Well, the New York Times has followed the script of Jim Acosta, Anderson Cooper, and so many others in the liberal leaning media. They are no longer content to bring you the news, but instead they want to be the news.
However, there is an upside to all these news organizations overtly steering the narrative, and that’s because it exposes their true intentions so much better than if they actually bothered to hide behind a veil of objectivity.
But what the New York Times hiring and defense of Sarah Jeong exposes is the true nature of the Progressive agenda. And that agenda is not to get rid of racism in all its forms as they claim. Instead their real agenda is to weaponize racism, to concentrate it so they can wield it against their political enemies. It’s really twisted when you think about. Claiming to fight something that should bring people together, something everyone can agree on, but instead use it to divide.
After the uproar over Sarah Jeong’s past racists Tweets, The New York times put out a statement claiming the Tweets were meant as an “impersonation” of others who harassed her first online. However, that excuse doesn’t really hold up. First of all, the harassment she claimed was several months apart from most of her racist Tweets. So unless she was spending those months thinking up the perfect come-back, that excuse doesn’t really seem plausible. A majority of her racist Tweets were not in reply to anything, they seemed to be just causal musings.
Not only that, what the NYT defense also claims is that because Jeong experienced racism, that gives her a free pass to project racism on an entire race of people in response. Which to me seems like the exact definition of racism. If she was attacked by one person of a specific race, isn’t then attacking that whole race in response the exact definition of racism?
Not to mention, there has always been an unwritten rule in our culture that people of the same race can get away with much more race oriented speech and comedy. Hispanic Americans can get away with making jokes about other Hispanic Americans. Same with African Americans who may choose to poke fun at their own race. But things get much more precarious when you start to cross races with your “jokes”. And this is where Jeong crossed a line in my opinion. She is an Asian American woman making “jokes” about another race. In our culture, there has always been an unwritten rule about that. But that’s exactly what Progressives want to reverse. They want the exclusive power to be racists towards whoever they want, crossing the line between races and being totally immune to any criticism for it.
Also somewhat perplexing, most liberal universities consider Asians to be a “privileged class” above whites, at least based on their acceptance rates. Often times Asians are negatively weighted when elite universities decide who gets into college and who doesn’t according to this report from the New York Times. Other races, who are considered disadvantaged, get easier entrance qualifications than Asians. So according to our elite universities such as Harvard, Jeong is considered “privileged” which should disqualify her from being able to make any race-related commentary outside of her own race, at least according to current Progressive doctrine that they force on everyone else.
But all this points to an obvious conclusion. The Progressive left is trying to weaponize racism for their own benefit. They are not trying to eradicate racism, they want to concentrate it so only one form of racism is allowed, and it is a form they can use with laser focus to attack their political enemies and avoid any criticism for their own absurd and divisive ideas.