characteristics of a bigot, but that is another discussion entirely.  A teacher or school board member holding onto the myth that a student’s race or “economic classification” restrains that student’s potential is a bigoted method of thinking that should have been stomped out of public schools in the 1940s or earlier.  However, as this blog has recorded, the public schools in America have been purposefully designed to create dullards, anti-scholars, and functional illiterates since the early days of the 1900s, courtesy of John Dewey.

What is Racism?

Bobblehead DollRacism is the adherence to the fundamental belief that race is the single most important determinant of human traits and capacities, that racial differences produce inferior and superior races, and harmony among people can be achieved through racial ranking.  Essentially, racism takes bigotry and hones and focuses bigotry on racial differences as the sole determinant between people.  What is not said, not implied, and not discussed is that bigotry and racism are extensions of each other; thus, to call low expectations bigotry is to name those holding low-expectations racists nicely!

Why Does the Difference Matter?

From the article, “The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations… Through Mathematics Education,” on the Racial Equity Institute, LLC website, we find the following:

The phrase “the soft bigotry of low expectations” was coined by President George W. Bush in 2000 in a speech to the NAACP that marked the launching of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. Bush asserted discrimination is still a reality, even when it takes different forms. Instead of Jim Crow, there’s racial redlining and profiling. Instead of separate but equal, there is separate and forgotten” (George W. Bush’s Speech to the NAACP, 2000). After promising that his administration would enforce civil rights, Bush announced that he would be confronting “another form of bias: the soft bigotry of low expectations…” (George W. Bush’s Speech to the NAACP, 2000). He acknowledged that educational achievement gaps fall along socioeconomic and racial lines but evaded discussing any systemic causes of these gaps.”

Plato 2What are these systemic causes for gaps?  The answer is relatively easy, simple, and straightforward, and no single piece of legislation will fix the problem until the 800#-Gorilla is addressed.  The Public School system was intentionally designed to mentally abuse children, classifying their potential by race, religion, color, sex, gender, handicap, socioeconomic status, and every other line of distinction.  All in an attempt to bring about the socialist utopia dreamed up by John Dewey in the late 1890s.

President Bush’s speech argued that school achievement gaps produce discrimination as if how a school works in one part of town creates the gaps and failures in another part of town.  Thus stealing resources from one school to deliver to another school would fix the discrimination gaps.  This is a glorified wealth redistribution scheme, and it has failed miserably!  It refused to discuss the reality in schools that the teachers and the school boards have attained power based upon discriminating upon race, gender, sex, socioeconomic status, and the intentional child abuse of the students.Plato 3

President Bush failed to understand that raising the bar will require destroying more than a century of ingrained thinking and training of teachers to abuse students.  Eradicating the discrimination will demand the rejection and destruction of the school board models, the Federal Hold on education, and placing states back in charge of the education in their states even if it means that each state has its own model of education.Angry Grizzly Bear

Regardless, the main problem in America’s schools is not the gender, sex, socioeconomic status, religion, etc., of the students, but the bigoted and racist minds of the teachers and school boards who would hinder students’ potential by setting low expectations for academic achievement.  I have worked with students across America; they are worth more than their teachers claim, can do more than their teachers think, and possess innate abilities, skills, talents, and raw potential.  But, without high expectations to aim at, the students fail themselves and live lives more diminutive than their worth and value, thinking they are stupid, dyslexic, unable to learn, and more.  All because the teachers and school board members set low expectations, refused to challenge the students’ own beliefs, and failed to do their jobs!

cropped-bird-of-prey.jpgWhen a school board, principal, and teacher fails to do their job, they commit child abuse in the most heinous and deceitful manner, and this abuse must cease forthwith!  As a new school year opens, let us challenge these low expectations, these abhorrent standards for performance, and these Neolithic ideas that should have died with John Dewey!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 vs. Critical Race Theory – Which one is Racist?

