A White American’s Response to Actor Jesse Williams’ Racist and Nonsensical Speech About Race at the BET Awards


In 2016 Americans have become so cowardly that we now largely allow racist and nonsensical comments such as those uttered by Jesse Williams at the 2016 Bet Awards to stand without a response. I am not afraid to call out Williams on his racism and nonsense.

Below is found selected excerpts from his speech in quotes and italics. My comments follow each quoted passage.

“Peace peace. Thank you, Debra. Thank you, BET.”

The Black Entertainment Network is a cable television network created for black people which caters specifically to black people and one assumes it is staffed almost solely by black people. BET was founded and operates on a racist and segregationist premise. The BET awards is a racist and segregationist awards show because only black people are eligible for its awards and it is presumably only black people who vote on the awards. The night he gave his speech, Williams accepted a racist and segregationist award. It was fitting that, as will be shown below, in a number of respects his acceptance speech was racist and segregationist as well. I cannot leave the topic of BET without mentioning that it stands as a prime example of the type of double standard that permeates most every aspect of the view of racism and race held by the typical African American. We can all imagine the reaction of black America to a WET.

“A thank you Nate Parker, Harry ohm and Debbie Allen a for participating in that. Ohm before we get into it, I just want to say you know I brought my parents out tonight. I just want to thank them a for being here, for teaching me ohm to focus on comprehension over career, that they a make sure I learn what the schools were afraid to teach us.”

Mere seconds into his speech, Williams proved that he does not deserve to be looked at as the leader and role model of his people that he obviously desires to be as a consequence of his bad command of the English language.

More important is Williams’ contention that the educational system is apparently involved in some vast right-wing conspiracy to hide the truth from African Americans out of a fear of something or other. It is probably safe to assume that eighty percent of educators in the U.S. are on the Left politically. Therefore for Williams’ to believe that educators are doing anything other than bending over backwards to accommodate African Americans curriculum wise means at least one of two things must be true. He may just be unintelligent. If this is the case he would be far from the first himbo actor who looks like a male model and has acting chops but little brains. Perhaps he is so blinded by his own racialized worldview that he cannot see the truth when it comes to issues connected to race. Maybe both are true.

“Now, this award – this is not for me. This is for the real organizers all over the country – the activists, the civil rights attorneys, the struggling parents, the families, the teachers, the students that are realizing that a system built to divide and impoverish and destroy us cannot stand if we do. Alright.”

Was Williams referring to the same “teachers” who work in schools that do not teach the “truth” to African Americans? The system Williams’ refers to as being set up to “keep down” African Americans allowed him, a person of color, to become one of the most beloved and rich actors in the entertainment industry. A majority white nation made him a television star and allows him to live a luxurious lifestyle. It is astonishing that a person could have so little self-awareness that he cannot see that his own life disproves the concept of a system designed to make black people unsuccessful in the U.S.

Could it be possible that when making his speech Williams forgot who has occupied the Oval Office for the last almost eight years? Does he not understand that a majority white electorate gave Barack Obama two election victories not despite but because of his race? The fact that Obama became president itself shows that Williams’ view of the “system” is laughable.

One does not have to look hard to find additional evidence. From the moment an African American child in need is born, she or he benefits from federal, state and local government assistance. An African American child who graduates from high school with just an average grade point average will be handed a full scholarship to most any college or university she or he wishes to attend for no other reason then race. An African American college graduate who completed her or his degree with just an average grade point average will be offered a full scholarship to almost any graduate school one might chose simply do to her or his race.

Once an African American begins her or his working career, she or he will usually find it easy sledding. This is because every entity of a good size that employs people has affirmative action quotas and is desperate to fill them. African Americans will be often hired over more qualified whites because diversity policies demand it.

Once an African American gets her or his foot in the door, she or he will usually quickly become acquainted with two realities. One is that it is almost impossible for an African American to get fired unless she or he does something along the lines of committing a felony or stops showing up to work. Employers are often so terrified of being accused of racism and being sued that African Americans who cannot do their work are many times allowed to continue to collect a pay check and the responsibility for their work falls to others.

An African American who performs as well as the average worker will be many times be quickly promoted even if it means being pushed ahead of more qualified whites. Affirmative action policies are in place for every wrung of the workplace ladder.

It is safe to assume that although educational and workplace affirmative action meets the dictionary definition of racism, Williams supports both because they benefit people of color.

“Now, this is also in particular for the black women in particular who have spent their lifetimes dedicated to nurturing everyone before themselves. We can and will do better for you.”

This was one of the few parts of Williams’s remarks that deserves praise. Peer reviewed research has long shown that children who are born to married parents and grow up with a mother and a father in the household are many times more likely to grow up to be productive members of society. Unfortunately, around seventy-five percent of African American children are born out of wedlock. The percentage of African American boys who grow up with no positive male role model in the house is about the same. Although Williams apparently recognizes illegitimacy as a problem in the African American community, what he fails to understand is that it, and not whites or a corrupt racist system, is the most significant problem facing African Americans.

“Now, what we’ve been doing is looking at the data and we know that police somehow manage to deescalate, disarm and not kill white people every day.”

The reason why police officers find it easier “to deescalate, disarm and not kill white people” is because the black community seems to assume that all cops are racists and out to get them. It is no wonder that even a cursory examination of video evidence uncovers the fact that African Americans often adopt a combative attitude in encounters with law enforcement officers. If one goes looking for a fight with a policeman she or he is likely to find it.

Another problem is that a large number of African Americans do not seem to realize that it is against the law to disobey a lawful order from a police officer. To few African Americans appear to understand that they must comply with any directive issued by a police officer as along as doing so does not force them to break the law and the failure to do so immediately makes them guilty of disorderly conduct and subject to lawful arrest.

Rhetoric like that used by Williams in the speech only serves to fuel the problems between African Americans and law enforcement. Williams is a part of the problem.

“So what’s gonna happen is we are going to have equal rights and justice in our own country or we will restructure their function and ours.”

I would respond to this if I could figure out what the heck he is talking about.

“Now… I got more y’all…”

By reinforcing the notion that speaking in “black English” is acceptable, Williams is setting back the African American community.

“Yesterday would have been young Tamir Rice’s 14th birthday so I don’t wanna hear anymore about how far we’ve come when paid public servants can pull a drive-by on 12 year old playing alone in the park in broad daylight, killing him on television and then going home to make a sandwich.”

Tamir Rice’s shooting is explained not by race but by the fact that at the time he was shot he was holding a toy gun that was indistinguishable from the real thing. How did he get hold of such an object?  How is it that he was never taught not to wave such a thing around on a city street. Were Rice’s parents married when he was born? Were they married when he was shot?

“Tell Rekia Boyd how it’s so much better than it is to live in 2012 than it is to live in 1612 or 1712. Tell that to Eric Garner. Tell that to Sandra Bland. Tell that to Dorian Hunt.”

The Rekia Boyd killing was what is referred to as a “bad shooting” by law enforcement officers. However, there is no evidence to suggest that it had anything to do with race. The fact that Williams thinks otherwise for no reason besides the cop was white and the victim black proves that Williams is a racist.

If Williams really believes that someone stole into Sandra Bland’s cell to murder her and her death was not a suicide by hanging then he truly is a himbo. The Hunt shooting just happened. Williams should reserve judgment until all the facts come out.

The Eric Garner situation deserves in depth comment. It is true if a choke hold had not been placed on Eric Gardner he likely would not have died at the hands of the police that day. However, people like Williams conveniently fail to mention several other facts surrounding the case when speaking on Gardner. If Gardner had not violently resisted arrest after informing the law enforcement officers on the scene that he planned to do so he would still be alive. If he had not been in terrible health he would likely not have lost his life even if a choke hold had been utilized to subdue him. If Gardner had not been illegally selling cigarettes in public, something which had been habitually guilty of, he would not have died while being taken into custody.

This last point brings to mind what is the second biggest problem facing the African American community. This is the penchant for breaking the law. Africans American’s make up about thirteen percent of the population in the U.S. but commit about 50 percent of the serious crimes in the nation. Rather than work to reform the African American community from within and work to make African Americans more law-abiding, people like Williams blame black crime on whites and argue that convicted African Americans should receive less jail time.

Were Boyd, Garner, Bland and Hunt born to parents who were married and remained married until each grew to adulthood?

