Cucky doesn’t like “cuckservative”

David French, a National Review writer who really, really, really wants you to know that HE HAS AN ADOPTED BLACK SONDAUGHTER, doesn’t think the “cuckservative” term should be used. Because, ah, well, it helps the far Left?

I understand frustration at political correctness. In fact, I’ve done something about it, filing more lawsuits to protect students and professors from campus PC tyranny than perhaps any other lawyer in the United States. I agree with the incredulity and rage at elites’ unwillingness to secure the border and their insistence that every immigration debate has to be racialized, with conservatives constantly accused of bigotry. In their frustration, I’ve even seen conservatives I call friends deride those they deem insufficiently devoted to the cause as “cucks” and “cuckservatives.”

In addition to being a derogatory, insulting slur, the word provides aid and comfort to the trolls whose tweets I’ve posted above. Just as bad, it enables and feeds the Left’s own engine of racial grievance.

Conservatives should reject those on both extremes of the spectrum. We defend a culture, not a race. The foundation of that culture is a faith that makes no distinction among races but rather declares, unequivocally, “All are one, in Christ Jesus.” Shunning the slur disempowers the trolls and forces the radical Left to confront the race hatred that fuels its own rage.

Look, this isn’t that difficult. Now that whites are no longer an overwhelming majority in America, they have to play the same racial politics game that everyone else in every other heterogeneous country has had to play for centuries. It’s not an accident that people like David French and Jonah Goldberg, decent conservatives who genuinely subscribe to the now-outmoded abstract ideals that the Left rejected in the Sixties, haven’t grasped the fact that the demographic changes to the United States have not only changed the way the political game is played, but have changed the game itself.

It’s rather amusing to see French attempt to play the Christian card in the secular context of U.S. politics. Yes, all are one in Christ Jesus, does that mean French supports expelling all non-Christians from the USA? If not, then what is the relevance of spiritual equality among Christians to the culture in which white Americans would prefer to live?

Diversity+Proximity=War. What used to be, and what French still believes is, virtue-signaling, in a mostly homogeneous white majority culture is now increasingly despised in a much more heterogeneous culture. What was praised 20 years ago may well get people killed 20 years from now. Just look at how the culture of Rhodesia has changed as a direct result of the changing racial demographics. Cuckies don’t understand that non-whites have never played by white rules except when forced to do so, and they never will do so by choice.

What is feeding the Left’s engine of racial grievance is the increasing size and number of competing racial identities. Trying to play the now-irrelevant “colorblind” game is as pointless as playing by touch-football rules in the NFL.

While it is true that race is not culture, neither are the two distinct concepts entirely unrelated. And culture certainly is much more intertwined with race than it is with geography; it’s more than a little ironic that those who claim race has nothing to do with culture also assert their belief in the culturally transformative qualities of magic dirt.

Moreover, the idea that it is the Alt-Right that is somehow feeding the Left is ridiculous, when the cuckservatives are attacking the same people, using the same tactics and terms, that the Left does. We all know why self-styled conservatives hate being called cuckservatives. It’s because the term strikes too close to home and cuts too deep.

It’s not the word “cuckservative” that has to go. It’s National Review cuckservatism. Isn’t 60 years of unmitigated failure enough to conclude that it isn’t working?