By Jim Campbell
May 30th, 2018
After eight years of Obama’s reign of terror on the U.S. Constitution and the American people do we seriously have that much more to fear in the U.S.?
Of course we do, its political correctness used so well by cultural Marxists and Adolph Hitler to forbid thoughts and speech.
Hitler accomplished his goals by getting members of his Hitler Youth to spy on their parents. (Source)
The Washington Examiner
By Ziyad Rahaman Azeez
May 30th 2018
Facts and critical thinking not allowed.
That’s a very Rousseauian way of thinking, common among liberals — an appeal to emotion.
To put it plainly, the quality of freedom that Rousseau attributes to human beings in the state of nature does not sound like freedom worth having.
More importantly, it does not seem to offer a basis for the radical reconfiguration of the world effected by entrance into this contract with other consenting human beings.
Other than the impulsive aversion to suffering, which Rousseau terms the natural virtue of pity, and from which all other social virtues derive, it is hard to see just what freedom a human being is supposed to own.
Indeed, as quoted above, Rousseau ultimately suggests that true freedom is only a result of the binding together of individuals into society, but freedom is also a necessary precondition of the founding of society.
What is called for is a robust account of human freedom divested of the circularity that I have tried to describe in Rousseau.
True human freedom would have to be self-legitimating, self-authorizing, in order to offer enough ground for the developmental account that Rousseau wants to offer: the liberty that Rousseau describes as “obedience to the law one has prescribed for oneself.”
This is a thought that German Idealism (e.g., Fichte, Kant, Hegel) will take to be the central problem of modern philosophy—it is also this line of thinking that results for Russell in the terrific destruction of the Second World War, at the hands of totalitarian empires. (Source)
It’s commonplace to hear liberals complain about conservatives denouncing them for being too politically correct.
Usually, the classic response from the Left has to do with stressing the importance of “empathy” or “protecting marginalized people.”
Recently, however, I’ve noticed leftists are taking a bit of a different path: accusing us on the political Right of engaging in safe space culture and having our own version of political correctness, calling it “conservative correctness.”
This argument is either some tenacious assertion that political correctness isn’t really a phenomenon or that the political Right has its own equivalence.
It may sound reasonable, but upon further inspection, it is anything but reasonable.
When one understands the origins of political correctness and its inherent relationship with left-wing politics, these arguments are clearly exposed as a deceptive attempt to both beguile and harm open debate on college campuses.
Professor Frank Ellis at the University of Sheffield noted the term “political correctness” was first used in the late 19th to the early 20th century when Vladimir Lenin began his rise to power.
Ellis said that Marxist-Leninist and Maoists placed a heavy preeminence on being ideologically correct, both politically and theoretically.
Essentially, a “forum for discussion,” as Ellis described it, would impede the revolutionary spirit needed to upend the social order.
Please see the entire article below.
Consider 20th century Europe, where the Frankfurt School was born in Germany. As pointed out by author William Lind, it was the intellectuals, such as Georg Lukacs, who believed culture needed to be rooted out before it could be replaced by a Marxist one. To do so, “critical theory” came to fruition with the goal of destroying what it perceived to be old ways of thinking.
While the Right is dedicated to authority and tradition, the Left is committed to egalitarianism by upending the social order. The upheaval of the 1960s is a perfect example. The New Left was born and its intellectuals began promoting anti-American hysteria and an all-out revolt against sexual norms. In later years, these very intellectuals would stock college campuses as professors and become the antecedents for the very people promoting multiculturalism, diversity, and “safe spaces.” Writing in Censorship: A World Encyclopedia in 2001, Robert Burt wrote that the introduction of political correctness to the American scene began with these very New Left intellectuals.
Ignoring the fact that political correctness has its origins in the Left is a way to distract against its pervasive presence at universities. According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education’s “Disinvitation Database,” which tracks campus speakers being disinvited due to pressure from students on campus, nearly 62 percent of recorded invitations rescinded since 2000 have come from individuals on the Left.
The Washington Post published a damning piece in which it was noted that at least 76 colleges (now 80) have a list of demands to end what they believe is “structural racism.” The article also pointed out that Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight conducted analysis on the demands and found that many of them related to “increasing diversity,” as well enforcing speech codes and public apologies.
Why is it that the most prominent and expensive cases of college censorship to ensure “civility” always come about when a conservative speaker pays a visit? Cornel West or Linda Sarsour could show up and all you would need are a few police officers and someone to check event tickets. Instead, the uproar occurs when a conservative speaker comes to campus because the most egregious protests always erupt from left-wing individuals trying to enforce a heckler’s veto. In the last year alone, Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, Charles Murray, Heather MacDonald, and Corey Lewandowski were all subject to campus visits met with vile resistance.
Instead of taking lessons from the “loving Left” on political correctness, let’s call out the troublemakers and make them acknowledge their own origins of upending the social order.
Ziyad Rahaman Azeez is recent graduate of George Washington University where he obtained a B.A. in Political Science.