I just came across this post on YouTube: Chicago: Demographics, Deficits, and White Flight. I encourage you to watch it. The issue is serious. The facts are uncontested. Illinois is de facto bankrupt. The only question is how long will it take to become officially so. At this point, after Moody’s re-evaluation of its credit rating, it (the rating) is supposed to hold for a while:

“While we still see the long-term pressures building on the state in the absence of a comprehensive pension plan, the view here is that at least for the next couple of years the state can essentially hold its ground,” said Moody’s analyst Ted Hampton.

…but this information is only reinforcing the message of the video. If anything, the tax hike that precipitated the re-evaluation will only accelerate the white flight. I could throw in here several quotes from respectable publications to show a consensus about the FACTS of Illinois’ and Chicago’s financial troubles. The subject needs discussions. If there is a bankruptcy, the hardest hit will be the retirees and the welfare dependent (and disproportionately non-white) underclass.

A few days ago, I posted another link from the same source on my personal Facebook page (The International Financing of Engineered Migration).  I got a comment to it from an old friend pointing out that the channel is “white supremacist”. As if I didn’t know. As if I did not put a preamble to the post to this effect.

I have an uneasy relationship with the Vertigo Politix channel. The very first video that caught my attention was a history of the Frankfurt School. I still consider it the best short introduction to the subject. I did not detect any sign of bias, racism or antisemitism in it, yet it has been deleted so many times that I am hesitant to put a link here as I do not know how long it will work. If it doesn’t, just search for the title:
“The Architects of Western Decline; A Study on the Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism”

The channel is a constant target. Several of its videos have been deleted and even the account has been closed:

After my initial good impression, it didn’t take me long to realize that the channel’s creator has a white supremacist, antisemitic bent on most of its subjects. Sometimes it is blatantly obvious (as in the Chicago video), but other times not so much.

Should such videos be banned?? What are the Community Guidelines (specifically) that these videos violate? Does watching them make me racist? Does sharing the concerns of the video make one racist?
Is being concerned about fiscal irresponsibility or the flight of the tax base of a state racist? Does such concern become racist when its racial implications are discussed?

Should Charles Murray be stopped from speaking at universities? Some call him racist. His concerns are social and political. He is blaming politics for the problems of the black community in America. On the good intentions of the policies of L. B. Johnson’s Great Society. In a study he did in England he clearly demonstrated that the same policies can just as easily create the same problems in British (white) societies. Yet, he is still called a racist.

The problem is not race, but the fact that the only acceptable way to talk about it is the Cultural Marxist narrative. The problem is that we cannot have ANY honest discussion on ANY subject that can even remotely be connected to race. The problem of Illinois is the extreme financial irresponsibility of leftist politics. NOT RACE. The most productive and the most mobile will leave, including the black middle class that is employed in the productive part of the economy.

Yet, this time I was hesitant to share the post, because I found its racist bias a little too offensive, while at the same time, I find it highly alarming that I am complicit in restraining the debate on an important subject. I could engage the author to argue that race is not the issue, but then I would become part of the discussion of race with a racist, a predicament I may find difficult to extract myself from. I am not interested in race. The subject irritates me because it is so poorly defined. The comments to the post are scary. I would not want to have any part of it.

The left does not want any discussion about their actual policies because the results of those policies are always disastrous.
The point of dragging identity politics and its accompanying neo-communist narrative into every conversation is the shutting down the real discussion of the problems.
By labeling everybody who disagrees with the leftist policy prescriptions racist, sexist and whatever-phobe, the left’s aim is to delegitimize the arguments of their opponents. To delegitimize the conversation. To delegitimize the people making the arguments.
That was the point of my friend. That the points made about fiscal responsibility are not legitimate because the person making them is a white supremacist.
She also sent me a chart that helps her determine what are, and more importantly what are NOT, legitimate sources for news and opinion.

As I am looking at it, I must wonder where is the center of American public opinion?
Probably somewhere between the Hyper-partisan right and the Most extreme right.

I am also wondering where is the line between the subjects that can and cannot be discussed. Probably off the chart somewhere on the right.

Here are some of the subjects that cannot be discussed without getting labeled as some sort of monster:

• Communism
• Race
• IQ
• Identity politics
• Fiscal responsibility
• Sound money (Gold standard)
• the left’s complicity with fascism and communism
• the left’s role in racism, slavery and opposition to civil rights
• The rule of law (as it applies to immigration and refugee policy)
• Climate change
• The actual problems with health care
• The destruction of civil society and marriage
• The harms caused by the promotion of gender dysphoria
• The racist side effects of public education, welfare and minimum wage laws on the black community
• The disgraceful housing policies and the harm of rent control
• Globalization
• The ever-increasing role of the state in our lives

And I could go on. The discussion of any of these subjects is verboten for the left.
The conversation is getting increasingly polarized as the middle is disappearing. If you are not on the left, you must be on the extreme right. You cannot talk about any of these subjects in any reasonable way without being lumped in with the “far right”, so eventually these subjects will only be discussed by those who have not yet been attacked by the left or learned to live with the smears and the labels.

If you are concerned about a situation (such as the fiscal irresponsibility in Illinois) you will be called racist because that is the easiest way to avoid the conversation. The result is polarization without the possibility for a dialog. If we cannot talk, we can only fight. This is what the left is practicing already, this is what the leftists want. A revolution. A civil war. Because they think they can win it.

In the end, the question is a simple one: Should I share the link to the Vertigo Politix about Chicago on my Facebook page? Should I learn to live with the far-right label or should I keep pretending that a real, honest conversation is possible? So far I have not met a leftist who is both intelligent and honest enough to have a fruitful conversation with. I met plenty of either, but none who is both.