“Now the thing is, though, all of us in here gettin’ money – that alone isn’t gonna stop this. Alright, now dedicating our lives, dedicating our lives to gettin’ money just to give it right back for someone’s brand on our body when we spent centuries praying with brands on our bodies, and now we pray to get paid for brands on our bodies.”

Might he have been drunk when he gave his speech?

“There has been no war that we have not fought and died on the front lines of. There has been no job we haven’t done. There is no tax they haven’t leveed against us – and we’ve paid all of them. But freedom is somehow always conditional here. “You’re free,” they keep telling us. But she she would have been alive if she hadn’t acted so… free.”


What conditions did Williams have to meet to become beloved, rich and famous that a white entertainer does not have to meet? What conditions did Barack Obama have to meet before he could become president that a white candidate does not have to meet?

Who is “she”? Did he think someone was standing on the stage next to him? Did Williams have a drink in his hand when he accepted his award?

 “Now, freedom is always coming in the hereafter, but you know what, though, the hereafter is a hustle. We want it now.”

Churches have made more of a positive contribution to the  lives of African Americans than any other institution. Here Williams runs them down. This is most unfortunate for those African American criminals I wrote of earlier because it would do them well to have religion in their lives.

“And let’s get, let’s get a couple things straight, just a little side note – the burden of the brutalized is not to comfort the bystander. That’s not our job, alright – stop with all that. If you have a critique for the resistance, for our resistance, then you better have an established record of critique of our oppression. If you have no interest, if you have no interest in equal rights for black people then do not make suggestions to those who do. Sit down.”


Does Williams find himself brutalized when living in his mansion, riding in limos and eating in the finest restaurants?

He is commanding people like me to shut up. This is yet another example of the Left trying to win politically by silencing all those who disagree with them.


“We’ve been floating this country on credit for centuries, yo,…”

A majority white America has given Williams a lifestyle of the rich and famous. He is not owed anything.

“We’re done watching and waiting while this invention called whiteness uses and abuses us, burying black people out of sight and out of mind while extracting our culture, our dollars, our entertainment like oil – black gold, ghettoizing and demeaning our creations then stealing them, gentrifying our genius and then trying us on like costumes before discarding our bodies like rinds of strange fruit.”

Does Williams believe, as does the Nation of Islam, that white people were created in a lab and engineered to be evil?

The last part of this passage touches upon the infuriating concept of cultural appropriation. I have two questions I would love to have answered. Is Williams guilty of cultural appropriation when he wears a business suit or communicates using the English language? Are black people who play classical music, tennis or golf committing cultural appropriation?

“The thing is though… the thing is that just because we’re magic doesn’t mean we’re not real. Thank you.”

I grateful to Williams for disabusing me of the notion that black people were figments of my imagination.

By referring to African Americans as “magic,” Williams is implying that people of other races are non-magical. In other words, he means that by nature of their biology, black people are racially superior to other people.

The victimhood narrative pedaled by Williams is a cancer upon African Americans. Rather than be given a Humanitarian Award, Williams should be viewed as a person who is harming is own race.

If you enjoyed this blog post, please consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter.

 You may also want to follow my blog and follow me on Twitter (T.J.Kong @Ride_the_bomb).

You can email me at T_J_Kong@yahoo.com. I always welcome suggestions for blog topics.

I also have a YouTube.com channel called: “Ride the Bomb!” See https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpauuMnQBSI2FWgFiScj2mw

I believe in free speech and so I approve all blog comments. No exceptions.


Why I Suspect the Recent Iowa “Hate Crime” Might be a Hoax


It cannot be disputed that making false claims about hate crimes has become an accepted tactic of Social Justice Warriors and the American Left. It is for this reason that as soon as I read the headlines of the stories of an alleged hate crime that was said to have taken place on April 30 in Iowa I was skeptical. After I read the stories themselves I became even more suspicious. Read on for why I believe that University of Iowa freshman Marcus Owens might not be telling the complete truth about the incident.

