“It’s far worse than I thought. In addition to the many links between the family that owns The New York Times and the Civil War Confederacy, new evidence shows that members of the extended family were slaveholders.
Last Sunday, I recounted that Bertha Levy Ochs, the mother of Times patriarch Adolph S. Ochs, supported the South and slavery. She was caught smuggling medicine to Confederates in a baby carriage and her brother Oscar joined the rebel army.
I have since learned that, according to a family history, Oscar Levy fought alongside two Mississippi cousins, meaning at least three members of Bertha’s family fought for secession.
…All that would be bad enough given that the same family still owns the Times and allows it to become a leader in the movement to demonize America’s founding and rewrite history to put slavery at its core. As part of that revisionism, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln are suddenly beyond redemption, their great deeds canceled by their flaws.
But shouldn’t such breathtaking self-righteousness include the responsibility to lead by example?Shouldn’t the Times first clean out the Confederates in its own closet? That was the question last week. It is now more urgent because of the new information.
A week ago, I was “aware of no evidence or claims that any members of Bertha’s family owned slaves or participated in the slave trade.”That statement is no longer accurate. I have found compelling evidence that the uncle Bertha Levy Ochs lived with for several years in Natchez, Miss., before the Civil War owned at least five slaves.
Mayer was a store owner and prominent leader of the small Jewish community in Natchez and, during the war, organized a home-guard unit, according to family letters and historians. He was her father’s brother and his name was John Mayer because he dropped the surname Levy, according to a family tree compiled by the Ochs-Sulzberger clan some 70 years ago.
Neither the 1860 census nor its separate “slave schedule” lists the names of Mayer’s slaves. They are identified as two males, ages 70 and 26, and three females, ages 65, 45 and 23…”
Poor Pinch Sulzberger:
Yeah,…only if he were a Conservative rather than a Limousine Liberal. Meanwhile…
Now, here’s The Gouge!
We lead off the week with a series of three articles whose subjects, by standing up to The Mob, display a brand of courage increasingly rare among Republicans, let alone members of the MSM and/or Academia.
First up, courtesy of Tom Bakke, Powerline Blog relays a Brown University economist’s revolutionary views on…
“…People cry, “structural racism.” Is that why the homicide rate is an order of magnitude higher among young black men? They say structural racism. Is that why the SAT test-score gap is as big as it is?They say structural racism. Is that why two in three black American kids are born to women without a husband?Is it all about structural racism? Is everything structural racism? It has become a tautology explaining everything. All racial disparities are due to structural racism, evidently. Covid-19 comes along and there’s a disparity in the health incidence.It’s due to structural racism.
They’re naming partners at a New York City law firm and there are few black faces.Structural racism. They’re admitting people to specialized exam schools in New York City and the Asians do better. This has to be structural racism, with a twist—the twist being that this time, the structural racism somehow comes out favoring the Asians.
This is not social science.This is propaganda. It’s religion. People are trying to win arguments by using words as if they were weapons.
They point to history. But the history is complicated. Yes, there was slavery.Yes, there was segregation. Yes, there was redlining. There were other things, too. A lot has happened in American history.Is the relatively marginal position of African-Americans taken within American political economy a causal result of Jim Crow segregation? Nobody knows the answer to that question. I’m not saying that you won’t find many patterns or practices of racial mistreatment in history, but I’m saying that the link between them and the contemporary circumstances of African-American communities, especially at the bottom end, is woefully inadequate to explain what we see.
…Structural racism, by contrast, is a bluff. It’s not an engagement with history. It’s a bullying tactic. In effect, it’s telling you to shut up…”
A tactic to which, in effect, we’d respond by saying…repeatedly and MOST vociferously…
“The bestselling book “White Fragility,” whose ideas have gained mainstream currency in the wake of protests against police brutality and systemic racism, dehumanizes and infantilizes Black people by encouraging a “cult” of White guilt, Columbia University associate professor John McWhorter argued this week.
McWhorter, who is Black, charged in The Atlantic. that “White Fragility” is “about how to make certain educated [W]hite readers feel better about themselves.”
The book by Robin DiAngelo, a White woman who works as a diversity consultant for corporations, was first published in 2018. Its paperback edition has been on The New York Times bestseller list for 97 weeks.
“DiAngelo’s outlook rests upon a depiction of Black people as endlessly delicate poster children within this self-gratifying fantasy about how [W]hite America needs to think,” McWhorter wrote. “Or, better, stop thinking. Her answer to [W]hite fragility, in other words, entails an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people.”
For example, McWhorter claimed, DiAngelo recommends White people refrain from or engage in certain behaviors in order to avoid reinforcing racial inequality, including not crying in Black people’s presence while discussing racism and not asking Black people about their feelings or experiences. “A corollary question is why Black people need to be treated the way DiAngelo assumes we do,” he wrote. “The very assumption is deeply condescending to all proud Black people.”
