Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us


Columbia Philosophy Major Exposes the Hypocrisy of the “High Price” of Black “Grievances”

It is exactly the sort of stuff that enrages leftists, but even more so because the author, Coleman Hughes, is himself a black man.



A Columbia philosophy major recently wrote a fantastic piece exposing the hypocrisy of the “high price” of black “grievances” that is well worth the read. It is exactly the sort of stuff that enrages leftists, but even more so because the author, Coleman Hughes, is himself a black man.

Hughes started his interesting discussion of black victimology by recounting an incident that he experienced when he was a young man trying to make his way through the music industry when he found a fellow musician fired by pop singer Rihanna because he was a “white Hispanic” and the singer wanted an all-black band.

At the time he was not sure if this was an unjust firing.

Trending: MUST SEE: Barr Shreds Reporter In Half When She Implies He’s ‘Covering’ For Trump [Video]

“Though I was disappointed on my friend’s behalf, I didn’t consider his firing as unjust at the time — and maybe it wasn’t. Is it unethical for an artist to curate the racial composition of a racially-themed performance? Perhaps; perhaps not. My personal bias leads me to favor artistic freedom, but as a society, we have yet to answer this question definitively,” he wrote.

But Hughes went on to make the exact point that many conservatives make when talking of racism and so-called “reverse racism.”

One thing, however, is clear. If the races were reversed — if a black musician had been fired in order to achieve an all-white aesthetic — it would have made front-page headlines. It would have been seen as an unambiguous moral infraction. The usual suspects would be outraged, calling for this event to be viewed in the context of the long history of slavery and Jim Crow in this country, and their reaction would widely be seen as justified. Public shaming would be in order and heartfelt apologies would be made. MTV might even enact anti-bias trainings as a corrective.

This is exactly right. Of course, the problem is that the left has spent so many decades warping our language that they have backed themselves into an untenable logical and rhetorical corner. Their own rhetoric is so skewed and they have coopted the language so badly that they just make no sense at all. They don’t see that they have turned themselves into hypocrites over nearly every single issue.

For instance, they try to paint their enemies (conservative Americans) as “uncaring” or uninterested in “tolerance.” So, they say THEY are the only “tolerant” ones and we (conservatives) are the intolerant ones.

But, in fact, liberals are no more “tolerant” than those they claim are inhuman. After all, they have a very long list — one that is growing every day — of things, ideas, and people who they hate and of whom they are intolerant.

Liberals are intolerant of Christians, intolerant of people who oppose abortion, intolerant of the Second Amendment and those who support it… well, I could go on and on.

Yet, they insist they are the “tolerant” ones. But clearly they are not. Indeed, in many cases they are more virulently hateful and intolerant of what they don’t like than those they oppose.

The reason for this is because the grievance industry has to continually up the ante on their hate and passion because that is the only way to keep selling their liberal ideology and gaining new adherents. You can’t sell grievances unless the passions are high enough to force vitriol and, therefore, action.

That is exactly what Mr. Hughes next remarked upon in his excellent essay.

He notes that the black grievance industry continually harps on slavery, America’s “peculiar institution” that ended over 150 years ago. He also pointed to the many years of lynching and oppression that occurred after slavery was put to an end. “In the face of such a brutal past, many would argue, it is simply ignorant to complain about what modern-day blacks can get away with,” he said.

But this is a “racial double standard that Hughes feels is unjustified:

Yet there we were — young black men born decades after anything that could rightly be called ‘oppression’ had ended — benefitting from a social license bequeathed to us by a history that we have only experienced through textbooks and folklore. And my white Hispanic friend (who could have had a tougher life than all of us, for all I know) paid the price. The underlying logic of using the past to justify racial double-standards in the present is rarely interrogated. What do slavery and Jim Crow have to do with modern-day blacks, who experienced neither? Do all black people have P.T.S.D from racism, as the Grammy and Emmy award-winning artist Donald Glover recently claimed? Is ancestral suffering actually transmitted to descendants? If so, how? What exactly are historical ‘ties’ made of?

“Similarly, modern-day black intellectuals often say things like, ‘We were brought here against our will,’ despite the fact that they have never seen a slave ship in their lives, let alone been on one. When metaphors are made explicit — i.e., emotions are vertical, groups are individuals — it’s easy to see that they are just metaphors. Yet many black intellectuals carry on as if they were literal truths.

Hughes went on to point to one particular grievance salesman, activist and author Michael Eric Dyson whom Hughes saw in a recent debate. Dyson was a perfect example of twisting rhetoric to feed his agenda.

“His ‘you’ refers not to identifiable, living humans, but to groups of long-deceased individuals with whom he shares nothing in common except a location on the color wheel. But by appropriating a grievance whose rightful owners died long ago, and by slipping between the metaphorical and the literal, Dyson was able to portray himself as a member of an abstract oppressed class and Peterson as a member of an abstract oppressor class. In his reply, barely audible over Dyson’s sanctimonious harangue,” Hughes wrote.