Initial News Reports

According to the initial news reports the nineteen-year-old was at an off-campus bar with two friends before leaving and separating from them between ten and eleven at night. (Could he have been drinking illegally and been drunk at the time?) Next Owens took a stroll down an alley that was presumably deserted since there seems to be no witnesses besides Owens himself to what happen next. One assumes it was also dark since most such alleys in U.S. downtown areas are so at that time of night. If he had not jeopardized his safety enough he started to type out a text message while walking. Could Owens really have been so stupid as to walk down a dark, deserted alley alone in an American downtown area between ten and eleven at night while looking down at his phone? I would never do such a thing.

According to a local television station Owens claimed that while he was presumably in mid-text: “I see this guy coming towards me aggressively, and I step back and say, ‘Hey man, what’s up? I don’t want any problems.” Under these circumstances, one would think that Owens would have gotten a pretty good look at least one of the three white men whom he claims thereafter began first hitting and kicking him and then yelled racial slurs.

According to the same local television station: “The victim described the suspects as three white men, of average height, between the ages of 19 and 22.” Was this the best he could do? This description fits 90% of the male student body at University of Iowa.  Should every one of them be arrested on the suspicion of committing a hate crime?

If Owens was able to discern the facial characteristics and skin color of all three of his alleged attackers well enough to make a declaration about their race, why have none of the accounts of what happen included any information about the color or style of the hair or clothes of any of the three men or their eye color?  According to one report, Owens “believes [one of his attackers] may have been a [University of Iowa] student….” Considering the fact that he seems to have only managed a cursory look at his assailants based upon the vague description of them he reportedly gave to police, why does he suspect one of them is a fellow university student? If his suspicion was based only upon their age, would he not have stated that he thought all three might have been students?

Why were the three men waiting in the alley at all? Owens has apparently not made any claim that he thinks the men wanted to rob him. Were these three men waiting in the alley in the hope that one of the five African Americans living in Iowa would randomly decide to walk down the alley so that they could beat them? 

My Personal Experience

When I was in high school I, along with two friends, were jumped by twelve African American strangers who objected to the color of our skin. Even these many years later I can provide a much more detailed description of our attackers than that Owens gave of the three he maintains beat him up. His having given such a vague description makes me wonder about his story.

More News Reports

It was again the same television station that reported Owens stated: “Someone yelled at the attackers, who ran away.” Based upon the reports I have read the identity of this “someone” appears to be a mystery to both Owens and police. If I had been this mysterious “someone” I would have, at the very least, offered to render Owens assistance and given him my name so that at a later time I could tell the police what I saw of the tail end of the violent encounter.

Contact with Police

According to what I read online, Owens made no attempt to report his attack to the police until 11:00 P.M., two days after the attack. If he believed that a gang of white men might be randomly attacking African Americans in Iowa, would he risk putting the safety of others at risk by waiting so long to report the attack? When he did contact police it was University of Iowa police that he spoke with first and not the local police. Why would he do such a thing when the alleged attack did not happen on campus? The University of Iowa police understandably referred him to the local police who have stated that they are investigating the incident as a possible “hate crime.” However, at this point in the investigation, and in today’s climate, they would have no choice but to do so regardless of what they suspect may or may not have happen to Owens.

Owens Injuries

It has been confirmed that Owens received treatment at a hospital for his injuries and photographs prove they were fairly serious. What needs to be determined is who (or what) injured him and under what circumstances did he suffer his injuries.


After I read of Owens story back on May 4, I suspected that his injuries might have resulted from something other than a racially motivated attack. Several questions sprang to mind: Could he have been beat as a result of a drug deal gone bad? Could an intoxicated person suffer such injuries from some sort of accident? Did he inflict his injuries upon himself so that he could fake a hate crime? (This is unlikely but not impossible.) Could a fellow Social Justice Warrior or one of his fiends injured him so that they could assist him in an effort to pull off a hoax? (This is likewise unlikely but not impossible.)

Owens’ Newspaper Interview


On May 5, Owens gave an interview to The Daily Iowan. He made statements about the attack he claims to have suffered that as far as I can tell have not been reported in online media sources as having been made to any police force. The paper reported that “he said he stepped out of Eden Lounge, 217 Iowa Ave., to make a phone call… While making the phone call, he heard someone yell racial slurs. [The reader will note that in this account he maintains that he first heard racial slurs before and not after being struck for the first time.] He said he looked around but did not see anyone. He then heard a racial slur a second time and then saw a ‘man aggressively approaching’ him. The man took a swing at Owens, which he dodged. Owens said he was defending himself when he heard a second person say ‘Don’t touch my brother’ before being punched and brought down.” No mention of any text message is made. Have the police checked his phone to see if he was using it around the time he said he was?

