Dinesh D’Souza: ‘Bigotry’ Is ‘Unifying Glue’ for ‘Progressives and the Democratic Party’
< >
Filmmaker and author Dinesh D’Souza described “bigotry” as a “unifying glue” for “progressives and the Democratic Party” during an interview with Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow on Friday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily.
D’Souza discussed his latest book, “Death of a Nation: Plantation Politics and the Making of the Democratic Party,” and its accompanying film of the same name.
LISTEN:
D’Souza explained his latest book and documentary’s shared title and thesis: “The reason we did that title is a hundred years ago, a progressive Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, screened in the White House the movie Birth of a Nation, and the hero of the movie was the Ku Klux Klan. Basically, the progressive Democrats were saying, ‘We don’t like the American founding. Forget about all that. We’re starting the country all over again,’ and I guess it’s the thesis of my book and movie that if that logic is played out, America as we know it will be killed off. Certainly the America of the founding will be extinguished.”
D’Souza commented on the New York Times‘ recent hiring of Sarah Jeong: “The notion that the New York Times would hire a bigoted editorial writer is only surprising if you think that progressivism and the Democratic Party are somehow anti-racist. If you thought they were anti-racist, then this becomes an anomaly. On the other hand, if you actually know the history of progressivism and the Democratic Party, you realize that bigotry has actually been its unifying glue.”
D’Souza added, “I’m not surprised the New York Times hired a bigot. What’s interesting about the Democratic Party is merely that the targets of its bigotry shift, but the bigotry remains constant.”
D’Souza rejected the historically revisionist narrative of a “Southern Strategy”: “The architect of this alleged switch is supposed to be Richard Nixon, and according to the progressive narrative put out by historians like Kevin Kruse of Princeton and others, basically Nixon went to the deep South, he courted the racists, he won the racist Dixiecrats over to the Republican Party, and so that’s when the parties switched. This narrative is, from start to finish, bogus.”
D’Souza remarked, “The whole notion that the Dixiecrats came over to the Republicans, it is factually, empirically, and logically a big lie.”
D’Souza explained how racial nationalism is a subset of left-wing ideology.
“These white nationalists are all leftists,” claimed D’Souza. “They have a deep background in the left. Jason Kessler, the organizer of the Charlottesville rally, is an Obama supporter. He’s an Occupy Wall Street guy. Now think about this, the idea that an Obama supporter could be quote a white supremacist is fishy on the face of it, and yet the media, which knew this at the time of Charlottesville, suppressed Kessler’s background [and] did not report on it.”
D’Souza described Richard Spencer as the news media’s “poster boy” for “white supremacy,” politically characterizing him as “on the far left.”
D’Souza said, “[Richard Spencer] does not believe that rights belong to individuals. He doesn’t believe that rights come from God. He believes that rights come from the state. He doesn’t think Reagan was a great president. Essentially, all his heroes are Democrats. He’s a Woodrow Wilson progressive from the early twentieth century.”
D’Souza continued, “His only problem is that, in a sense, his racism moves in the wrong direction. See, if he actually hated white people the way [the New York Times’s Sarah Jeong] does, they would love him. His problem is that … he hasn’t kept up with the changing contours of Democratic bigotry. He hates the wrong people.”
D’Souza reflected on parallels between the economic policies of Nazism and contemporary socialists among Democrats.
“What did the Nazis campaign on [in the early 1930s]?” asked D’Souza. “Why did people vote for them? What were they seen as promoting? So the Nazis had this 25-point platform. Most of it is about economics, and they laid it out. Amazingly, when you read through the Nazi platform, point by point by point, yes, there are some points that deal with Jews, but the economic thrust of the platform [was] state control of banks, state control of education, state control of health care, confiscation of war profits, redistribution of income, redistribution of land, and down and down the list you go, and you suddenly realize … this is not a surprise, these were national socialists, and so this is a socialist agenda, and large parts of it are eerily similar to themes that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez], all the stuff that they talk about is hauntingly present, right there, in the Nazi 25-point program.”
D’Souza drew parallels between the political climates following the elections of Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump in explaining the cover of his latest book and the similar poster of his latest film.
“I’m not saying that Trump and Lincoln are the same person,” said D’Souza. “Temperamentally, they’re kind of opposites. Lincoln was brooding. He was philosophical. He was melancholy. Trump is not any of that. But, their situations are actually quite similar.”
D’Souza continued, “In 1860 an outsider, a Republican wins the presidency very narrowly, and the moment he does, all hell breaks loose. The other party, which happens to be the Democratic Party, refuses to accept the results. There was all this craziness going on, and it all hinged on the failure of a major party to accept the results of a lawful election.
D’Souza added, “Here we are again in 2016, and now two years later, the same craziness is going on in this party. The same party, the Democratic party, won’t accept the fact that Trump won a lawful election. THey’re trying to get rid of him by any means necessary. … Will they stop at nothing? Is there a line beyond which they won’t go? We don’t really know.”
Marlow concurred with D’Souza’s analysis: “You really make a pretty apt comparison to the tenor of the country at the time. I really think we could be as divided now as we were at that point; at least close to it. I don’t think we’ve seen a level of division in the country [like this] since the Civil War.”
