Saturday, July 3, 2021

All Things Great and Small ......Are Racist, Part IV

By Rich Kozlovich

 Political Cartoons by AF Branco

I've been tracking all things being declared racist for some time, but these claims are now so persistent, and aggressive, I decided to organize them and post them.  I started with this first piece on April 11, All Things Great and Small.....Are Racist!.  The fact is, this has become so persistent and so pernicious I've turned this into a series.  This administration, the media, and all those who are Woke are making these claims of racism the standard by which everyone must rally under.  

On April 11 I posted, All Things Great and Small ........Are Racist, followed by Part II on April, then on May 3rd. I posted Part III, all of which is testimony of how dangerous this has become to the continued existence of America as we know it.

 So then, and once again, the title of this article is based on that great British TV series which ran between 1978 and 1990 called  All Creatures Great and Small about British veterinarians in the 1930's.  Although the Church of Wokeness hasn't passed judgement yet, it was clearly racist!  Why?  There weren't any blacks in the show, which is clearly one of the arcane identifying clues used by the congregants of the Church of Wokeness to declare that something, anything, or for that matter, everything is racist, including....and get this..........Bird Names are now Racist

According to this June 22, 2021 article by Eric Utter the names of birds must be changed because so many of them were named by William Alexander Hammond, who happened to use the "N" word, and since he wasn't a rap artist or black, all that he accomplished must be "eviscerated from the face of the Earth", including the names he coined for the birds he identified. 

He makes an observation that should be obvious to the most casual observer:

In the same article, J. Drew Lanham, a Black ornithologist, is quoted saying that “conservation has been driven by white patriarchy.” Really? Could it be that whites organized and catalogued most of the natural world in part to protect it when no one else was doing so?  

He then makes another observation that also should be obvious to the most casual observer: 

There is no end to what one can find offensive if one is desperately looking to be offended.

Then of course there's this overriding issue of trees.  Trees, the presence of them or the lack of them, is, or can be declared racist.  Again, Eric Utter brings another racist outrage to our attention in his piece  'Tree Inequity' plaguing, noting"

It's worse than we thought.  It's bad enough that "peoples of color" are victims of racist math and racist bird names, but now we know they are also made to suffer from "tree inequity."..........The group claims that trees are disproportionally planted in those wealthier and whiter neighborhoods and that this has "deprived many communities of color of the health and other benefits that sufficient tree cover can deliver."  The USFS funds the utilization of a 100-point system to determine whether there are "enough" trees planted in a given neighborhood, known as the new Tree Equity Score............Conversely, the extraordinary numbers of well-off white people living in desert communities in Arizona and other locations often have few or no trees on their properties.  So perhaps, say, the Department of the Interior can institute new Cactus Equity and Golf Hole Equity scores.

No comments:

Post a Comment