Indeed, Dyson went on to insult another panel member over his race in that very debate. Yet, as Hughes notes, “Dyson will likely face no consequences” for his racist outburst.

Hughes added several more examples of other grievance salsemen, then made this observation.

His point is…

…modern-day blacks are permitted to employ language and behavior for which whites would be condemned. And wherever these racial double-standards show themselves, appeals to historical oppression, and to a metaphorical ‘we,’ follow close behind. After all, it is argued, how can Dyson and Coates be expected to abide by a so-called ‘politics of respectability’ in a country that routinely humiliates and subjugates them. Indeed, all demands to uphold colorblind standards ring hollow in view of America’s foundational plunder of ‘the black body,’ we are told. The ‘black body’? Such abstract claims are rarely met with the concrete question: to whose black body are you referring?

It all forces us to see this in stark terms, Hughes said:

As these cracks widen, the far-Left responds by doubling down on the radical strain of black identity politics that caused these problems to begin with, and the far-Right responds with its own toxic strain of white identity politics. Stale grievances are dredged up from history and used to justify double-standards that create fresh grievances in turn. And beneath all of this lies the tacit claim that blacks are uniquely constrained by history in a way that Jewish-Americans, East Asian-Americans, Indian-Americans, and countless other historically marginalized ethnic groups are not. In the midst of this breakdown in civil discourse, we must ask ourselves—academics, journalists, activists, politicians, and concerned citizens alike—if we are on a path towards a thriving multi-ethnic democracy or a balkanized hotbed of racial and political tribalism.

But maybe there is some hope that all this nonsense will come to an end. Hughes also found that, ” The majority of blacks themselves are noticing that bias is not the main issue they face anymore, even as blacks who dare express this view are called race traitors.”

Let’s hope that this is true and that eventually blacks will tire of the grievance industry and we can finally begin to heal our racial strife.



Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Kellyanne’s Husband Goes NUCLEAR on Twitter, Calls Trump The ‘C’ Word

George Conway’s latest lambasting of the President surely has him sleeping on the couch.



George Conway

As the nation begins to dig in their heels in regard to their views of President Trump, we are undoubtedly set for a prolonged social and cultural battle. Our nation was already deeply divided prior to the release of the Mueller report; itself a lightning rod of controversy involving political biases, alleged spying, campaign rivals, and flaring tempers.  These facets of the already-wild story were then amplified, predictably, by an unkempt and irresponsible mainstream media simply for the sake of cashing in on the outrage that they themselves fanned the flames of. This national nightmare has created its fair share of “divided households” as well, with the most famous example being that of Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway and her husband George, himself a longtime figure in Washington DC. The fairer Conway is, obviously, still on Team Trump, while George has roaring against the President on Twitter at a breakneck pace. His latest insult, coming just hours after the release of the redacted Mueller report, may be his most stern yet. “What the Mueller report disturbingly shows, with crystal clarity, is that today there is a cancer in the presidency: President Donald J. Trump,” Conway wrote in a Washington Post opinion-editorial. “Congress now bears the solemn constitutional duty to excise that cancer without delay.” Conway’s insinuation is nearly verbatim to the slant of the mainstream media, who also see the Mueller report as the beginning and not the end. Of course, this runs counter to what both the President and Attorney General Bill Barr have stated repeatedly over the course of the last several hours.

Continue Reading


Would-Be NYC Cathedral Arsonist Had Just Purchased a One Way Ticket To…

The story just keeps getting stranger…and more worrisome as well.



Rome vatican

As with just about any news these days, there was an almost immediate sprouting of conspiracy theories surrounding the blaze at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris this week. For many social media users, the coincidence of the inferno occurring on Monday of Holy Week was just too much.  They saw this as “a sign”, and almost certainly as a “nefarious act”, possibly played out in order to spark some sort of Holy War. The theories get much wilder than that as well, but we dare not wade too deep into the conspiratorial waters, lest we want to be blacklisted by some clandestine “fact checking” gestapo. Despite the insistence of investigators that there was no reason to believe foul play was at work, the internet’s darker corners remained skeptical.  Then, came the story of a man in NYC who was arrested after walking into Saint Patrick’s Cathedral with two cans of gas, some lighter fluid, and a lighting device. This sparked a whole new realm of conspiracy for many…and that was before we knew about his travel plans. Marc Lamparello, a former director of music at a New Jersey Roman Catholic Church, was arrested at the historic St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City on Wednesday night after security stopped him with two cans of gasoline, lighter fluid and butane lighters, police said. Sources with the New York City Police Department told ABC News that he also purchased a one-way ticket to Rome, which was scheduled to depart from Newark, New Jersey, on Thursday evening. Lamparello, 37, was charged with attempted arson, reckless endangerment and some violations of city codes. He told police that he was taking a shortcut through church to reach his minivan, which he claimed had run out of gas. Police then inspected Lamparello’s vehicle, determined that it…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend