“[T]he arbitrary separation of citizens on the basis of race,” he observed, “is a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and equality before the law established by the Constitution.” —Justice John Marshall Harlan.
You’d think, given the “antiracist” rhetoric coming from Democrats, that the end of race-based policies—affirmative action, DEI, racial gerrymandering—would be celebrated by that side. But yesterday, the three Democratic appointees on the Supreme Court voted to uphold Louisiana’s race-based map. The rank-and-file are up in arms today about the colorblind approach of the Republican Party.
In a 6–3 ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down Louisiana’s congressional map, finding that the state’s creation of a second majority-black district amounted to an unconstitutional racial gerrymander because race was used too heavily in drawing its lines. The case, Louisiana v. Callais, reshaped how the Voting Rights Act of 1965 can be applied, with the Court requiring stronger evidence of intentional discrimination rather than relying primarily on the impact of district maps on minority voters.
Predictably, Democrats in lockstep argue that the decision weakens long-standing safeguards for minority voting power and could lead to reduced representation in states with histories of discrimination. “Safeguards for minority voting power” is code for Democratic power. Stripped of rhetoric, they are telling us that they don’t believe in equality. They are telling us that they do not believe in individualism.
In his famous dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, the law that sanctioned Jim Crow, Justice John Marshall Harlan rejected the majority’s approval of racial segregation, arguing that it violated the Constitution’s core principle of equality. Harlan declared in his lone dissent that “our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens,” insisting that laws separating people by race are inherently unequal and designed to mark black Americans as inferior.
Harlan dismissed the idea that segregation can be neutral, warning that the decision would become as notorious as Dred Scott, which declared that black Americans are inferior to whites. Harlan predicted it would undermine civil rights for generations. He was right. He was right because race-based policies are incompatible with liberty.
Justice Harlan was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1877 by Rutherford B. Hayes, a Republican president. This is an important fact. The difference between the parties on the question of race is a long-standing pattern in American history. The Democratic Party was the party of the Slavocracy and Jim Crow segregation.
Today, the Democrats are the party of Affirmative Action and DEI. Race-based policies and politics are embedded in the Party’s DNA. By contrast, it was the Republicans who emancipated black Americans. Republicans have been consistent in their opposition to race-based law and policy.
The public has been confused about this. Via colonization of our sense-making institutions, progressives have revised history to make it appear that Democrats are the party of civil rights and Republicans are the party of the racist dog whistle. I fell for it. I was set up from early in my life to fall for it. I had to recover the true history of the United States for myself. When I started blowing up the lies those around me were telling—many of them not knowing they were telling lies—I saw the lie machine. Once you see it, it cannot be unseen.
It’s the same thing with the political violence lie machine that I wrote about in yesterday’s essay on this platform. When you understand how these machines work, it becomes obvious that the widgets they pump out are the commodities of deceit. Public education and the Culture Industry are the machines that make primary commodities of men, preparing them to accept uncritically the lies spat out by other machines.
The corporate state runs the machines. We have to smash the machines. And we are smashing the machines. That’s why progressives are squealing like stuck pigs.
Today, Democrats are out in force, squealing about the judiciary. “Stare decisis!” they shriek. Stare decisis is the principle that courts should follow prior judicial decisions when the same points of law arise again, ensuring consistency and predictability in the legal system. Dred Scott? Plessy? Do Democrats believe in these precedents? They’re no longer useful, so they readily condemn them. Democrats don’t really believe in precedent. They believe in power. Precedents are instruments they wield to secure and reinforce power. Without race-based policies, they lose power.
Democrats don’t believe in equality because equality underpins a free society. Voters in a free society don’t want what the big intrusive government Democrats peddle. This is why, with the fall of Jim Crow, Southerners flocked to the Republican Party. To overcome this, Democrats rigged the system to overrepresent those whose loyalty they have cultivated through racial privileging and dependency on welfare. This is why they push affirmative action, DEI, racial gerrymandering, and all the rest of it.
Racial gerrymandering was never about benefiting black Americans. It was about benefiting the Democratic Party. Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act knowing that Democrats would lose the South. With racial segregation out of the way, there was no reason for Southerners to stick with big government Democrats. The Republicans were the party of small government, and liberty represents the spirit of the Southern man.
As the Democrats were negotiating the civil rights movement, they spent trillions of dollars over the long term on programs that made black people dependent on the Democratic Party. Since the South was going to turn Republican, Democrats had to make extraordinary arrangements to keep their majority in Congress. Democrats are the party of racial politics. They have always been the party of racial politics. At its core, progressivism is identitarianism.
Identitarianism works from tribalism. It rejects individualism. It pursues instead selective collectivism. Identitarians separate individuals into tribes, subordinate agency to groupthink, and then weaponize groups against the people. The goal is a one-party state in which progressives reshape America towards totalitarians ends.
The congressional map Virginian Democrats devised under Governor (and former CIA operative) Abigail Spanberger reveals Democratic ambition for one-party rule. Earlier this month, while the Supreme Court of Virginia did not strike down a redistricting plan, it bought freedom-lovers time by upholding a lower-court ruling that blocked certification of a voter-approved referendum that would have allowed new congressional maps to be drawn before the next census.
Opponents have challenged the referendum as unconstitutional, claiming it amounted to partisan gerrymandering and violated Virginia’s existing redistricting framework. By leaving the block in place while litigation continues, the court effectively paused any immediate changes to the state’s electoral maps. Although the issue remains unresolved, it gives the people of Virginia a chance to stop the weaponization of their state against democracy.
The Supreme Court’s action, as well as that of the Virginia Supreme Court, is a sign that the champions of liberty are making strides in rescuing our republic from authoritarianism and collectivism. But history shows that without drastic and persistent action, authoritarianism creeps back in. If we are not vigilant, we will lose our liberty. We have already lost enough. We cannot depend on the courts to save us. Indeed, as we have seen, the judiciary can be our enemy. If Democrats win the midterms, they will resume the project of American decline. We will lose the progress we have made. Not all of it, but enough of it to make reclaiming our heritage more difficult.
We must deal with this now. Ending racial gerrymandering is a necessary step. But we also need to deconstruct the administrative state and reclaim our courts. And we must educate the public as to what a constitutional Republic founded on equality means.
This last piece requires reclaiming public education and returning curricula to the formation of patriots. We must prevent progressives from manufacturing foot soldiers for the collectivist agenda if we are to have a country. Public education was never meant to be an indoctrination program for ideological tendencies. Its purpose is to prepare the young for a self-actualized life and citizenship in a constitutional republic. Democrats want the opposite. They want docile bodies for a New World Order.
The war for democracy has many fronts.
freedom and reason 