Later in the piece we read: “Despite rumors, Owens said there was no fight prior to his attack and that he does not believe the attack was fraternity-related. ‘Greek life had no part in this in my opinion,’ he said. ‘I think it was just individuals making a bad decision.’” Might Owens have received his injuries in a fight that was fraternity and not race-related? The “Don’t touch my brother” comment would make sense in the context of a  fraternity-related fight.

There is one last passage from the article worth quoting: “When asked if Owens knew what his attackers looked like and if there were any descriptions, he only said the police are conducting an investigation.” Why would he not have taken advantage of the opportunity the newspaper gave him to tell the public every detail he could of the appearances of those he claims attacked him? Would not he want the public to be on the lookout for the men?

I wish to conclude by stating that everything in this piece is based upon reports I found online. It could be that some, or even all, of this information is inaccurate and therefore any part of this piece may be wrong. I therefore wish to state, unequivocally, that I am not calling Owens a liar. What I am saying is that it would not surprise me if in the near future we learn that not all of what Owens said took place on April 30 happen just as he said it did (or at least as he has been reported to have claimed it did). On May 4 Owens stated: “This is 2016 you shouldn’t expect this to happen.” In 2016 these things happen only very rarely and this incident may have not happen at all.


EDIT: Since I wrote the above I have done additional research and found on the Web more accounts of what was supposed to have happen to Owens. Since he seems to have been the only witness to what he claims occurred, I assume all of these accounts derive, either directly or indirectly, from him. Some of the accounts have even included recorded TV interviews with him. Why are some of the details in the accounts contradictory? Was he “on his way back to his dorm” at the time of the attack or had “he [just] stepped out [of the bar] to make a phone call….” Did the confrontation happen “in” the alley ,“near” the alley or just “outside the bar”? Was he sending a text message or making a phone call just before the assault? If he was making a call or sending a text why did he have to make it in an alley? Could he not have made it in front of the bar?

One report stated that after the attack, some person “escorted [him] back to his dorm.” What happened to this mystery person? Did he or she vanish like the person who yelled out and by doing so stopped the attack?

Did Owens first contact the University of Iowa police at 10:45 or 11:00 on Monday, May 2?

Why did Owens wait until Sunday to seek medical treatment for his injuries? How come one news report stated he “walked to a hospital” on the night of the attack?

After the UVA rape story was shown to be a fraud, Social Justice Warriors told us: “The facts don’t matter.” Do the facts matter in this case?


I have given more thought to this story and have some more comments and questions.

So far the only connection between what happen to Owens and the University of Iowa that can be said for certain is that Owens is a student. Why is the University of Iowa bending itself into a pretzel over his claims at this point in the investigation?

Owens’ family has stated they are not happy with the “sense of urgency” shown by the police in the investigation. Could what the family perceives as a lack of urgency be explained by the fact that the police have some information about the case that has not been released to the public?

The crime was said to have happened ten days ago but there have been no new developments in the case. Why?

It seems as if today almost every inch of public space is covered by security cameras. By now all the local businesses have checked their security camera footage and yet we have seen no video released of the suspects or even of Owens himself from that night. Why?

Cases such as this usually get a good deal of national news coverage. This story seems to have gotten very little attention from media outside of Iowa. Could it be that journalists know more about this case than has been published?

I still have no idea what happen. I likewise remain skeptical.


Today marks two weeks since Marcus Owens claimed to have been the victim of a racially motivated attack. Since there still have been no new developments in the case during this time, besides his having given numerous conflicting accounts to the media, I think it is safe to assume that none will be coming in the future. For this reason I wish to take this opportunity to make some final remarks related to Owens and his assertions.

Darrell Owens, Marcus Owens’ uncle, has told the media that the family is upset over the way the University of Iowa Police handled Marcus’ effort to make a report about the alleged incident to them. Darrell Owens stated: “Here you have a victim who goes to the campus police and who has been assaulted — he’s a bloody mess — and they say, ‘We don’t want you to repeat it again, so you need to go talk to someone else’?” That’s a problem for me. Had that been a blond, blue-eyed white female coming in after being assaulted, I think there would be zero chance that they would have given the same response.”

