Tone Deaf Leftists Lavish Praise On Book That Features A Man Falsely Accused Of Rape

The death only days ago of To Kill A Mockingbird author Harper Lee produced fusillades of praise from the militant celebrity left. The centerpiece of their commemorations was her flagship book about a white Southern lawyer tasked with defending a black man accused of rape with no evidence. However, these same public figures are always the first to jump on the “rape culture” bandwagon, immediately equating female accusers with victims and males accused with rapists.

“Listen and believe” has for them become an ardent ideology, not a platitude to be given mere attention, a travesty recently reaffirmed in the deplorable Souad Faress’ false rape fantasy. How does this gel with To Kill a Mockingbird, which is a direct indictment of mob antics and thinking?

Sadly, at the same time they were applauding Lee, celebrities were publicly calling singer Kesha a rape victim and her producer Dr. Luke an abuser/rapist. Whether they called Dr. Luke a rapist by actual name is immaterial. Hedging one’s bets slightly for legal reasons so you can still slander a man society has already hit to the ground remains inexcusable. The worst offender, by far, was attention-deprived former Charmed actress Rose McGowan. She thought that #FreeKesha was too “weak” and opted for the conspiracy theory patriarchal superstructures line:

Strangely enough, earlier on that same day she was full of praise for Harper Lee and her book:

A good book, just one twisted to suit SJWs

“Atticus Finch is a monster! He cross-examined a girl who said she was raped! Listen and believe!”

I can imagine the politics of Harper Lee were to the left of me. That much is clear. The notoriously reclusive writer nevertheless produced a novel that I can continue to appreciate, years after first reading it. Though the trial of African-American Tom Robinson on trumped-up charges of rape becomes the major plot device, the story is told through the eyes of lawyer Atticus Finch’s precocious little girl, Scout. She, observing her morally upright father, comes to see the true nature of mob justice. In the end, after being convicted based on the accusations made by Bob Ewell and his “raped” daughter Mayella, Tom Robinson is gruesomely murdered by the townsfolk en route to prison.

Before that sad ending to an innocent man’s life, Atticus Finch cross-examines Mayella, blowing hole after hole after hole in her claims. Cross-examination of “victims” is anathema for feminists and SJWs, which is why those leftists praising the book have either forgotten this central part of the story or do not want to mention it. Of any episode with To Kill a Mockingbird, this passage outing Mayella’s lies and the one where Tom Robinson is ridiculously convicted and killed demonstrate Harper Lee’s profound belief in the need for finding the truth, not casually presuming what it is. The model for the character Atticus Finch was her own attorney father, incidentally.

Grotesquely, To Kill a Mockingbird has been contorted to symbolize racist injustices only (and ideas about this sort of injustice are usually completely misapplied by zealous, self-promoting SJWs). Of course, Tom Robinson’s race had a lot to do with him being charged, convicted and then killed. Yet the entire book is a warning against people rushing to judgement, which has the habit of producing violence and other negative outcomes. For example, it is the loner “monster” Boo Radley, played by a young Robert Duvall in the film adaptation of the 1960s, who eventually saves Scout and her brother Jem after they are attacked by Tom Robinson’s accuser Bob Ewell. Likewise, Dolphus Raymond, the purported town drunk, who has children with a black woman, only pretends to be inebriated because it gives people an “excuse” for his miscegenation.

Whatever Harper Lee thought about radical feminism and SJWs (and there are too few quotes from her to make any decent calculations about what she believed), her book stands on it own as a savage critique of people jumping the gun in both courts of law and general society. To Kill a Mockingbird‘s message of level-headed thinking and tolerance has been turned into an excuse for leftists to pretend to care about justice, even as they try and strip every conceivable notion of it from how we deal with rape accusations. Atticus Finch could never exist in a world populated by SJWs.

Changing the words to suit your own agenda

SJW Arguments for Dummies.

To Kill a Mockingbird, like all novels that go beyond being half-decent, imparts its message implicitly or semi-implicitly. But considering how the book is read by millions of children even in late junior high or early high school, it is not exactly difficult to discern the themes of the book. SJWs can read a piece of literature and forget what it means, depending on which lessons they like, do not like or appreciate only selectively. All the while, they spew verbal diarrhea about how great it is to them and how it changed their life.

