Support for Slavery Reparations is a Conservative Fait Accompli
With just one day to go in the year 2022, conservative Tim Pool tweeted that the money the U.S. is sending to Ukraine should instead go to…wait for it…reparations for the descendants of slaves.
Stop sending US money to Ukraine and use it to pay reparations to descendents of slaves
— Tim Pool (@Timcast) December 30, 2022
Though he doesn’t say which descendants of which slavery, we must assume he means African descendants of the
Jewish White Anglo-Saxon Christian and definitely no one else slave trade in the Americas.
He cannot possibly mean the White Europeans who were also enslaved by the Jewish slave trade in America or by the Jewish slave trade in the Ottoman Empire, but while we’re on the topic, those are some specific flavors of reparations I could get behind.
While vapidness may be one of Tim Pool’s strongest suits, his reason for choosing slavery reparations as the only obvious alternative use of Ukraine funding may have a more calculated purpose. And yes, Pool is an Occupy-turned-Vice News-turned-Bernie Bro-turned-MAGA 2016, 2020, and Stop the Steal fist-pumper, which is why it makes him an even more perfect for this role.
There are many non-controversial popular causes that fit neatly within the conservative paradigm Pool could have proposed, but the point of the seemingly non-sequitur tweet was neither about proposing a meaningful alternative nor was it about actually building support for ending money to Ukraine.
For starters, Conservatism, Inc. would never seriously consider cutting off Zelensky and Pool isn’t going to burn much time on the issue, but it can’t be completely ignored. Endless money for Ukraine has grown unpopular to the point where it has become problematic on both sides of the political spectrum.
So goes the formula for Jewish problems like this one: Bait the target audience by granting the premise of the controversial issue, which has the effect of soothing angst over the issue. A big name in the thing I care about is taking a social media stance on an issue important to me!
Then, as the dopamine starts hitting, switch attention to an issue on which Jews are trying to shift public opinion in the opposite direction.
Reparations continue to be deeply unpopular with the American public at large, but what makes Pool’s suggestion even odder is that it’s a topic that nobody was talking about. And for good reason. The more Jews have attempted to normalize reparations by pushing them as a foregone conclusion, the more unpopular they’ve become.
This is classic psychological reactance, a perfectly normal phenomenon found within human psychology that has been studied intensely by Edward Bernays and other Jews for their expressed purpose of undermining it.
Under a section entitled “Latitudes of Acceptance” in his 1928 book “Propaganda”, Edward Bernays defines psychological reactance as:
If a person’s message is outside the bounds of acceptance for an individual and group, most techniques will engender psychological reactance (simply hearing the argument will make the message even less acceptable).
Bernays went on to propose two solutions to this “problem” (a problem for Jews like Bernays, but a healthy trait for everyone else):
- First, one can take an even more extreme position that will make more moderate positions seem more acceptable.
- Alternatively, one can moderate one’s own position to the edge of the latitude of acceptance and then over time slowly move to the position that was previously.
While it’s possible that reparations are the extreme position and Pool will moderate later, that’s not how conservatism has ever functioned. In fact, it does the opposite. Option 2 is usually the more conservative course of action and Pool predictably goes that route, but with a slight modification. Pool gets to the edge of the latitude of acceptance by taking a popular but entirely risk-free position on the controversial issue of Ukraine money (bait) in order to present support for reparations (switch).
As far as I’m aware, this is the first time reparations have been promoted by conservatives from within “grassroots” conservatism. It is important that this support originates from a source that is perceived to be outside of establishment politics. Had reparations support come from those circles instead, it would have generated significant levels of reactance from the public.
Given that the basis for the Republican Party’s entire existence has always been predicated upon subjugating White political interests in favor of blacks, getting conservatives to support reparations would merely be a continuation of a long-standing historical theme; from the party’s founding under Abe Lincoln, which culminated in 620,000 dead White men in exchange for emancipation and that was soon followed by the horrors of Reconstruction, to Donald Trump’s Platinum Plan.
“Impossible!” says the diminutive conservative voice inside hopefully not too many of you. Just remember, the non-White immigration bomb hidden within the Hart-Celler Immigration Act of 1965 was deeply unpopular too – more so than reparations – but the lie that was told to make it more palatable to the American public was that it would have no impact on the demographic makeup of the country.
I believe that the lie that will be told by many conservatives to sell their shrinking pool of supporters on reparations will be to make it the panacea for rising crime rates. Oh no, they won’t do what rational logic dictates and demand that cops, prosecutors, and judges actually do their jobs and simply follow pre-existing black-letter U.S. law. The solution to a problem of Jewish neoliberalism’s own making is to concede to a longstanding pet project of Jewish neoliberalism.
I can hear Greg Gutfeld making the argument now as I walk past a television blaring Fox News at an airport this summer: “If America has any hope of resolving violent crime in our country, which, of course, is downstream from a century and a half of egregious inequity for Blacks in America™, it’s time for White people like myself to pay it forward. It’s the least we can do”.
And yet numerous studies have shown that socioeconomic status has no impact on disproportionately high black crime rates. In other words, wealthy blacks commit crimes at disproportionately higher rates than wealthy Americans of all other races. These immutable facts are so ingrained in who we are as a nation that the real reason the United States flag has 13 stripes and 50 stars is apparently because 13% of its population commits 50% of the crimes.
The target audience for the Gutfeld argument will be people to repeat to their friends without attribution so as to appear “smart”. After all, cable news is essentially just talking points for boomers and wealthy party people, i.e., Team Republican and Team Democrat sycophants, mega-donors, bundlers, and other self-important scum.
For the cheap seats, they’ll just sell it as a way to own the libs, who will all promptly drink it right up and ask for seconds.