Academia, Free Speech

New York College Under Fire After Targeting Conservative Students and Groups

We have been discussing how universities are remaining silent as student governments limit rights of free speech and association, including the impeachment of conservative students.   Now, students at Skidmore College have reportedly barred fellow students from starting a campus chapter of the conservative group Young Americans for Liberty (YAL). In Rochester Institute of Technology, the student government has impeached student Senator Jacob Custer for defending campus police officers wearing Thin Blue Line masks. In both controversies, there are appeals or reviews being pursued but students were subjected to weeks of abusive campaigns for the exercise of their free speech and associational rights.

Skidmore has been previously in the news as a campus with a growing anti-free speech movement, including an unsuccessful effort to fire  professors for attending a police rally. There is a growing threat to free speech posed by student governments curtailing free speech under the guise of self-governance.  For some universities, student governments can accomplish indirectly what they cannot legally or politically accomplish directly.

That danger is evident in the account of Hannah Davis of how she was the subject of a campus campaign and petition to prevent her founding a YAL chapter. According to the Albany Times Union, the Skidmore Student Government Association told Davis she could not establish a YAL chapter because the formation of the group triggered “concerns of hate speech and … students on campus feel unsafe.” 

According to the Times Union, the anti-YAL petition was authored anonymously and denounced YAL as a springboard “for hate speech and bigotry disguised as political discourse.” It also claimed that “Skidmore has become increasingly hostile to BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) and marginalized students. It is no coincidence that this club is being proposed following months of bold activism by students of color.”

Skidmore College president Mark Connor said: “The student leaders whom our students have elected as their representatives have the right to vote to decide the outcome of this process I encourage all members of our community to exercise their freedom of speech and freedom of association and to engage with each other with patience, courtesy and respect for one another.”  Connor’s statement is disappointingly vague. He added:

“These fundamental rights apply to all, regardless of political persuasion or other differences, including views and beliefs. The rare exception would be hate speech, in which violence is clearly the goal, which would not be tolerated in our community. As always, I encourage all members of our community to exercise their freedom of speech and freedom of association and to engage with each other with patience, courtesy and respect for one another.”

There is nothing that one could object to in that statement but also little worth repeating. YAL is clearly a very conservative organization that is involved in both political and academic events.  The question is whether Connor would have been more proactive and clear if this was a campus effort to ban other more popular groups. Connor said that the conservative students could appeal but universities need to speak early and strongly in support of free speech and associational rights in such controversies.

In attacks on professors, we have also seen a sharp difference in the level of support voiced by university officials depending on the content of the viewpoints. Indeed, we have seen schools refuse to apologize when they effectively fueled false allegations.

When conservative faculty or controversial speakers are targeted, few officials or fellow professors have stepped forward to denounce such campaigns. The same is not true when controversies have arisen for statements on the left. We have been discussing efforts to fire professors who voice dissenting views on various issues including an effort to oust a leading economist from the University of Chicago as well as a leading linguistics professor at Harvard and a literature professor at Penn. Sites like Lawyers, Guns, and Money feature writers like Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos who call for the firing of those with opposing views (including myself).  Such campaigns have targeted teachers and students who contest the evidence of systemic racism in the use of lethal force by police or offer other opposing views in current debates over the pandemic, reparations, electoral fraud, or other issues.

Over at RIT, the students went the impeachment route to punish opposing viewpoints. The controversy arose in late January and students sought to impeach Custer due to his arguments on the student government’s messaging app in support of a campus officer who wore a Thin Blue Line face mask. This has been a controversy on other campuses where some symbols are favored while others are disfavored.  For free speech advocates, the issue is not the inherent meaning or value but the basis of discriminating on the basis of content in speech regulation.

Custer defended the right to wear such masks, writing:

 “Wearing such masks if they want to is not counterintuitive. It is perfectly okay for students and adults to express it since it is free speech. It is not disrespectful either. We are student government, representing all students. It is not our role to determine what idea is good or bad simply because a few members or more disagree with it and punish members of our community over something small. That is just outright censorship.”

This is clearly a much debated issue, but that is what academia is about: passionate but tolerant debate. Custer was voicing the view of many that TBL masks are not disrespectful or threatening of others. Yet, his defense of the officer triggered an immediate and anger response. According to The College Fix, one student senator wrote “[I]t’s honestly humorous that a White man is going to sit here and try to tell someone of color, more specifically Black, when something is or isn’t racist.” Another said that Custer believes that black people should be murdered: “Breaking news: Jacob Custer is angry and taking a stand against people of color because he isn’t allowed to disagree with the idea that Black people don’t deserve to be murdered.”

