The murder of Mollie Tibbetts–a young University of Iowa student–at the hands of an illegal immigrant showed the horrible consequences of diversity to millions of Americans last summer. But not all Americans have accepted the reality of the slaying, and the Tibbetts family, sadly, falls in that category.
Last week, the Washington Post reported that Mollie’s mother had taken in the 17-year-old son of a migrant family who were friends with her daughter’s murderer. The teenager’s family had fled Iowa because locals were no longer friendly to them after the slaying. (Go figure.) So Mollie’s mother, Laura Calderwood, offered the teen a place to stay at her home.
The Washington Post’s retelling of this event is insufferable. We’re hit over the head with snippets from Fox News and President Trump about the dangers of immigration while Ms. Calderwood courageously goes about her life. Her resistance to the sensible calls for immigration restriction is treated by the Post as the act of a modern-day saint. The paper juxtaposes Calderwood’s reaction to her daughter’s death to the supposedly toxic responses of other families who were harmed by illegal immigration.
The Post negatively portrays another Iowan who dubbed the illegal alien that killed his son “trash.” The paper calls this reaction “finding what they can with obsession and hatred.” It’s apparently abnormal and disgusting to hate your children’s murderers if they’re immigrants. The Post also unfavorably paints parents voting Republican or becoming involved in anti-immigration activism as inferior to Calderwood’s magnanimous approach.
Here’s how the Post counterposes Calderwood to the bad victims of illegal aliens:
Then there is Laura Calderwood. Fifty-five, with curly blond hair and a halting gait, she is a lifelong liberal who didn’t abandon her politics. She feels anger like the others, but not toward an entire group of people. She’s not afraid of the demographic change remaking the country. But she does fear the deepening polarization. So she never goes to political rallies — never speaks publicly — because she believes that would just inflame things. Instead, she tries to live every day, including this one, just as she did before it all happened.
The teen she adopts, Ulises Felix, is depicted as an all-star kid that all Americans should want. He’s just so nice–he plays high school football, to boot! Mollie’s killer even earns a positive portrayal. Felix tries to convince Calderwood that the man who stabbed her daughter is a good person, and the Post seems to agree with the Mexican teen’s assessment.
The article’s message is obvious: white Americans should bear the costs of diversity with open arms and bend over backwards to accept their attackers. You don’t want to be one of those bad Trump voters who wallow in “obsession and hatred.” Tune out the “hate,” don’t ask questions, don’t seek solutions to prevent future tragedies, and embrace the other.
Pathological altruism is the only media-approved solution. No Angel Mom would ever receive a glowing profile from a major newspaper, and no pundit would celebrate their “Christian virtue.”
The worst part is not that our elites promote this pernicious mindset–it is that it is happily embraced by millions of whites. Too many of us are programmed to believe that we must help the other even if it harms us. The Tibbetts have demonstrated this behavior with their strong opposition to (correctly) blaming mass immigration for their daughter’s death and going out of their way to show support for the killer’s community.
In September, Mollie’s father attacked Donald Trump, Jr. for politicizing his daughter’s death and advocating views the slain daughter would find “profoundly racist”:
They have instead chosen to callously distort and corrupt Mollie’s tragic death to advance a cause she vehemently opposed. I encourage the debate on immigration; there is great merit in its reasonable outcome. But do not appropriate Mollie’s soul in advancing views she believed were profoundly racist. The act grievously extends the crime that stole Mollie from our family and is, to quote Donald Trump Jr., “heartless” and “despicable.”
Tibbetts praised the Hispanic community for its superior food and for culturally enriching Iowa. “To the Hispanic community, my family stands with you and offers its heartfelt apology. That you’ve been beset by the circumstances of Mollie’s death is wrong. We treasure the contribution you bring to the American tapestry in all its color and melody. And yes, we love your food,” he wrote.
He then went on to claim that he is Hispanic, African, and Asian, because “[m]y blood runs from every corner of the Earth because I am American. As an American, I have one tenet: to respect every citizen of the world and actively engage in the ongoing pursuit to form a more perfect union.”
Mr. Tibbetts’ one proposal in response to his daughter’s death was to demand the nation unite against “racism.” He went on to say, “[T]o knowingly foment discord among races is a disgrace to our flag. It incites fear in innocent communities and lends legitimacy to the darkest, most hate-filled corners of the American soul. It is the opposite of leadership. It is the opposite of humanity. It is heartless. It is despicable. It is shameful.”
He argued that the search for his daughter’s body united the country regardless of color, and that we must “take heed of the lessons that Mollie, John McCain, and Aretha Franklin taught.”
The father concludes, “Let’s celebrate our diversity rather than argue over our differences.”
You would never see such an op-ed from the mother of a black man shot by police officers, or even from a non-white who suffered the horrible atrocity of a white person demanding to see his ID. Non-whites are not obligated to forgive the trespasses of the white majority. They are allowed to embrace the hate and desire for revenge against those racial others who did them wrong.
Only whites are supposed to forgive, and they are rewarded for this contemptible behavior. Mollie’s parents have both been held up in the media as the perfect example of how to react to the costs of diversity, and have earned praise from powerful pundits. All people want to be seen as doing good, and if the powerful say taking in the friends of your child’s killer and denouncing “racist” talking points is noble, then normal people will follow.
The desire for vengeance and solutions to unrestricted immigration are natural responses to the murder of a family member. But we are told we must repress these natural urges and turn the other cheek. This reaction, however, harms America. If you insist that immigration policy is not to blame for such a death, you ensure that other American families will suffer the same loss. For what gain? The warm, fuzzy feeling of being loved by journalists and non-white racial activists? That you please God and uphold Christian virtue by seeing no evil?
Pathological altruism is the fundamental flaw of the twenty-first-century white man. It hinders his ability to defend himself and his children. It encourages him to bow before the other and treat him in a way that this outsider would never treat him in return. It creates a toxic value system that ends with dispossession and self-destruction.
There are plenty of normal white Americans who are repulsed by the behavior of the Tibbetts family. They know that it’s natural to see the killing as representative of the costs of mass immigration and diversity, and they want solutions to these problems. The point to get across to these normies is that it is moral and right to think this way, and that it is immoral to follow the Tibbetts’ example.
To refuse to face the problem is to abdicate your duty to your fellow citizens. It only ensures that more Americans will die at the hands of illegal aliens. Pathological altruism only earns you the empty plaudits of a hostile elite.
Are We Ready For “White Boy Summer”?
Politicians Didn’t Invent Racial Divisions
One Carjacking Embodies the New America
The Localist Trap
No Government Subsidies For You, Whitey
The Evil Empire Gets Lamer
Critical Race Theory: America’s 21st-Century Lysenkoism
What Culture Are Conservatives Trying To Protect From “Cancel Culture”?