Democrats Thrive by Keeping Americans Divided, Dependent, and Angry
Dennis Prager
In almost every area of American life, the better things are, the worse it is for the Democratic Party. And vice versa.
Marriage
Even today, after decades of feminism, most Americans agree that it is better for women (and for men)—and better for society—when women (and men) marry.
Yet, when women marry, it is bad for the Democratic Party; and when women do not marry, even after—or shall we say, especially after—having children, it is quite wonderful for the Democratic Party.
Married women vote Republican. Unmarried women lopsidedly vote Democrat.
It is both silly and dishonest to deny that it is in the Democrats’ interest that women not marry.
Blacks
Blacks who are not angry at America, especially white America, are more likely than those who harbor such anger to vote Republican. On the other hand, the more a black American considers America a racist society, the more he or she is a guaranteed Democratic voter.
Therefore, it is in the Democratic Party’s interest to ensure that as many blacks as possible regard America negatively. If Democrats feel it will benefit their party, they will play with fire—the fire of violence.
Take Ferguson, Missouri. No Democrat or Republican knows what happened in Ferguson just before a black teenager was shot by a white policeman. The only thing almost any American has known about Ferguson is that a white police officer shot and killed a black teenager.
Yet, while blacks in Ferguson demonstrated, some violently, the reaction of Democrats—both politicians and the mainstream left-wing media—has been to side with the demonstrators.
There does not appear to be any level of black anger at white America that is too much for Democrats, who would rather see riots—no matter how unwarranted—than potentially lose black votes.
Latinos
The more a Latino assimilates into American society, the more likely he or she is to vote Republican. On the other hand, the more Latinos continue to identify with the country they or their parents fled, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.
Thus, Democrats and the rest of the left have engaged in two massive undertakings for decades: One has been to label Republicans “nativist,” “anti-Hispanic,” “xenophobic,” and “anti-immigrant.” The other has been to promote “multiculturalism,” the anti-assimilation doctrine that cultivates ethnic identity over American identity.
Democrats repeatedly assert that America is “a nation of immigrants.” This is undeniable. But there is a big difference today.
In the past, nearly all immigrants sought to become American and to shed their previous national or ethnic identity. Today, many, perhaps a majority of, immigrants from Latin America do not have that goal. They come primarily or exclusively for economic benefits (and no one should blame them for doing so).
Meanwhile, under cover of “multiculturalism,” Democrats and the rest of the left cultivate these immigrants’ Latin American identities, knowing that the more American an immigrant feels, the less likely he or she is to vote Democrat.
Victim Identity
Americans who do not see themselves as victims—of an “unfair” or “racist” or “misogynist” society—are more likely to vote Republican. On the other hand, Americans who see themselves as victims of American society are likely to vote Democrat.
Therefore, the Democratic Party and its supportive media cultivate victimhood among almost all Americans who are not white and male.
Dependency
The more Americans depend on themselves or on their family or community, the more likely they are to vote Republican. On the other hand, the more Americans depend on the government—whether for a job or for economic assistance—the more likely they are to vote Democrat.
Therefore, it is in the Democrats’ interest to have more and more Americans depend on the state.
In other words, in almost every area of life, the better things are, the worse it is for the Democratic Party. Democrats have placed themselves in the role of benefiting from social and moral dysfunction.
And they have embraced this role. The Democratic Party cultivates singlehood, black anger at America, Latino separatism, victimhood, group grievance, and dependency on government.
Nor is this the only way in which Democrats do terrible damage to America. They are also tearing America apart, setting women against men (with such falsehoods as “the war on women,” “the rape culture” at American colleges, and the nonsense that “women are paid less for the same work”), blacks against whites, and Latinos against other Americans.
They do this because the less women see men as an enemy, the less blacks regard whites as an enemy, and the more Latinos see themselves as Americans, the worse it is for Democrats.
The Democratic Party has become a wholly destructive force in this country. Even though you may not intend to, if you vote for any Democrat, you contribute to that damage.
