Skip to main content

White Guilt: A Seven-Second Parable-- Why Liberals Are Willing to Risk (and Lose) All For Illegal Aliens


The shooting of Renee Good is the most obvious example of Americans living in two separate realities offered in recent history. In the now viral videos of her interactions with ICE agents she is ordered out of her vehicle, stopped perpendicular across one lane. After quickly reversing she is shot by the agent now in front of her SUV after placing the SUV in gear and revving the engine forward. Depending on the reality in which you reside, the ICE agent either committed murder or justifiably defended himself from a deadly multi-ton weapon. The reality one inhabits seems to depend heavily on how one feels about the fulfillment of President Trump's political promise of mass deportations. The only real question that may be shared between the realities is whether we can come to enough of a consensus to prevent this from becoming a regular occurrence or if this is the first of many. The further apart those two realities remain, the more likely that Good is just the first casualty.

There are multiple video angles of the incident, which lasted approximately seven seconds from an ICE officer approaching the vehicle and ordering Good out, to Good placing the SUV in gear, to another officer firing on Good. The first video largely seen was shot from behind Good's vehicle on the driver's side. Many accuse the agent of placing himself in front of the SUV to create danger for himself. Some accuse him of pulling out his gun in a premeditated fashion. There is a slowed version of this clip which makes it clear that he draws the weapon as the SUV shifts forward. What is less clear from either video is if the officer shooting had reason to fear danger. A second angle of the incident makes clear that he was actually struck by the SUV. Additional videos offer greater detail of the incident. The video shot by the officer who shot Good adds further evidence that he was struck by the vehicle and that Good looked at him before driving forward. It also puts to rest the arguments about the other rational choices he could have made. There was little time for thinking, just reacting to the events happening. Another angle makes it clear that the officer did not place himself in front of the SUV. That happened after Good reversed the vehicle. It should be noted that most people who made up their mind on whether the shooting was murder or justifiable after watching the first video held their certainty through every video released. Clearly, the videos cannot simultaneously prove both murder and a justified shooting. Despite the officer being struck by the SUV, the people who swore that he was untouched in the first video changed their argument to, he was just barely bumped. Thus revealing their hand. For them, their conclusion is less about the facts or the law, but their preferred narrative.

Much of the media discussion of this incident has focused on the second by second passage of events, as if looking through the Zapruder film, to assign blame. While the question of murder or justified shooting is important, it is not the central question behind this incident, which is how this set of circumstances came to be. Before pulling back completely from the videos, there is one vital element to keep in mind. In the video taken by the ICE officer note the tone and attitudes of Good and her wife. They are antagonizing and disrespectful, they seem a bit tightly wound from adrenaline. They have no clear goals. They are committing an act of civil disobedience with no intention of being arrested. Put simply, there is a lack of deliberation behind their actions, and thus no consideration of the possible consequences. Good likely did not intend to run down the ICE officer, she may have panicked when his fellow officer attempted to open her door. She may also have assumed that her wife attempting to open the passenger door was another officer. Good backed up as she attempted to open the locked passenger door. Good lacked the training, experience, and situational awareness to understand where the red lines were in this situation, and crossed them.

Beyond the video, Good's involvement with activism provides some context. Good is reported to have been a mother of 3 participating with an activist group called Minneapolis ICE Watch. She became involved through her son's charter school, which focuses on social justice. The media suggests that what is happening with local groups like Minneapolis Ice Watch is simply protest and observation. They describe themselves as an "Autonomous Collective Documenting & Resisting ICE, Police, & All Colonial Militarized Regimes." They resist ICE through "de-arrest" using tactics from directly intervening physically in arrests to surrounding agents with a crowd to pressure a release through intimidation.





When it is noted that protest involves speech and not physical interference with law officers, people against ICE enforcing immigration law will suggest that Good and others are simply exercising civil disobedience. This is also incorrect. The people in the streets of Minneapolis opposed to ICE are honking their horns and blowing whistles to let any possible subject of apprehension flee. This is not an act of civil disobedience, it is aiding and abetting escape. The training that people like Good are undergoing is being framed as protecting neighbors, rather than committing possible felonies to protect illegal alien predators. The material from MN ICE Watch downplays the seriousness of these actions. Instead of calling  the actions they recommend felonious, they describe the actions as risky. I have not seen where they suggest what these activists risk in interfering with armed officers. Nothing in the tactics still used suggests that they understand that based on circumstance what happened to Good is one possible risk. Homeland has shared the crimes some of the aliens being apprehended have committed. They range from assault, rape and child abuse, to murder. ICE officers are prepared to deal with potentially dangerous people who wish to avoid capture and may employ violence to do so. Few things could make more clear how little these activists understand the potential danger of their actions than a video released that captures the aftermath of Good's shooting. In the video a woman can be heard screaming, "Why did you have real bullets?"

The hubris shown by Good and her partner have been on display throughout ICE actions in Minnesota. There are several examples of middle class white women confronting or threatening ICE only to cry, "I'm just a mom," or "I'm going to a doctor's appointment," when taken seriously by ICE. One woman was captured on video demanding that ICE shoot her in the face. It cannot be said enough that none of this is based on rational opposition to anything. This is the expression of a desire to belong and be a part of something larger than themselves. This is a substitute for religion. This is the female urge to nurture and protect being misdirected. Consider several factors among liberals, especially women, highlighted in recent years. A PEW Research study from March 2020 found that liberal women have the highest rates of self-identified and diagnosed mental health issues.