What does this mean? Firstly, common sense and plain words mean nothing to SJWs. It will not convince them to hear an alternative position out, let alone agree with it more just partially. Words, pages and overall interpretations will be gerrymandered depending wholly on their politics and basest sensitivities. Better yet, the more nuanced version of justice advocated by To Kill a Mockingbird, including the need for due process, the testing of rape claims, and rule of law, can be ignored by someone simply claiming the word “justice” and deciding ham-fistedly what it is. After that, the person can mention that they read the book and that it inspired them to seek it in the world.

Secondly, newer generations, or simply those uninitiated about the true nature of SJW activism, are liable to link the well-meaning book with the retrograde political activity they see playing out on the streets and in charged environments like college campuses. In the minds of the impressionable, all instances where phrases like “justice” are used will be linked together, no matter how different or unexplainable the situations are. SJWs genuinely believe that they have the moral fiber of an Atticus Finch. It is irrelevant to them that he defended a (black) man accused of rape with no evidence and they want rape convictions with no evidence.

At a minimum, To Kill a Mockingbird is a great literary resource for illuminating the madness of so-called popular justice. When discussed (and that is the key word), it is an unforgiving admonishment of the horrors too frequently unleashed on the innocent, deprived of due process and the requirement to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Read More: How To Kill Zombie Arguments

76 thoughts on “Tone Deaf Leftists Lavish Praise On Book That Features A Man Falsely Accused Of Rape”

  1. I didn’t understand why woman would stick up for kesha until it hit me , she is the stereotypical millennial who has gone threw the “getting it out of her system ” phase and has now awoken to the harsh realities of the real world . I’m not familiar with her entire catalogue of shit music but I’m sure most lyrics are about excessive drinking , drug use , and hookups . She didn’t seem to mind any of this until she became a used up cum dumpster .

        1. In fairness to Mick….about 4 generations of models have sucked this guys cock. Whatever he has that you don’t see people are eating it up.

        2. My best theory I can come up with is, she got drunk, had her beer goggles on, and must have confused Jagger with Jim Morrison. And if course we’re talking about Light My Fire Jim Morrison, not fat druggie Jim Morrison, or how Val Kilmer looks nowadays. That could partly explain the date rape hysteria.

        3. precisely.
          Mick has written some of the most red pill songs ever and has banged, literally, tens of thousands of the most beautiful women in the world for the last 50+ years.
          I mean, come on, he wrote the song Under My Thumb

        4. Jim Morrison is a hack.
          Mick Jagger has been using raw sexuality to make women do whatever he wants since the early 60’s.

        5. 2 things that have offended me after watching this . Taylor Swift hasn’t made a sextape and the fact that I like coldplay

        6. Funny thing is, I came to that conclusion years ago when I was cleaning my house and Korn came on the radio. I pretty much purged my music collection of anything post ’95 since then.

        7. Yeah, it’s nothing really revolutionary for us who lived through the era’s of good music, but teens might actually be shellshocked that their music is infantile. My common approach to music is this: Made after the year 2000? 95% chance it’s absolute shit.

        8. It´s the Henry Kissinger effect. Generations of the world´s most attractive woman have played upon his wooden flute.

        9. It is the heart of what is on this site….that with the right attitude you can turn any girl inside out…

        10. Power is the greatest aphrodisiac- yes, this explains part of the attraction, but the quantity and quality of women he had was way in excess of any rock star. Makes you wonder.

        11. Conceded. He reminds me of the 80s genre of Mexican cinema known as picardia, where guys like Rafael Inclan or Alberto Rojas who weren’t physically attractive but made up for it by using charm and wit to get the ladies. Of course, money doesn’t hurt either. Those movies were spicy comedies also bordering on softcore porn.

        12. she wasn’t bad to look at, but even then she had vagina dentata….probably lining her bunny ears as well

        13. he was particularly special….even in his 60’s mick can peel the panties off of a lingerie model with just a look.

        14. Dude, making Gloria Steinem squeal your name and call you daddy is where you go when you are fucking lingerie models 3 at a time and not bothering with names.

