You can’t do anything these days without getting the progressives all bent out of shape. You can’t even make a movie about an Amazonian warrior princess who can hold her own with the likes of Superman and Batman without wounding the feelings of a modern feminist, because something about that warrior princess will still not be “progressive” enough.
The recent flurry of marches, demonstrations and even riots, along with the Democratic Party’s spiteful reaction to the Trump presidency, exposes what modern liberalism has become: a politics shrouded in pathos. Unlike the civil-rights movement of the 1950s and ’60s, when protesters wore their Sunday best and carried themselves with heroic dignity, today’s liberal marches are marked by incoherence and downright lunacy—hats designed to evoke sexual organs, poems that scream in anger yet have no point to make, and an hysterical anti-Americanism.
All this suggests lostness, the end of something rather than the beginning. What is ending?
America, since the ’60s, has lived through what might be called an age of white guilt. We may still be in this age, but the Trump election suggests an exhaustion with the idea of white guilt, and with the drama of culpability, innocence and correctness in which it mires us.
Deterrence is the strategy of persuading someone in advance not to do something, often by raising the likelihood of punishment.
But in the 21st century, we apparently think deterrence is Neanderthal and appeals to the worst aspects of our natures. The alternative view insists that innately nice people respond better to discussion and outreach.
History is largely the story of the tensions between, and the combination of, these two very different views of human nature — one tragic and one therapeutic.
On March 8, women abstained from work as part of the International Women’s Strike (IWS) – a grassroots feminist movement aimed at bringing attention “to the current social, legal, political, moral and verbal violence experienced by contemporary women at various latitudes.” But these positive goals were distorted by the inclusion of anti-Israel rhetoric in the platform of the IWS.
There are many countries and movements throughout the world that treat women as second-class citizens: Israel is not among them. Yet this platform singles out for condemnation only Israel, the nation state of the Jewish people. There is a word for applying a double standard to Jews. That word is anti-Semitism.
“Hello, it’s me! I’m the Media Mole’s killjoy spinster aunt, and I am here to disagree with my nibling and drop hot feminist takes all over your internet. Just call me Millie Tant. Moley Tant. Whatever. We’ll workshop it.
Today, the internet has been on fire with hilarity over this video of a BBC pundit being interrupted, first, by a toddler. Then a baby in a wheeler. Then a woman desperately trying to retrieve both so that the pundit can get on with delivering his take about North Korea.”
The moral of the recent melee at Middlebury College, where students shouted down and chased away a controversial social scientist, isn’t just about free speech, though that’s the rubric under which the ugly incident has been tucked. It’s about emotional coddling. It’s about intellectual impoverishment.
Somewhere along the way, those young men and women — our future leaders, perhaps — got the idea that they should be able to purge their world of perspectives offensive to them. They came to believe that it’s morally dignified and politically constructive to scream rather than to reason, to hurl slurs in place of arguments.
They have been done a terrible disservice. All of us have, and we need to reacquaint ourselves with what education really means and what colleges do and don’t owe their charges.
When even the New York Times thinks the batshit crazy SJW’s are batshit crazy…
Wednesday was International Women’s Day, and with that came a theme: The Day Without a Woman. The Washington Free Beacon interviewed six people at the event, who explained why they chose to join the strike.
Striking from smiling, hurting the poor, and suppressing male authors were some of the genius ideas of ‘Day Without Women’ activists.
Despite the tremendous amount of free marketing for the day provided by media outlets, and the major funds devoted to the effort, the day was a bit of a bust. A “day without women” turned out to mostly be like every other day, with a few notable exceptions.
Let’s look at a few of the mis-steps organizers and other activists took.
To say women should fight under one progressive feminist banner undermines the notion that women are independent actors, able to determine for themselves what is moral, just, and right.
The feminist movement in America began as a fight for political suffrage, economic independence, and personal autonomy. Now, almost a century after the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified, many so-called feminist lobbies and leaders no longer promote the political interests of American women, but instead promote leftist policies.
Historically, the feminist movement was progressive, pushing boundaries from one goal to the next, continuing to fight battles for equality in the voting booth, schools, the workplace, health care, and other major spheres of private and public life. This gave feminism a natural affiliation with political progressivism, but also put it on a trajectory of progress for progress’s sake.
A wall on the side of a Pitzer College dormitory devoted to unmoderated free speech through art (colloquially named “the free wall”), was recently painted by a group of Latino students with the message, “White Girl, take off your [hoop earrings]!!!”
TEL AVIV – The organizers of Wednesday’s International Women’s Strike, which includes a convicted Palestinian terrorist, have expressed their support for the “decolonization of Palestine” and said they are against the “white supremacists in the current government.”
“Against the open white supremacists in the current government and the far-right and anti-Semites they have given confidence to, we stand for an uncompromising anti-racist and anti-colonial feminism,” the platform published on their website.
Canadian organizers of an international celebration of women in aviation are standing by their decision to honour Hanna Reitsch, who was the first woman to fly a helicopter in 1937 — and, some historians say, an unrepentant Nazi.
“She was an amazing pilot,” said Mireille Goyer, the founder and president of the Institute for Women of Aviation Worldwide (WOAW), the group co-ordinating a week of events now underway, timed to coincide with International Women’s Day.
Shelby Steele’s wonderful article in the WSJ this past Monday is a masterwork. And yet I feel there is one thing I would presume to add to his insightful and honest analysis. That “shame of the past” needs to be looked at with that same honest insight. We all know that Mr Steele refers primarily to the two “grand sins” of American history, slavery and the taking of the continent from the indigenous peoples… I just had to address that.