“In my life, racism has affected me now and then at the margins, in very occasional social ways, but has had no effect on my access to societal resources,” McWhorter went on. “If anything, it has made them more available to me than they would have been otherwise.”
“The sad truth,” he concluded, “is that anyone falling under the sway of this blinkered, self-satisfied, punitive stunt of a primer has been taught, by a well-intentioned but tragically misguided pastor, how to be racist in a whole new way.”…”
While we agree DiAngelo is tragically misguided, we’d respectfully but vehemently disagree she’s well-intentioned. It’s time we started correctly characterizing these purveyors of Progressive propaganda for what they are:
Lastly, also courtesy of FOX, more confirmation The Left’s dedication to diversity doesn’t extend to diversity of thought, as…
“…The columnist reiterated thoughts he made years ago about how “we all live on campus now,” noting the increasingly limited exchange of ideas on college campuses has spilled into everyday life and pointed to a survey that showed only 1.46 percent of the faculty at Harvard University identify as “conservative.”
“But that’s probably higher than the proportion of journalists who call themselves conservative at the New York Times or CNN or New York Magazine,” Sullivan wrote. “And maybe it’s worth pointing out that ‘conservative” in my case means that I have passionately opposed Donald J. Trump and pioneered marriage equality, that I support legalized drugs, criminal-justice reform, more redistribution of wealth, aggressive action against climate change, police reform, a realist foreign policy, and laws to protect transgender people from discrimination. I was one of the first journalists in established media to come out. I was a major and early supporter of Barack Obama. I intend to vote for Biden in November.”
“It seems to me that if this conservatism is so foul that many of my peers are embarrassed to be working at the same magazine, then I have no idea what version of conservatism could ever be tolerated“…”
Welcome to reality, Andrew! By the way, it’s worth noting prior to Sullivan becoming utterly and completely consumed by his homosexuality, making it a prism through which he has since viewed every subject, we were a fan. We’ll be curious to see where his journey for enforced affirmation takes him from here.
In a related item, NRO‘s Andy McCarthy explains why, at least for now…
Weather Underground terrorists, who made no secret of being anti-AmeriKKKan “small-c” communists, are having more success than they could have dreamed of in the 1960s.
They are dominating the language. You know that whole “white privilege” nostrum that we’re paying universities $60K per year to drum into our children’s brains?It is derived from their lamentation of “white skin privilege.” In their ideology, the revolution to overthrow the capitalist, racist, imperialist system summoned them — lily white radicals — to abandon their privilege and embrace the armed struggle. (Except, they haven’t!!!)
…The goals of the revolution have never changed. It has simply airbrushed its terrorist leaders into prominent public scholars and “activists” with a passion for “change” and “justice.” The revolution has lots of money, organization, control of the schools, support from one of the nation’s two major political parties, and the media megaphone. That is why the revolution is winning. The 1960s never ended, they just paved the way for today.“
With Barack Hussein “The First Admittedly Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist American President” Obama personally operating the asphalt-laying equipment…with the invaluable financial assistance of…
The sooner The Donald begins to hammer home Groper Joe’s connection to the sins of his anti-American masters the better.
Which brings us, inappropriately enough, to The Lighter Side:
Then there’s these from Balls Cotton…
…along with a few more from Ed Hickey:
Finally, we’ll call it a day with another sordid story straight from the pages of The Crime Blotter, as FOX News informs us how incomprehensibly irresponsible Progressive anti-police rhetoric has claimed another innocent victim:
“…Shatavia Walls, 33, who was peppered with gunfire July 7 after asking the man to stop setting off the explosives, died from her injuries Friday night at Brookdale Hospital, police sources said.Walls was shot eight times at 1259 Loring Ave. in the Pink Houses around 8:30 p.m. Her companion, Kelvin Hernandez, was also struck, the sources said.
Walls made the apparently fatal mistake of telling the man, who remains at large, to cease the pyrotechnics.The suspect left, only to return with a gun, shooting the doomed Walls and Hernandez as they tried to run away, police said.
“Setting off illegal fireworks is a “nonviolent act,” Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams said last month, urging residents to “go talk to the young people or the people on your block who are using fireworks” instead of calling 911 or 311. Adams, who spoke about the fireworks scourge (“scourge”?!?) at a news conference last month, insisted Saturday that “the first line of interaction when it comes to non-criminal behaviors should be between neighbors.”…”
Oh, really…
Unless borough presidents are immune from criminal and/or civil action, is there any doubt what’s, deservedly, in Eric Adams’s immediate future?!?
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.