Syracuse Professor Declares the Sept. 11th Attacks a Response to “Heteropatriarchal Capitalistic Systems”

Many of us who lived through September 11th terrorist attacks have used today to share the painful memories of that day. In addition to losing a friend on one of the flights, the Pentagon plane hit just after I passed next to the impact side of the Pentagon in my car on the way to work. I ended up being cut off by another car and blowing my front tire and fixing it as the huge plume rose over the Pentagon. For others, the anniversary carries a different meaning from religious extremists murdering thousands in the name of Allah. For Syracuse University political science professor and Washington Post contributor Jenn M. Jackson,  the attacks were really about destroying the “heteropatriarchal capitalistic systems” supporting the United States and Western powers. Would that make Osama Bin Laden a champion in intersectional homotransnationalism?

Jackson wrote

She added that “White Americans might not have really felt true fear before 9/11 because they never felt what it meant to be accessible, vulnerable, and on the receiving side of military violence at home. But, white Americans’ experiences are not a stand-in for ‘America.’”

What is curious about Jackson, who teaches gender and African American studies, is that she ignores the attacks of Al Qaeda in other countries, including other Muslim countries. Likewise, ISIS has brutally repressed other Muslims and religious minorities in its own reign of terror. These groups openly work for the creation of Islamic rule and the establishment of a Caliphate. They seek to establish theocratic authoritarian regimes.

In those regimes, Professor Jackson may find that Al Qaeda is only intersectional to the extent that its religious values overlap with homicidal inclinations.

87 thoughts on “Syracuse Professor Declares the Sept. 11th Attacks a Response to “Heteropatriarchal Capitalistic Systems””

  1. As a physician it is unethical for me to make a diagnosis on a person I have never interviewed or physically seen but this person’s tweet would suggest even to a layman that they may have a some alteration in their comprehension of reality and maybe should consider seeking professional help.

  2. I know most Moslems are peaceful religion but can anyone tell me why Islam seems to disproportionately (relative to other religions) inspire adherents to commit indiscriminate mass murder of innocent people?

  3. Yes, and of course only whites want to protect the “heteropatriarchal capitalistic systems” because, you know, there aren’t any black capitalists. The race narcissism of the elite black class is stunning. It makes them say the stupidest things and reinforces the impression that they were only hired to fill affirmative action quotas. No brains, just lots and lots of BS.

  4. “Jenn M. Jackson (she/they) is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science.”

    They? He choice of third person pronoun is “they?”

    Give the book to they. They book is heavy. Let’s go to they house (or is it permissible to make the pronoun they possessive?).

    I’m sorry. Even if the laws of science are malleable, the laws of English grammar are immutable. Unless dining with a monarch, I’m using first person pronouns for every individual. Don’t like it? Pound sand!

    1. Grammar is hard-do away with grammar. AP math is hard-do away with AP math. Entrance exams are hard-do away with entrance exams. Getting inti an elite college is hard-do away with standards. SAT tests are hard-do away with SAT exams. Not being obese is hard-have a COSMO cover that shows an obese woman with the caption-THIS IS HEALTHY. Odd that sports has not done away with the meritocracy??? Why no lowering of standards for shooting guards or cornerbacks? We can lower standards for medical school but not for baseball?

  5. It seems like every time there is a terrorist attack, the apologists come out of the woodwork with their excuses.

    9/11 was Islamic Terrorism. There’s plenty of it around the globe. Extremists want a global caliphate where they can kill Jews, gays, apostates, and immodest women, and they don’t want the West interfering.

    What’s strange is how often activists who claim to be feminists, anti-racists, pro-LGBTQ rush to defend them. Actions count more than words, when judging these people. You can say you’re a nice person working for a better world, but the moment you defend terrorism, you’ve shown your true colors.

    1. To KarenS, September 11, 2021 at 5:38 PM
      While I generally agree with you, one cannot ignore the fact that the U.S. has gone mucking around in the Middle East, stirring up the hornets’ nest with military and diplomatic interventions time and again, which certainly cannot be pleasing to the locals.
      My understanding is that the various tribes and Islamic sects in the Middle East have no particular sense of inherent bond, but are actually more competitive, so just leaving them be to their own absorption with internal rivalries would keep their energies focused away from the West. By attacking them and occupying their countries, they become united in a sense of self-preservation and duty to defend their holy land. Simply a matter of eye-for-eye, tooth-for-tooth morality, no need to posit heterohemohomohabababa capitalshmapitalistic blah blah blah.