Darrell Owens appears to be so focused on race that he cannot see that the University of Iowa Police acted properly with regard to his nephew. They have no legal jurisdiction when it comes to an event that happened off campus and there has never been any proof that whatever happen had any connection to the university besides the fact that Marcus is a student at the school.

Furthermore, the reader will recall that Marcus reported his assault came on Saturday, April 30, that he went for medical treatment on Sunday, May 1 and he did not contact University of Iowa police until late on the night of Monday, May 2. Marcus was not a “bloody mess” when he communicated with university police on the night of May 2.

Darrell Owens’ wearing of racial blinders, as well as his having brought a hypothetical “blue-eyed white female” into the discussion, makes me suspect that racial issues may have been a preoccupation with the Owens family long before Marcus made the news earlier this month. It would not surprise me at all if this were true for Marcus is from Naperville, Illinois. Naperville is a suburb of Chicago, the city known for being an epicenter of extreme Leftwing activism. Perhaps in such a preoccupation can be found the key to understanding what happened to Marcus Owens.


EDIT: On May 16, the story broke that Owens admitted he had lied about being beaten in a racially motivated attack. He did so only after being confronted by police with evidence about what really happen to him on April 30 and May 1. See: “Commentary on Marcus Owens’ Claims About Being the Victim of a Hate Crime Being Shown to be Untrue

If you enjoyed this blog post, please consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter.

 You may also want to follow my blog and follow me on Twitter (T.J.Kong @Ride_the_bomb).

You can email me at T_J_Kong@yahoo.com. I always welcome suggestions for blog topics.

I also have a YouTube.com channel called: “Ride the Bomb!” See https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpauuMnQBSI2FWgFiScj2mw

I believe in free speech and so I approve all blog comments. No exceptions.


Some Thoughts on The Man in the High Castle (No Major Spoilers are Revealed Below.)


Amazon’s The Man in the High Castle is the best series on “television.” There is much good that could be said about it. No program is perfect, however. It is because The Man in the High Castle is so good that its flaws are so painful.

An Alternative Reality 1962

The show is set in an alternative reality 1962 in which the Axis powers are ten years removed from triumphing in World War II. Germany occupies the East Coast and Midwest of the former United States. Japan controls the once American states along the Pacific Ocean. A “Neutral Zone” sits precariously in the middle.

The Acting


To say that there is not a bad performance among the cast that populates this enthralling world turned upside down is not enough.  The series’ acting is actually superb!  Between expert hair, makeup and costumes and losing herself in the role, skilled actress Mayumi Yoshida is unrecognizable as the Crown Princess of Japan. Lee Shorten’s Sergeant Yoshida is very entertaining as a member of the Kempeitai (Japanese secret police). Carsten Norgaard as Nazi officer Rudolph Wegener acts in an extremely powerful scene that calls for him to say goodbye to his child. He moves any parent watching to feel the profound pain his character suffers through when doing so.


One of The Man in the High Castle’s two main villains is Kempeitai Inspector Kido, played by Joel de la Fuente. He benefits from a brilliant costuming choice. The thick round-rimmed glasses Kido wears connect unconsciously with anyone who has seen these glasses in anti-Japanese propaganda images from the World War II period that depict Japanese soldiers as monsters. That Kido has ice water in his veins is easy for the audience to accept thanks to de la Fuente’s impressive talent.


Even more chilling is Rufus Sewell’s Obergruppenführer John Smith. Smith is an SS officer one cannot but love to hate.  He is one of the program’s stars.


Yet the man who steals the show is Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa. If he does not win an Emmy for his multilayered and intense performance as Trade Minister Nobusuke Tagomi, the Kempeitai must arrest the voters.

A Different World


As compelling as The Man in the High Castle’s acting is, what makes the series most intriguing is that it offers us a prospective on what life might have looked like if Germany, Japan and Italy were victorious instead of being defeated in the 1940s. After inventing the A-bomb and dropping it on Washington, D.C., Germany is the only nation who possesses this death-dealing technology and dominates the world as a result. We learn of extermination camps set up within the former United States and witness the gassing of Jewish people in San Francisco. The sick and disabled are killed and cremated at local hospitals. Many religious and ethnic minorities appear to have been banished to the Neutral Zone. Middle class American children are members of the Hitler Youth and their fathers are SS officers. V-A Day (victory over the Allies day) is a national holiday. We are left to assume that similar things can be said of other parts of the world.