        15. I’m hoping to God you’re referring to the sixties not the present day. Bet she’s a dirty sub in her private life though

        16. i did mean the 60’s but I would totally bone her wrinkly ass now and make her beg me to call her my little cum whore. You know the old joke: Why did the feminist cross the road? To suck my cock and make me a sandwich

        17. Hell yeah I would too, especially if Germaine Greer joined in. I wouldn’t mind scrambling her fossilised eggs except I’m asthmatic and allergic to dust. I mean it would be like the dead sea scrolls down there

        18. It ain’t about looks if you’re a man. Take that from a good-looking man.

        19. At least the wise can take them as deterrent.
          Dignity is the value a human places on oneself and those modern day artists show that it always leaves a gap that cannot be filled with money.

    1. I think I would make an exception for Kesha (not that I listen to her music) because there is an awful lot of Satanic / cultist / NWO elitist / brainwashing crap that goes on the entertainment industry.
      It could be that she had a moment of sanity and is telling the truth.

      1. don’t believe in much of that . I think the only reason theories like that exist is the average person can’t believe that people willingly in the entertainment industry do some of the things they do but having worked in it , though a very small aspect of it , I can tell you that their are people out there with low morals to begin with . You combine that with alcohol and hard drugs in steady supply and it’s a shit show . I think the worst case of it I’ve ever seen was Steve aoki.

        1. Go to a slayer show , look up Norwegian black metal , look up death metal . Satan and music have gone hand and hand since at least the 80s

    2. I think this article is topical but for a slightly different reason. Adam Johnson was recently convicted for sexual activity with a 15 year old girl.
      Leaving aside the appropriateness of this, Adam Johnson may go to jail for 10 years for having a snog with her. Keep that in mind because in a nightclub where it is dark and girls are made up, that could easily happen to you. Not only that, if he’d snogged her in France his activity would have been perfectly legal. Likewise, if Adam was 15 and the girl 28, no crime would have occurred, prior to 2000.
      It is interesting that they say Johnson “groomed” this girl because that could easily apply to “game”. Why? Because the same arguments applied concerning “grooming” on a legal basis are in fact, being applied concerning “game”.
      Now I remember growing up girls as young as 13 were getting pregnant, one of my exes first had sex at 14 and frankly, most 15 year old girls know what they are doing. The argument is that she is not capable of making an adult decision regarding sex. That to me needs to be determined on an individual basis rather than a one size fits all rule. And in fact, no one can agree on what the age of consent should be as it is different across the world.
      In England it used to be 12 (which is shortly after a girl has completed puberty). I can’t say what it should be but Adam Johnson is facing 10 years and the only complaint by the girl seems to be that her friends called a liar.
      Consider that, when you game grown women because before long a woman will prosecute a man for rape because she was “gamed”. If it can happen, it will happen.

      1. Working clubs I’ve seen that exact situation happen , although the girl in question was noticeable underage but it definitely wasn’t her first rodeo

        1. Yep. The outcome here is that Adam Johnson’s reputation is trashed, his career is over and he’s facing 10 years in jail. The girl was called a liar.
          When you read the text transcripts you can’t really be sure who is grooming who. The girl sounds confident and experienced, unlike myself at that age…
          I wonder who the victim is here?

    3. There’s the element of “maintaining the herd” also. Women will flock around to defend a rape-accuser even though they assume she’s lying. Of course we don’t know what really happened, but I’d bet that she’s restructuring her career and using this expose for sympathy and support from women’s groups.

    4. What else can we expect from a “woman” who associates her image with the consumption of her own urine?

  2. How to avoid the dismissal of a rape charge and win your lawsuit:
    Rule 1: DON”T swear a previous affidavit that you were not raped.
    Rule 2: See rule 1

      1. Kesha is from my city and she came in and sang a song for one of her videos or some shit at this bar I once worked at.
        One of my buddies bar backed there and he told me how he was introduced to her one time at some kind of EDM party and she came up to him and licked the side of his face. Said he was utterly disgusted.
        There is also a video of her on YouTube drinking her own urine.
        Pretty sure she is a satanist and I’ve also seen some video of hers where they portray a ritual sacrifice and everyone is covered in blood.

