Friends, I have some captivating sideshows for you today.
First, ever wondered what became of that feminist professor who wrote the stridently anti-male WaPo op-ed that I posted a few days ago? Seems she's an embarrassment even to her leftist colleagues. That's heartening, but it's only because she states her prejudices so baldly. Prejudice itself is quite normative on the Left.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/19/northeastern-distancing-itself-from-professor-who-said-women-have-right-to-hate-men-because-ve-done-us-wrong.html
And check out this story about a communist who tried to become an officer in the U.S. Army! It takes all kinds, but this was never going to work...unless, I suppose, Hillary had won the election. Then perhaps he would have been made a five-star general?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/19/west-point-grad-who-posed-with-communism-will-win-in-cap-discharged.html
Lastly, consider this article, about a (lone) Democrat who laments the divisiveness of identity politics. Of course, he's 100% right, which is a sure sign he won't win the Democratic nomination for Governor of Wisconsin. In fact, expect him to discover he's actually a Republican within a few years. Make no mistake -- the Dems are absolutely addicted to identity politics, as is academia. You wouldn't believe the lunacy that this can sometimes engender. The upside is that the Left can never agree on whose victimhood is the most excellent of all. To put it another way, occasionally people of color, women, gays, Muslims, transgender folks, and the disabled don't all think the same way, and then what's a lefty to do? Tie themselves in knots, naturally.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/19/democratic-candidate-decries-partys-identity-politics-and-victimology.html
Dr. Waddy: AHHHH, Northeastern and that prof - a plague on both their houses. I would fully expect to find the vast majority of Northeastern's faculty, situated as it is in lala land, to be firmly leftist. Leftist antipathy (hate perhaps?) is probably expressed in its classrooms with regularity. Would Northeastern have us believe that it was shocked (shocked!) to learn of this prof's biases? Their official statement of a wide spread of views in their faculty (uhh, 50 leftists to three conservatives?)and their implied devotion to free expression is disingenuous. They may be afraid of losing Federal funding. But if they are sincere, then let actions confirm their stated principles; I'm not holding my breath though.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I think if I were recruiting for the "revolution" I'd be wary of this guy. He spends four years in the extremely demanding setting of West Point, he graduates, which is one hell of an accomplishment and then he just fritters it away? A screw is loose someplace (aside from the widespread mundane insanity of seeing any virtue in murderous Communism and its subhuman exemplars). Good thing Obama is no longer (gag) Commander in Chief. This guy would be fast tracked.
ReplyDeleteThis is a little hyperbolic but that well meaning candidate in Wisconsin reminds of German citizens who wrote to Hitler in the '30's: "Mein Fuhrer, I am certain that if you knew of the excesses I have seen practiced by those who profess loyalty to you that you would immediately correct them". They learned, soon enough. The candidate should, I think, face the fact that he is dealing with the Democrat party - the party of political correctness, of vicious contempt for any person or entity which questions its justice in all matters, of dissembling and dividing the American polity as a prerequisite to reunion under totalitarianism and that his constructive comments fall on deaf and disdainful ears. He and Joe Manchin need to come in from the cold.
Jack, I agree with you that Northeastern's protestations are formulaic and not especially genuine. It's a rare university indeed these days that truly embraces "diversity" in the ideological sense!
ReplyDeleteIt is rather amazing that the communist revolutionary graduated from West Point, no? One wonders whether he was protected by sympathetic Army bureaucrats put in place by General Secretary Obama... Having said all that, I don't believe anyone should be chucked out of the Army because of their private views. It was this fellow's public insubordination that did him in.
I agree -- those who are hanging around in the Democratic Party, hoping it will regain its sanity, are wasting their time and doing America harm. Do you believe in the inferiority and unquestionable evil of capitalism, white people, men, the "cisgendered", and Christianity? Then by all means vote your conscience and support the Democratic Party! If not, well, come to your senses and join the GOP...
Dr. Waddy: In having conducted himself as he has, that young officer betrayed one of Alinsky's most important injunctions to (presumably American) radicals: "Do not be honest about your convictions until you have secured unassailable power". Even Obama was guided by this maxim in his absurd Presidential tenure. If I were a serious commie I'd give him a wide berth. He's ok though: he's still a cinch for some "university" faculty even with just a Bachelor's.