A report from the Manhattan Institute in 2025 found that, "mental health appears to shape political ideology more than ideology shapes mental health." In fact, the results "suggest that increases in psychological distress often precede shifts toward "system-blaming" political ideologies, including "woke" liberalism...Regardless of their merits, these ideologies may help individuals manage feelings of inadequacy and insecurity by minimizing personal responsibility, portraying individuals as "victims" of an unjust system, and advocating for collectivism that promise a more caring and equitable social order." Finally, a 2019 study on moral values and ideological differences found based on self reporting that conservatives have more proximate empathy which diminishes as concern expands concentrically outward, liberals have greater universal empathy. Put simply, conservatives extend more care and empathy to family and friends, liberals extend more care and empathy to objects like the planet, rocks, and trees.


Taken altogether, these factors-- the correlation between higher rates of mental health issues and liberalism, mental health shaping political ideology, and the universal empathy of liberals-- help to explain what is happening in Minnesota and other blue sanctuary cities. More importantly, they help to explain why these conflicts are likely to intensify without external intervention. 

The liberals are not going to reason themselves out of attacking ICE for apprehending criminal illegal aliens. We are witnessing a willingness by liberals, especially women, to self sacrifice, and in some cases, sacrifice their children, to save illegal alien predators from apprehension for reasons they could never articulate honestly. 

There is no good faith reason for stopping these apprehensions at personal risk, when doing so, frankly, results in greater community risk. Liberals who feel inadequate in their lives are indulging in heroic fantasy that centers illegal aliens as being of higher moral value than themselves, their family and friends, or their community. 

There are no bounding principles for this ideology-- call it suicidal empathy, maladaptive altruism, or the expression of self loathing white guilt-- when it places the perceived unconfirmed needs of strangers over family, friends, community and self. 

The fault line is real and growing. Activists treat armed agents as oppressors to surround and intimidate. Officers respond with lethal force to perceived threats. Blue sanctuary cities are now battlegrounds with unclear rules of engagement. Without firm federal authority and a clear line that interference equals felony obstruction, Good will not be the last casualty. She will be the first in a string of predictable, bloody clashes.

Ultimately, the two separate realities that collided on that Minneapolis street cannot coexist indefinitely. One sees a justifiable use of force against a driver who weaponized her vehicle. The other sees a premeditated murder by a trigger-happy agent who placed himself in harm's way. Both cannot be true, yet both are held with unshakeable certainty. The thread that binds these irreconcilable visions is not new evidence or legal nuance, but ideology. One side is anchored in the consequentialism of duly enacted law, the other in a deontological moral framework that elevates universal empathy above proximate duty, family, and community. Until one reality prevails-- through argument, vote, or body count-- the nation will remain suspended between paralyzing division and violent resolution. Renee Good's death did not create the divide, it just made the cost of maintaining it impossible to ignore.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

'Anti-racism', All Trap, No Honey: A Discourse About Discourse

One of the things that prevents me from writing more often is the sense that I'm just writing the same thing repeatedly from a slightly different angle. In a nutshell, all I'm saying is that moral idealism substituted for material goals will not lead to justice, but is an argument against materialism. I'm a dumb person's low rent Adolph Reed Jr. translator. I'm a "class reductionist" who understands that when the discourse is reduced to just class there's nothing as important as food, water and shelter that's left out. I often find myself contending with people who insist that there is, unable to name anything. They don't understand that they're making an argument against economic redistribution, or they don't care. There are no concrete manifestations of systemic racism or any oppression that are not dealt with through economic redistribution. When people say that economic redistribution won't end racism, what they mean is that ...

The Due Process Industrial Complex: "Are We the Constitutional Crisis?"

Democrats, seemingly resigned to political irrelevance, have shifted from principled opposition to obstructionism. They are seeking to stall or block the Trump administration's fulfillment of voter will.  In the face of popular demand for mass deportation of illegal aliens they have positioned themselves as self-appointed experts on due process. Their demands for due process might hold greater totemic power if not undermined by apparent hypocrisy, having supported limited due process for January 6 defendants. The demand for due process is desperate political opportunism driven by faulty political calculus. This explains why a US senator and congressional representatives traveled to El Salvador over a single deported alien. They are demanding that illegal aliens receive more vetting for deportation than they received on entering the country under Biden. In 2016, 38% of Americans supported deporting all undocumented immigrants. Today that number is 56% . There is nothing quite like i...

Drowning in Denial, Grasping at Straws-- Democrat's Desperate Bid For Male Voters

The phrase "grasping at straws," from Sir Thomas More's proverb, "A drowning man will clutch at straw," captures a desperate, futile attempt to avoid an inevitable end. It evokes a person falling off a cliff, frantically grabbing for anything to halt their doom. In cinema, this creates tension as the hero snatches a sturdy shrub at the last second. In politics, it signals a refusal to face reality. The Democrats' new $20 million Speaking With American Men (SAM) initiative to attract male voters is a textbook example. This effort is less substantial than straw, likely pushing men further away. It delays confronting the obvious: the party's positions alienate men, offer little to women beyond abortion, and oppose the interests of native-born Americans-- also know as voters. A late May New York Times article by Shane Goldmacher highlights the Democrat's struggle to recover from Trump's re-election. He notes, "Democratic donors and strategists ...