I continue my drift

rightward. (Though some might call it "free fall".)

Apparently brilliant actor, social critic and cougar-dumper Ashton Kutcher --why does he have jobs and money, again?-- is in trouble for doing a mimic of Indians. The Indian Indian kind, those down-trodden souls who come here on special visas and are forced to work in high-paying tech ghettos and medical professions.

Mr Kutcher may be forgiven, as good liberals are. But I digress.

An Indian Indian --as self-described member of their "diaspora"-- comments, quite level-headedly: ‘I can’t imagine I have to explain this to anyone in 2012, but if you find yourself putting brown makeup on a white person in 2012 so they can do a bad “funny” accent in order to sell potato chips, you are on the wrong course.’  Whites, in 2012, in 2012, are apparently expected to know their place.

But Ex Cathedra, although a civilized and polite fella, at least on the surface, disagrees.

My regular readers know well my affection for the powerful explanatory range of Mr Burnham's Truth, that the liberal is morally disarmed in the presence of anyone that the liberal deems less well off than his or herself. In matters of race most especially, this rule is ironclad. Whites may not ever ever make fun of other races because all other races are, in principle, less well off than Whitey. And that, as we know, is Whitey's fault.

But, pardon my Eurocentric quoting of a Dead White European Male, ay, there's the rub; there is no reciprocity expected. Nor will there ever be.

This flows from Ex Cathedra's corrollary: Oppressor groups, having power, have no moral standing at all; victim groups, lacking power, have absolute moral standing. Consequently, oppressor groups must be ever anxious about never offending and always placating, praising, celebrating and oohing and aaahing victim groups. Victim groups on the other hand, whose moral standing as victims is absolute, --and will never change, by the way-- have no constraints whatever on their beliefs, attitudes or behaviors about oppressors.

Blackface (or in this case, Brownface) is a grievous race crime, as we know, akin to deflowering a Vestal Virgin or flogging li'l Eliza. Whiteface, however, is just so fuckin' hilarious. Dave Chapelle making fun of the flat White tonalities of the mid-West is so edgy and observant and a hoot. Ripping on ebonics or Indianics is crassly and Bull Connerishly wrong.  Suggesting that Barry Hussein O is "the food stamp president" is obviously a secret wish to lynch Negroes, but the now Sacred People of Color are under no such moral regime. In fact, if they make fun of you, contemn you, even engage in violence against you, or kidnap and torture your children to death, well, you probably deserved it.

This prohibition against making fun of non-Whites as non-Whites while letting Non-Whites have a free hand and mouth, is one of the earliest and seemingly most harmless of the inroad of the PC Regime of Lies; after all, is it civilized to speak mockingly of people who are less well off  than oneself? Especially when their plight is your fault? Isn't it rather noble, actually, to tolerate this sort of thing? It is one of the many Lilliputian moral constraints on speech that eventually sink down into thought and feeling, so that finally you can't even see what's happening around you or tolerate anyone pointing it out. That's liberalism's opiate role, according to Mr Burnham: it makes your slow and pointless suicide seem like virtuous martyrdom...if you even notice that you're dying at all.

I have found myself with a vaguely Nietzschean sense of late, that if dominance cannot be expressed, then it is being lost. And as with White and male and heterosexual and English-speaking and legal-citizen "privilege" and all the other arachnoid cliches of the cultural Marxists, it will not cease to be but will merely cease to be yours. Others, whom you mistakenly think to be meek, will inherit your earth. And believe me, they will not be liberals.