ReplyDeleteHa! You're right, Jack. This pinko will surely make waves on the lecture circuit. No doubt he's already popular with leftist groupies. And, if all else fails, he can run for office in the People's Republic of Vermont. I say good luck to him!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: Why, he's young and resilient and he's shown he can hack it. He should volunteer for inmatehood in the North Korean gulag. Actually, all he'd have to do is filch a poster. We all went through adventure when we had the stuff! I hitchhiked across the U.S. in the '60's and I enjoy the memories even though it was actually a pretty wretched experience. Oh he should try it - put his passionate radical convictions to the test, yes?
ReplyDeleteJack, did you really hitchhike across the country? Wow! That's almost unimaginable today -- mainly because no one stops to pick up hitchhikers. Anyway, I applaud your intrepidity -- and your frugality! Why "see the USA in your Chevrolet" when you can see it from someone else's, right? Ha ha.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I wasn't doing a "Kerouac". I was always headed some certain place and I really didn't spend much time on the road - three days at any one time. I did coast to coast in three segments during separate years. The worst time was standing on the western side of Denver, heading east with a "Buffalo, NY" sign written on a popcorn box which I still have and seeing a bad storm coming ( with three dollars and it did get me through) Within two twenty four hour days though, I was in Buffalo. The young often consider themselves invincible. I was going to go for Haight-Asbury in '68 but I ended up in the Navy. Glad I didn't do it. Flower power was quickly turning to mayhem by then. I'd have been prostrate with dread had any of my kids tried what I did then.
ReplyDeleteAmazing, Jack! Yes, I suppose you took your life in your hands, but it was a different country in those days. Safer, to a point, and certainly less inclined to dwell on the negative, though all that was about to change. The Navy was quite a detour from hippiedom! How did you manage a 180 like that?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I never was much of a hippie. I wanted to go to Haight to see it and to cross the country again. The transformation from the "summer of love" came about because the real bad asses quickly recognized the naivete of the phenomenom and its enthusiasts and moved right in. It would have been a very bad trip. Maybe that officer could benefit from such an experience though. So very many like him, people who simply lack the sobering experience of seeing the far left in complete power, who act as if this is 1917 and who ignore a century which confirmed the essential evil of Communism, could be wised up - most people lack the sociopathy necessary for unflagging devotion to such a proven inhuman cause.
ReplyDeleteJack, it's true -- socialism in practice has always fallen far short of socialism in theory... History is a big laboratory, and it's hard to prove the badness of any idea conclusively, but it seems to me that, the more a philosophy conflicts with socioeconomic reality and/or human nature, the more violence will be necessary to keep people in line and achieve the idealists' minimal goals. To my mind, socialism is pie in the sky, and thus its real world consequences are bound to be...sub-optimal?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: You hit it right on the head with two points which are among the main ones which motivate my hostility to Marxism and its many malignant offshoots, including "socialism" (as antisocial a creed as any ever)and including the many poisonous branches of American radicalism:1.History certainly is a laboratory and though the findings are often ambiguous, some have been proven beyond doubt. To ignore such historical verities is unwise but it can also be as irresponsible as to cast those who willfully reject them in a most reprehensible,and if they still seek to govern, dangerous light. In 1916, responsible well informed people could have had plausible dialogue on prospective merits and demerits of Marxism. But after the 20th century . . . !!?? 2. Marxism in practice proved beyond any effort to justify it, sustainable only by violence unparalleled in history and is conclusively condemned by the findings of the laboratory of its murderous progression over the last 100 years.
ReplyDeleteJack, I think one of the core principles at stake in the debate over Marxism is: how much trust are we willing to place in the state? If the state makes ALL important decisions, will most people be better off? It seems fairly clear the answer is no, and that disposes of communism, but socialism does come in many varieties and degrees. You and I would probably agree that the ideal amount of government is a lot less than we have now...but most people still seem to be seduced by the socialist creed, insofar as they are happy to support bigger government, if they feel it will direct its largess to them. In this sense, the danger of Marxism is still very real. We won a big battle circa 1989-91, but the war continues.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: You make alot of sense in that comment. Uttered by Stalin, the word "socialism" meant hell on earth but though we may to some extent distrust the "socialism" the state enacts here, it does not deserve direct comparison to the depravity of Marxism. It could get there someday though, if the wrong people prevail.
ReplyDeleteTrue, Jack, and I think we need to be especially wary given that the technology and bureaucratic machinery of the state grows ever more sophisticated. Give it a few years, and the state will be tinkering with our genomes in the womb, if it wishes...
ReplyDelete