Comments

ANOTHER ANTI-GUNNER BEGINS TO SEE THE LIGHT — 10 Comments

  1. Mas – My compliments to you. Your comments show that you are an optimistic person who is always willing to view the glass as being “half-full”. You read this article and picked out the effort of the author to dimly see that firearms might actually have some utility in securing freedom. You see this as being “open-minded”. That is sure looking on the “positive” side with regard to this author.

    I, however, am more pessimistic when it comes to the left-wing mind. When I read this article, I saw a mind that was totally trapped in the left-wing worldview. I have commented before that left-wing ideology creates a “prison” for the mind of the individual infected with it. It puts that person into an ideological “maze” in which they can only struggle down the defined pathways of left-wing orthodoxy.

    Notice that the author of this article is totally trapped inside the world of identity politics. His whole worldview is based upon the racial, sexual and class status of the people he references. He quickly identifies himself as an “African-American Historian”. He views the current owners of the Hayden house as white (English, Dutch, Irish and German Ancestry). His whole view of American History revolves around slavery. Clearly, to him, it is the defining event for America. Indeed, he seems incapable of viewing American History outside of the context of slavery (he must be a very limited historian!).

    His sexists politics come out when he discusses N.A.A.G.A and the fact that 60% of its members are women. Indeed, identity politics is the prism through which this author views everyone he meets.

    He still sees America as a racist nation and sees right-wing, MAGA-hat wearing white racists under every bed and in every closet. Like all leftists, he sees President Trump as a fascist. Odd, really, given that African-American unemployment has dropped to new lows under his Administration. What have the Democrats ever done for African-American citizens? Destroyed the black family structure with handouts and victimization? Turned them into nothing more then a reliable “Voting-Block” for the leftist Democrats? In my view, President Trump has done more for the African-American community, in two years, then President Obama did in eight. Indeed, poverty and racial hatred EXPANDED under Obama. He made thing worse rather then better. No wonder that so many African-American women are taking charge and owing the guns. The men are all on drugs or sitting in prison thanks, largely, to the efforts of the Democratic Party and leftists like this author.

    So, the author is “open-minded”? In reading this article, I saw a mind that was very “closed” indeed. A mind that is still trapped in the maze of identity politics, political correctness and left-wing ideology. I suppose that he did, weakly, open his mind to at least the “possibility” that firearms might have a utility beyond mass-murder. That must be some kind of openness but, not much, since he still won’t touch a firearm himself and his relatives all have to hide their guns, from him, whenever he drops by for a visit. No doubt, they did so because they did not want to “set him off” into another left-wing rant!

    I suppose, given that most leftists have their minds 100% closed to anything other then left-wing dogma, a person with his mind only 98% closed, like this author, can be called “open-minded”. At least in comparison to the norm for a leftist.

    • In reading the other comments, I realized that the author of the referenced article is female. Since it was written in a first-person, narrative style, I did not realize the sex of the author was female when I wrote my first comment. I am afraid that I jumped straight into reading the article without paying much attention to the author’s name. I missed the fine print about Ms. Miles being a Professor of History at Harvard. A mistake on my part.

      However, the sex of the author does not really change my views or the validity of my previous comment. Both men and women are subject to being trapped inside the prison of left-wing ideology. Indeed, I believe that women are often more susceptible to left-wing thought-patterns since leftist ideology is based upon the false belief in the innate goodness of mankind and women, because of their nurturing nature, are more subject to fall for this false belief. Reference the fact that organizations that focus purely on women’s issues tend to have leftist leadership and (generally) fall into the category of being “left-wing activist” groups.

      Given how the leftists have taken over education in this country, I am not surprised that she is a Professor at Harvard. My Goodness, can you imagine what her classes must be like? Slavery, slavery, slavery, racism, racism, racism, with a healthy dose of white privilege and feminism thrown in for good measure. The burst of freedom represented by the founding of America and the force for good that America has been over the decades, on the world stage, is probably completely neglected in her classes. I expect that students who finish her classes either end up hating America or else hating her!

      • TN_MAN,

        About slavery, in history, it is totally normal. A nation without slaves is an oddball nation. Not all blacks were slaves in America. Some were free. Now those free blacks would not own black slaves, would they? Well, some did and they were not oddballs either.

        Who ended slavery? White people ended it. I think the man who did the most was William Wilberforce.

    • A ‘crack in the door’ still allows sunlight and fresh air to enter the otherwise suffocating atmosphere of a stale room. People are ‘anti-anything’ usually because they come from that line of thinking in their upbringing. Just sayin’…

    • I think any ideology – political, religious, philosophical can lead someone to adopt the blinders of orthodoxy. The only way I see to avoid that is sincere dialog with people and ideas you don’t agree with. My take away from the article is that civil dialog is more likely to change someone’s mind than any amount of vitriol.