The student government then impeached Custer for what appears to be his exercise of free speech.

The university will only say that it is reviewing the action.

The action is a clear denial of the free speech rights of the conservative students and violates the university policies on protecting such rights:

As a private university, RIT retains the legal authority to determine the extent to which it will regulate an individual’s right to free speech and expression. RIT vigorously supports the rights of all members of the RIT Community to freely express their views and to peacefully and lawfully protest against actions and opinions with which they disagree.  RIT also recognizes that the right to free speech and expression is not absolute. It must be balanced against the university’s obligation to the principles of academic freedom and to provide a secure and civil environment where faculty, staff, and students can freely exchange ideas and openly engage in deliberation, debate and learning. Any decision that RIT might take to regulate speech or expression by members of the RIT Community, shall be based on RIT’s commitment to foster a safe and civil environment where differing views and opinions are expressed.  Open-mindedness, civility, respect, decency, and sensitivity for the opinions and rights of others, however different from one’s own, are crucial to fulfilling the university’s academic mission.

While the statement seems to emphasize the right to regulate rather than protect speech, this action is clearly in contravention of the policy.

The university did little during the campaign or the petition to make clear that all students will be guaranteed the rights to free speech and association. Recently, RIT President David Munson declared:

“Earlier today, we learned that the Student Government Senate voted to uphold the Standards Review Board’s decision to impeach an elected member of the Student Government Senate. We felt strongly that it was proper and necessary for the Student Government to follow and complete the process outlined in their Student Government Bylaws, …However, the question of whether the decision may have violated university policy C.11, protecting free speech and expression, has been raised. As is always the case, the RIT President’s Office reserves the right to review any decision that may violate RIT policy. … To ensure that no RIT policies have been violated, I will be assembling a Review Panel, which will include members of the RIT Board of Trustees and others, to review the evidence and decisions from the Standards Review Board and the appeal process.”

The two controversies are the latest example of how student governments can function as surrogates to silence opposing voices and viewpoints on campuses. It is commendable for reviews or appeals to be conducted. However, the silence of these schools in both controversies has been disconcerting. Students were subjected to abusive campaigns for weeks due to their exercise of free speech.  The universities remained conspicuously silent. However, student self-governance is not a license to abuse other students or deny their speech rights. Universities cannot simply say that students “can always appeal” and do nothing to maintain the core guarantees of speech and associational rights.

I recognize that universities must be careful to honor self-governance as well as opposing free speech rights. What was missing in my view was a proactive statement from the university presidents that viewpoint discrimination would not be allowed and that, while students will be allowed to voice their opposing to viewpoints or groups, the university will not permit the sanctioning or barring of students or groups based on content discrimination.  One possible reform is to allow for the equivalent of an interlocutory appeal to the university to force a review on the grounds of raw viewpoint discrimination in certain cases like impeachments.  The alternative to is allow students to be dragged through abusive processes based on their voicing unpopular views.

Under the current system, students can create kangaroo courts that pummel students with opposing views as universities wait silent and passively for any possible appeal. The result is a chilling effort for other students who will not want to be subjected to such abuse — and have a year of responding to these attacks by the student government. The obvious result is that the majority can deter opposing viewpoints and groups by increasing the cost of exercising the rights of free speech and association.

 

191 thoughts on “New York College Under Fire After Targeting Conservative Students and Groups”

  1. Mamie Fish,

    The American Founders left a message for you.
    ______________________________________

    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and

    to provide new Guards for their future security.’

    – Declaration of Independence, 1776

  2. You know it’s getting really bad for old Joey D when the MSM starts questioning his ability to act like a President, instead of a barely walking-talking puppet.

    “Biden not yet holding a formal news conference raises accountability questions”

    https://www.yahoo.com/gma/biden-not-yet-holding-formal-100150308.html

    “Even as the nation deals with multiple crises — a deadly pandemic and the devastating economic fallout — Biden has gone longer without facing extended questions from reporters than any of his 15 predecessors over the past 100 years.”

    Old Uncle Joe will be breaking all kinds of ignominious records before they figure out how to get rid of him.

