Structural Evil at The New York Times: The Historic Fascism in Fashion
“According to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2).
-----------------------
"The attack in Boulder, combined with the killing of eight people at Atlanta-area spas last week — six of whom were women of Asian descent — has brought gun control back to the center of political discourse in America. President Biden on Tuesday called for Congress to take immediate action by passing a ban on assault weapons and closing background check loopholes."The New York Times
Precisely what does “six of whom were women of Asian descent” have to do with the massacre of ten people in Boulder, Colorado? [The New York Times is race-baiting here. I have known Koreans for 40 years. They are at home in the US, and take pains to camouflage their rise, because at Harvard, Yale, and in Manhattan, it is their success that has made them a target. South Korea is essentially a US state, and many intermarry. As with BLM, the NY Times never misses an opportunity to incite violence. In twenty years there will be no Korean Church in America--they will have completely assimilated. This Wuhan nonsense has nothing to do with race. Were it discovered in Germany it would be called the Hun (an old name for Germans) virus. Koreans (because of their success) and Hispanics (because of their youthful vigor and confidence) would like nothing more than for Civil Rights to disappear. They do not experience the lingering evil of slavery, and they are the furthest groups away from LGBT (which seeks legitimacy by attaching to slavery). LGBT now marches on the back of slavery, and is constantly on the lookout for new bodies to attach in order to reach critical mass. Hispanics and Koreans know they're being used here, but are silent, because, as newcomers, they do not wish to appear ungrateful. How would you not be ungrateful for rejecting such an unconditional embrace? But privately they know they're being used to promote an agenda they abhor. Hispanics and Koreans are 90% (even Catholics) evangelical. None of them come within ten miles of Manhattan without holding their nose]. Would it make a difference if they were not Asian--within the context of the situation described here, the Colorado massacre? Would it make a difference if they were not women--within the context of the Boulder, Colorado massacre? If the Atlanta victims had not been Asian, would The New York Times have felt compelled to give us the additional information about the six victims in Atlanta while pretending to report the 10 murders in Boulder?. If the Atlanta victims had been mere men would we have been told about “six of who were men?” What has race in Atlanta got to do with non-race in Boulder, Colorado? What lies behind the Times’ breathless race-whispering here? Is it a cover for the incarnational racism that is uber-rich/uber-white Manhattan, the patron anti-saint of Fashion, which is the patron anti-saint of the New York Times. For Manhattan is Fashion, and Fashion is the New York Times. Fascism has never been more than a Fashion statement, regardless of its historic incarnation, and Manhattan has become the worldwide face of Fashion, with The New York Times as its Ministry of Propaganda.
The Times does not deem it even necessary to tell us how many of the Boulder victims were men, how many women, how many were children. They do not tell us the race of the victims, or the race of the murderer. They give us numbers. Pure factual journalism. Nothing more. Only as much as an ordinary reader might like to know, you see. Why would you obsess about the race of the dead in the first place? Is it not “a life for a life?”
That may be the case if you’re a reporter. It is not the case if you’re a journalist. Here it is all in the way it is said, what is said, what is not said, and what is said about what is said. A life is not just a life for a modern journalist. Like Marx said when he turned history on its head with the 11th Thesis on Feuerbach: Reporters have so far only recorded world events, the duty of the journalist is to change them. [Ludwig Feuerbach was a German theologian/philosopher whose writings helped Marx turn Hegel upside down. Until Marx, the State was organized along the lines of ideas considered Universal (from the top down, God being at the top), such as private property and marriage. Communism destroyed all these notions and tried to replace them with institutions based on science (from the bottom up)--shared assets, non-marriage. This is how you change history. Modern journalists see it as their task to bring about change by any means necessary: journalist activism. Communism is activism--new ideas implemented by revolution--violence is never far away. Hope this helps. Marx's 11 Thesis was based on his reflection on Feuerbach--it's the idea behind Marxist communism. In order to see how German Marxist communism can still be the doctrine of the Chinese Communist Party, you need to turn Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel upside down and stand him on his head. Only religion has such power. By turning Hegel upside down you get pure secular religion: Statism. This may sound like rubbish. But once Marx put these ideas out there, they about burned the world down. President Xi Jinping says even in capitalist China, Marx is still “totally correct.” Now imagine yourself working at the company store (leftwing Bezos' Amazon) for just enough to get by, and you hear the words of The Communist Manifesto, "Workmen of the world, Unite." That's why it almost burned the world down. It's a different version of Q's "where we go one, we go all." It promises relief from a soul-crushing system that no longer feels human]. And thus he begat activism. Now you see why an Asian life is different from a Boulder life. If you see it as your task to solve the world’s ills as a journalist, then some facts will be to that purpose and some will not be to that purpose. “6 Asian women in Atlanta” are to the purpose. Ten murdered people in Boulder are just ten murdered people in Boulder if they don’t contribute to the narrative you want all the world to see. The New York Times wants you to see “6 dead Asian women” even as they report on 10 non-descript Boulder dead. Because “6 Asian women” fit the narrative (or story) that The New York Times wants the whole world to see, and it’s the only story the Times wants the world to contemplate at the moment. Ten murdered Coloradans do not fit the narrative in this instance, and thus are not suited to the purpose the story The New York Times wants the world to see. They do not suit the purpose of “changing the world.” They do not rise to the demands of Marx’s 11th Thesis on Feuerbach. They do not rise to the purpose of the Ministry of Propaganda.