Bobblehead DollWhen a government, teacher, business, etc., focus on race as the only issue, racial tensions will increase, and racial problems will abound.  Sort of like focusing on chronic pain makes the pain worse; focusing upon race produces racial issues.  Worse, imagined racial issues will create a reality where those issues are alive and well, for race is the only topic.

Of a truth, often spoken of in these articles, every race man can create to segregate humans into sub-categories, have experienced periods of ostracization, enslavement, racial hatred, and racial segregation.  As a person who identifies his race as AMERICAN and not a color, like a box of Crayolas, I have witnessed man’s inhumanity to man too often to care what race you choose to be.  I have met blonde hair/blue-eyed individuals who report their race as black, blacks saying they are white, adding any other color or racial denomination they desired. The same examples become apparent to others who care to look and listen, for the United Nations affirms that race is a choice and not a biological component of heritage.  When you have met your first Vietnamese-African-Anglo-American Indian, who practices Zen-Buddhism-Catholicism/Judaism, come find me, and we can talk about the racial, ethnic, and religious designations people choose!Andragogy - LEARN

Civil Rights Act of 1964

In 1964, Congress passed Public Law 88-352 (78 Stat. 241).  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.  Provisions of the civil rights act forbade discrimination based on sex and race in hiring, promoting, and firing.  The Act prohibited discrimination in public accommodations and federally funded programs.  It also strengthened the enforcement of voting rights and the desegregation of schools.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 continues to resonate in America. Passage of the Act ended the application of “Jim Crow” laws, which had been upheld by the Supreme Court in the 1896 case Plessy v. Ferguson.  The Court held that racial segregation purported to be “separate but equal” was constitutional.  Congress eventually expanded the Civil Rights Act to strengthen the enforcement of fundamental civil rights.Finest Hour

Effectively ending racial discrimination in America, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was approved by a more significant percentage of Republicans than Democrats.  Yet, the Democrats continue to claim they are the banner under which all voices are equal.  While I do not want this article to take on any partisan political banter, the facts are essential to the history of how America adopted the Civil Rights Acts into law.  As always, if you desire more information, feel free to check the links embedded.

Critical Race Theory (CRT)

QuestionHungarian philosopher Georg Lukacs, the neo-Marxist progenitor of critical race theory, once described Critical Theory as being “on the edge of an abyss, of nothingness, of absurdity.”  Critical theory is an approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture to reveal and challenge power structures—with origins in sociology and literary criticism, arguing that social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors.  Critical race theory is a philosophy that views everything in public and private life—from the government to business to art and anything in between—through the prism of racial identities.

The worldview is based on critical theory, which originated in Germany after World War I and combined the Marxist belief of an oppressed working class with an opaque description of relative truth.  The philosophy swept through universities in the US in the 20th century.  In the 1960s, theorists claimed American law was systemically oppressive, creating critical legal theory.  By the 1980s, theorists added race, giving us critical race theory.  One of the originators of critical race theory, Derrick Bell, wrote: “We use a number of different voices, but all recognize that the American social order is maintained and perpetuated by racial subordination.”quote-mans-inhumanity

According to Derrick Bell, this means that General George Washington was not a great leader; he was a privileged white boy.  That would make Frederick Douglass only capable because he was black. Turning Rosa Parks’ courageous stand for racial justice and equality into nothing but a gender card play.  When everything is subjugated to race, nothing else matters but race.

Racism, Racist, and Racial – The Story of Three Adjectives

Racism is a noun defined as “The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.”  “Discrimination or prejudice based on race.”  “The belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes.”  Racist is a proper adjective and is defined as “having, reflecting, or fostering the belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.”  Racial is also an adjective and is described as something “existing or occurring between races,” or “relating to or based upon race.”Content of their Character

Interestingly, racism is a noun, not an adjective, even though many desire racism to be an adjective.  The difference being that an adjective describes a noun, and a noun does not, and cannot, describe an action by a person, place, or thing.  Thus, you can have racist individuals, but racism is a noun; it cannot be expressed enough; every race in history has experienced periods of being the aggressor and the oppressed through race.  Worse, when discussing race, racial history, and racial descriptions, plasticity has evolved to continue to allow those desiring an excuse to use racial prejudice as a reason for their actions.