  3. Here is an informal overview of the kind of Political Philosophy lecture I used to give on these matters…
    Two Aspects of Democracy: These are political rights (equal voting rights equal opportunity for holding office) and human rights (equal protection from violations of one’s life, liberty and property, essentially meaning that the government must have compelling just cause for interference of those rights such as arresting and convicting those who violate other’s life liberty and property).
    How can both sets of rights be maintained? Aristotle, in his Politics , famously criticized pure democracy, which he thought was a version of mob rule that usually lowers itself to unthinking emotional appeals. He developed a requirement of virtue that could mitigate the excesses of unconstrained decisionism of absolute voting democracy. He said that virtue is essentially habitually doing the right thing for the right reasons. Acting for good reasons would be each person’s constitutional makeup. If the citizens each had these individual constitutions, then they would vote for the common good instead of personal or factional interests. The instillation of personal virtue constitutions should be an essential part of the schooling. He mentioned also that there could be written constitutions which would establish rule by law that could not be overridden by the mob vote. ( Indeed, that is what we have in this country today). He even made the case for a benevolent dictator, guided by his or her personal virtue, which would tend toward the common good and thought this would be a rare case since the possibility of corruption is great. ( MacArthur, as the post war leader of Japan until 1951 , functioned as the supreme commander of Japan, but benevolently established a constitutional Japan, with voting rights , basic human rights, and so on.) In all three cases, single virtuous leader, virtue based voting by citizens (called a “polity”), or written basic rules of law (constitutional or “liberal” democracy), could provide the remedy for mob rule.
    The US constitution uses the rule of basic laws to constrain what is on the table for voting. We cannot vote in rules either in Federal, State or even Colleges that violate basic rights, like the Nazi’s did in laws harming people for being Jewish. That is how we have tried to solve the paradox of the two kinds of rights (political and human). We prioritize human rights. Freedom of speech and association are part of the basic right of liberty. The other option that seems to be prevalent in public discussion today is democratic socialism, which usually has voting rights trumping human rights. Democratic socialism allows for control over all aspects of life, usually based on majority rule, and constrained not by a constitutional guarantee, but mere “empathy” for the plight of others which does not have a good track record. Again, Democratic Socialism has voting rights trumping human rights.
    When I first went to college in 1970 there was a lecture by the student government on the rules dorm life. For example, a curfew on coed mingling in dorms, making too much noise and so on. One comment stuck out to me, if there were repeated violations of the rules a student could be confined to their dorm room. I objected that that might sound like a good idea but can’t happen in a free country. I said you could take steps to have the student kicked out of the dorm life but imprisonment by a student government is off the table of remedies. So are the rules against freedom of speech and association that Prof. Turley mentions.
    Both types of equality need protection and our method is the allowing of voting with the proviso that basic human rights are not violated.

  4. If they can’t arrange to get noticed by acting like children just re-enact Ocasio or 9/11. Other than that they are still the eastern armpit of the nation

  5. To the individual known as “Art Deco x 4 / ‘Darren Smith Banned Me’ / et al”

    You made a comment on this page suggesting that another commenter commit suicide in a violent manner. Your gross violation of the civility rules is not acceptable and consequently your commenting privilege is permanently revoked.

    Do not post any further comments to this website under any alias.

    1. Darren, I think somebody has been spoofing the Art Deco x 4 alias. Some idiot was using it this past weekend, and I’m certain it was not the same guy who usually comments under that alias. It’s very strange, and I can’t prove it, but I’m certain it was happening.

      1. The stealing of others’ identities on this blog is, unfortunately, a rather common practice. Certainly CTHD has had to contend with it in a big way. Ditto for Seth in probably the biggest way. By the Book, same there. I’ve had it happen to me, in a smaller way. ID theft fits in with the protocol of personal attack as rhetoric of first resort.

        It’s why commenting anonymously is so prevalent.

        EB

        1. When Seth and CTHD were spoofed it was pretty obvious; not right, but obvious. If Art was faked it was a bit more subtle though Diogenes was quick to suspect it.

      2. Diogenes– I remember your saying that over the weekend. I did notice a little change in tone but I didn’t give it much thought. Probably I am not as perceptive as you. I didn’t see the critical post, but it doesn’t sound characteristic of Art.

        1. Yeah, I called him out. He was attacking his normal allies, sometimes caustically. That’s when I smelled a rat.

        2. He dialed it back later that day, probably to avoid detection, but it was the same guy. You must have missed his earlier tweets.

      3. That icon has been used by the person known as Art Deco, so unless someone guessed his email address, that really was Art Deco even though you think it was an imposter.

    2. To Darren Smith.

      Darren.

      I gather that you do some of the blog ,maintenance for JT.

      I posted a comment on this post but have not been able to find it to take a copy of it for my own records. Probably it has been caught by some kind of filter, SPAM or banned words. It is somewhere between comment number 205 and 212 on this post. Would you be able to correct whatever has resulted in it being banned or if you consider banning justified send me a copy of it to my email address.

      It contains maximum strength sarcasm so I should not be surprised that it has disappeared.

      Regards Carlyle Moulton.

