I was startled to find a quote from Mark Steyn that, in referring to the rape in Rockville on a Fox television program, “This is the depravity of the political class. They’re basically willing to offer up their own citizens, 14-year-old schoolgirls and sacrifice them on the altar of diversity and virtue signaling and the shameless political posturing.”
This remark echoed and reinforced a theme I have been exposing for some months now and has led me to a new conclusion about my the waxing trend toward Human Sacrifice in the world today.
Money Quote Here:
The key difference between liberalism and progressivism is that progressivism requires the acceptance even the advocacy of human sacrifice as part of the “progress” toward the “new (and improved) world” they imagine that they have the wisdom and mandate to force us all to “evolve into.
‘The rose-coloured glasses are off’: Why experts, students suspect racism under-reported on campuses
So let’s see, one girl was upset about a Hip-Hop themed party where students imitated rappers or whatever they’re called and another girl was upset because students mocked her Halloween costume demands.
Conservative students at St. Olaf College, a Lutheran liberal arts school in Minnesota, live in terror of their liberal colleagues and are afraid to discuss politics on campus, The College Fix reports.
Not only are they outnumbered, as 80 percent of the college voted Democratic in the last presidential election, many have been violently threatened by college neighbors.
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.
Once upon a time, the causes of tolerance and diversity meant throwing off the yoke of old prejudices and being open to new ideas and different opinions.
Nowadays, those who preach diversity have less in common with their progressive forebears than the puritans they used to pit themselves against.
The imbroglio surrounding the now infamous Bible Society video featuring a few close ups of Coopers Premium Light Beer exposes the ugly authoritarianism behind many who pay lip service to toleration while waving a rainbow flag.
Admitting to white privilege actually builds up white privilege, a graduate student suggests in a scholarly article published in “Feminist Philosophy Quarterly.”
In the article, “Unhappy Confessions: The Temptation of Admitting to White Privilege,” author Claire Lockard argues that confessions of white privilege or racism are “pleasurable to enact but ultimately reinforce white people’s feelings of goodness and allow them to avoid addressing this racism.”
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.
“American politics is dominated by an enduring myth,” writes author Peter Collier—the myth “that Democrats are the party of the common man, the voiceless, the powerless, the poor. That if you care about what happens to the least among us, you will cast your vote in the Democratic column.”
But as Collier also points out, the vast majority of America’s voiceless, powerless, and impoverished people are concentrated in cities that have been run exclusively by Democrats for decades—even generations—without interruption. These are cities where stratospheric rates of crime, poverty, unemployment, out-of-wedlock births, homes without fathers and failed school systems have become a way of life—along with oppressive and confiscatory taxes whose only discernible achievement is to keep the leaky ship of city government afloat for as long as possible before it is inevitably capsized by economic and social calamity.
Posted outside my office door is an old cartoon. A bearded professor wearing sandals and carrying a backpack leads a group of wide-eyed undergrads into a land labeled “utopia.” As they merrily march along, they pass an exodus of escaping humanity, fleeing an ash-strewn landscape amid scattered bodies and smoldering ruins. “Isn’t this great?” the beaming professor asks. “We’re almost there!”
Liberals need to appreciate the dangers posed by a radical movement that rejects the principles of intellectual freedom and freedom of expression.
The Middlebury College protest on March 2 that silenced an invited speaker and hospitalized a popular professor has continued to garner attention.
More than 100 Middlebury professors—included the one injured in the encounter—have signed a statement of principles, Free Inquiry on Campus, upholding the classic virtues of “free, reasoned, and civil speech.” The document implicitly repudiates the actions of some other Middlebury professors who instigated the effort to deny Dr. Charles Murray the opportunity to speak on campus.
In the last few weeks, there has been a spate of columns by writers on the left condemning the left-wing college students who riot, take over university buildings and shout down speakers with whom they differ.
These condemnations, coming about 50 years too late, should not be taken seriously.
Danish journalist and free speech advocate Flemming Rose recently drew an aggressive pack of student protesters to his speech at Franklin & Marshall College as he spoke on his book The Tyranny of Silence: How One Cartoon Ignited a Global Debate on the Future of Free Speech.
Rose in 2005 published cartoon depictions of the Islamic prophet Mohammed in his role as cultural editor of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, sparking international controversy and catapulting him to the forefront of free speech debates.