Final week, Black Lives Matter World Community Basis, the company behind the Black Lives Matter motion, issued a rather interesting statement. The company’s members stood in solidarity with the individuals of Cuba. The “U.S. federal authorities’s inhumane remedies of Cubans” was unacceptable. Not completed there, BLM appealed to the Biden administration to raise the embargo, because it solely serves to undermine the “Cubans’ proper to decide on their very own authorities.”
The place some noticed a passionate assertion of solidarity, others noticed opportunists seeking to exploit a state of affairs and steal among the highlight.
The writer Jorge Felipe Gonzalez seems to fall into the latter class. In a chunk for The Atlantic, aptly titled, “Black Lives Matter Misses the Point About Cuba,” Gonzalez writes, “Cuba shouldn’t be an empty canvas” onto which calculating, cynical actors “can undertaking their political concepts.” Moreover, it’s “not a utopian car to advance some fantasy of socialist equality,” neither is “it a pawn for opportunistic political debates.” The BLM motion, whose members have additionally voiced support for the Cuban regime, would do nicely to maintain Gonzalez’s phrases in thoughts.
With the BLM assertion, in addition to Gonzalez’s feedback, I used to be reminded of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) many statements on the current rental collapse in Miami, Florida. “Few international locations,” in accordance with the journalists Rebecca Tan, Lyric Li, and Alicia Chen, “have adopted” the rental collapse “as closely as China.” The trio doc the methods by which “state-run information businesses have offered wall-to-wall protection of the collapse midway internationally, with day by day updates on the loss of life toll and a number of editorials deriding the U.S. authorities’s “‘sluggish’ response.” Mockingly, because the CCP’s numerous mouthpieces have been busy mocking the tragedy in Miami, a catastrophic resort collapse occurred in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province. Irony, nonetheless, shouldn’t be one thing that the CCP seems to be accustomed to. The identical is true of the BLM motion, whose tone-deaf messaging is as ironic as it is farcical: we’ll defeat racism by being explicitly racist; black lives matter, however solely the lives of these black those who agree with the whole lot the motion stands for. I might go on, however you get the message.
The similarities between the CCP and the BLM motion don’t finish there. Each promote absolutist ideologies. To disagree is to open oneself as much as a world of violence and ache. Within the case of the CCP, just ask Jack Ma. Within the case of BLM, simply ask anybody dwelling in Portland, a metropolis that has been completely decimated by the so-called “peaceful movement.” With the CCP and BLM, the specter of violence is used as a weapon of coercion, and if the threats fail to work, then precise violence is used.
Final 12 months, at a “peaceable protest” in Kenosha, an aged man who had the audacity to guard his house from an offended BLM mob had his jaw broken.
Moreover, each the BLM motion and the CCP (somewhat clearly) fetishize the idea of communism. BLM’s fetishization of communism is especially amusing, particularly when one realizes that the group’s co-founder, Patrisse Khan-Cullors, is the owner of multiple million dollar homes. Communism has by no means regarded so lavish. Oh, so as to add, these properties are located in predominantly white neighborhoods. The hypocrisy is astounding.
One other similarity consists of the need to rewrite historical past. Take the 1619 undertaking, for instance, a fact-free initiative with intimate links to BLM. The heavily criticized undertaking is the brainchild of Nikole Hannah-Jones, a journalist who has tried to “reframe the country’s history.” One needn’t possess a Ph.D. in formal semantics to grasp what is supposed by the phrase “reframe.”
In the meantime, in Beijing, Xi Jinping and the Chinese language Communist Occasion have, for a few years, actively tried to “reframe” historical past. In 2014, for instance, Xi repeatedly urged historians to discover the CCP’s function in WW2, with a selected emphasis on the methods by which Chinese language forces helped defeat the Japanese. In different phrases, the CCP requested the nation’s individuals to fairly actually droop disbelief and comply with the altering of actuality.
Management Language and You Management the Lots
The revision of historical past is intimately linked with language. Each the BLM motion and the CCP excel at dictating who will get to say what. In 2018, as Vox reported, a matter of days after asserting “that presidential time period limits might be abolished, opening the door for President Xi Jinping to proceed his rule indefinitely,” the Chinese language regime launched “an intensive checklist of newly banned phrases.” These included phrases like “my emperor” and “lifelong control.” References to George Orwell’s dystopian novels “Animal Farm” and “1984” have been additionally banned. The identical 12 months, the CCP banned the “Winnie the Pooh” film after comparisons were made between the character and Xi, a dictator for all times. In the meantime, BLM has its personal checklist of acceptable language. From “microaggression” to “intersectionality,” “colorism” to “performative activism,” the motion, in some ways, has turn into a grasp of self-parody. Its members demand to be taken severely but they make use of gobbledygook as a method of speaking with the plenty. However, there may be nothing humorous about brutal bullies and sinister agendas. The CCP and the BLM motion, extra alike than one may think, are jam-packed with each.
John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist. His work has been printed by the likes of the New York Submit, Sydney Morning Herald, The American Conservative, Nationwide Evaluation, The Public Discourse, and different respectable retailers. He’s additionally a columnist at Cointelegraph.
Views expressed on this article are the opinions of the writer and don’t essentially mirror the views of The Epoch Instances.