        1. Thanks Darren.

          Each comment on the Turley Blog used to have a date/time stamp but this is no longer shown. Not only is a time stamp useful in its own right but it is an anchor tag for the comment itself and without it there is no way to determine the comment’s URL.

          1. I tried to think at what was causing you not to see the date/time link & timestamp but I am drawing a blank. I viewed it using two GUI browsers and a text based one and it was visible on my end. The only thing I can think of, and it probably is not the anser, is to physically resize your browser and/or change the font size (can be done in many browsers using [Control][+] or [Control][-]) that might change the layout and might reveal something that could be hidden.

            1. Darren.

              There are some sites that do not work with Seamonkey and for them I use Firefox. I do not think writers of HTML code test their code with all browsers, just Firefox and Chrome. I will try using Firefox & Chrome.

        2. Thanks Darren.

          On another matter. The comments on the Turley Blog used to have date-time stamps and these were anchors for the comments individual URL. Not only are time stamps useful in themselves but without them one cannot find the URL for the comment if one wants to record it so one can find it again.

          Banning words because they are attached to malign stereotypes does not work as the malign ideas slowly transfer to the replacement in this case the N-word.

          The only way for removing the stereotypes is to remove the minority disadvantage that causes them.

          Regards, Carl.

  7. It’s viewpoint discrimination and indoctrination.

    If public universities wish to receive federal funds, then they need to remain politically neutral. Same goes for PBS and NPR. Taxpayer funds appear to go to Democrat madrassas.

    If a university wishes to become a Democrat stronghold, then they need to explain this in their marketing material. Be honest if no conservatives need apply. Be honest if the focus is on social justice rather than academics. That will help parents and students find the best match.

    Universities who really are politically neutral, and who require their professors to leave personal politics at the door, may have an advantage. There are plenty of less expensive venues to learn social justice indoctrination. If a university is going to take the position that classical literature, Western civilization, and even math are all racist, then please accurately disclose this to prospective students.

    1. I would add that the Democrat revival of Jim Crow racially segregated dorms, graduations, clubs, meetings, and other events, racial bias in grading, and racial bias against Asian and Caucasian college applicants should also be disclosed on marketing materials about universities.

      1. Karen S– Good thoughts. It is peculiar to hear calls for unity and healing on one hand intermixed with demands for separate dorms, classes, graduations, recreation areas, grading, and admissions on he other.

  8. “[I]t’s honestly humorous that a White man is going to sit here and try to tell someone of color, more specifically Black, when something is or isn’t racist.”

    It’s honestly humorous when someone claims a certain ethnic group isn’t qualified to discuss race based on racial profiling of that group. Fixed it for ya.

    “The word ‘racism’ is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything – and demanding evidence makes you a ‘racist.’ ”

    Thomas Sowell

    As the father of two millennials I was schooled by my children years ago that as a “rich old White man” I could not understand the problems faced by POC.

    When I pointed out that they had profiled me based on age, gender, and race I was told it was “scientifically proven”.

    Later in the day I was talking about using TSA Pre. They had never heard of it and wanted to know how to get it. I told them that I called the TSA and said I was a rich old white man and could I get any special perks, and voila! TSA Pre AND Global Entry.

    Sadly they found this believable.

  9. Imagine having to fight a war, with the kids that we are raising now. They don’t feel “safe” when they hear speech they don’t like. An enemy could just say things that make them feel unsafe and they would surrender, without a shot being fired. Matter of fact, our country is going down without fighting, because of the far left taking over control of every aspect of our lives and our funds.

    I hear people say “wait for 2022” and we can get the country back. But, if the same voting methods are used, then 2022 may be a repeat of 2020. My other fear is, can we survive for two years, when the country has been almost destroyed in less than two months?

    1. Imagine fighting a war with the Trump snowflakes who can’t even get it together to wear a mask for the common defense because “their rights” to party are being abridged. Useless babies.

      1. The truly useless and snowflake types are all left of center hacks like yourself. Your party apparatchiks that have gotten a senile puppet in POTUS , open borders , back to friends and cash with the Iranian mullahs , importing fossil fuels while destroying our previously reliant fossil fuel industry….. that is America’s problem.

        1. Why do I think your paragraph would be perfectly punctuated by you going old school and crunching a beer can on your forehead as you uttered it?

          EB

      2. Anon: “Imagine fighting a war with the Trump snowflakes”
        ***
        Many of the Trump supporters I know have already fought in our wars and served honorably

        You don’t need to “imagine’ it. It has already been done.

    2. *Irony alert*

      The U.S. is indeed fighting a war with multiple fronts with at least some people who were born after 9/11. No doubt they’d love to discuss your sentiment with you.