For example, when a store was robbed, the robber claimed that he only robbed the store because the owner was racist.  Intimating that if the owner had not been racist, the store would not have been robbed; not a very flattering or valid excuse for robbing a store, perpetuating violence, or acting in a manner behooving a terrorist.  Yet, this pattern of thinking is prevalent in many places in the world today.

quote-mans-inhumanity-2Digging a little deeper, how does anyone know the store owner was racist or not racist?  Just because an accusation is made does not a reality and truth reveal.  Having been slandered many times by people accusing me of being racist, I know the veracity of this question.  For example, in the US Navy, I was accused of being racist for not showing due consideration to a second-class petty officer speaking ebonics.  At the time, I had no idea what ebonics was, and since this petty officer only spoke ebonics on the ship, I had no idea what I was supposed to do differently.  But, the petty officer complained to the chief, the chief tore me a new one, and I was left confused and angry.

How can a person tell if something is racist?

Believe it or not, there is an easy test to check for racism.  Where is the focus?  Using the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Critical Race Theory, we can quickly tell which is racist by the focus or intent of the work.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was designed to end a focus upon race; CRT is designed to exploit race and focus solely upon race as the preeminent separating force in human relations.  Thus, CRT is racist, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not.  Don’t believe me; look closer at the purpose; CRT has race proudly mentioned in the name, whereas the Civil Rights Act of 1964 focuses on equality under the law of all people.

Knowledge Check!The Civil Rights Act of 1964 aims to place all people on equal legal footings.  CRT aims to rip equality under the law to shreds and put people on unequal footing based solely upon race.  Worse, since the UN has claimed that race is a choice and not a sub-human categorization mechanism, people can choose to adopt the race that is favored to their advantage when placed upon unequal footing under the law.  Thus, how does CRT purpose to halt people from choosing different races to suit their desires for more equal treatment?

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

NO MORE BS: Statehood for DC – A Total Waste of Time!

Angry Wet ChickenAnother legislative session, another brain-dead idea passed off as needed, fair, and necessary, and wholly without merit.  Gosh, I am fed up with the time wasted by both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.  Speaker Pelosi (D) is pontificating about the U.S. House passing (again) legislation to make the District of Columbia a state.  Except, Speaker Pelosi (D) never saw a liberal idea she didn’t immediately love, embrace, and wholeheartedly support, so nothing new in this news.

President Biden (no surprise here) backs the idea he has previously not supported as a Senator.  Color me shocked!  What did not surprise me was racist and belligerent commentary on the house floor during the debate.  It seems, every time someone with a (D) after their name can play the race card, the race card gets thrown down.  No objectivity, no specificity, no reason, logic, only plain emotion, malice, and stupidity!  Man, the use of the race card has gotten ridiculous.  Read Rep. Jones’s (D) comments, and feel free to laugh at the stupidity!  Plain ol’ public scorn should follow commentaries like the statements Rep. Jones (D) made, including mockery, shunning, and shame!

On the issue of race, the 2019 Census estimates 46% of D.C.’s residents identify as “Black,” and 46% identify as “White.”  Leaving a mere 8% of the population to fill all other ethnicities and races.  Yet, Rep. Jones (D) wants to make D.C. becoming a state a race issue.  Queue the mocking laughter and public shaming!Calvin & Hobbes - Irony Hurts

One of the issues brought up for making the District of Columbia a state was the amount of taxes they pay.  Personally, I laughed at this argument!  Still laughing; not sorry!  How long has the District of Columbia elected mayors who have done nothing but tax and spend; almost forever!  Taxation without representation is a dead issue when you elect tax and spenders into office.  As I was told as a kid, “You made your bed, now sleep in it!”  Think I might be wrong, understand the following:

No Republican has ever been elected mayor since D.C. home rule began in 1975. The DC Republicans have had no representation in the D.C. Council since Carol Schwartz left office in 2009. As of January 7, 2019, there are 30,001 registered voters affiliated with the Republican Party of the District of Columbia” [emphasis mine].

