“Chickens coming home” – again
Sometimes I think things have changed dramatically for the worse since I was a child. And I do believe that’s true – of some things.
But sometimes I think there are aspects of human nature – and of left and right – that have hardly changed at all, and that perhaps we’re just more aware of them because of social media, the internet, and cable news.
For example, as an instance of something that’s really changed, we have Jimmy Kimmel, a talk show host on a major network expressing something other than empathy/sympathy/sorrow/shock at the assassination of a prominent American political/religious figure. In the 1960s, or when Reagan almost lost his life, talk show hosts kept their politics to themselves. Kimmel has become highly political in recent years – and unfunny as well as unentertaining. But until now he hasn’t been at all reluctant to offend at least half the country.
He got into trouble a few days ago, but now he’s being reinstated – sort of:
Nexstar Media Group, Inc., announced on Tuesday that it will continue preempting “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” despite Disney allowing the show to return to ABC.
“We made a decision last week to preempt ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ following what ABC referred to as Mr. Kimmel’s ‘ill-timed and insensitive’ comments at a critical time in our national discourse. We stand by that decision pending assurance that all parties are committed to fostering an environment of respectful, constructive dialogue in the markets we serve,” the company said in a statement.
“In the meantime, we note that ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ will be available nationwide on multiple Disney-owned streaming products, while our stations will focus on continuing to produce local news and other programming relevant to their respective markets,” Nexstar added.
It may even help his sagging ratings. More people might tune in to hear whether he’ll continue to diss the right or whether he’ll pull back a bit.
But although talk show hosts didn’t do this back then, I remember that when JFK was assassinated the left lost no time whatsoever blaming the right even though the killer was a Communist. The left – and many regular Democrats – blamed the right for creating a “climate of violence.” Sound familiar?
And what of the chickens of the title of this post? It comes from a speech and answer given by Malcolm X – who later was himself cut down by an assassin’s bullet that most agree came from his old allies now turned enemies, the Nation of Islam. At the time of the speech, not long after JFK was assassinated, he was still allied with that group, but by the time he was killed in 1965 he had pulled away. If you read the speech you can see themes that are very popular with today’s left; here are some excerpts, for example:
The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that as it was the evil sin of slavery that caused the downfall and destruction of ancient Egypt and Babylon, and of ancient Greece, as well as ancient Rome, so it was the evil sin of colonialism (slavery, nineteenth-century European style) that caused the collapse of the white nations in present-day Europe as world powers. Unbiased scholars and unbiased observers agree that the wealth and power of white Europe has rapidly declined during the nineteen-year period between World War II and today.
So we of this present generation are also witnessing how the enslavement of millions of black people in this country is now bringing White America to her hour of judgment, to her downfall as a respected nation. And even those Americans who are blinded by childlike patriotism can see that it is only a matter of time before White America too will be utterly destroyed by her own sins, and all traces of her former glory will be removed from this planet forever.
But before God can set up his new world, the Muslim world, or world of Islam, which will be established on the principles to truth, peace, and brotherhood, God himself must first destroy this evil Western world, the white world…a wicked world, ruled by a race of devils, that preaches falsehood, practices slavery, and thrives on indecency and immorality. You and I are living in that great Doomsday, the final hour, when the ancient prophets predicted that God himself would appear in person, in the flesh, and with divine power He would bring about the judgement and destruction of this present evil world. …
The white liberals control the Negro and the Negro vote by controlling the Negro civil rights leaders. As long as they control the Negro civil rights leaders, they can also control and contain the Negro’s struggle, and they can control the Negro’s so-called revolt. The Negro “revolution” is controlled by these foxy white liberals, by the government itself. But the black revolution is controlled only by God.
The black revolution is the struggle of the nonwhites of this earth against their white oppressors.
It goes on for quite some time in that vein. But the “chickens” part came as part of a question and answer period afterwards. I don’t think there’s any recording of it, but here’s Malcolm X a few months later, attempting to explain his remarks. Again, it’s very familiar stuff:
If you go to YouTube and look at the comments there, they almost all say some version of “Yes, that’s what happened to Charlie Kirk, too.” I’ll give you just a few typical examples, all put up after Kirk was killed:
Charlie Kirk
I thought about this after Charlie Kirk got popped
The chickens appeared in Utah yesterday to greet Charlie Kirk
Charlie Kirk is all I shall say.
When I heard about Charlie Kirk this was the first thing that came to mind.
“They won’t even admit the knife is there” is basically half of Charlie Kirk’s content
We Know Why we’re all here.
And of course we have so many social media postings, and pundits and politicians, openly saying the same thing about Charlie Kirk’s killing. One popular observation is the idea that it’s fitting that Kirk was killed with a gun, since he supported gun rights and said that defending liberty by supporting the Second Amendment meant – sadly – that some people would be killed by guns. The assassination is generally justified and even applauded by many people on those grounds plus the idea that Kirk was a “hater” – although nothing could be further from the truth.
But plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Depicting Ryan Routh’s performative re-enactment of ABC/Disney’s decision:
https://x.com/Breaking911/status/1970573565184614733
Well. The idea that Greek and Roman empires were destroyed by their use of slavery is arguable, to say the least, especially since the Eastern Empire was destroyed by Islam, a slave-holding civilization. Lots of those slaves were black Africans.