    2. Karen S says:

      “It seems like every time there is a terrorist attack, the apologists come out of the woodwork with their excuses.”

      But it goes without saying, but just to be clear, that you as with Turley would defend to your death her right to speak freely though you could not disagree more with her opinion, correct? Nor should the professor be subject to any retaliation by her University for speaking her mind outside of her classroom, nor be shunned, ostracized or in any manner face negative consequences for exercising her Constitutional freedom of speech apart from your good speech to rectify her bad speech?

      1. jeffsilberman. The Constitution protects speech from governmental censorship. It says nothing about how ordinary people and non-governmental institutions can or cannot respond to idiots like Jackson. Speech, like all actions, comes with consequences. Shunning, ostracizing, or just plain avoiding or responding to such idiots is not prohibited even by people who support free speech. Just because you refuse to censor an individual doesn’t mean you are required to listen to them or applaud them. Your argument exaggerates and distorts.

        1. Giocon1 says:

          “Speech, like all actions, comes with consequences. Shunning, ostracizing, or just plain avoiding or responding to such idiots is not prohibited even by people who support free speech.”

          May I quote you on this statement?

          Thus, if some Conservative academics want to hold a seminar on Islamic Terrorism, and one of the participants proposes to invite this professor to share her alternative views, I take it that you would not dare “cancel” her appearance but, rather, invite her with open arms, for opinions can’t be right or wrong; they’re just opinions which you either like or dislike.

      2. Nor should the professor be subject to any retaliation by her University for speaking her mind

        The professor to be treated exactly like all the other Professors that voice their opinion?

        Asking for a friend

          1. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.

            PRO ELIGENDO ROMANO PONTIFICE

            Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
            Vatican Basilica
            Monday 18 April 2005

    3. What’s strange is how often activists who claim to be feminists, anti-racists, pro-LGBTQ rush to defend them.

      Via Andrew Sullivan, a decidedly gay writer

  6. Do you think she includes the Ashanti Empire just one of many African tribes involved in the slave trade?

  7. It is getting harder and harder to support the principles of academic freedom, but I persist. I only wish that the subject of this piece and associated would grant others the same privilege

  8. If it were not for dreamed-up, non-academic higher education coursework like “gender studies” and “African-American” studies people such as Jackson never would have earned an undergraduate degree – let alone a PhD. Now, she and others flaunt the paying jobs given to them in the nonsensical interests of some kind of diversity – where they spend their time commiserating with other self-styled victims and trying to indoctinate any FOOL they come upon.

  9. I did a search for Jenn M. Jackson. Jackson is a bounty of checked boxes for university hires. Considering her background, I strongly suggest
    she never vacations in Afghanistan.

  10. Impressive how LEO and first responders adore Trump.

    Trump makes surprise visit to New York police and firefighters on 9/11

    Former President Trump made a surprise visit with New York City police and firemen Saturday to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks.

    In remarks to assembled guests, the former president sharply rebuked President Biden and the US pullout from Afghanistan.

    “It was gross incompetence and I hate to talk about it on this day,” Trump said.

    Trump left the NYPD’s 17th Precinct in midtown just after 1:40 pm. He exited to cheers and applause, with one well-wisher screaming, “Thank you for keeping us safe.”

    “I’ve been given so much support by the people who do what you do,” Trump told the friendly audience. “We love the blue. I’ll say it loud. You know, you’re not supposed to say that. We love the blue.”

    Officers lined up outside the stationhouse in formation to greet the former President.

    https://nypost.com/2021/09/11/trump-makes-surprise-visit-to-new-york-police-and-firefighters/

  11. Ms. Jackson’s unfortunate remarks trivialize 9/11 – what drivel! I have three degrees from Syracuse University – B.A., M.A. and J.D. What an embarrassment to alumni, the First Amendment notwithstanding!

