Forget peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Now, trees in national parks are racist and remind blacks of lynchings in the days of slavery according to Mickey Fearn, the National Park Service Deputy Director for Communications and Community Assistance (try saying that 10 times real fast…).
Keep in mind that Yellowstone, the first national park, was created in 1872 in Wyoming — several years AFTER slavery was ended. And the last time I checked my history, Wyoming wasn’t a slave state.
Talk about inconvenient facts.
“African American people feel safe in cities and less safe in nature,” Fearn, who happens to be black, said. “Preserving wild places is a white concept, going back to Rome.”
What? Where did he get that from? Maybe he graduated from Portland Community College…
Daniel Greenfield added:
So if preserving wild places is a white concept, then clearly national parks are just white privilege and need to be dismantled in a truly multicultural society.
Contending that black people aren’t visiting national parks because of slavery memories doesn’t make much sense at this latter date. And it doesn’t appear that other minorities are visiting national parks either. Asians probably don’t have memories of lynched in the wilderness. (Was anyone being lynched in the wilderness at all?)
And Canada, where Fearn had visited, didn’t have major slave issues, but also has low utilization rates by minorities. So yes, it’s clearly slavery.
But it gets even better, as WCBM explained:
Now Alcee Hastings, an impeached judge, and a coalition of minority groups is demanding increased “inclusiveness” at national parks. High on their list is the claim that, “African-Americans have felt unwelcome and even fearful in federal parklands during our nation’s history because of the horrors of lynching.” What do national parks have to do with lynchings? Many national parks have trees. People were hung from trees. It’s racial guilt by arboreal association. Trees are racist down to their roots.
Rush Limbaugh added:
Now, why is it only trees in our national parks where there wasn’t ever any racism or slavery? Why is it only trees in our national parks remind African-Americans of their ancestors being lynched? Why doesn’t every tree remind them of that? You African-Americans in the audience — and I know that there is a beaucoup bunch of you out there — I bet you, not a single one of you has the slightest reaction like that when you see a tree. You talk about a constructed media narrative.
“What do national parks have to do with lynchings? Many national parks have trees. People were hung from trees. It’s racial guilt by arboreal association. Trees are racist down to their roots.” That’s the Alcee Hastings group. (interruption) Cut all the trees down? There aren’t any trees in the inner city, right? Many people thought that’s what was gonna be racist about it. (interruption) Well, I know a tree grows in Harlem. There are trees. But not like there are out in the suburbs and not like there are at the national parks.
Now trees are racist. I wonder how many are sexist or homophobic? Maybe some of the trees identify as other types of trees.
It just proves the maxim that liberalism is a mental disorder…
- Author at ‘whiteness’ event: White Americans ‘biggest terror threat’ — Video
- Videos: Moonbat professor tells students to imagine a ‘world without whiteness’
- Vanderbilt prof. calls for massive surveillance of whites to combat racism
- Education consultant says white paper may cause racism in young children
- Clinton to white people: ‘We need to recognize our privilege’