The Trump Victory and ‘Whitelash’: The Left’s Dilemma

Jack Kerwick,

Though I find CNN’s Van Jones to be a man with few redeeming qualities, he may have stumbled upon an insight when he described the presidential election outcome on Tuesday night as the product of a “whitelash.”

While people of every racial background and religion voted for him—Trump was as close to an “omnibus” candidate as any that we’ve had in a long time—it’s no secret that the vast majority of President-elect Trump’s support (like that of every other Republican candidate in contemporary America) derived from whites: 63% of white men and 52% of white women. Disillusioned Democrats, independents, and white Evangelicals came out for Trump in numbers the likes of which we haven’t seen in decades.

The Hispanic vote was at a record-high. And while blacks didn’t vote to the extent that they had in 2012, Clinton received 88% of their votes.

Contrary to what the Van Jones of the world would have us think, armies of whites didn’t back Trump because they “hate” non-whites. Nor do they “fear” a “changing” America (Sorry to disappoint, Van, but since America has been changing demographically by design, via immigration policies that privilege Third World immigrants, this change can be arrested and, potentially, reversed).

The truth is that whites have had it with the accusations of “racism” by which they’re tirelessly bombarded.

They’re sick of this one-sided game in which whites, and only whites, are branded with this potentially ruinous charge anytime they dare to so much as question the prevailing racial orthodoxy.

They’re fed up with being told that irrespective of their best intentions they and their loved ones are unconsciously “racist.”

Whites who are struggling daily with all of the problems of the human condition are over being condescended to about their “white privilege.”

Compounding this problem is the fact that this race-shaming of whites has intensified in proportion to the intensification of the racial hostility that’s been directed against them. And when white Americans see black and Hispanic (rental) thugs with “Black Lives Matter” signs and Mexican flags, respectively, visiting violence upon innocent and unsuspecting whites for doing nothing more than attending a Trump rally, the resentment mounts.

gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAAAAACH5BAEKAAEALAAAAAABAAEAAAICTAEAOw== The Trump Victory and ‘Whitelash’: The Left’s Dilemma Voters

For perhaps the first time, whites may have decided to follow the lead of non-white groups by participating in the politics of racial identity. Again, this is not equivalent to “racism,” which is supposed to refer to animosity, beliefs concerning the innate superiority of one’s own race, hatred, etc. White Trump supporters needn’t and, in at least most instances, do not endorse any of these beliefs or harbor any of these feelings. However, when the members of every other group vote in terms of their ostensible collective racial interests, and when the advancement of these interests requires the demonization of whites as unconscious “racists” and “supremacists” who deserve whatever they get, then it is inevitable that, before long, self-preservation (to say nothing of self-respect) will provoke a reaction of a comparable kind.

Only in this case, a vote for Trump is not offensive, an assertion of power over other groups, but defensive, a means by which white voters can say “No more!” to the relentless barrage of hits to which they’re subjected every time they are branded with the charge of “racism.”

Nor does this mean that Trump is “racist,” as the left insists. However, it was his refusal to meekly pay homage to Politically Correct idols all while the self-appointed guardians of those idols objectified him as Evil incarnate that endeared him to tens of millions of Americans—including people of color—who could empathize with Trump.

The causes for which the white working and middle classes voted this year they genuinely believe are best for all Americans. Blacks, Hispanics, Indians, Muslims, and Asians who voted for Trump did so from the same conviction. For this the latter deserve especial congratulations, for they defied the noxious, implicitly and not so implicitly anti-white identity politics of the groups of which they are members.

As of this writing, Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) are wreaking havoc by the thousands in the streets of American cities over the election of Donald J. Trump. What they fail to realize is that the latter is the spawn of their ideology, an ideology shared by Obama, the Democratic Party, and those of their media propagandists that worked inexhaustibly to demonize Trump and his supporters.

They pushed too hard, too fast. It has backfired.

President-elect Trump is the left’s (current) Apocalypse, the Mother of All Evils (at least for this week). Yet Trump’s success is, in large measure, the product of their handiwork. This is crucial, for what it means is that the SJW is trapped on the horns of a dilemma:

On the one hand, if she wants to delegitimize Trump in his first term in office, she must abandon her leftist/progressive/Politically Correct ideology and attack him from the right, for it is the rejection of this leftist ideology that propelled Trump to the White House. On the other hand, if she doesn’t want to abandon her ideology, then the SJW should count upon President Trump spending the next eight years in Washington D.C., for the more militantly she expresses her agenda, the more intensely will the country rally behind the politically incorrect president.

From this dilemma, there is no escape.

The SJW has gotten sick on her own medicine. She thinks she can cure her illness with this same medicine.

The tide may be turning. Trump doesn’t have a constituency or a base. He has a following, an impassioned, devoted following. These are the tens of millions of Americans who delivered him the presidency. As long as he does right by them; as long as he doesn’t retreat from at least some of the big issues that concern them; and as long as the left doesn’t run another radical in sheep’s clothing against him in 2020, Trump could very well be looking at the next eight years on Pennsylvania Avenue.

So, Van Jones is partially correct. We shouldn’t, though, expect for him to learn the lessons from this “whitelash” that he and his ilk need to learn if they want to regain the power that the Republicans, courtesy of Trump and his following, took from them last Tuesday.

|