It appears to me, thou doth protest too much, and consequences hurt!  One-party rule is never a good idea, but the District of Columbia has embraced one-party everything and is suffering accordingly!  Please note, I am not claiming the Republicans could rule any better, but I am arguing that one-party rule is NEVER a good idea!

What is the issue?

Detective 4The District of Columbia keeps petitioning to become a state.  The U.S. Constitution provided for a federal district under the exclusive authority of the U.S. Congress; D.C. is therefore not a part of any U.S. state.  Since this is a U.S. Constitutional issue, it will require all 50-states to ratify a change to the U.S. Constitution, not simply the wasting of time and resources of the U.S. House of Representatives.  But, as they say on the Home Shopping Network, “There’s more.”  With 34 US States never having been made states properly, according to the US Constitution, and their lands remain under “Federal Government Control,” I do not see DC being a state that big of an issue!

The District of Columbia is a unique federal district of the U.S. The Government of the District of Columbia operates under Article One of the United States Constitution and the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, which devolves certain powers of the United States Congress to the Mayor and thirteen-member Council.  The District of Columbia Home Rule Act was a compromise back in the 1970s to allow more self-rule to D.C. while still being within the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution.  While the District of Columbia Home Rule Act caused some pretty wild protests, this was expected as a compromise between Congress and the local D.C. residents.  All the adults know that a good compromise leaves everyone upset.  How effective has the District of Columbia Home Rule Act been; well, look at the before and after economics, and the problem becomes loud and clear.  Taking us back to why I am still laughing and still not sorry!

For the lawyers in the house, the District of Columbia Home Rule Act is a quagmire of legal jargon and directionless logic like no piece of legislation it has ever been my displeasure to review.  If you can make sense of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, please I.M. me directly, for I have questions and need answers.  Thank you!Apathy

Alert!

Dont Tread On MeToday’s chicanery in the U.S. House of Representatives was not the first time a piece of legislation making D.C. a state has passed the house.  I doubt this will be the last time our tax dollars are wasted on passing frivolous legislation on a U.S. Constitutional issue that will be passed in the U.S. House of Representatives.  Have any of the elected officials in the U.S. House or Senate read the U.S. Constitution, US Bill of Rights, or other founding U.S. documents?  I figured those with (D) had read their Marx and Keynes, but they were not elected to act like Keynes or Marx!

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Plasticization of Words and the American Political Left – Shifting the Paradigm

Non Sequitur - Plasticity of LanguageI love words; I was taught from a young age three invaluable lessons:

  1. Speak the King’s English with exactness.
  2. Correctly pronounce and enunciate your words.
  3. If you do not know what a word means, and misuse it, you are wrong and must correct your mistake immediately.

Growing up, these rules were inviolable.  You could use any word you knew the definition of; but, you had better pronounce that word, enunciate, and be able to defend yourself when asked.  Since 1990, I have become detested with two things the American Political Left has chosen to do that is atrocious and worthy of the vilest condemnation, racism, and the plasticization of words.

As a student of history, the American Political Left has, from the inception of political parties, been telling lies to hide political skullduggery and shenanigans, to obfuscate issues, and derail issues.  The plasticization of words has shamed many a person, has cast doubts that have ruined elections, and been exercised tirelessly to tear America apart.

