Our podcast today is titled “The Unintended Consequence of the BLM Marxist Allegation of “White Supremacy.” I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the Citizens Liberty Party News Network, for September 28, 2020.

Our podcast examines the use of the allegation of “white supremacy” by BLM Marxists, and its unintended consequence of instigating a class consciousness among White citizens.

We argue that the allegation of “white supremacy” today, plays the same type of political propaganda purpose for Black Marxists as the issue of slavery played during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, and then 70 years later, in the first Civil War.

In the early history of the Nation, the term “sectional animosity” was used to describe the two irreconcilable cultures between the commercial North and the agrarian South.

Today, the term sectional animosity between two alien cultures has a historical continuity with the ideological animosity between Marxists and conservatives, not over the credibility of the allegation, but over the stark difference in the mission of America, much like the issue of slavery did then, in the sectional animosity between the North and the South

Slavery, then, served as a convenient ground of dispute between the two alien cultures, in the same way that Marxist white supremacy plays today between the alien cultures of Marxists and natural rights conservatives.

Something real, slavery, then, acted as the precursor agent to solve the historical animosity between North and South, in the same way, today, that something real, racism, acts as the agent to impose Marxism on natural rights conservatives.

Madison attempted to combine two alien cultures under one government, and now, Madison’s flawed arrangement is allowing two distinct ideologies  to, once again clash, over the future of the nation.

We argue that Madison did not get the right institutional framework in place to ameliorate the sectional animosity. His grand compromises over slavery, in order to get the new constitution ratified, left the issue of slavery to fester, before the start of the Civil War, and after the Civil War ended.

When the 38 elites (one delegate signed twice, once for himself, and once for his buddy, who could not make it to Philadelphia that day), walked out of the Convention, on September 17, 1787, they knew that their compromises on slavery would lead to Civil War.

We agree with Ta Nehisi Coates, a Black Marxist writer at The Atlantic, who claims that the Civil War did not solve the issues of sectional or ideological animosity.

Coates argues that the Civil War solved nothing, and, therefore, that reparations are due to Black people for the ensuing racism, after the War ended.

In contrast to Coates’ conclusion about reparations, we argue that the conclusion of the Civil War did not provide the common cultural or moral values that bound the citizens together into a shared national mission of individual liberty because Madison’s constitution was not a moral document, but rather a legal framework of economic and financial civil rules of procedure.

We argue that the genesis of modern racism in America is not 1619, and that the ensuing racism is not due to white supremacy.

The modern version of racism began with the globalism of the large corporations, around 1985. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, The Origins of Modern Racism in the United States and Black Economic Dysphoria Under Global Corporate Crony Capitalism and the COVID Economic Lockdown Shock (June 11, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3625160).

As in 1787, and later in 1860, there are now two distinct cultures, and two different nations in America.

As the British observer in America noted, in 1860, there were two nations operating under one government. The British observer stated:

          “In order to master the difficulties of American politics, it will be very           important to realize the fact that we have to consider, not the action of           rival political parties, or opposing interests within the limits of one           body politic, but practically that of two distinct communities or   peoples, speaking indeed a common language, and united by a federal     bond, but opposed in principles and interests, alienated in feeling and        jealous rivals in the pursuit of political power.”

Further, we argue that today’s conflict cannot be solved peacefully under Madison’s flawed document because its civil rules of procedure permanently elevated the power of the natural aristocracy over the howling masses.

The ongoing racial hatred in America is due to a defect in the Preamble of Madison’s constitution, which failed to link his constitution to Jefferson’s Declaration, that all men are created equal.

For Madison, a “more perfect union” was a union that corrected the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation by permanently placing men who had “virtue” in unchecked economic power.

“A more perfect union,” said Thomas Paine, about Madison’s flawed Preamble, “meant a nominal nothing without principles.”

For BLM Marxists, a more perfect union means a communist tyranny.

Madison’s flawed, vacuous Preamble can mean anything to whoever happens to control the U. S. Supreme Court at that moment in time.

Madison’s two-class arrangement makes the constitution vulnerable to the ascendancy of the elite Marxists, who assume the authority and functions previously reserved by Madison for the natural aristocracy.

We raise the same issue about a future civil war that Edward Pollard raised in 1866, in his book, The Lost Cause: A New Southern History of the War of the Confederates.

Pollard wrote,

  “It is obvious that the controversy is no narrow one of party, that   it involves the traditions and spirit of government, and goes to   the ultimate contest of constitutional liberty in America. Regarding these issues, the question comes forcefully to mind:           Has the past war merely laid the foundation of another? The      pregnant lesson of human experience is that few nations have      had their first civil war without having their second.”

 

The essence of the ideological division today is over the difference between a society founded on individual freedoms, and a society organized under Marxist collectivism.

No force on earth will make the BLM Marxists suddenly decide to become individualist patriotic citizens, and give up their dream of imposing Marxism on the citizens. The ideological conflict between Marxist collectivism and conservative individualism is permanent and irreconcilable.

That Marxist ideological recalcitrance will lead to a second civil war, unless a peaceful civil dissolution occurs first.

In its relationship to Marxist class theory, the term white supremacy is used by BLM Marxists to describe the dynamics of the American social class of white capitalists who exploit the disadvantaged under classes.

In the logic of BLM Marxists, the white capitalist ruling class has an objectively verified, identifiable class consciousness that allows the Marxists to target the White capitalist class as a collectivist group.

The term white supremacy of the capitalist class has been broadened by BLM Marxists to include all White people, not just the capitalist class, who benefit from white privilege.

