Caught in the crosshairs of ideological warfare, AOC and her partner have embarked on a mission to shepherd their followers toward their brand of ‘enlightenment,’ under the pretense of battling subtle biases and systemic racism, while conveniently using this narrative to advance a partisan political agenda.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a zealous proponent of the progressive political agenda, has leveraged her personal life to promote her own biased viewpoints. Already infamous for her polarizing rhetoric, Ocasio-Cortez has now chosen to use her boyfriend, a white man named Riley Roberts, as a prop in her grand political theater. She argues that the unwitting masses need to be educated about the subtle and nefarious strains of racism lurking in their unconscious minds, of course, according to her self-righteous perspective.
Roberts, under Ocasio-Cortez’s influence, is joining the brigade, spearheading an endeavor to stir guilt among those who dare to reject the idea that they’re perpetually at fault for an unending list of societal woes.
According to this narrative, even if you don’t believe yourself to be racist, you may well be – and, apparently, it’s Roberts’s duty to enlighten you. “I think a lot of people don’t want to be racist,” says Roberts, implying that those who dismiss the idea that they’re biased might simply be ignorant or misguided.
With an air of patronizing wisdom, Roberts suggests that merely exposing someone’s allegedly racist viewpoint could serve as a “teaching moment.” As if everyone needs this self-styled educator to lead them towards enlightenment, away from their supposedly ingrained racist and culturally biased tendencies.
He reinforces the idea that people need to be educated about why some of their beliefs, thoughts, or utterances are “wrong.” The problematic assumption here is that only Ocasio-Cortez and her ilk can define what is “wrong” or “right.”
Ocasio-Cortez, not one to be left behind, added her thoughts, stating the importance of being open to learning about our own potential racism. The couple’s shared rhetoric is designed to subtly implant guilt and self-doubt, suggesting that resistance to the idea of unconscious bias or racism is a sign of defensiveness.
They, in essence, suggest circumventing the term ‘racism’ and focusing on ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ to ensure less resistance. The alarming aspect here is the hijacking of the term ‘racism’, using it as a political tool to manipulate conversations and attitudes.
Post Trump’s acquittal, Ocasio-Cortez chose to boycott his State of the Union address, decrying it as a “normalization” of the President’s behavior. She publicized her decision on Twitter, stating, “I will not use my presence at a state ceremony to normalize Trump’s lawless conduct and subversion of the Constitution.”
It’s worth noting that she accuses the President of “normalizing” behavior while she herself attempts to normalize an ideological narrative that weaponizes the term ‘racism.’
Continuing her tweet, Ocasio-Cortez wrote, “This is a deeply personal decision for each member to make, and a choice I did not take lightly.” Yet, it’s hard to shake off the feeling that this is less about personal decisions and more about a collective effort to denounce the administration, especially considering that Representatives Maxine Waters and Ayanna Pressley, both frequent critics of Trump, also abstained from attending his speech. It seems that in Ocasio-Cortez’s view, the only acceptable perspective is the one that aligns with her own – a truly alarming prospect for a democratic society.
Source: AWM