  3. I’d like to see the story told from Boo Radley’s perspective. I imagine him as a kind of poor man’s, small-town Dark Knight character who comes out at night to protect the town’s white girls from feral black men.
    Either that, or else he’s the town’s vampire. Can’t wait for the parody versions of Lee’s novel, like To Kill a Mockingbird – and Vampires.

      1. Depends. I’ve read the author’s book World War Z which was good, and Abraham Lincoln-Vampire Hunter wasn’t bad either. But so far women doing kung-fu moves in Victorian dress is too silly, even for my B movie tastes.

        1. That’s why I haven’t seen it. Took one look at the previews and said, “Nope. Not going to ruin my book.”

        2. Indeed. I wanted to see them do the battle of Kiev when the Ukrainians gassed their own people to find out who was infected and the Russian frontier story would have made an excellent beginning for the film. The Battle for New York, Israel and Palestine joining forces, the list goes on what would have been awesome to see on screen.
          Fucking Hollywood…

        3. Heh, talking about WWZ makes me want to pull that book out again. Think I’ll get the audio books as well.

    1. Notify Max Brooks, author of World War Z, Abraham Lincoln-Vampire Hunter and host of other books done in the same vain.

  4. I can see why many nerds like Boo Radley. Don’t a lot of them live like him these days, never moving away from their parents’ home, not dating and going out only in the middle of the night?

  5. What about the hypocrisy of feminists supporting hillary who legally defended in court a child rapist? Feminists don’t care about rape victims. Feminists selectively use rape as a political tool.

  6. “It is an unforgiving admonishment of the horrors too frequently unleashed on the innocent, deprived of due process and the requirement to be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt” True, it´s a brilliant indictment against all types of mob rule and bigotry that are informed from prejudice and/or ideology rather than the objective facts that should be based on jurisprudence and evidence. It´s an indictment against everything from Hitler and Stalin appreciation right up to false rape claims and the mentality that needs to incessantly ban everything on the internet.

  7. this is a good article.
    Having read the book at school like most people probably, when I was reminded of it this year, when Harper Lee’s second book was being published all I really thought of was the racial justice side of things (and Boo Radley too I guess), but thinking about it in light of this article, it should indeed be seen as a parable of sorts about how mob perceptions are nearly always wrong precisely because mobs don’t reason through careful evaluation of evidence. In fact they don’t reason at all, and that’s precisely what we’re faced with today: a mob formed of the self-righteously angered whose lust for the blood of anyone who deviates from their fake values, is so easily roused and directed.
    Race politics clearly isn’t going to go away any time soon, but equally the fact that anti-racist values are now normalised and ‘hegemonic’ does indeed suggest that a latter day Atticus Finch might well find himself deeply uncomfortable with what passes for liberal, progressive values today, given that it is joined at the hip with the same mentality of the mob that fired the lynch mob that killed falsely accused Tom.
    The book really should be seen as a timeless parable for how lazy and unexamined assumptions can never be the right path. Things are never quite how they seem, and the mob – Plato’s great stupid beast that knows only how to like or dislike – is always wrong.

    1. Harper Lee never published a second book. She never intended Go Set A Watchman to come out. Her agent basically waited until she was senile with Alzheimer’s to get her consent to it coming out, and Go Set A Watchman is not in a publishable state – it is the proto-text to To Kill A Mockingbird, the first draft that was refined into the final novel. That’s why it only came out when Lee was at death’s door.
      Don’t buy Go Set A Watchman. It is exploitation of the worst kind, akin to grabbing unedited outtakes from Casablanca and selling them as a “new film.”