In contrast to the objectively verified class consciousness that the BLM Marxists project onto all White people, all White people do not identify themselves by race.

White people, as a collectivist entity, do not possess a class consciousness in the same way as the term is used by Marxists to identify the ruling capitalist class.

In other words, White people in America do not think of themselves as a collectivist social class, and do not think of themselves as a part of a white supremacist nation.

Following Madison’s idea about economic and commercial factions, between the natural aristocracy and the common citizens, White people today think of themselves in terms of economic and social status, and vote for either the Republican Party or the Democrat Party to represent their financial interests.

White people, applying Marxian analysis, do not have class consciousness.

However, one of the unintended consequences of the continued invocation of the term “white supremacist” by BLM Marxists, is that the Marxist ideology will cause the formation of racial class consciousness among White people, who had never before identified their common political and economic interests with other White people.

The media and cultural agencies will continually reinforce the message that all White people are racists, leading to the realization by White people that BLM Marxists consider White people to be an identifiable collective social group.

There is nothing in Marxist theory that suggests that the outcome of a new White class consciousness will lead to a pre-determined communist state.

A more plausible outcome of emerging White class consciousness is a revolutionary ideology of radical egalitarianism, based upon an individualistic entrepreneurial society.

The historical antecedent of that radical egalitarianism is found in the agrarian populist philosophy of North Carolina, as described by Cecil-Fronsman, in his book, Common Whites: Class and Culture In Antebellum North Carolina.

Cecil-Fronsman quotes an observer traveling through the South in the early 1800's.

          “The observer remarked that common whites, in North Carolina, were           "...extremely tenacious of the rights and liberties of republicanism.           They consider themselves on equal footing with the best people in the           country, and upon the principles of equality, they intrude themselves           into every company."

The feelings of social and political equality of common North Carolina White people arose from the priority they attached to attaining self-respect and economic independence from the Southern plantation elite.

They believed that their own moral worth as individuals did not derive either from their initial endowment of labor, or from their accumulation of property from market transactions.

Paul Escott notes, in Many Excellent People, that

          “North Carolina’s yeomen were, in reality, a self-directed, stubborn           and independent group. Theirs was a traditional way of life based           upon subsistence farming. It was neither luxurious not easy, but it           offered self-reliance and self-respect.”

Escott goes on to write, that from the eyes of the plantation elite, the (White) yeomen were not respectable, and tended to view them as unreliable and in the same class as free blacks and slaves.

In other words, it is more likely that the nascent white class consciousness will not be built upon the existing dialectics of the Marxist antagonistic relations between workers and the capitalist class, but will be built upon the social class awareness that Hobbes and Locke were correct that the best social welfare outcomes are achieved under a regime of private property and individual initiative.

The philosophical mistake made by BLM Marxists is to substitute the concept of “white supremacy” of all White people for the more cogent Marxist economic theory of ruling class exploitation.

The white supremacy of all White people, as a social class, does not fit into the Marxist ideology, but the categorization of the American ruling class does have a collectivist class consciousness that fits neatly into the Marxist two-class theory.

The American white ruling class is now busy undermining the Marxists with the tools of co-option and collaboration. (Vass, Laurie Thomas, BLM Marxism and the Emerging Alliance With Global Corporate Crony Capitalism. (July 25, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3660493).

BLM Marxists would probably have attracted more middle class White citizens if the Marxists had stuck with Marx’s original two-class distinction between the ruling class and the proletariat.

Following the ruling class theory of American history, promoted by Angelo Codevilla, most White citizens can easily see the unelected power of the ruling class, and realize that the two track justice system generates unfair, unearned, advantages for the ruling class.

The common name of this current political condition is “the swamp.”

Our term for Codevilla’s American ruling class is a kleptocracy of global crony corporations, which is composed of the senior executives of the 1500 large global corporations who favor a one-world government.

We call that system global crony corporate capitalism.

We argue that the only peaceful solution to the ideological divisions between BLM Marxists and natural rights conservatives is a civil dissolution of the current 50 states into two new nations, one of which embraces the philosophical roots of individualism of Hobbes and Locke.

The other new nation is founded on the collectivist Marxist principles of social justice envisioned by the Black BLM Marxists, and funded by the insane “open society” globalism of George Soros.

The ultimate consequence of the market branding of the  BLM allegation of  “white supremacy” and the end goal of BLM Marxism, for the second new nation is a totalitarian dictatorship of the proletariat, with an unspecified economic system, and untested ideas of a communist, one-class society, ruled by Marxist elites.

We predict that the on-going invocation of “white supremacy” will create a white consciousness among working class and middle class citizens, commonly called the petty bourgeois by Marx.

Marxist theory is defective in its treatment of the middle class because Marx only identified conflict between the working class and the ruling class.

We conclude that the solution for liberty lies in the direction of more individualism, and less central government, in a state sovereignty economic commonwealth of independent entrepreneurial producers of the American petty bourgeois.

This podcast is the introduction of a much longer article, available at clpnewsnetwork.com.

The other sections of the longer article include:

Section 1. Sectional Animosity As The Historical Antecedent of BLM Marxist White Supremacy Animosity.

Section 2. A Second Civil War Over White Supremacy or the Second Revolution Over Individual Liberty?

Section 3. Radical Egalitarianism as the Unexpected Outcome of the Unintended Consequence of the BLM Allegation of White Supremacy.

Conclusion: The Restoration of Jefferson’s Natural Rights Republic.

 

The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.