It is left for you to now read between the lines. Ten murdered people in Boulder are just ten dead people. The fact that they are left unidentified is only a just outcome of their historical situation: white privilege. As such they got what they deserved. Of course, this is all loudly unsaid. And it is all the louder for that. It is the perfect application of Marx’s 11 Thesis on Feuerbach. In sum, a life in Boulder is not the same as a life in Atlanta if it does not suit the purpose of changing the world to the glorious age the New York Times sees on its horizon.
Again, does it matter what the race of the murderer is? It does in Atlanta. If your purpose in life as a journalist is to change the world, then, yes, it does indeed matter. But it must be suppressed in Boulder. Are there proportional scales of guilt, then, suited to the degree of racial accountability on the arc of justice? Because the New York Times grades for race in one instance, and does not grade for race in another.
The New York Times and Washington Post filled the streets with days of rage precisely because of the race of the Atlanta victims. They fit the narrative. The New York Times and Washington Post filled the streets with days of rage precisely because of the race of the Atlanta murderer. He was to their purpose. He suited the narrative for which they had been waiting for some time now. In that sense, he was a gift that was intended to keep on given. He was to the purpose, he fit the narrative perfectly. That is, until this. Because the Boulder murderer is not to their purpose. The Boulder murderer does not fit the narrative. In fact, the Boulder murderer destroys the narrative. Which is why he is also left anonymous. Because he essentially cancels the Atlanta narrative, which the New York Times wants all the world to see. The Boulder murderer is the actual story that The New York Times does not want the world to see.
But this is pure race-whispering propaganda. And no one does it more effectively than the New York Times. But why race, and why now? Because it is the latest cudgel in hand. Evil needs a host to incarnate and act as the face of its war against the Church of Christ. To gain legitimacy it needs to continually offer a counterfeit to subvert the truth. Thus it seeks a host to hijack. Currently it sees an opportunity in the race-geist, so it hijacked the Civil Rights movement (the big money in Manhattan is old Massa slave money). But does anyone think that the uber-white/uber-rich people who own and direct the New York Times have anything but contempt and loathing for people who are not uber-white and uber-rich? Just follow them when they leave the office for the day. Where do they go? To party in the mansions in the sky, the billion dollar suites that reach to the clouds. Only uber-white people live there. Manhattan is a plantation on steroids. Massa above, all the po folk down below. Just listen to the gossip of who was at what party with all the hedge fund managers, the museum people, the opera people, the people who flew in on private jets just because they had nothing else to do, along with all the blonde models---all snow white. This is the dirtiest secret in the whole wide world. This is what the New York Times looks like on the inside. Theologians used to speak of practical atheism: a man whose religion you can tell by the way he lives. If The New York Times don’t talk racist, they sho live that way. If you want to see the face of White Supremacy look at the current models on the New York Times front page advertising $50,000 handbags. This is what you see within the high towers of Manhattan Plantation. It's what you see in billion dollar museums. It's what you see at the Metropolitan Opera, it's what you see on Wall Street, it's what you see when you plunk down $900 for dinner (for one--without drinks--not including tips). All the "help" is not like that. They all live below, schlepping luggage and opening doors for the blonde mistresses for whom those $50,000 handbags on the front page of the New York Times are intended. The Confederacy is gone (it was a fashion statement). Nazi Germany is gone (Hitler wanted even his dogs to be blonde). Apartheid is gone (it was a fashion statement). Blondiwood on Oscar Night is a bottle-blonde Nazi tribute. The fashion industry, which supplies the depraves of Manhattan with its victims, is the latest incarnation of those who have gone before. They may not talk racist (when they're drunk it all comes out), but they sho live that way.