The left will not allow you to abstain from the anti-racist (that is, new sort of racist) movement
Professor William Jacobson reports from the frontlines at Cornell:
The new activism surrounding race is completely at odds with the traditional goals of the civil rights movement — that all people be treated with dignity and afforded the protections of our laws without regard to race…
Not being racist is not enough. One must be “antiracist,” a term famously used in the book “How to Be An Antiracist,” suggested summer reading by Cornell University’s President Martha Pollack:
“As a campus community, we have a collective responsibility to engage in difficult but critical conversations – to listen genuinely to, and learn from, one another. To help bring focus to these conversations, I invite all of you to participate in a Community Book Read of “How to Be an Antiracist,” by National Book Award winner Ibram X. Kendi. We will soon provide all students, faculty, and staff with information about how to access an electronic copy of the book, along with a schedule of virtual discussions which will take place over the summer. I hope you will choose to read the book and to join in the conversation.”
President Pollack has additional “suggestions” for the Faculty Senate at Cornell to take up ASAP (apparently, Cornell is such a hotbed of racism that there can be no delay):
Development of a new set of programs focusing on the history of race, racism and colonialism in the United States, designed to ensure understanding of how inherited social and historical forces have shaped our society today, and how they affect interactions inside and outside of our classrooms, laboratories and studios. All faculty would be expected to participate in this programming and follow-on discussions in their departments. The programs would complement our existing anti-bias programs for faculty, such as those from the Office of Faculty Development and Diversity, the Cornell Interactive Theatre Ensemble, Intergroup Dialogue Programs for Faculty, and the Faculty Institute for Diversity…
Launch an institution-wide, themed semester, during which our campus community will focus on issues of racism in the U.S. through relevant readings and discussions.
I like the use of that word “expected” for faculty. Not required, of course; just “expected.” And if you refuse – well, that’s a nice little job you had there you, you RACIST! Because anyone who is anti the anti-racist program – which is the most utterly racist thing I’ve seen since Governor Wallace stood in the doorway at the University of Alabama in that year of ancient memory 1963 – is of course a racist.
The left used to be against loyalty oaths, as I recall. That’s ancient history. In fact, anyone in favor of free speech was against loyalty oaths. Ancient history as well.
The Levering Act was a law enacted by the U.S. state of California in 1950. It required state employees to subscribe to a loyalty oath that specifically disavowed radical beliefs. It was aimed in particular at employees of the University of California. in January 1950, 750 faculty members had approved a resolution to oppose the university’s regents and create a committee to coordinate legal action against the university should an oath be required. Several teachers resigned in protest or lost their positions when they refused to sign the loyalty oath…In August 1950, the regents fired 31 faculty members who refused to sign the oath. Those who were terminated sued, and by 1952 had been rehired when the university declined to pursue its case against them in court.
At least, back then loyalty oaths merely required swearing that the person wasn’t a member of certain radical groups. Now, loyalty oaths require that people actively teach and promote racist theories designed to (among other things) foster racism, this time against white people.
Ah, how far we’ve come!
By the way, this was the oath the Levering Act was requiring back in 1950, as a result of Cold War fears of Soviet infiltration (justified, I might add):
do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of my office according to the best of my ability; that I do not believe in, and I am not a member of, nor do I support any party or organization that believes in, advocates, or teaches the overthrow of the United States Government, by force or by any illegal or unconstitutional means, that I am not a member of the Communist Party or under any oath or a party to any agreement or under any commitment that is in conflict with my obligations under this oath.
I’m not in favor of loyalty oaths. Among other things, people such as Communists, who are actually working to destroy the US as we know it, can just plain lie. Oaths mean very little to them. I also really do favor free speech. If a university hires a Communist or anarchist (and it sometimes seems these days that universities hire nothing but) I’d like to know upfront that’s what we’re dealing with.
The classicist at Princeton (Joshua Katz) who wrote a very fine essay (Quillette) very mildly critical of BLM’s illiberal activism has not only been attacked by many members of the faculty, but also by the cowardly nonentity (Eisgruber) who is president of this once-distinguished university. At the same time, one of the few truly intelligent public intellectuals at one of the Ivies (Glenn Loury of Brown) has a fascinating conversation posted at City Journal concerning many aspects of the current cultural madness.
j e:
I was just about to post Loury’s interview, which I read late last night and it impressed me a lot.
I really like Loury, who is both smart and courageous. I may not agree 100% with everything he says, but I usually agree at least 90%.
After 16 trimesters of witch hunts, warlock trials, press propaganda, and protests to cover-up Obama spied, quid pro Joes, Clinton collusion, and, apparently, an attempt to force a coup in Russia and a global anthropogenic conflict, they fall back to their strategic practice of stoking diversity (i.e. denial of individual dignity, denial of individual conscience, affirmative discrimination, color blocs, color quotas) not limited to racism.
“Silence is violence”
You will be forced to choose a side. Life is not always fair …
Well since “Speech is violence” it certainly follows that “Silence is violence.” Everything it seems is violence, “Existing is violence!” Or to be more specific:
“Your existence is violence,” although specificity doesn’t mean what we thought it meant. ;(
I read a couple of posts at New Discourses earlier this week that talk about how to overcome the problem Jacobson discusses – basically, most people don’t have the wherewithal to fight back against the totalitarian thought-control forces.
