The instances of racially charged domestic unrest we've witnessed in recent weeks have, for me, even further emphasized what craven, deceitful creatures those on the far left are. They really have come quite close to eliciting actual nausea as I've read of their exploits and heard the poisonous lies emanating from their mouths.

When racial tensions flare in America, people tend to expect political analysts and commentators of color to respond, particularly if they're not part of the leftist establishment press machine. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. In my view, I would hope that what I have to articulate in other areas is considered as valid as what I have to articulate regarding issues of race, as I consider arguments on this subject from analysts and commentators who've not been pigeonholed as people "of color" valid despite their amelanotic condition.

In instances like I've described above, occasionally I will be reminded well into a news cycle that people do tend to expect political analysts and commentators of color to weigh in, and that as a commentator of color, as it were, I probably ought to say something.

I will admit that sometimes I do this grudgingly, which should give the reader an idea of how much significance ethnicity holds for me on a personal basis.

Despite this outlook of mine, since I am a black American, some level of identification with other black Americans, regardless of what our political differences may be, is inescapable. I suppose this is why I find it particularly disgusting when I see black Americans acting out in their exploitation of ginned-up racial tensions. This is the case whether the culprit is an ignorant black football star, an ideologically motivated black congresswoman with a two-digit IQ, or an accomplished black academic or entrepreneur.

TRENDING: Trump identifies Judges Amy Coney Barrett, Barbara Lagoa as possible SCOTUS front-runners: Report

While the protests that occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia, Aug. 12 and the mayhem that arose from this are certainly a cause for concern, the biased news coverage and divisive rhetoric that subsequently came from the left are far more concerning.

Charlottesville gave those on the left an opportunity (or more accurately, they exploited the event as such) to associate alleged institutional racism with just about anything they can, particularly if the issue at hand has to do with policies advanced by the administration of President Donald Trump.

Last Saturday for example, North Carolina NAACP President William Barber stated on MSNBC that "rolling back health care" is something white nationalists desire. While this may or may not be true (and may or may not have even been considered by white nationalist groups), Barber's words were of course "dog whistle" for repealing Obamacare, a staple of Trump's campaign. On Tuesday, CNN anchor Don Lemon said that President Trump is "clearly trying to ignite a civil war in this country" in his handling of race-related issues.

Since Donald Trump became the GOP nominee in 2016, it has been taken as a given by leftists that he is a dedicated racist. Nearly all Trump detractors, from street corner winos to celebrities, appear to literally believe this and will preach that sermon to anyone willing to listen despite there being no evidence whatsoever to support this contention.

As we know, during the reign of Barack Hussein Obama (who did in fact intentionally foment racial discord), black militant organizations enlarged their public profiles and dramatically stepped-up their activities. Radical groups exploited sensitive and contentious social issues, particularly in the area of race. Some of these groups were comprised of dedicated communists.

It is these very groups such as Antifa (which played a central role in the Charlottesville debacle) that are both generating and exploiting racially charged issues, which they subsequently attempt to attribute to the influence of Trump's alleged racism.

Many a reader will be aware that quite a few race-related incidents and issues brought to our attention in recent years did not have their genesis in communities of concerned black Americans, but in the designs of these radical organizations. The stated motivators for grief, subsequent demonstrations and violence were merely pretexts for fomenting unrest and, hopefully, ongoing cultural Balkanization.

Here's an analogue for you: As someone who observes the Judeo-Christian ethos, I believe that taking a life is one of the worst things a person can do, but I would do so without hesitation to protect my life or the life of one being threatened by someone with malicious intent.

Similarly, as someone who reveres the Constitution, I believe that under the First Amendment, Americans are entitled to hold and express the most loathsome political views or speech, respectively. However, I believe that since those on the left have demonstrated their disdain for constitutional law and their intent to completely disenfranchise those who hold political beliefs divergent from theirs, their First Amendment rights should be considered forfeit and that we should be doing our level best to politically disenfranchise them.

As odious as I find the views of white nationalists, they possess very little political clout in America, whereas those on the left possess quite a bit. While certain white nationalists might like to see my civil liberties curtailed, very few if any are pursuing action that might actually bring this about. Those on the left, on the other hand, continually advance policies that have militated against the civil liberties of all Americans and will continue to do so in incremental fashion.

So which, in the end, represents a greater evil and the greater threat?

Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact [email protected].