      • @ Nick42 – I agree. Sincere dialog with people on the other side of your issues is the path to expanding one’s mind beyond orthodoxy. There is the rub. It takes two people to open a dialog but it only takes one to throw vitriol.

        To quote Winston Churchill: “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

        It is encouraging that Ms. Miles is beginning to question some of her orthodoxy as shown by this article. I did a search for her biography. I was curious as to her age. Like many women, she does not seem eager to list it. However, based upon the fact that she attended college in the early 1990’s, I would estimate her age as being in the range of 45 to 50. Clearly, she is old enough to start questioning the left-wing dogma of her youth. Since higher education, in America, has become a left-wing echo-chamber, it may be hard for her to completely transition to “having a brain” but one hopes that she will eventually make it.

        Sadly, Churchill’s view is not guaranteed. One only has to look at old-time, leftists like Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and Bernie Sanders to see that! 🙂

  2. That was a very interesting, well thought and historical perspective from a self-proclaimed anti-gunner. I wish more people of all races would consider what the alternatives would be without the tools of freedom and defense.

    I was born in Winchester, MA in a part of town then populated by the Italians, and not so preppy as you will find it now! My childhood home on Irving Street was also part of the underground railroad. My Great-Grandparents, the Filiponi’s, purchased the home from a black family who had operated the underground. We not only learned of the underground railroad, but also had fun playing in between the secret wall passages and tunnels that linked many homes in the neighborhood! I always imagined how clever and highly motivated to survive those runaways must have been. My Uncle ‘Sonny’ Cucurullo still owns the property. He is not concerned with history though.

    The choice to defend and carry a firearm is always a personal one. As stated in the article , what would your alternative be if you needed one? What situation would leave YOU to conclude that preservation of life against a violence encounter would necessitate use of a firearm?

  3. Gadzooks! The author, Tiya Miles is a history professor at Harvard. I’m afraid she is going to lose her job!

    I believe the unconstitutional gun laws which are on the books now are actually racist laws. I’m guessing that, after the Civil War, no one was afraid of white men with guns, but they were afraid of free black men with guns. When the laws were passed, white men didn’t complain, because they were told the laws would only be applied to black men. Wink, wink.

    Maybe we should tell people that gun laws are racist. The Left is certainly good at using that word to get what they want.

    • @ Roger Willco – Quite right. The purpose of Firearms Prohibition (AKA Gun Control) laws has always been to disarm the lower classes. Many were passed after the Civil War with the goal of keeping firearms out of the hands of the newly-free slaves.

      However, the lower classes are not always defined in purely racist terms. New York’s Sullivan Law was aimed at disarming newly arrive immigrants. Note that the first person convicted under the law was an Italian immigrant. The law was never intended to be applied to the “elites” in the City (Wink, Wink). Even today, it is well known that, while ordinary citizens are blocked from owning firearms by New York’s laws, if you are rich, famous and/or politically well-connected, you will have no problems getting a permit to carry. Neither will your body-guards. See this link:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act

      All of the current anti-gun laws being pushed by the Left-Wing elites, in the Blue States, in Hollywood, in Silicon Valley, etc. are also aimed at the masses. No one is suggesting that these laws should disarm the forces of the Government (which largely obey the left-wing deep state) or the bodyguards of the leftist elites. No, they are aimed at disarming the “smelly Walmart Trump Supporters” in “Flyover Country”.

      Gun Control is always, always, always pushed as a “crime control” measure. However, what it always, always, always actually has been is a method of disarming the lower economic classes so as to keep the rich and powerful on top. Trust me. If the leftists succeed in gutting the 2nd Amendment and ending the Right to Keep and Bear Arms for the regular American Citizen, then it is OVER! Americans will no longer be citizens inside their own country. Rather, we will be Subjects of the All-Powerful, left-wing controlled Central Government. We will be the new “Slaves” of the rich, leftist elites. The new slavery will not be defined by the color of your skin. Rather, it will be defined by economic status (poor or middle class) and by location (in Rural “Red” areas). The new “Slave-Owners” will be the rich and powerful leftist elites living the “Good Life” in the Blue Cities.

      And, if all that comes about, it will take a Second Civil War to bring change. A Civil War but with the same ultimate aim. To Free the Slaves from the Oppression of the rich, slave-owners!

  4. Interesting read, but I suspicion that the last paragraph is why the NYT published it. He puts firearms ownership in historical perspective, but appears unwilling to take the final step to accepting responsibility for his or his family’s well being. Which, of course, is a choice he’s free to make.