James Tiberius Kirk couldn’t have done better! Go here to read the comments.
James Tiberius Kirk couldn’t have done better! Go here to read the comments.
BTW 16 US Presidents owned slaves. Many of them are featured on US Currecy. I’d suggest those offended round up all this objectionable currency – make sure you check the pockets of the clothes in the hamper and send all that offensive cash to me. If you need my address (See above).
Good advice Social Justice Warriors.
Jordan Peterson and Bill Maher discuss the fact that debating important ideas always involves offense, or the potential of offense. Language advisory as to the below video. One of the more pernicious taboos of our time is that ideas should be suppressed due to their offensive nature to some. Politeness is important but it pales in comparison to freedom of speech. Of course social justice warriors have mastered the art of the cry-bullying: suppressing other viewpoints over alleged offense, while being immensely offensive. Time, past time, to end this congealed nonsense.
Dave Griffey at Daffey Thoughts recalls the SJW trolls who swarmed over his blog, alarmed at this conservative intruder into their happy hunting ground, when it was at Patheos:
This time, a post-battle review. He nails Ms. Newman of Channel 4 for what she is. She is a Marxist inspired post-modern leftist. To that end, there is no truth, there’s merely the assumption of my measure of righteousness, anyone who disagrees must be a stereotype. And it isn’t just Ms. Newman. That’s the biggest problem. Peterson also calls out the fact that Ms. Newman’s tactics are all too common. While not unique to any time or place, her approach is pretty much the go-to approach in our millennial age; the post-Truth age where the point is to be affirmed in your awesomeness and contempt for non-conformers, rather than care a lick about getting to the truth.
As I listened to this, I thought of a glaring mistake I made at Patheos. Early on, I assumed commentators commented in good faith. Not sure why, since I’ve visited blogs for years. But I did assume this, I suppose because it was my blog and I thought I could direct the spirit of the comments. No. I was wrong. Some did in good faith. Many did not. The best Troll of the bunch incarnated the postmodern leftist millennial age and all its problems that we see with Ms. Newman.
Early on I missed that and tried to engage in the spirit of mature discourse. Which led to endless comments of nothing, strings of pointlessness that ended up chasing readers away (by the end, some told me exactly who it was that they dreaded seeing on a comments thread). The wag would use any tactic imaginable – deflection, inconsistency, arrogance, subtle insult, pointless rabbit chasing, insinuation, you name a method of obfuscation – to do nothing other than win, and feel intellectually superior. Any attempts to correct the situation? More accusations, name calling or insults.
Which is why his approach reminded me of Ms. Newman, and much of the postmodern, millennial approach to debate. There was no attempt to get to the point, discover the truth, find an answer, or discover a solution. There was no real desire to understand my point – something I missed for too long. The point was keeping the individual tripped up as long as possible to feel validated and superior. Truth, and reality were completely irrelevant.
When engaging with the Marxist inspired postmodern millennial Left, it might be worth remembering this sad and ugly fact. We don’t engage with people seeking Truth. We engage with people who have one agenda and one agenda only – the eradication of anything that challenges their own superior view of themselves and their latest convenient values.
The fact that mainline outlets are taking notice and making with the slick ‘he’s obviously evil, he’s not liberal’ headlines, is all I need to know to understand how dangerously on the edge we are. Dangerous because it’s not just people who need validation on blogs, but actual jouranlism and even our very educational institutions that are in on the act. Here, the Chronicle of Higher Education takes on Peterson. It’s more subtle than Ms. Newman, but the obvious suggestions and hints are there. Slate, of course, cuts right to the chase and in typical *Yawn* form, labels Peterson an Alt-Right hero. Alt-Right is quickly becoming ‘excuse to root for the extermination of those who don’t conform’, rather than a descriptive label.
All of which reminded me of the Patheos Trolls, Ms. Newman, progressive millennials, and why we must stop fooling ourselves about compromising with a movement of tyranny, oppression, violence and wickedness resting on lies and calumny and rejection of Truth as its primary tactic. It’s not just on Patheos or Channel 4. Increasingly, it is the millennial Left in a nutshell.
Go here to comment. One of my favorite scenes from the movie Becket:
I have always been struck by the words after the mitre is placed on Becket that: “he may appear fearsome to the enemies of Truth.” With most Leftists we are dealing with people who do not believe there is such a thing as truth, which explains a lot when you think about it.
One of the features most amusing about SJWs is that they take vast pride in their erudition while being bone ignorant of basic facts:
It began with a seemingly-innocuous gift:
To celebrate “National Read a Book Day,” the first lady [Melania Trump] had sent out a collection of 10 Dr. Seuss books to one school in each state across the nation. The titles included: “The Cat in the Hat”; “One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish”; “Wacky Wednesday”; “Green Eggs and Ham”; and “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!”
She followed in the footsteps of her predecessor, Michelle Obama, who often read Dr. Seuss books to children. Former first ladies Hillary Clinton and Barbara Bush also read to children at Dr. Seuss-themed educational events.
So far so good, right? One would think that this would be a relatively non-controversial, non-political act—with bipartisan agreement, as it were, since Dr. Seuss seems to have been given the Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton seals of approval—but if one thought that, one would think wrong.
