Events like Orlando are always sad to look at, as we can see the massive loss of life involved for no real reason. It will be a further waste not to use events like that and the reaction to them ,as well as issues in general to help us understand the world we live in more. Inspired by some material I have read online I would like to flesh out the pecking order in the democratic party for all to see.
Muslims are and will be for some time in the forseeable future the top of the democratic food chain. After every terrorist attack Islamics are involved in you will immediately see a democrat defend them. They will say it is not “real Islam” or Islam is the religion of peace which has nothing to do with these attacks. Despite the perpetrators of the attack coming from what they call an Islamic state. Alternatively they will delay and insist loudly that it is not a terrorist attack despite the attackers claiming allegiance to ISIS. They will attempt to call everyone who says it is a Islamic terrorism as racists or bigots.
The privilege of Muslims in the liberal sphere extends past acts of terror. For instance a white male in Sweden was raped by a muslim migrant from Somalia and he expressed regret at reporting him since he was deported. A white female was gang raped in Sweden as well by Islamic migrants and she covered up her own rape so that she would not sully the honor of the Islamic migrants. In Germany the cologne rapes are explained away as being a cultural difference between the Islamic immigrants and the Germans. It is clear that any act no matter how heinous that muslims do will be defended. It is not surprising that the Orlando shooter was a registered democrat. ISIS sympathisers know who the greatest enablers of ISIS are.
Some of you may be surprised at how high I ranked the LGBT community coming it at number 2. Everyone of course will point to the Orlando shootings and the fact that the democrats are prioritizing defending the Islamic community rather than the LGBT one as evidence that they are not highly ranked. It is why I ranked them number 2 as opposed to number 1. It is not to say that they are not highly valued. Democrats have gone to bat for them in taking on an entire religion, christianity, over its treatment of gays.
It is very instructive to see that democrats are willing to take on christianity for supposed discrimination and bathroom habits yet defend and make excuses for the treatment of the LGBT community in Islamic ones, where they are punished sometimes by being thrown of a roof for being gay.
It was a hard decision to place Latinos in third. There is very little conflict to see if they were treated better than gays. Yet it is very obvious that their issues are given more importance than blacks. Ultimately what decided it for me is that democrats are willing to go after Christianity as a whole in defense of gays and Latino culture, particularly in Central and South America, places a very heavy emphasis on Catholicism and patron saints of all stripes. If Latinos were higher than the LGBT community on this scale then the catholic church would have been spared criticism, which it is not.
People will be very surprised I rank blacks as fourth. Most will say “but Obama” as a reason why blacks should be ranked higher. Remember though Obama was running against a white female which is a lower rank than black in his primary so he should have been given the nod over her.
Blacks have among the highest rate of unemployment. The main contributing factors to this are illegal immigration and globalization, embodied most by NAFTA and outsourcing. The main group concerned with illegal immigration is Latinos as they have plenty of people who send money back to mexico and other south and central American countries. It is clear that their economic interests were placed over blacks. Culturally the left has also declared war on Christianity on behalf of the LGBT community and as we can see there is a significant portion of the black population that is involved with the church. In fact most of their leaders in the civil rights and modern eras had a lot of involvement in churches, with some even having the title of reverend.
Blacks should be very careful. They are near the bottom of the hierarchy already and in the near future democrats may begin treating them like whites. I will add that because of Obama being black, blacks think they are better off under democrats than they actually are.
There is a caveat here that there are two divisions to whites. White females over white males. However a male of any other race comes before a white female. Consider that in a recent rape case a white male has convicted of 6 months jail time. Accusations of a biased judge went flying and even calls for “additional investigation”. Yet when the swedish white female was gang raped by the Muslim men or when the Rape spree happened in Cologne there was very little condemnation and even expressions of sympathy for the poor rapists.
It is no coincidence that a majority of the people supporting Bernie were white. Outsourcing and illegal immigration hurts whites almost as much as it does blacks and there is no instance where they get a pass when interacting with a member of another race. When you are in the bottom of the party it is always a better to choice to ask for reform or to burn it down. It is no coincidence that it is this group, particularly its working class, that is most susceptible to voting Republican this election.
There you have it. The democratic hierarchy of Affirmative Action for easy reference. It will be helpful for anyone interested in how democrats react to events around them.