Don Lemon… Domestic Terrorism and Revisionist History

A few weeks ago, CNN Host Don Lemmon inflamed the nation when he said, “The biggest threat in this country is White men.”  Well, he didn’t inflame the nation, mainly just Conservative White men, including President Trump.

Side note, writing President Trump still shocks me. It’s like early in the New Year when you haven’t gotten used to writing January yet. 

Anyway. 

The same people Don Lemmon inflamed with his comment are literally the same people who often say don’t talk about race, don’t talk about slavery, so no surprise there. The comment was NOT a comment against White men, it was against the White men who have been the chief architects for most of the recent domestic terror in this nation. While so many people dwelled on his comment, I think it’s important to note that White men have largely been responsible for the gross atrocities in our nation… specifically the genocide and damn near decimation of Native Americans, and the Transatlantic Slave Trade. As much as some people might not want to hear it or dispute it… that’s history. 

The surprise for me is the repeated attempts to push revisionist history and narratives that are completely false. Notions such as “the Civil War was over states rights,” or that slavery does not have deep roots in the minds of extremists. Extremists that have used their boisterous ways and power to influence others. In fact, not only have they minimized the wrongs of this nation, in many cases, they’ve attempted to suggest that said wrongs never occurred.

The storyline is simple… White Conservative/Republican men refuse to acknowledge that the lion share of mass shootings and serial killings in this country are carried out by hate groups and civil militias comprised of White men, or as some media outlets truthfully refer to them, White Supremacists. (Fact.) 

Revisionist history… really bad revisionist history… so bad, it reminds me of an episode on Martin in which Martin and Gina tell very different stories of how they first met. Each told their version of the story with extreme bias. The real truth of how they first met had to be told by a neutral party to avoid bias and blatant lies. It’s a very funny episode because it’s TV… not real life minimized to talking points by the extreme right regarding issues of humanity in this nation. 

“I Still Believe In My Country And Party”

[Last year we published several articles under the category “Define Your Patriotism.” In light of the NFL controversy and other major issues, such as proposed tariffs and the upcoming North Korea Summit, we felt that revisiting several articles in this category would be helpful at a time when many of us might be questioning our patriotism.] 

My first association of patriotism with myself comes from my family history of military service. All of my brothers, my sister, my uncles and aunts, grandparents and great aunts were in the Army. The vast majority served in wartime, and so did I. How I was raised undoubtedly framed how I’ve thought about my country, and I’m not afraid at all to say that I’m very, very inclined to side with my own country over the World. However, I do feel that our position gives us a responsibility to have an impact in the World. American values – freedom of expression and religion, human rights, property rights, self-determination, and the idea that those rights are worth dying for – for all people – frame how I think about my country and the World.

Related: “Patriotism Is A Dirty Word”

The last few years of politics in the street have been hard to watch, but I still believe our core ideals (though we may not always follow them) are the best in human history, and our system will ultimately bring us back to our ideals. Populism has its place in the center of a democracy, but the Bill of Rights is there to keep the majority from oppressing the minorities. An electoral college makes sure our leadership reflects both the will of all people and the importance of consensus of the different ways of life across our many states and districts. The three branches of government are there to keep any one branch of government from dominating the others, and the Bill of Rights contains the elements that keep all branches of government from ever wrestling power from our citizens. That’s the brilliance of American democracy.

I believe in promoting our values overseas, and the idea of our ideals making possible again Reagan’s idea of the “Shining City upon a Hill”. We are still the country that brought down the Soviet Union with a steady and orchestrated combination of military and economic might, and I believe the US still has a leadership role to play in the World that we should not surrender to Europe, China or a global coalition.

The daily politics of the past few years has bothered me a lot. It feels like a bulk of the country thinks about either “I want this, or I need this, so I have a right”, or “mine is mine”, or at least each side frames the other that way- very successfully. Natural rights aren’t things people have to do for you, they are things they can’t do for you. Citizens have the right to be treated equally before the courts, to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Whether they catch happiness or fail is up to their desire, determination and ability, and failure is part of life. Collective healthcare may or may not be a good idea, but it’s a privilege and not a right that one person (regardless of their means) provides that care for another.

By the same token, far too many with means focus only on “what’s mine is mine”. The free markets of the US, the roads we drive on and the infrastructure of safety and order that predicate the wealth-creation of our country require that everyone in the US must have an opportunity to succeed and a place in society. Without that, the environment of order that makes our economy great doesn’t work. Furthermore, whether inside or outside of government, our duty to our fellow man isn’t one we can forget by pushing others away. It may be that’s not the job of the government, but if it’s not, it’s because we private citizens instead make the active effort to create that opportunity for others on our own. If you say it’s the private market’s job because the private market is more efficient (as I do believe), you are placing that responsibility for your fellow citizens holistically on your church, your private organization or on yourself. You can’t say “I already pay my taxes so I’m good” and then just fight for lower taxes.

Conservatism didn’t use to be just about saying “no.” It used to be a vision for the US that our founders’ ideals were superior – that America has a dominant place in the World- and a vision with a place for all people.   We were the ‘Party of Lincoln’ when we were the first to foster the idea that “all men were created equal” really meant all men- and then all humans. We were the ‘Party of Reagan’ when we believed in our special role with a duty to defend the World and promote democracy globally. I still believe in my country and my party, and it’s my hope that in the coming years, my patriotism will help me guide those I care about in making sure that our next evolution in conservatism is not simply the ‘Party of Me.’

How do you define your patriotism?

Subscribe for free to receive LCR perspectives. 

This article was originally published on 3 July 2017.

Texas Church Shooting, I Disagree With Trump

President Trump claims more would have died were there stricter gun laws—insisting the gunman would not have been taken down by a “brave civilian” if that were the case. As a member of a Southern Baptist Church in Texas, and whose father and brother are both Baptist Ministers, I still cannot agree with POTUS. There absolutely should be a ban on assault-style weapons in the United States such as the firearm used by the gunman to kill 26 people and injure 20 others. Even with oversight by the U.S. Air Force to upload the gunman’s past domestic offenses in their database, civilians should never be able to possess weapons designed to be used in war. 

However, not isolating this incident and considering all of the senseless shootings that have taken place, my stance is not a commentary on the Second Amendment giving civilians the right to bear arms. I do not advocate for a gun-free society, but I do believe stricter laws should be enforced and types of firearms should be evaluated. There are firearms such as the one used by the “brave civilian” that are meant for recreation and defense. While they still can cause bodily harm, they should not be banned. However, in the case of assault-style weapons which are meant for combat situations—to kill as many people as possible in the least amount of time—they should not be accessible to civilians.