      EB

      1. “The U.S. is indeed fighting a war with multiple fronts”

        What war is that, Bugs?

          1. No. That’d be you, Bugs. The one who can’t answer the question.

            Exactly what war do you think the US is fighting?

            1. Well, since you seem fixated on my time as a high school basketball coach I’ll point to time spent by a couple of my players in Northern Iraq. One as Air Force SF. The other as Army intelligence. So maybe it follows there was military activity in that location???? One also did several tours in Afghanistan as well…

              Have to say Wally, the fact you even persist with the question makes me doubt your mental capacity just a little bit more than before.

              EB

      2. Kapitan Elvis , I went through Army boot in the early 80’s to become light infantry… there were no “stress cards” , no coed training , no woke garbage…you did it by the numbers or you as was instructed or you got booted. With the “politization” and introduction of woke insanity infused in our military today…I would have a hard time believeing our troops are anywhere near as “hard” as they should be. Discipline in an environment where you have to shoot , move and communicate is absolute , or people die. When woke politics trumps discipline and physical reality..all is lost. .

        1. Grunt training is hell, Phergus, no doubt. It was then. It is now. Congrats and much respect on your service…, but just know the biggest illusion of the old looking back is they tend to go all ‘i walked 20 miles to school barefoot in the snow’ upon recollecting their experience.

          EB

    3. Woke and Broke

      Well you get it then. The same losers been telling us to wait for the next time since 1968 or so. And it gets worse in every cycle.

      Get organized, and get even. .

  10. Skid more!
    You are whores!
    You live in New York State.
    Please…don’t go south when things go bad.

    1. This Navy Chaplin was harassed by TSA afterwards on every leg of his trip.

      Scanned his notes that he had in writing and cards from other people. Then they did the same to someone he knew after she said they were friends. Intimidation, not all that different from the fascists pre WW2.

  12. Turley will jump like a cat when some high school or small college teacher or student express’s their views on “Free Speech”. Never mind that Turley says nothing about the 100’s of thousands or millions that will lose their rights to the ballot box because there is a group effort by a political party to limit and destroy their right to vote. Voting is free speech, without the vote, nobody’s voice is heard.

    2. The 14th and 15th Amendments solidified the right to vote. In Shelby County v Holder the Supreme Court stated that 15A “commands that the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of race or color.”

      However, as far as I can tell it does not extend this franchise to non-citizens.

      Do 14A and 15A extend to non-governmental entities? How about government subsidized entities? If your university is non-compliant with 14A and 15A give them the Title IX treatment.

      RIT clearly asserts its right to be the arbiter of free speech. Ok, then don’t use government money to skirt the Constitution.

      14A was the backbone of both MLK’s civil rights movement and the women’s rights movement ensuring equality under the law. RIT is pissing on those principles.

    3. Dude, try reading the Constitution. It doesn’t say the voting franchise extends to non-citizens. It extends the right to vote only to citizens.

      Using your logic what’s to keep the PRC from sending 500,000,000 non-citizens over here to exercise their “freedom of speech” by voting?

      Besides, if voting made a difference they wouldn’t let us do it.

    4. The Senate needs to pass H.R. 1 to protect vulnerable voters. Republicans want to filibuster that, and for the time being, Manchin and Sinema aren’t willing to vote to do away with the filibuster. But Manchin, at least, it open to other changes, like returning to the days of requiring a talking filibuster and requiring 41 votes on the floor during a filibuster.

  13. I keep getting insulted for calling the left and the Democrat Party as a whole fascist but everyone of these free speech articles by Professor Turley demonstrates that what I have claimed is true.

    1. Our leftist friends can’t debate the topic because the fascism is so evident. Instead they insult Turley and criticize the topics he chooses. That criticism of the topic demonstrates the fascism that exists within their souls. They want protections of civil liberties and speech NOT to be discussed.

      1. My god, I’m ceaselessly amazed by your willingness to open your mouth and prove the breadth and depth of your unmitigated idiocy on virtually every topic. Good job (I guess)!!

        1. Anonymous the Stupid, we see such amazement in five year olds, but I would be insulting them by putting you in the same category.

          No content in what you are complaining about. Tell me where I am wrong in the following paragraph.

          Our leftist friends can’t debate the topic because the fascism is so evident. Instead they insult Turley and criticize the topics he chooses. That criticism of the topic demonstrates the fascism that exists within their souls. They want protections of civil liberties and speech NOT to be discussed.

        1. “Why would any intelligent person choose to debate a troll?”

          Good question but if people stopped talking to trolls you would have no one to talk to.