      1. I loved the first book when I read it at school. I heard the new one wasn’t anything special, but didn’t realise that was the background. Well done to the publisher for damaging her legacy and mystique I guess

  8. Leftism is the epitome of emotionality.
    While right wing (and I mean reactionary, non-equalist) thought can be extreme, it has a rigid moral and intellectual system.
    Leftism is best defined by it’s fluidity.
    They believe rape is the most awful thing ever, unless the perpetrator is non-white.
    They believe false accusations against black men are evil, like in “To Kill a Mockinbird”, then they jump on the Bill Cosby hate wagon.
    The reason leftism is so hard to define is because of it’s internal contradictions. It is a mess, masquerading as enlightenment, in fact “The Enlightenment” itself was the biggest joke of the last 500 years.
    When your philosophy is supposed to believe race doesn’t exist, yet white men are evil and we must celebrate diversity because we are all the same and we need to destroy homogeneity but only in western countries, etc. you cannot have any serious rigorous intellectual thought. In fact all cultural marxist works, from “Das Capital” to “Sex and Culture” are a confusing mess of blabbering idiocy.
    Leftism is hatred of beauty and order, “The Feminine Mystique” is just a more intellectual manifestation of the “SCUM manifesto”. No matter how much leftist pretend to be about happiness, equality and cherry pies, deep inside they are all just blue hair degenerates, that have not yet reached their final form. Even more moderate forms of liberalism are just watered down form of SJW-ism. SJWs are just a natural conclusion of 500 years of “Enlightenment’ thinking.
    Ugly degenerates competing on who is more of a useless individual and a victim, destroying what is done by their betters in jealousy, while maintaining the higher moral ground and no one having the balls to call them out.
    The reason the left has lost all reason, and does not seem to have even a semblance to the liberals of the old is because liberalism has reached it’s final stage. Now that all forms of social control, such as religion, patriarchy, tradition and community have been dissolved and you just have an amorphous mass of confused individuals. Liberalism is running unfettered. All these years liberals complained no one allowed them to employ their vision, now they were given all power and we see the result.
    Now that everyone sees the ruinous result of liberalism and “Enlightenment” thinking it is time to guide people to a more natural and masculine form of social order.
    Even the worst manifestations of the masculine right, like Imperialism, slavery and some would say excessive racial policies can at least be easily understood as they are in line with nature.
    Leftism is a culture of Anarchy, Death and Destruction, the fact that “Enlightenment” thinking even took hold and was not yet repudiated by the public is heresy. It’s time for the masculine right to take the intellectual torch and create a movement and philosophy for the West that is more in touch with human nature, truth, beauty and order.

    1. “It’s time for the masculine right to take the intellectual torch and create a movement and philosophy for the West that is more in touch with human nature, truth, beauty and order”
      This would be immensely difficult to do as most right wing men have little or no interest in intellectual matters (generally) and left wing guys, like hipsters merely play around with these ideas for “fun” and “affect”. Besides, the world´s greatest artworks often came about from a rebellious or at least questioning aspect which worked against the static conservative outlook of the age, which is what began with the renaissance in Italy, this why liberal ages tend to produce such inferior works.

      1. “This would be immensely difficult to do as most right wing men have little or no interest in intellectual matters (generally)”
        You are correct in this matter. I remember reading an article on an alternative right blog dealing with this issue.
        For the last 500 years, “conservativism” had no clear ideology, being more of a reflex in a desire to maintain an older social order.
        If the right is to advance they must create a more advanced ideology, that nonetheless borrows from the success of old-school forms of government.
        Dugin’s work, as well as the book “Archeofuturism” deal with these challenges. An intelectual right is possible, it is in it’s inception now.
        While the masses are energized by Trump’s simplistic rhetoric and populism, intellectualism on the right is on the rise, but currently not in front of the public’s view.

        1. “For the last 500 years, ‘conservativism’ had no clear ideology, being more of a reflex in a desire to maintain an older social order.
          “If the right is to advance they must create a more advanced ideology, that nonetheless borrows from the success of old-school forms of government.”
          You’re speaking form the perspective of western European civilization which is already mortally wounded and thus irrelevant. The living and healthy part of European civilization is Russia, which except for a 74 year hiccup of Communism, has always been autocracy in synergy with Orthodox theocracy. No intellectual ideology can tame the Whore of Babylon.

          Feminism: Are you a god? (Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?)
          (Insert Western Ideology): No.
          Feminism: Then die!
          Orthodox Russia: (Insert Western Ideology), when someone asks you if you are a god (meaning you have authority from God), you say yes!
          — Earlier with the same two characters —

          Orthodox Russia: Hey, (Insert Western Ideology), do you believe in God?
          (Insert Western Ideology): Never met Him.
          Orthodox Russia: Well, I do and I love Jesus’ style.
          — Jesus style (Luke 4:28-30)—
          “All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove Him out of the town, and took Him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw Him off the cliff. But He walked right through the crowd and went on His way.”