There were some useful ideas, but it requires commitment and courage to implement them.
https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/template-resisting-white-fragility-workplace/
https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/how-we-fought-woke-thought-police-won/
Their name is meaningless… Call them the pink tiger octopuses… (actually it SHOULD be octopi, but the idiots who make spell check say octopuses is ok).
Antifa is a communist insurrectionist organization
Democrats are part and parcel of this
Both are having a revolution against the Federal Government
The people are too confused to understand what is going on, and is reading, interpreting, judging, by the labels and the news, which is the 5th column of the insurrection
I will try to put some order to this rather than in big terms, and we will use Portland Oregon as the basis of our Kronstadt – and I hope that you guys realize that this current event and action is the result of decades of KGB/GRU type analysis of our legal system and not just mere chance. IS it the KGB/GRU? IS it another group? IS it both together? We dont know, and wont know until much later if we ever know (ie, if we lose we will never know). What I do know is that such analysis has been going on since at least the 1970s, and that it is also combined with what appeared to be innocuous changes to the laws, like removing laws against communism (which i announced HERE when the last one fell).
First, get the lay of the land…
you have Antifa attacking federal buildings
you have democrats suing the feds for various things and allowing the attacks
you have citizens who keep being told that this is protest, not insurrection
you have judges who are not informing the grand jury panels of the differences
you have jury nullification being used to protect the insurgents
you have various backings and sister organizations as factions
you have a cell structure and someone is coordinating this (internationally)
you now have federal agents arresting/detaining people by seizure to avoid a response from the larger crowd when they act
As in Germany, who is who? Who is painting who as false?
after all, Nazi’s used hammers, so if anyone uses a hammer, we are stupid enough to consider them using the tools of fascism.
The ideology that is backing this whether fascism, socialism, communism, authoritarianism, need not have an accurate label to exist!! that is, it exists regardless whether you can describe it accurately… it can even exist in multiple forms that overlap or ie. in multiple contradictory states of existence (And does)
this main faction born out of the movements of feminism originally (ie, birth mothers of all the modern movements as they normalized and prepped the population to have certain ideas, views, regards, etc)… is the army, military, force movement of the revolution (and it is a revolution. IT would have happened regardless of who was in office, however, Hillary would have helped it, trump is in opposition to it)
The people have assisted this by voting in the ‘right’ entities who are permitting, allowing, and assisting what is going on, and openly opposing the federal state asserting independence from it, its laws, and its validity to act. without this, the revolutionary movement would crumble instantly… they are also in violation of their offices, despite the rhetoric which confuses the point and the big words about constitutions, protests, etc… (didn’t the ladies movement and their victim equality movement do well confusing the meaning of words so people are unsure of action?)
They are trying to force the federal hand so the federal government appears to be what it isn’t, because to the public all action that is force from the feds is authoritarian, and we have been trained well that all action against a smaller force is oppression (which is why we fight our wars in the worst way that leads to endless attrition).
The movement is existing in the cracks of action. relying that a just system does not act unjustly, and its legal wheels move slowly. that it has no capacity for decisive action against decisive action that it has in front of it without prior action to inform it of how to move. It has long been bound up and negated in allowing any action of the holders of power, which you can see in things like mandatory minimum sentences and other things that with more study can be found to remove autonomy (and the flexibility require to close cracks of action).
As in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, this will HAVE to play out, we no longer have the laws or requisite autonomy of action to respond decisively.
later i may delineate what can or cant be done.
but if i go more i am too long and boring
so thats that… you all work out the rest…
hint: look to history you dont know and didn’t want to learn in preparation
“They are trying to force the federal hand so the federal government appears to be what it isn’t, because to the public all action that is force from the feds is authoritarian, and we have been trained well that all action against a smaller force is oppression (which is why we fight our wars in the worst way that leads to endless attrition).
The movement is existing in the cracks of action. relying that a just system does not act unjustly, and its legal wheels move slowly. that it has no capacity for decisive action against decisive action that it has in front of it without prior action to inform it of how to move.” – Artfldgr
Very perceptive, especially the concept of “existing in the cracks of action.”
I agree that the Unmakers (“The ideology that is backing this whether fascism, socialism, communism, authoritarianism, need not have an accurate label to exist!!”) are trying blatantly to get violent reactions from the various levels of government, not just the Fed via President Trump, to distract from and give cover to their own criminal actions.
That, and the hate crime hoaxes (can anyone cite an actual real racist action from the last 20 years?), are an attempt to jump-start a hot war throughout the country, before more of the moderate Democrats, non-activist black people, and other “victim groups” reach an understanding of the bankrupt and, yes, oppression of the Left that keeps them poor and dependent.
One never knows what will be a tipping point, or when it will occur, but the Left can’t afford for one to happen before they get control of the Presidency and Congress again.
Related:
Andrew McCarthy on the mainstreaming of “The Revolution” and its infiltration of American Institutions, most notably education and the Democratic Party:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/the-revolution-is-winning/
Love your country or find out your homeless..
That you will have no country, because only this one accepts the poor openly