The quote by Malcom X demonstrates him to have been an historically ignorant racist who supported the most murderous ‘religion’ ever conceived.
Take a look at this Youtube video.
Hambly says that many of the criminals in our prisons–who are obviously black–are being listed as being white, deliberately skewing what are already very bad statistics.
He also points out that, for the last several years, the FBI has not been issuing violent crime statistics with breakdowns by race.
Now why would that be?
Is he wrong?
Do Hambly and the numbers lie?*
* See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZClxvAyEMYA
From the title of this post, I thought it would be about the “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor, who cursed his own country from the pulpit five days after 9/11, while the old black women in his congregation applauded.
Re: 9/11
Due to my leftist comrades blaming America for 9/11, I changed conservative.
This weekend I noticed the astonishing numbers of folks honoring Charlie Kirk with their presence or views.
I think there are a lot of changers in the making who don’t buy Malcolm X’s “chickens … roost” rhetoric then or today.
They shot the wrong guy.
(Not that there’s a right guy.)
Chickens coming home to roost— karma— what goes around comes around—he got what he deserved.
All blaming the victim, claiming he was bad, the badness based on lies.
The lies are at the heart of the Dem Demonization Strategy. Not truthful critique, as Charlie did (& Neo!), but lies & distortions.
One popular observation is the idea that it’s fitting that Kirk was killed with a gun, since he supported gun rights and said that defending liberty by supporting the Second Amendment meant – sadly – that some people would be killed by guns. The assassination is generally justified and even applauded by many people on those grounds . . .
Countries with much stricter gun control than the US have much higher homicide rates. Homicide rates track with culture.
Also note that the rifle used to kill Kirk was an old hunting rifle. Not a type of gun targeted by gun control efforts. The rifle was probably imported and sold before Kirk was even born. There’s no amount of realistic gun control that could have prevented this even if in principle gun control worked.
I’ll also add in that what Kirk’s assassination means with respect to guns is that we need guns to defend ourselves from violent leftists. Particularly since the left spiked homicide rates in 2020 (up 30%) by releasing criminals and encouraging riots.
We have a Democrat problem, not a gun problem.
It’s interesting… as I’ve been further thinking about the Kirk assassination and what it means, one of the historical parallels that occurred to me was indeed that of Malcolm X. It is close enough that I can’t say that the circumstances of Charlie Kirk’s mortal end were historically unique.
The chickens are coming home to roost because you have to break some eggs to make an omelet.
Or something.
@ Don > “We have a Democrat problem, not a gun problem.”
There are a lot of memes circulating on the webz that make the same points you did.
wasn’t malcolm targeted by the faction that farrakhan came from, that was certainly speculation in the 90s, even the subject of a Law and Order episode,
interestingly Malcolm’s faction was more affiliated with Wahhabi interests and Farrakhan’s had ties to nationalists like Quadaffi, as would Reverend Wright and Jesse Jackson at different times,
apparently the mentions of martyrdom which was accurate, particularly the parallels with Stephen were too provocative,
charlie was killed as the end result of that stupid and dangerous ‘words are violence’ trope, the paroxyms that some outlets used to stigmatize the wonderful memortial were disgusting, even among nominally religious publications like the Presbyterian Outlook and the Baptist Global News, just another left wing appendage,
Philip Sells:
Malcolm X was killed by former allies who felt he’d left the fold and become less radical. To me, although he does resemble Kirk in that he was a speaker rather than officeholder, the parallel is poor. The Malcolm X analogy would work if Kirk had been killed by a groyper, but he was not although the left dearly loves to say he was.
I actually think a better parallel for Kirk is Martin Luther King, although the latter was better known and an actual minister.
Don:
No, no amount of realistic gun control would have prevented it. But leftists don’t want realistic gun control.
“a wicked world, ruled by a race of devils, that preaches falsehood”
This business about white people being devils is, for followers of the Nation of Islam, not merely a rhetorical flourish, but is a matter of doctrine. White people were created by an evil scientists on the island of Patmos named Yakub 6000 years ago in order to torment the black race.
It’s all here. Go read it and you’ll get an idea why Malcolm X thought a return to standard Sunni Islam was a move towards sanity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakub_(Nation_of_Islam)
I wonder if there have ever been any conflicts between the Black Nation of Islam and the Black Hebrews, who believe themselves to be descendants of the ancient Israelites (but do not consider themselves to be Jews).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hebrew_Israelites
I did not know this, having only seen stories about the Black Hebrews in America:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Black-Hebrew-Israelites
Most Black Hebrew Israelites live in Dimona, Israel, with the first ones arriving in that country in 1969. The group began in Chicago in 1967 under the leadership of Ben Ammi Ben Israel, an African American whose birth name was Ben Carter. Ben Israel appointed 30 disciples and in 1967 moved the group to Liberia before embarking for their final destination in Israel.
The Black Hebrew Israelites’s claims of Jewish heritage provoked substantial debate in Israel. Israeli law offers citizenship for all Jews throughout the world, but the Black Hebrew Israelites could produce no evidence to substantiate their Jewish heritage. After much investigation, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel thus decided that the Black Hebrew Israelites were not really Jewish and were not entitled to citizenship.
Opressors? Some on my father’s side may have been O’Pressors way in the past. I think on my mom’s side there was a Frank O’Prussia.