    2. Please stop comparing them to fascists. They lack the snappy uniforms. The ghost of the Duce is very insulted by this comparison. Sal Sar.

      2. New York City is dead forever

        By
        Author, comedy club owner and former hedge-fund manager James Altucher self-published this essay on Thursday, Aug. 13, under the title, “NYC is dead forever. Here’s why.” He granted the New York Post permission to reprint his piece in full below.

        I love NYC. When I first moved to NYC it was a dream come true. Every corner was like a theater production happening right in front of me. So much personality, so many stories.

        Every subculture I loved was in NYC. I could play chess all day and night. I could go to comedy clubs. I could start any type of business. I could meet people. I had family, friends, opportunities. No matter what happened to me, NYC was a net I could fall back on and bounce back up.

        Now it’s completely dead. “But NYC always always bounces back.” No. Not this time. “But NYC is the center of the financial universe. Opportunities will flourish here again.” Not this time.

        “NYC has experienced worse.” No, it hasn’t.

      3. OK Sal, I apologize. In the future that means the sloppy fascists.

        I got this advertisement from the NYT: “Sloppy fascists 50% off on all dry cleaning. Get a snazzier look and shut people up with style.

        Burnt Books Dry Cleaning

        666 Hitler way
        Suite KKK
        Washington D.C.

  15. I keep reflecting on Atlas Shrugged when I read articles like this. Keep up the good fight Professor

  16. “Attack of the Nihilists”

    https://www.unz.com/kbarrett/attack-of-the-nihilists/?__cf_chl_jschl_tk__=20b0186959ba4ed39c4714dc2aee9db792d40aff-1615318290-0-AUlGAjT4fx1C3iX4nSLc5G8pFlTEjITOszsp2WjdImMKSzeWD-1p40ziRJ3yNzFPKzn7_Clab-sfLNvEL7WXjLNR280lqcZyzTHeJF0eKZNpm1LQZUW0JK6vZeR1fO9_0mN2mT2UaPzG6ovQ9UUE-Z5U7Q_idMiQdfm2pkUFVhrmWM1n4nodM6Fb_nV2x0Ca_JWz7iKxDvZ0cRoNkLnKrEGNrF59rT2g4g6CuyuVTe7Wl6-SZbyafpFFKUShiSVs5xp7DP4s3tFg41Pxr6km8_02wAMMl7RYJ406lvuCSmQzHhInWBgNTLKuagP_PiF_5OLrLJzAJIMTTk0ALNMppkftAHxewgtH9ycA_-EF7AeDwnoCDiHC2rp5YYb89h7q8w

    “Liberal parents neglect the religious education of their children, who grow up to embrace radical political ideologies as a poor substitute for faith and the spiritual life. That’s why Western culture has been trapped in an oscillating dynamic between liberalism and nihilistic radicalism for roughly two centuries, with no end in sight.”

    1. Kevin Barrett’s answer, years ago, if I recall correctly, was to become a Muslim. I don’t find that a congenial answer. I could be wrong about that. but, that’s my recollection.

      What is “nihilistic radicalism?” Anyways? Frederick Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger? You can call them names but in their works there are sincere encounters with nihilism which do not end with continuing blind allegiance to liberal materialisms. Try and read and unpack them for yourself, without worrying about all the derision that has been heaped upon them for so long, by our oppressors.

      We can’t wish away the red guards that are wrecking what few values we have left before our eyes. They will not just go away. The billionaires are backing them and at some point there will be no choice. They will either be met with organized force and neutralized, or they will grind us under permanently.

      Now human life itself has no meaning for them, as they reduce us all to the status of useless co2 emitters polluting the planet with our bad breath and farts. That’s all we are to them. They don’t even need us as slaves anymore: they have the robotics and AI progressing in leaps and bounds.

      At the end of the day, it’s just like facing up to a bully. You either fight or go under.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svpffpu8M9E

      “…there are no tribes beyond us, nothing indeed but waves and rocks, and the yet more terrible Romans, from whose oppression escape is vainly sought by obedience and submission. Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace. — Calcagus, from Tacitus

      Sal Sar

  17. I harbor the same fear, Mamie. They want a leftwing dictatorship. They may cause the opposite, which is equally dreadful.

    I would warn these young ayatollahs don’t force people to choose.

    1. “They would not listen, they’re not listening still; Perhaps they never will.” Don McLean

    2. Agreed. Falling for the head fake of free speech argument is a distraction. The real effort, the brain behind the weapon as it were, is in watching and fighting against voter suppression from the right. That’s where the rubber meets the road right now since it’s a concerted and focused effort to instill minority rule. Keep an eye on that ball.

