Being young and energetic, former Democratic presidential contender Andrew Yang was once hailed as a breath of fresh air. But some (erstwhile?) fans are now saying he seems more like the ill wind of politics as usual. The issue? Yang has caved to the mob regarding assailed podcaster Joe Rogan.
As 1010 WINS radio reported Monday, “Andrew Yang, a former New York City mayoral [candidate], has apologized after tweeting…comments defending Joe Rogan, claiming [on Sunday that] the podcast host isn’t racist.”
“‘I don’t think Joe Rogan is a racist — the man interacts with and works with black people literally all of the time,’” 1010 WINS continued, quoting Yang.
“‘Do I know black friends of Joe’s who would swear by him? Yes I do,’” Yang had added.
Then he subtracted, however — deleting the tweets — and, say critics, detracted from his own reputation. That is, Yang issued the following early Monday apology:
That wasn’t enough, apparently, so Yang then proceeded to try to polish up his credentials, tweeting:
Yang didn’t explain whether “those on the outside looking in” who needed “uplifting” — or those he was making the country “more fair, equitable, and just” for — included people targeted by the cancel-cultist mob.
Rogan is certainly among them, too. The 54-year-old, who boasts our country’s most popular podcast, has been viciously assailed in recent weeks by establishment disinformation specialists who claim he spreads COVID-19 “misinformation.” And over the last several days Rogan has been maligned as a “racist” after scandal miners dug up old clips of him using the n-word for illustrative purposes (which, apparently, is only something Joe Biden can do).
Unfortunately for Rogan, he made the mistake of apologizing to the mob, which only emboldens it to intensify its attack. Yet it appears that Yang’s apology didn’t do him any good, either, as evidenced by the Twitter responses to it:
- “How does a good faith interpretation of a man you know hurt anyone?” asked tweeter John Klindworth, rhetorically.
- “You know Joe is not a racist from first hand experience,” lamented Jon Greenhalgh. “This walk back is so lame. I always love your ideas. But, I’ve been consistently disappointed by your character.”
- “You want to be a leader yet your convictions can change in 30 min?” “KittyCity” wrote. “No thanks.”
- “It’s not wrong headed to stand up for a friend,” stated “Waters and the Wild.” “Wrong headed is allowing yourself to be bullied into not sticking up for that friend….If you can’t stand up to the mob, how can you change the broken system?”
Yet the problem is not so much a broken system as it is broken thinking by a broken race. That is to say, Yang had his supporters in the Twitter thread, too, and there were also those who believed Rogan was “racist.” But there wasn’t anyone I saw who made a simple point:
It doesn’t matter.
Oh, this isn’t to say “racism” — a leftism-birthed term — isn’t bad when referencing bigotry. It is to say that it’s applied to many things by leftists, from supporting election integrity to opposing illegal migration to offering a foreigner a peanut-butter sandwich. It’s also to say that our current racism inquisitions are sometimes a bit like hiring expert after expert to try to determine if your child has some hidden musical talent:
If you have to look that hard, there’s probably not enough present to make a difference.
Mostly, however, modern America has the affliction “racism-on-the-brain.” Where the Nazis once had a racial purity test, we have a racism purity test. Both involve scouring a person’s past to see if he passes muster.
To achieve perspective, consider that “racism” is just a sub-category of Wrath, one of the Deadly Sins. However, there are not only other manifestations of Wrath, but six other such sins: Greed, Sloth, Pride, Lust, Gluttony, and Envy.
Now, given research showing — and open eyes and ears perceiving — that the U.S. is one of the world’s least racist countries, is it possible that some of those other sins figure more prominently in our national life? For example, with the Sexual Devolution raging to the point where even children are indoctrinated with “LGBTQ+++” propaganda, maybe, just perhaps, we’re a bit more Lust-plagued than racist.
To analogize our characteristic hang-up, however, imagine a society in which:
A man’s Senate campaign is scuttled because, famished one day years before, he was overheard saying, “I could eat a horse!”
A principal is fired because she disseminated on social media numerous recipes and pictures of delectable delights.
An actor’s career is “canceled” because an old picture emerges of him looking like Jabba the Hutt’s out-of-shape brother.
This society is a place where the accusation “You’re gluttonous!” is a reflexive and reliable way to tarnish an opponent, and people fall all over themselves value-signaling about their temperance. “I’ve never shopped at Whole Foods” a judicial candidate will say — “a quarter of a food is as high as I go!”
Now, if upon looking around you see that most everyone is nonetheless emaciated, would you suppose this society had a problem with gluttony?
Or rather that it had a problem with a hang-up concerning gluttony?
In reality, our racism obsession is akin to a heresy and reflects a distorted moral compass. Today we have people who’d prefer Hannibal Lecter to Archie Bunker so long as the former, when indulging his cannibalistic tendencies, didn’t discriminate between white and dark meat on his plate.