Enter snippy, condescending social justice warrior Liz Phipps Soeiro:
Liz Phipps Soeiro, a librarian at a public school in Cambridge, wrote a letter to the first lady, which was then published on The Horn Book blog, notifying Mrs. Trump that her school would “not be keeping the titles” for their collection, explaining that her school didn’t have a “NEED” for the books, due to her school and library’s “award-winning” status.
“I work in a district that has plenty of resources, which contributes directly to ‘excellence,’” Soeiro wrote. “My students have access to a school library with over nine thousand volumes and a librarian with a graduate degree in library science.”
Might that highly-degreed librarian be none other than Ms. Soeiro herself? What a terrible insult from Melania Trump! And that’s not all; oh no, Soeiro was just getting warmed up:
Soeiro went on to slam the White House and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos for not gifting the books to “underfunded and underprivileged communities,” which she suggested “continue to be marginalized” by DeVos’ policies.
But Soeiro seemed to be the most offended by the books themselves.
In what way do these Dr. Seuss books offend? Ms. Soeiro explains:
Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are steeped in racist propaganda, caricatures, and harmful stereotypes,” said Phipps Soeiro in her letter to the first lady, calling Seuss “a bit of a cliché, a tired and worn ambassador for children’s literature.” “Open one of his books (‘If I Ran a Zoo or And to Think That I Saw It On Mulberry Street,’ for example), and you’ll see the racist mockery in his art.”
I’ve read many a Dr. Seuss book in my day, and loved them (although I’m not familiar with those two; my favorites were and are Horton Hatches the Egg and Happy Birthday To You, as well as Hop on Pop and Green Eggs and Ham). My son loved them, too.
Go here to Neo-NeoCon to read the rest. Now the hilarious aspect of this is that Theodor Seuss Geisel, Dr. Seuss, was a lifelong leftist and Ms. Soeiro is oblivious to that fact. Go here for a good summary of the political messages contained within his works.
The better informed President Obama lauded Dr. Seuss:
All hail the SWJs and their constant struggle to bring unintentional humor into contemporary life.
The University of Arizona is paying students $10 per hour to assume the responsibilities of “Social Justice Advocates.”
According to an online job description, Social Justice Advocates, or SJAs for short, “will be responsible for instituting monthly programmatic efforts within the residence halls that focus specifically on social justice issues,” such as setting up “bulletin boards in the halls” and hosting “social justice modules once a month for the RAs.”
Successful applicants will be expected to “report any bias incidents or claims to appropriate Residence Life staff” in addition to hosting bi-semesterly “Real Talks” with dorm residents.
“The position also aims to increase understanding of one’s own self through critical reflection of power and privilege, identity and intersectionality, systems of socialization, cultural competency, and allyship as they pertain to the acknowledgement, understanding, and acceptance of differences,” the job description elaborates, noting that the ultimate goal of the position is to “increase a student staff member’s ability to openly lead conversations, discuss differences, and confront diversely insensitive behavior.”
Notably, SJAs are paid an hourly rate of $10, and are expected to work an average of 15 hours per week, meaning students who fill the position can expect to make about $150 per week for promoting “inclusive communities through positive interactions.” Continue Reading
Language advisory for the video. Orwell saw this coming long ago:
At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.
Scratch a Social Justice Warrior, and a Grand Inquisitor will emerge.
Stephanie S. at The Right Geek has some interesting thoughts on Social Justice Warriors, and what a pretentious term that is, and Original Sin.
The SJW’s version of Original Sin does not apply to everyone equally. If you’re white, you’re more guilty than a “person of color.” If you’re straight, you’re more guilty than someone who is gay. If you are “comfortable” with your “assigned gender,” you’re more guilty than someone who is trans. If you’re a man, you’re more guilty than a woman. The list goes on and on. And because identity is “intersectional,” the formulae are even more intricate than the above binaries would suggest; indeed, you basically have to sit down and explicitly rack up your “victim points” to figure out just how much sin you have to expiate. The higher your point total, the less you are required to examine yourself, purge your hidden hatreds, and control your own behavior. Thus, a white, heterosexual, “cis-male” is the lowest of scum and must flagellate himself constantly to make up for it…
… while someone who is black, “pansexual,” and “genderfluid” is free to be as vicious and as abusive as “they” like — because, of course, “they’re” obviously “punching up.”
The SJW’s worldview is not only byzantine in its complexity; it’s also protean in its application. Just when you think you’ve finally figured it out, the SJW pulls a Lucy with her football and goes off to change the ground rules. Consider the issue of “representation.” The most reputable studies indicate that, for example, somewhere between two to six percent of the population is gay. It stands to reason, then, that in order to truly “represent the world as it is,” my writer friends should make sure that two to six percent of the characters they create are gay. Right? Right? Nope — not in SJW Land! For the SJW, the fact that gay people have appeared in virtually every modern television program that I’ve ever watched – and often in very visible roles – still does not satisfy. As John Trent reports today at The Federalist, she wants already established characters – like Captain America – to hop onto the rainbow bandwagon. And I suspect she’d find other reasons to complain even if Steve did get himself a boyfriend because, for the SJW, there is no endgame — no final objective she can clearly define.
The “social justice” movement, in short, is not True and Beautiful; instead, it has all the earmarks of an evil power grab. And as I’ve said many times before, we shouldn’t stand for it. Continue Reading