      EB

      1. And here I was hoping for a quiet day.

        Bug, ballot verification is not voter suppression. Stop listening to Stacy Abrams.

        1. Funny thing, ballots *were* verified during this election by…., wait for it…, actual ballots. Ta da. Just because you’re not in favor of the numerical reality they portrayed doesn’t make them worthy of being thrown out in the neighborhoods/districts you don’t favor.

          Stop *NOT* listening to Stacy Abrams.

          EB

          1. Stacy Abrams is a cornfed Holstein who wouldn’t know verification if it slapped her in the jowls.

          2. “Funny thing, ballots *were* verified during this election by”

            You think they were. That is why few pay attention to what you say.

            SM

              1. Verifying ballots that are claimed not to be valid in the first place doesn’t verify that the vote is proper.

                That you don’t understand the logic is understandable. That is why one cannot pay much attention to what you say.

                SM

        2. The question is Dog man, how do you not realize this is the tactical path forward for the right??? They come right out and admit that it’s their only path forward when faced with the demographic wave breaking over their heads.

          EB

          1. “Democraphic wave–” We know what this means. It is the notion that non-whites will outbreed whites, and they will vote for Democrats, and then the utopia can finally begin when whitey can never muster a democratic majority again.

            The amazing thing is that this notion usually comes from the mouth or pen of a white person. Think about that for a minute, let it sink in. There are millions if not tens of millions of white people in this country who are ashamed of their own skin and their ancestry. Is this sad, pathetic, or disgusting? Or a little bit of all three? Never has there been a people in human history that was collectively so wealthy and yet collectively so weak, so demoralized, and so pathetic.

            I used to be amused when white people celebrate their own demise. Go ahead and extinguish yourselves then, useless carbon emitters. Trust me, if you despise yourself, nobody else will respect you either.

            Among other things, one big thing that has spared me from becoming a big fat racist in my adult life is this: white people increasingly disgust me. Why? I am disgusted by people who lack no tribal instincts whatsoever. And that is white people. Utterly ashamed of all their historical success, and perfectly willing to surrender. This is why I can never be a white supremacist. The white race from one corner of the world to the next is a weak and selfish joke. From our self-abnegation, to our individualistic selfish materialism and greed, to our vanity and sloth, we can see that we are unfit. It seems to me we coast on the fumes of our ancestors, soon to run out of steam and expire. Evidently, white people are an inferior race that will be extinguished by evolution. It would not matter if we had the best characteristics of one sort or another, would not matter at all, if we have no instincts to survive, no will to live, then we are finished as a people.

            Why, it’s so bad now, that white people won’t even agree that they are a people! The only time they will admit to being a group is when they accept the mantle of “systemic racism” or some other opprobrium. Otherwise there is no group identity, cohesion, or solidarity whatsoever.

            All the things that white people have praised in other groups, are for us, denied! For us, faults, in what we consider virtues for others. Who laid down the rules of this unfair contest?

            Take a wild guess. The irony will be most of them wear the white skin too.

            https://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/

            why would billionaires want to demoralize and destroy white people, as such? Simple. To save themselves. White people in america are the only group large and powerful enough, that if they turned on the billionaires, the billionaires would be finished. over, done, destroyed, wiped out. hence, for many decades, they have been funding all the usual white-hating intellectual and mass media claptrap that we are familiar with, and this toxic drug of collective-guilt has become a narcotic, a thing that puts people to sleep, lets them stay home and accept every sort of infamy and humiliation with ease. It is the ultimate excuse for being a failure and a weakling. And it has been mainlined by the suckers for long that they are hypes, addicts, junkies, unable to resist,

            Again: if we tolerate this situation, then Nature renders its verdict on us one day, and we will cease to exist, just as surely as any other unfit breed, variety, type, or species that has ever vanished from the Earth. And on the next day life will go on and nobody will care whatsoever.

            Ever heard of the Khwarazmians? Of course not. A nation totally destroyed by the Mongols that formerly occupied all of Persia and more. Wiped off the map as a nation, and utterly eradicated and assimilated. Who’s crying for them now?

            Oh that baddie Genghis Khan. But you know who he is, don’t you? You’ve heard of him. And millions of men are descended from him today. Probably the most ruthless conqueror in history– that’s who Nature rewards with “descendants as many as the stars in the sky,” not Abraham, after all.

            https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/mongolia-genghis-khan-dna

            Sal Sar

              1. Did that study factor in CO2 produced by all the places he burned down?

                1. Apparently, they surmise it was just that he razed so many cities and kingdoms, all the trees grew back where people once lived. Sal

                  1. So . . . no.

                    They ignored the fact that the Romans showed you can get 8 hours of heat and light just burning ONE Christian. At least that’s what the tour guide told me.

