Better Dead Than Racist

Cold War liberals used to parrot the mantra “Better Red than Dead.” According to this line, the prospects of nuclear war were so dire that surrender to the Soviet Union was morally preferable to an anticommunist foreign policy that, in its willingness to provoke our nuclear foes, might cause the end of human life on earth.

We should, of course, be skeptical of the Left’s sincerity. Time has shown that liberals have never been so much anti-war as they are pro-communist. The ideological descendants of the sixties generation clamored for wars in Kosovo, Bosnia, Rwanda, Libya, and now Syria, so long as they could be dressed in humanitarian garb. And if America’s Cold War adversary had been a nuclear Nazi Germany or other some “fascist” menace, likely the same sixties liberals would have instantly boarded the war train, as did the fraudulent peacenik Woody Guthrie when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.

Still, the Left’s Cold War rhetoric at least showed a willingness to put aside moral preening and try to achieve the best outcome possible at the time.

Fast forward thirty years. Donald Trump is a purported “racist” and “sexist” who credibly claims that he will extend an olive branch toward Russia and dismantle the Cold War-era NATO bureaucracy. His statement on at a recent debate that it is actually a good thing for America to cooperate with Russia for common interests is unprecedented among presidential candidates.

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton has a long history of antagonizing Russia—in Syria, in Ukraine, even within its own borders—in ways that could easily escalate to a nuclear World War III. But she mouths the correct left-wing platitudes in public.

Given the choice between a pro-war egalitarian and an anti-war racist, the Left has emphatically chosen the former. Among the SWPLs with whom I live and work in the Washington beltway, support for Hillary is de rigeur, while support for Trump would bring immediate ostracism. I actively avoid workplace functions from the knowledge—borne from experience—that they inevitably turn into anti-Trump hatefests.

And this is despite the fact that, if Hillary actually does antagonize Russia into World War III, we in the nation’s capital will be among the first incinerated. Thus, whether consciously or through willful blindness, the DC smart set prefer to increase their own chances of death than dissent from egalitarian orthodoxy.

The modern, fashionable liberal’s approach to this election is an application of the “Rotherham effect” on a global scale. For over 16 years, over a thousand young girls in Rotherham, England were raped, abused, and groomed as sex slaves by Pakistani immigrants. One such girl was raped with a broken glass bottle while others were doused in gasoline and threatened to be lit on fire. There are reports that other girls even had their tongues nailed to tables, ostensibly to prevent them from speaking to the police.

Most tragically of all, the nail-tongue was entirely unnecessarily; the town council and local police actually knew about what was going on, but simply failed to act, because acting against dark-skinned immigrants might be considered racist.

The types of people who would ignore the localized, private brutality in Rotherham for the sake of conforming to left-wing shibboleths are the same ones who demand that we support the one candidate for the presidency who would make the extermination of the entire human race more likely. Of course, when pushed, most of them will say that they do not want war with Russia. But they are still willing to look the other way when their chosen candidate acts to make that war more likely. The fact that they not only fail to do same, but work themselves into a moralistic frenzy, when People magazine slaps together a few hastily assembled sexual allegations against Donald Trump tells you all the need to know about the demented death cult that is the modern Left.

Whereas once its claimed peace as its highest value, now it would rather destroy the world in nuclear winter than countenance a peace candidate who might have called a Latina beauty queen “Ms. Housekeeping.”

In the kind of world these fanatics have created, the most radical truths are ones that wouldn’t have made our grandfathers bat an eye. For starters: Better Racist than Dead. If racists could avoid the horrors or Rotherham or prevent nuclear war, then I’m with the racists. Whether our people can make the same common-sense choice in the face of immense social and political pressure remains to be seen. But our ability to do so will be our ultimate test. The fate of the world depends on it.