< >
Filmmaker and author Dinesh D’Souza described “bigotry” as a “unifying glue” for “progressives and the Democratic Party” during an interview with Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow on Friday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily.
D’Souza discussed his latest book, “Death of a Nation: Plantation Politics and the Making of the Democratic Party,” and its accompanying film of the same name.
LISTEN:
D’Souza explained his latest book and documentary’s shared title and thesis: “The reason we did that title is a hundred years ago, a progressive Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, screened in the White House the movie Birth of a Nation, and the hero of the movie was the Ku Klux Klan. Basically, the progressive Democrats were saying, ‘We don’t like the American founding. Forget about all that. We’re starting the country all over again,’ and I guess it’s the thesis of my book and movie that if that logic is played out, America as we know it will be killed off. Certainly the America of the founding will be extinguished.”
D’Souza commented on the New York Times‘ recent hiring of Sarah Jeong: “The notion that the New York Times would hire a bigoted editorial writer is only surprising if you think that progressivism and the Democratic Party are somehow anti-racist. If you thought they were anti-racist, then this becomes an anomaly. On the other hand, if you actually know the history of progressivism and the Democratic Party, you realize that bigotry has actually been its unifying glue.”
D’Souza added, “I’m not surprised the New York Times hired a bigot. What’s interesting about the Democratic Party is merely that the targets of its bigotry shift, but the bigotry remains constant.”
D’Souza rejected the historically revisionist narrative of a “Southern Strategy”: “The architect of this alleged switch is supposed to be Richard Nixon, and according to the progressive narrative put out by historians like Kevin Kruse of Princeton and others, basically Nixon went to the deep South, he courted the racists, he won the racist Dixiecrats over to the Republican Party, and so that’s when the parties switched. This narrative is, from start to finish, bogus.”
D’Souza remarked, “The whole notion that the Dixiecrats came over to the Republicans, it is factually, empirically, and logically a big lie.”
D’Souza explained how racial nationalism is a subset of left-wing ideology.
“These white nationalists are all leftists,” claimed D’Souza. “They have a deep background in the left. Jason Kessler, the organizer of the Charlottesville rally, is an Obama supporter. He’s an Occupy Wall Street guy. Now think about this, the idea that an Obama supporter could be quote a white supremacist is fishy on the face of it, and yet the media, which knew this at the time of Charlottesville, suppressed Kessler’s background [and] did not report on it.”
D’Souza described Richard Spencer as the news media’s “poster boy” for “white supremacy,” politically characterizing him as “on the far left.”
D’Souza said, “[Richard Spencer] does not believe that rights belong to individuals. He doesn’t believe that rights come from God. He believes that rights come from the state. He doesn’t think Reagan was a great president. Essentially, all his heroes are Democrats. He’s a Woodrow Wilson progressive from the early twentieth century.”
D’Souza continued, “His only problem is that, in a sense, his racism moves in the wrong direction. See, if he actually hated white people the way [the New York Times’s Sarah Jeong] does, they would love him. His problem is that … he hasn’t kept up with the changing contours of Democratic bigotry. He hates the wrong people.”
D’Souza reflected on parallels between the economic policies of Nazism and contemporary socialists among Democrats.
“What did the Nazis campaign on [in the early 1930s]?” asked D’Souza. “Why did people vote for them? What were they seen as promoting? So the Nazis had this 25-point platform. Most of it is about economics, and they laid it out. Amazingly, when you read through the Nazi platform, point by point by point, yes, there are some points that deal with Jews, but the economic thrust of the platform [was] state control of banks, state control of education, state control of health care, confiscation of war profits, redistribution of income, redistribution of land, and down and down the list you go, and you suddenly realize … this is not a surprise, these were national socialists, and so this is a socialist agenda, and large parts of it are eerily similar to themes that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez], all the stuff that they talk about is hauntingly present, right there, in the Nazi 25-point program.”
D’Souza drew parallels between the political climates following the elections of Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump in explaining the cover of his latest book and the similar poster of his latest film.
“I’m not saying that Trump and Lincoln are the same person,” said D’Souza. “Temperamentally, they’re kind of opposites. Lincoln was brooding. He was philosophical. He was melancholy. Trump is not any of that. But, their situations are actually quite similar.”
D’Souza continued, “In 1860 an outsider, a Republican wins the presidency very narrowly, and the moment he does, all hell breaks loose. The other party, which happens to be the Democratic Party, refuses to accept the results. There was all this craziness going on, and it all hinged on the failure of a major party to accept the results of a lawful election.
D’Souza added, “Here we are again in 2016, and now two years later, the same craziness is going on in this party. The same party, the Democratic party, won’t accept the fact that Trump won a lawful election. THey’re trying to get rid of him by any means necessary. … Will they stop at nothing? Is there a line beyond which they won’t go? We don’t really know.”
Marlow concurred with D’Souza’s analysis: “You really make a pretty apt comparison to the tenor of the country at the time. I really think we could be as divided now as we were at that point; at least close to it. I don’t think we’ve seen a level of division in the country [like this] since the Civil War.”