            2. I’m patting myself on the back for getting through three paragraphs of this before gagging, Kurtz/

              EB

      2. “watching and fighting against voter suppression”

        Says the genius who doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand that fraudulent physical and electronic ballot harvesting equals “voter suppression”.

        You claim to be a high school basketball coach.

        What subject do you teach? Leaf burning 101? Motorcycle maintenance?

        1. You of course have the evidence of this and are willing to put it all out here for us to see, no?

          EB

            1. You’re a speed reader?!

              As I said; “Not that you would ever admit to it”.

              BTW, bogus high school basketball coach who spends all of his time here posting, day in, and day out.

              You never answered the question.

              What subject do you teach when you’re not coaching hoops?

              Breathing Air and Taking Up Space 101?

              1. I can see it will be best for me to exit this discourse as it enters the rarified air of the higher levels of intellect and there will be no way a mere mortal such as myself will be able to keep up.

                EB

            2. Ahh…, I see our spirited dialogue that was reaching for rarefied intellectual air was deemed out of bounds and edited out. All for the best I say! Let me just add that, no, I don’t take the testimony of the Overstock guy as being the cutting edge of election forensics…, especially when Pat Cipolone openly questioned why he was present at a meeting with trump & inner circle that nearly broke out in a fist fight over whether overthrowing election results was actually best practice or not.

              EB

      3. The only voter suppression caused by voter ID that is significant is the suppression of illegal votes. The US has helped hold elections in third world nations and they always used some form of ID to provide one vote for one person. The US tried to prevent all the ballot harvesting and many other aspects of voting promoted by the left in these countries. These tactics are fascist since one man one vote is not preserved.

        It’s this type of mentality that cheats at Little League games teaching the wrong things to their 7 year olds.

        1. “. . . voter suppression caused by voter ID . . .”

          If requiring an ID to vote is “voter suppression,” then an ID at a liquor store is “liquor suppression;” at a bank, “money suppression;” at the airport, “flying suppression;” . . .

          When you play games with words, you can make any manner of bizarre assertions.

          1. Then print up a voter identification card to go with every SS# at birth. Only solution. But my guess is you’d like limitations (suppression) on that, no?

            Endlessly amused by you guys freaking out about this and immediately going right to selective voter ID in your ham fisted defense of suppression while ignoring the targeted voting polls and times being systematically attacked, limited and shut down in neighborhoods of color.,

            EB

      4. This is my favorite bugaboo about this particular point: if there is nothing to hide, if everything is legit, then there is nor reason to not release information. Legitimate info would simply show that legitimate activities had transpired resulting in a legitimate outcome. You are either paid or simply just a low IQ tool with nothing better to do, EB, and none of your nonsense will convince educated, experienced, and thinking people otherwise. If it isn’t for a paycheck, why you waste your time in this fashion is anybody’s guess.

        1. James: you of the supposed gargantuan IQ, show me one legit example of withheld information from those advocating free and fair voting practice. I’ll wait for those IQ points to get busy, buddy.

          EB

      5. EB thinks that requiring a driver’s license is “driver suppression.”

        1. I know right? That’s because I’m well read on all the parts of the Constitution that have to do with driving law.

          EB

  18. It’s another piece of evidence, in case you needed one, that the cohorts born at the end of the last century have within them an abnormally large population of jerks. If they’re not getting positive feedback, they’re getting succor of the sort offered by the president of Skidmore. If you doubt that, try to imagine how that same apparatchik would react to a petition campaign to prevent a Burn Loot and Murder chapter from forming at Skidmore.

  19. I agree Mamie. The Fascist Left is now digging in for the long haul. After H.R. 1 is signed it will be time for the firing squads and re-education camps.

    1. The re-education camps have been here for a long time. They are called the public fool system. School system I mean.

      There will be no firing squads. They will just tell you to stay home and shut up. And guess what? As we have seen, most of us will do exactly that

      Sal Sar

      1. I know, right? The fact Rhetoric 101 isn’t taught in public high school is egregious. The genius of ass clowns like trump lies in recognizing this gullibility capacity and then working to divide the populace along those lines.

        Twuly twagic i tell ya.

        EB

  20. We had a good run of it, here in the United States, but I am afraid it is over.

    1. Geez. Stop being so nasty. That sort of response doesn’t exactly ‘muster the Rohirrim’.

    2. Mamie Fish,

      The American Founders left a message for you.
      _____________________________________

      “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,

      and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      – Declaration of Independence, 1776

Comments are closed.