Pentagon BureaucracyConsider a term oft used to describe the political left, “Social-Justice Warriors.”  Long have I asked my political left-leaning colleagues what this term means, how it applies, and the veracity of the term as a description of societal action.  Breaking down the term, we find three definitions taken from Dictionary.com:

Social: Adjective – relating to society and its organization; Noun – informal social gathering

Justice: Noun – just behavior or treatment; administration of law or authority

Warrior: Noun – an experienced soldier or fighter

Social Justice WarriorThus, to extrapolate meaning from the definitions, one would conclude a social justice warrior is “a person in society, looking for the social administration of law, who has experience fighting for the proper administration of law.”  Yet, the definition from the dictionary for this term is 180-degrees different and is termed derogatory, “a person who expresses or promotes socially progressive views.”  Those rioting and looting in the streets got there because a social justice warrior enraged the community on an issue that is racist, one-sided, and emotionally driven.  Lest it is forgotten, the term being applied to the people driven by emotion to launch protests that become mob violence is derogatory in nature, critically disrespectful of the person calling themselves a social justice warrior.  But, the social justice warrior carries this title as if it were a compliment and a badge of the highest esteem.

Thus, language is plasticized to confuse, interfere, and claim moral superiority, while at the same time damaging the basic fiber of America, destroying small businesses, and ruining commerce.  In reviewing the historical records of riots in America, the term social justice warrior appears to have cropped up as a neutral or possibly positive term in the 1990s, but by 2011 the term had gained its derogatory connotations with the rise of social media.  Many victims of social justice warriors claim they have been “thought policed,” “word policed,” attacked for not being appropriately centered on progressive politics.  The social justice warrior is often extremely biased, self-aggrandizing, sanctimonious, but first, last, and always puerilely unreasonable!

Social Just Warriors 5A recent attack by a social justice warrior regarded the inability of poor black people to have government-issued photo ID, and that without that photo ID, the poor black person would be disenfranchised in exercising voting rights.  My response was that holding any person down by race was racist, and the social just warrior preceded to become unhinged.  Let us be clear, anytime a person’s race is the sole reason that person, or group of people, cannot take part in something, is racism, and the person espousing that opinionated garbage is racist.

In fourth grade, shortly after the Christmas Break, Governor Anderson Elementary School, Belfast Maine.  The teacher is Mrs. Ohlund, I am repeating fourth grade because I was accused of being socially unprepared for fifth grade.  I express doubts about Martin Luther King and a negative opinion regarding “Black History Month.”  Then I am falsely accused, for the first of many times, of being racist.  I lost three recesses, had to write a paper by way of apology, and was forced to spend the rest of “Black History Month” not participating in the events planned and scheduled.

Social Justice Warriors 4From that day to this, I have been attacked for not seeing race, not being sensitive to the race of others, and refusing to allow a person’s race to be an excuse for poor performance, bad language, and infantile public and private behavior.  I remain unapologetic; I am not a racist!  I hold myself to the highest standards publicly and privately as my first obligation to society.  Without regard to race, color, creed, etc. I hold others to the same standards.  I am willing to teach and remain willing to learn as my second obligation to society.

Senior Chief Cloud (DCCS) gave me a tongue lashing in the US Navy because I could not understand the verbal interlocution of a second-class petty officer.  The second-class petty officer used “Ebonics,” while on duty as a form of speech, and I had no idea what he was saying.  Off-duty, this same second-class petty officer spoke differently and I was able to understand him, just fine.  I was accused of being racist, disrespectful, and obstinate for not understanding the intentional speech patterns of a higher-ranking person.

Social Justice Warrior 2I quickly learned that if any other race of person employed “Ebonics” they were told to speak properly, but there was a pass for black people.  When I pointed out this was racism, I was sent up on charges for being disrespectful to see the Commanding Officer.  In the US Army, I was the only white person in my squad in S. Korea.  I was never invited to squad parties, social get-togethers, or allowed into training.  I asked why I was being excluded and was told it was because the squad leader did not understand white people.  The command structure supported the exclusion, and I was left without support as a new soldier in the US Army.