          Cool guys don’t look at (social) explosions, they blow things up, and then walk away. Keep walking. Keep shining. Don’t look back, keep on walking. Keep strutting. Slow-motion.

        2. The right in Europe tends to be much more middle and upper class and attracts a considerable interest in cultural and intellectual matters for its members. In the States it seems the oppoiste, with largely liberal minded democrats having an interest in cultural and intellectual matters and I think this is a signifcant weakness in the American convserative movement. You have no Roger Scruton for example.

      2. You are confusing the modern connotation of liberalism and the classical definition.

    2. “Leftism is the epitome of emotionality.”
      This should be our first port of call for explaining the world to the uninitiated.

  9. I’ve no doubt Harper Lee was a Leftist.. at a time when Liberalism and Leftism actually meant something noble. Unlike today, where the left is akin to fascism and cultural marxism. I bet that fact wasn’t lost on Lee either, which is why she was very quiet about her political views.

  10. I don’t believe any of these idiots have actually read the book. It’s just a status symbol to say they have. If you actually read it, you find that Atticus himself is conflicted and does not want to take the case. He does so not because he loves black people, but because he feels duty bound under the law. In other words Atticus is “tolerant” of others and “fair” to them regardless of his personal feelings. SJW’s profess to value these things, but imagine how they’d react to Atticus in real life. Oh yeah, Atticus owned a gun too, and used it [SJW heads explode].

  11. Great article! It is true the left like to piss all over their own shoes and then pretend it’s raining. They obviously are only looking at the shallow end of this movie, and not seeing what it really is about. Then again they would need trigger warnings for that in which case the moral of the story would be lost.

  12. Dammit, if only I thought of what I read here in the article back when I was in the class reading that book.

  13. One and done. 1984 or brave new world would have been much better for today’s youth

      1. Might as well have them give it a go. Can’t get much worse. The 5% that get it will benefit more than reading TKAMB and thinking what their burnout teacher is zealous about.

      2. They would see it as progressive ,but in need of more Black and Brown people,so kind of racist.

    1. If it has a white dead male as an author, it won’t get read. Hell, common core has gotten rid of novels.

  14. In those days in the American South, a white woman whose honour had been offended by a black man didn’t have to go to the courts. She could go to her father, her brothers or her husband, secure in the knowledge that no court would convict a single one for making an example of the rapist.
    Emmett Till, the great martyr of the SJW’s, was raised in the North to believe all white women were sluts who loved black cock. He made the mistake of getting fresh with a southern woman who took her marriage vows seriously. He paid for it with his life. Nothing of value was lost.
    That’s the reason SJW abhor lynching. It kept blacks well behaved.
    Fun fact: it didn’t even need doing often. More blacks are killed in gunfights with each other every year than were lynched during the entire century after the War of Southern Independence. Merely the threat of swift, merciless and final punishment made blacks think twice before bothering white women.

  15. Social Justice Warriors, Feminists, or Cultural Marxism getting you down? Join an Exciting Online Study!
     Are you a male?
     Are you at least 17 years old?
     Are you worried about the current state of politically correct culture?
    If you answered YES to these questions, please participate in on our study of social attitudes and online behaviors. Please refer to the link below for more information:

  16. The book must have been a quandery for the SJW’s. A black man and a false rape case. And then the “Daddy Figure” getting in between and saving the day.

  17. But the point of To Kill A Mockingbird was to highlight the horror of false rape and demonise the “rape” victim just like the left wing do today, you don’t seem to actually understand the left argument fully before making scathing articles at all
    Also if you do ban me because I disagree then that is disbarment of free speech which this website so champions and it forms a pool of commenters that only agree with you

  18. Will Robinson was innocent in To Kill A Mockingbird. Suppose, though, that he had been guilty? Would that then mean that a lynching would have been justified? Bill Cosby is “probably” guilty, so society is okay with lynching him???

Comments are closed.