For people who have watched this “new-normal” process play out before the footprints of retreat are obvious. For others this might be their first experience.
From the outset of the Mike Brown shooting there has existed a familiar pattern, an inauthentic pattern. Eventually the nature of constructed falsehoods reach a point where: a.) the usefulness expires, and, b,) the empirical facts belay the claims.
The concentric circles of hatred flow out as a natural outcome of dropping a divisive rock into a pool of ideology. The ripple effects flow out, often with unintended consequences and all too often out of control.
The problem with intended division is that it’s sometimes difficult to contain. Protests can quickly become riots, looting, long-term anger, flag burning and worse.
Author Jack Cashill aptly used a phrase “transparently innocent” to describe a new Obama era useful victim.
Historically, useful victims have always been transparently guilty people who the left could defend. However, in the modern Obama era – a useful victim is innocent of the accusations, transparently so, but must be made to look guilty for the left to advance a goal of division.
Additionally a new aspect appears when the BGI are constructing a divisive narrative. To select a transparently innocent victim, you must control the media cycle – and embed a media fear of investigation.
In essence if “snitches get stitches” then inquiring media reporters must carry the same fear; replace stitches with career diminishment.
For Ferguson think about the recent federal “leaks” of information surrounding the August Mike Brown/Darren Wilson encounter – against the picture here of President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder meeting a few weeks after the shooting.
Obviously by the time they discussed President Obama and AG Holder knew the physical (forensic) evidence supported Darren Wilson’s version of events. They knew two shots were fired in the vehicle, Mike Brown’s blood was on Wilson’s uniform and gun, and they knew the autopsy results. They knew all this…
Yet they allowed the riots to continue… as if.
Because “division pays”.
Think about the Daryl Parks and Benjamin Crump story, originally sold by Dorian Johnson, of officer Darren Wilson grabbing Mike Brown by the neck, pulling him into the car, etc. Yet you never heard anything about such neck injuries when they did their “private autopsy”.
Again, “division pays”.
Think about Dorian Johnson’s attorney Freeman Bosley Jr. telling CNN’s Don Lemon that its not really lying when you tell the media a fabricated story. So long as Dorian told the police the truth, he can tell the media anything he wants. Think about who the audience is that’s really being lied to, and why such lies would be so easily espoused.
Yep, “division pays”.
Think about CNN playing the Kevin Seltzer “Construction Worker” video over-and-over, for two solid weeks, yet neither “Explosive New Eye Witness” gave an official statement or testimony to Grand Jury – because they were not, in actuality, eye-witnesses to anything.
Why play that meme repeatedly?
But there’s an odd dichotomy when division is used as a tool for personal benefit.
The inauthentic claims can only hold value so long as the truth remains hidden, and the audience remains willfully blind.
Think about this juxtaposition – In Ferguson Missouri a community remains divided over outrage based on inauthentic claims of a racist cop shooting an unarmed black male. This is just the way it was intended. Absent of evidence released, the framework for the incident, the outrage, is based on “things people say”. Division is retained by the absence of the truth.
Yet in South Carolina a clearly “AUTHENTIC” grievance incident happened when a police officer shot an unarmed black male at a convenient store after the police officer asked him for his drivers license. Why was the Ferguson outrage missing in South Carolina. No month(s) long outrage, no looting, no riots and flag burning.
Simple. Because there was no division. Black residents and white residents both stood outraged against the behavior of the police officer in South Carolina. The truth lay bare for all to witness. Everyone, regardless of color, in South Carolina was similarly outraged. There was no division.
For the professional black grievance industry, without the division – there can be no benefit. They need the division.
So what exactly is valued more; the incident itself as an outrage, or the ability of the incident to be used to divide people?
The lack of division does not pay.
Ergo when an outrageous incident happens that does not divide, it is dropped because it’s not considered useful, or valuable.
This is why the Professional Black Grievance Industry never rail against incidents like Baby Boo having a grenade thrown into his crib by a SWAT team. When the outrage is common – the incident is not useful.
In South Carolina the convenient store shooting was similarly, and commonly, outrageous by everyone’s interpretation – the incident is not useful.
….And then, the “ah-ha moment” when you begin to realize the only way the BGI can use division is to “CREATE it”!
….Because, in large measure, outrage is consistently applied by both blacks and whites when the situation genuinely warrants it.
In our lifetime the dynamic of division changed when an obviously guilty O.J Simpson was found innocent. The change took a while to reflect in the social narratives of the left because the sympathy toward the guilty shifted.
Subsequently, the modern grievance class changed tactics. The era of Obama division requires finding, exploiting and using the “Transparently Innocent”.
The professional left is replacing their prior division formula of advocacy toward the “transparently guilty”, by selecting the transparently innocent to become the victims of their attack.
Support for Che Guevara, Rubin “Hurricane” Carter and Mumia Abu-Jamal, the transparently guilty, no longer carries the same level of effectiveness and financial benefit as hatred toward George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson, the transparently innocent.
The strategy involved a fundamental paradigm shift – yet the financial and political goals remain the same.