When white people treat black people in a manner that segregates, separates, or allows lower standards based upon race, this is considered racism, and rightly so.  Yet, when black people reflect the exact same behaviors, the socially progressive elements in America rush to defend this behavior, and it is still racism.  The term racism sees no colors, understands no race, and cannot distinguish between people.  The term racism has been plasticized and forced into seeing colors and races, but only when directed in one direction towards black people; and, this is wrong!

In S. Korea, I met some of the most amazing people, gifted, talented, intellectually brilliant.  In S. Korea, I never felt I was a foreigner; the people accepted my small gestures to learn the language and were very kind.  Yet, in South Chicago, South Detroit, Bakersfield, Palisades, and other traditionally black neighborhoods, I am a foreigner, and the people not only treated me like scum on their blocks but insisted I did not belong.  How is it, I can feel more welcome in a foreign country, than on American soil, simply because of my race; this is racism!  The same is true when I visited Bahrain, and the Rock of Gibraltar, highly integrated societies, where I was the foreigner but was never treated as a foreigner or an outsider.  But, travel to Jersey City, Burlington, or Baychester and I was told to wear armor because I was going to be shot.  As a point of interest, Bruce Willis has this same problem in the movie Die Hard 3, and Hollywood treated that overt racism as a movie plot; this is wrong!

Social Justice Warrior 3In the name of racial equality, America has been taught since the early 1980s that words create problems, and some words cannot be used by “white people.”  This behavior is inherently racist and spreads the problems of race, not improving racial relationships.  During President Obama’s reign, America learned that peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are racist.  Fluffernutter sandwiches are racist.  But, this is not so, they are sandwiches, food, and delicious.  Yet, through plasticization and a social justice warrior, suddenly, a staple of millions of people is now “off-limits” and cannot be consumed.  My local sandwich shop had to stop selling a peanut butter honey spread on bagels as a sandwich option because the owners feared being picketed.

It is time for Americans to stand together against the tyranny of plastic words.  Terms see no race, color, creed, and can do nothing but form expressions in communicating ideas.  People see colors, race, creeds, handicaps, and more, words do not.  The plastic words employed by the political left need to be called out every single time a new term arises, and the following are some suggestions for reducing plastic words.

  1. Get to know words and their definitions. It is okay to look up new words and use them in daily vocabulary.  It is okay to have a vocabulary to fall upon to describe, detail, and inform your communication.
  2. When in doubt, ask for clear definitions for terms. If this is the second or more instance, compare definitions from previous explanations, and every time the definitions do not match the intent, call that person out.
  3. Insist upon pronunciation and proper annunciation of words. The English language is beautiful when properly used, and the proper usage of language improves the world.  Be the speaker that makes flowers bloom in another person’s mind through language.
  4. Swearing, cursing, and vile imprecations do nothing but degrade the speaker and lower the speaker’s intelligence. Insist that speakers improve their language usage before speaking as a sign of respect.  I show my respect to you by guarding my tongue, you show your appreciation and respect to me by guarding your tongue, and communication advances both of us.
  5. Plastic words are a social disease and a tool of weak and untested minds. Remember, emotional outbursts are not tolerated by parents from children, and are even less tolerated by adults towards other adults.  Teenagers should be able to get away with back-talking and emotional hyperbole, why do we allow these same outbursts from adults?

Words DefinedImproving communication is all about knowing and using language succinctly and precisely, and then supporting proper social behaviors through courage and tenacity.  There is no reason the grocery store, the restaurant, and other social and community gatherings should be an atmosphere of foul deprecations, excuses for small minds to emotionally lose control, or for adults to imitate the worst childish behaviors.  Standards promote freedom, and the US Republic is all about personal freedom through responsibility and accountability for one’s self.

© Copyright 2020 – M. Dave Salisbury

The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the pictures.

All rights reserved.  For copies, reprints, or sharing, please contact through LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/davesalisbury/