Don’t eat the apple, Snow White! It’s poisonous!
Everyone is familiar with the story of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs — and if you’re not, shame on you. Go watch it and then come back and finish reading. I’ll wait. Otherwise, spoiler ahead…
The wicked queen disguises herself as an old lady, pulls an apple off the lowest branch of a tree — because, let’s be honest, that’s about as high as an old lady can reach — and then poisons it before tricking Snow White into taking a bite out of it. Snow White then falls into a deep sleep and needs a prince to awaken her from her slumber.
Avoid the toxic “-isms” and “-phobias”
Now, let me give you a metaphor.
The wicked queen represents anyone who engages in identity politics. Like the queen, identity politics preachers care about appearances and being “the fairest one of all.”
The tree represents negativity and slander. The lowest branch, obviously, represents the idiom “low-hanging fruit,” which means that which is easily attainable or requires little effort. Each apple on the tree is an “ism” or a “phobia” — you know, all the malicious claims of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, you name it. Thank you, Hillary Clinton, for giving us some examples.
Snow White represents the innocence of Americans. Those who are naïve or have let their guard down. Those who misplace trust in shady characters.
Lastly, the deep sleep represents a metaphorical spell that identity politics advocates place on unsuspecting citizens who listen to them — or, take a bite of the apple, so to speak — and then buy into it.
The Prince (i.e. truth) will set Snow White free
In order for the spell to be broken, a Prince comes along and kisses Snow White. In our analogy, the Prince is “the truth.”
Jesus said in John 8:32: “…the truth will set you free.” It’s a phrase that has entered modern lexicon, often used in reference to judicial proceedings. But Jesus was referring to himself and the belief in his teaching. After all, Jesus is “the way and the truth and the life.” (John 14:6).
In this regard, the truth will set people free from the slander of “-isms” and “-phobias.”
Where is the evidence?
To avoid eating the toxic, low-hanging fruit, always ask those presenting the apple to you, “Where is the evidence?”
I read a recent piece on politico.com titled “It’s the Sexism, Stupid.” The author was trying to make a case why Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are the two front runners at this early stage in the 2020 Democratic primary battle.
Not only is the headline a poisonous apple, but there is toxic, low-hanging fruit littered throughout.
“If 2018 was supposed to be the Year of the Woman…” the story begins, immediately playing (or feeding into) the gender card.
“…[2019]’s proving to be the Year of the White Guy,” the identity politics continues in paragraph two.
In the next paragraph, the author lists some of the front runners, who are all male, before adding, “Meanwhile, experienced female rivals … haven’t generated nearly the same media buzz, or led any recent polls.”
Another bitter piece of produce pops up in the next paragraph. “The evidence is mounting that these patterns are the work of sexism and misogyny,” the author muses. She tried to dilute the poison by adding, “albeit often unconscious, unwitting and the result of implicit bias.”
Um, what?
So, because she couldn’t cite actual evidence of sexism and misogyny, she slung a broad generalization at the collective conscious of the electorate.
Who is this author — who is anybody — to judge the intentions of anyone else, let alone identify implicated bias?
The author attempted to use a study examining voter preferences and showing that “gender is a powerful force in inducing voters to defect across party lines.” But in the discussion section of that survey, they say: “In primary nominations, gender bias was not very evident, especially among Democrats. Hillary Clinton was viewed as a viable nominee among Democrats.”
But wait … the author of the Politico piece was complaining that the women candidates were trailing behind Sanders and Biden, claiming “patterns of sexism and misogyny.” How can that be? The study that she cites says the Democratic primary doesn’t show gender bias.
Dig deeper for reason
Here’s an idea: instead of taking the “easy way out” and slandering American voters with unsubstantiated accusations, why not dig deeper and find out what is behind these poll numbers?
For example, did this author take into consideration the fact that Bernie Sanders fared so well with voters in the 2016 Democratic primary? That maybe they feel he deserves a second chance to finally take down Donald Trump?
Did she consider that Joe Biden is a former Vice President to the Left’s favorite President, Barack Obama? And maybe Democratic voters want a proverbial third term for Obama’s policies?
Barack Obama was the nation’s first black President — and was re-elected. Hillary Clinton was the first female presidential candidate nominated by a major party — and actually received more votes than Trump did in the 2016 election. These two Democratic politicians achieved this notoriety in back-to-back-to-back elections.
With this knowledge, how anybody can play the racism or sexism card on American voters is astounding.
Are there racists in this country? Of course. Are there sexists? Of course. The same is true for every other type of “-ism” or “-phobia” that is mentioned.
But, there’s only a small minority of people actually guilty of these charges. And anyone who so effortlessly and carelessly slings accusations like these to try to deflect or explain away any shortcomings is lazy and reckless.