SOURCE
*****************************
US threatens to close Palestinian office in Washington
The Trump administration put the Palestine Liberation Organization on notice Friday that it will close the group's office in Washington if the Palestinians don't get serious about peace talks with Israel, State Department officials said.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has determined the Palestinians have violated a rarely invoked provision in US law that calls for the closure of the Palestine Liberation Organization's mission if they act against Israel in the International Criminal Court, the officials said.
The department asserts that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ran afoul of the law in September when he called on the ICC to investigate and prosecute Israel for war crimes against the Palestinians.
"The secretary concluded that the factual record, certain statements made by Palestinian leaders about the ICC, did not permit (Tillerson) to make the factual certification required by the statute" to keep the PLO mission open, a State Department official said.
In a speech to the UN General Assembly, Abbas said the Palestinians have asked the the ICC "to open an investigation and to prosecute Israeli officials for their involvement in settlement activities and aggressions against our people."
Saeb Erekat, a top PLO official and lead Palestinian negotiator, said the Palestinians have responded to Tillerson's determination by warning they will end all contact with the Trump administration if it closes the US office.
"This is the pressure being exerted on this administration from the Netanyahu government; at a time when we are trying to cooperate to achieve the ultimate deal, they take such steps which will undermine the whole peace process," Erekat said in a statement to CNN.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office issued a short statement calling the US decision "a matter of US law."
"We respect the decision and look forward to continuing to work with the US to advance peace and security in the region," it said.
The Associated Press first reported the news of Tillerson's decision and the notification to the Palestinians.
The threat to the Palestinians of losing their office in Washington could be a point of leverage for President Donald Trump as he seeks to coax the Palestinians to the table. The Israelis and Palestinians are not engaged direct negotiations, but Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law and a top White House adviser, and Jason Greenblatt, a senior aide charged with negotiations on Middle East peace, have been working to broker a peace deal to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This month, the White House said officials are preparing a peace proposal which they intend to put forward at a unspecified time. They have provided no details about the proposal, but Kushner and Greenblatt have been shuttling to the Middle East region to meet with Palestinians, Israelis and Arab nations in hopes of securing a deal.
Although the United States does not recognize statehood for the Palestinians, President Bill Clinton waived a 1980s-era law that barred them from having an office and allowed the PLO, which formally represents all Palestinians, to open a mission in Washington in 1994. President Obama allowed the Palestinians to fly the flag over their office, upgrading the status of their mission, in 2011.
Congress added a provision to the law in 2015 requiring the shuttering of the mission if the Palestinians seek to "influence a determination by the ICC to initiate a judicially authorized investigation, or to actively support such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians."
Before the change to the law, the president could keep the PLO mission open merely by certifying that waiving the ban on Palestinian representation in the United States was in the US national interest. The most recent certification period ended in November.
Trump, meanwhile, could also waive Tillerson's determination; the President now has 90 days to consider whether the Palestinians are engaged in "direct and meaningful negotiations with Israel" before making such a decision.
However, the law does not specifically define what constitutes direct or meaningful negations.
Even if Trump decides to close the office, a State Department official said the United States would not completely cut off relations with the Palestinians and is focused on bringing about a comprehensive peace deal.
"We remain focused on a comprehensive peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians that will resolve core issues between the parties," the official said in an email. "This measure should in no way be a signal that the US is backing off those efforts. Nor should it be exploited by those who seek to act as spoilers to distract from the imperative of reaching a peace agreement."
SOURCE
*************************
For more blog postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, and Paralipomena (Occasionally updated), a Coral reef compendium and an IQ compendium. (Both updated as news items come in). GUN WATCH is now mainly put together by Dean Weingarten. I also put up occasional updates on my Personal blog and each day I gather together my most substantial current writings on THE PSYCHOLOGIST.
Email me here (Hotmail address). My Home Pages are here (Academic) or here (Pictorial) or here (Personal)
***************************