  12. “Syracuse Professor Declares the Sept. 11th Attacks a Response to “Heteropatriarchal Capitalistic Systems”

    – Professor Turley
    ______________

    “Heteropatriarchal Capitalistic Systems”

    Translation: NORMAL MEN ARE PERSONA NON GRATA!

    Yes! We have arrived.

    The inmates have taken over the asylum.

    Whatever have the unconstitutional, improperly ratified, and illegitimate 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Dumbmendments wrought?

    Abortion, hysterical, incoherent women’s suffrage and unassimilable, parasitic, foreign invader hyphenates good.

    Actual, ambitious, capable, aggressively productive, successful and patriotic American men enjoying natural and God-given freedoms and engaging in natural and God-given free enterprise bad.

    Down is up.

    Front is back.

    Wrong is right.

    The Constitution has been injured.
    ___________________________

    “…amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution,…”

    “And if there are amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution, and they can be ingrafted so as to give satisfaction to the doubting part of our fellow citizens; the friends of the federal government will evince that spirit of deference and concession for which they have hitherto been distinguished.”

    – James Madison, Proposed Amendments to the Constitution, June 8, 1789
    ___________________________________________________________

    Women got the vote. Women got abortion. America got a death sentence (i.e. a fertility rate in a “death spiral”).
    _________________________________________________________________________________________

    “the people are nothing but a great beast…

    I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”

    – Alexander Hamilton
    _________________

    “[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”

    – Ben Franklin, 1787
    ________________

    “[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can take it back.”

    – Ben Franklin, 2021
    ________________

    “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

  13. A Brazilian acquaintance posted the following: It’s easy to be a communist in a free country. It’s difficult to be free in a communist country. A similar principle applies here.

    1. Excuse me. Just a few days ago members of the Republican right wing were praising the Taliban! And Texas is on the road to Texas style Sharia law by legislation.

        1. Nonsensical comment. The right are the only ones standing up for freedom of speech in these times of leftwing cancellations.

      1. And we have learned from the Democratic administration that the Taliban are “professional” and “businesslike.” Just regular capitalist guys!

    2. What I can’t fathom is why those living here and hating all that this nation stands for continue to live here. The door is open, don’t let it hit you on the way out.

      1. Why would they leave? The have the Supreme Court, more state houses, and will gerrymander their way to the the house next year. They can hate what our nation stands for and stay to re-make it the way they want.

        1. Our response should be a push back against them so that they need battle for everything that the rinos have so quietly been giving them, we need to clera out the entire swamp, one way or another.

          1. Alma says:

            “we need to clera out the entire swamp, one way or another.”

            One way is to unelect Leftists. What is another?

            Killing them?

    1. “It’s the [parents], stupid!”

      – James Carville
      _____________

      The parents feed the beasts with tuition.

      Withhold the tuition, you kill the beast.

      That’s what “Crazy Abe” should have done to rid the nation of slavery – boycott cotton, withhold the cotton revenue, and kill the beast.

      1. To George, September 11, 2021 at 5:25 PM
        The cotton economy was not limited to the U.S., but also Europe. Great Britain might have been happy to support the South and promote its secessionist tendencies to weaken their uppity ex-colonial rival, in support of their own economy.

  14. Ms. Jackson is an America hater.

    Her right.

    But she should be honest. Ms Jackson is a respected professor here (!!!); in Africa she would have found the road far harder. Statically, in Africa she would be living near the poverty line.

    Given Ms Jackson’s wilful dishonesty, I have little interest in what she says.

  15. Other than her focus on “white America,” she’s largely right. I said at the time that the attacks were the buzzards coming home to roost. The attacks were in response to US actions in the Middle East during the Clinton administration.

    1. semcgowanjr. The attacks were blowback, but that’s not what Jackson is saying. In fact, Jackson is trying to reduce the complexity of the Middle East to the only two issues she knows: race and gender. Her reductionist mentality is typical of today’s activists, who seem incapable of understanding complexity and nuance. Things are either black or white, and white, according to them, is bad.

  16. Horse poop…
    Gets dropped…
    On wife and family…..
    As they serve in all the conflicts overseas!
    And the poop that gets served…had shattered many nerves…
    But left no shrapnel in the knees!

Leave a Reply