It is ironic then, that a hard Left-leaning entertainment industry which typically views America and Americans as the cause of most of what is bad in the world, has produced such a program. After all, the big takeaway from The Man in the High Castle should be that we should feel gratitude for the American system/way of life and the American people since U.S. victory in the Second World War prevented the horrors of The Man in the High Castle from becoming a reality.



It would be wrong, however, to assume that the show is a Conservative television series. Unlike the novel of the same name upon which the program is based, the show features a resistance movement that stands in opposition to German and Japanese rule in what had been the United States. An important figure in the resistance, and a character not in the novel, is Lemuel “Lem” Washington (Rick Worthy). We learn, quite awkwardly, that Washington is Muslim.

It is a curious choice. During World War II the Islamic world was an ally of Hitler. Muslim leaders wanted to bring his Final Solution to the Middle East. It was no coincidence that after the fall of Germany some key Nazi’s fled to the region. Such men taught the first wave of Islamic terrorists the terror tactics honed by “elite” German units as the war wined down. Today’s Muslim terrorists are their successors. In 2016 Mein Kampf remains the bestseller it has always been in the Arab world.

Washington’s faith means nothing in terms of plot. Since his religion serves no entertainment or artistic function, one has to assume his identification as Muslim suits a different purpose altogether. The writer[s] of the show presumably do not understand that while I, and other fans of The Man in the High Castle are justifiably fearful of Islamic terrorists, we feel no ill will toward law-abiding, peaceable Muslims. I assume that instead, the writer[s] believes we are bigoted toward and fearful of Muslims in general.  It is easy to imagine the Leftist writer[s] earnestly believing that a portrayal of a heroic Muslim fighting for the resistance will “cure” us of our “prejudice” and “Islamophobia.”

This is a grave insult to the viewer and I take great offense. No one likes to be lectured. That those doing preaching come from an entertainment industry that is often hedonistic and peopled with many who would sell their mother for fame and fortune is particularly irksome.


Leftist ideology makes its presence felt in the show in another important way–dialog. In graduate school, I read John W. Dower’s, War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War. Dower argues that prevalent notions of racial superiority strongly held by both sides resulted in a conflict in the Pacific Theater which was much more brutal than that in Europe. He falls somewhat short of the mark when discussing the U.S. side. His position on the Japanese conduct of the fight is most convincing.

Nowhere in The Man in the High Castle do we see any evidence of the virulent Japanese racism that is found in the historical record and led to numerous Second World War atrocities and war crimes.  Seemingly every episode is peppered with references to “Nips,” “Japs,” and “Pons” (I am not familiar with this last term, but it is clearly intended to be understood by the viewer to be a racial insult). Yet in the series’ alternate world only white, former citizens of the United States use racial slurs. Even the language of Nazi characters is surprisingly muted. The word “Semite” is spoken as if it were a slur but surely the Nazi’s used additional and much different and more harsh language when referring to Jewish people. The Leftist notion that only whites can be racists and act racist is therefore clearly reflected in the program. (I hold it is a dangerous and irresponsible notion to perpetuate since I firmly believe it results in a much higher incidence of racially motivated crimes against whites.) So too is the Leftist idea that the U.S. and its people are flawed in their character.

I wish to repeat that I think The Man in the High Castle is the best show on television. No fan awaits the coming of the recently announced season two more anxiously than myself. It is because the show is so good that I have been moved to write both in praise and condemnation of it. I want it to be even better. If the writer[s] back off the Leftist politics and strictly aim for producing great art it will be.

If you enjoyed this blog post, please consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter.

 You may also want to follow my blog and follow me on Twitter (T.J.Kong @Ride_the_bomb).

You can email me at T_J_Kong@yahoo.com. I always welcome suggestions for blog topics.

 I also have a YouTube.com channel called: “Ride the Bomb!” See https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpauuMnQBSI2FWgFiScj2mw

I believe in free speech and so I approve all blog comments. No exceptions.