Beyond the Cusp

September 17, 2017

Argument for Free Speech, Old Style

 

The college scene is not what many of us remember it being. We knew a place where all sides met on the stage of debate. Professors would take the opposite side of every student and force them to defend their positions. This built confidence and forced everyone to understand their own side and the opposition side just as well. Why know the other side, that would be the question from students today. Their response to any opposition is to shut down all discourse and disallow their opponents from speaking at all. There are some serious deficiencies with that approach, namely what do you do when you no longer have complete control over the debate and the new rules are defend your position or shut up. That is called the corporate world or the business world. Even a salesperson needs to shop their competition such that they know why their product is superior or how best to show their product or ideas to perspective clientele. In the real world you cannot just show up to a convention with baseball bats and cans of paint and try and intimidate your competitors as doing so will soon put your company out of business and you in prison. The real world, that’s the place you end up after college, demands more from you than running to a safe-space and grabbing a coloring book or cuddling with kittens or puppies. They demand that you actually produce and then they grade you, it’s called your annual review, on your performance against the other employees. I realize for many of you coming from a liberal arts education, or should we say indoctrination, will find the real world filled with triggers, microaggressions, full-on aggressions, challenges and not one single safe zone outside your parent’s basement, will be quite a system shock. Your current college education costing your parents $50,000/year or more is leaving you dreadfully unprepared for the horrors awaiting you out there in the real world.

 

If we have gotten your attention and you now are wondering what you can or should do, we do have some advice. The first thing you should do if you are remotely capable of handling something in the hard sciences, change majors and probably schools and take a hard science where opinions are not important, only facts in these parts, real provable facts. Engineering is demanding and dependent upon mathematics, seemingly the courses which most Liberal Arts majors have the greatest fears and trepidations over. Differential Equations will be your nemesis that stands in the way for a fair share of engineering majors. Let us assure you that it is not that horrific, just remember and learn to use the quadratic equation. It works much the same and they keep that a secret until about three weeks before the final just to make you learn how to do proofs. Just get through the course as once in the real world much of the equations and solutions are performed by calculators, very nice calculators. Other courses include Mathematics, Physics, Cosmology, Chemistry and Biology, which all are straightforward sciences. Computer Sciences and numerous Computer fields also exist but we would recommend avoiding simple repair as that field is slowly disappearing and will require ever increasing competition over fewer and fewer positions. But first, you are going to have to look inside and make some decisions.

 

College is supposed to be an adventure through which you find out who you are and what you are made of. This requires meeting challenges head on and often failing at them. Failing at a challenge does not mean you fail a course, it means you need to do some more work and prepare better for the next time. If your professors were honest and sure of themselves, they would challenge you honestly and debate and they would usually win, as they are slightly older and hopefully more knowledgeable. The same professor would defeat you when you took one side and then in the same class defeat the next student who took the opposite side. A good professor can argue both sides equally well and defeat every student except that rare student who surprises his teachers. Such students were prized, not scorned back when we went to college and was often given more challenging assignments. You want to become that student because challenge is presumably why you are in college. College is where you can try different ideas and find the ones which will define you for most of your life and it is up to you to find these core beliefs, not for some leftist professor to assign you core beliefs. When you have a good and solid education as your base, then you do not need be afraid of people who oppose what you believe because you know your side and the weaknesses of their position and this makes you the one holding the power. That is real power, not a mob of masked zealots wearing black and threatening people while preventing those they oppose from speaking. Somebody who honestly believes an opposing view would debate the speaker during question and answer and prove their beliefs to be a better solution. These people using violence and claiming that all ideas they do not support are hate speech and must be banned are insecure and afraid of honest debate and will not have any power outside the university. What job would they be hired for anyways? What skills have they shown? What prowess? What proficiency? What competence? What ingenuity, resourcefulness or useable mastery have they shown?

 

Are you getting the idea here yet? University or College is not just a place to drink beer or whatever and smoke whatever you wish and other recreational activities; you are also supposed to prepare yourself for the remainder of your life. Many of you who have demanded trigger warnings about courses which might challenge your beliefs or even slightly make you feel uneasy or who demand safe spaces where nobody can say things which might offend you are not going to be prepared for anything except a world controlled by robotic creatures who are programmed to keep a certain number of humans alive as their pets; you will be fully capable of being a robot’s pet. But let us for a minute take your beliefs and inspect their viability in the real world. Let us also inspect a world made to honor and respect your sensitivities and also another person your age with the same degree as you and identical grade point average and all the same recommendations. The two of you are perfect bookend, and like bookends, your composure and beliefs are exactly opposite. So we have the two of you identical in all ways but holding opposite views and sensitivities. Now you are both working in the same company and the company has extremely progressive tendencies except they are unfeeling so they do not fully understand that safe spaces are supposed to be exclusively for protecting left wing ideology holders and are supposed to be closed to people like your opposite who have right leaning ideas, remember you are bookends, you on the left, then all the books and then your opposite on the right. Now somebody starts defending President Trump and his policy to hold immigrants from six Middle East and North African (MENA) nations and you get all flustered and feel threatened by this person so you run to the designated safe room where you grab a coloring book. Now right after you leave another employee berates this person as a racist and spouts collective ideas and your opposite now feels challenged and afraid and also runs to the safe room and starts holding a puppy. In your world, what happens when the two of you start to discuss the situation and the argument out in the office? You are both in a safe room so your opposing beliefs cannot be offensive or is your opposing viewed bookend not permitted feelings? That is the problem with the real world, even if they had safe spaces they would be sued to make them equal opportunity safe spaces.

 

But we hear Google and many other Silicon Valley giants have found a solution to this kind of problem, namely selective employment where only those people who hold correct thinking views, which agree with the left, are safe in their employment. We are waiting for the next step where some employees gather together, go to management, and inform on the conservative in their department. Will this poor unfortunate be dragged into an office and badgered to determine whether they are truly one of those? What after that, maybe told to take an Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and if they score too right of center with their indicators they are fired. Then the witch-hunts will start and those companies will start to tear themselves apart and that will be their downfall. There was an entire nation which fell because of this exact deficiency in their community.

 

Destruction of the Second Temple

Destruction of the Second Temple

 

The Israelite nations had fought and gained their freedom from the Greeks and were once again united and were one people. Even though the Assyrians and then Romans conquered their lands, they remained united. They fought the Romans and gained their freedoms only to be reconquered when Rome sent many Legions such that the Roman Legions about equaled the number of Judeans (Jews). Imagine a conquest where there are almost as many soldiers as people. The Romans appointed a King over the Judeans who the Romans lazily and with scorn simply referred to as Jews (pronounced Juze). The people turned one against their neighbor. Gossip became the main form of communication. This made the people very argumentative and restless. Some groups blamed the Romans for their troubles while many simply blamed their neighbor, their employer, anybody but their own actions. This made the province more difficult to manage and eventually the Romans decided to remove the central institutions and erase the Jews from the earth like they had so many other tribes of people. They burned the Second Temple and stole all of the holy objects with one glaring exception, the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark simply seemed to disappear completely from the face of the earth. The Romans searched but were unable to find even a trace of where it might have been taken, hidden, or even carted out of the nation, absolutely no trace, and this was immediately after the Temple was destroyed and it presumably was within the Temple just before the destruction. The exception was most evident on the Arch of Titus, the Roman General who paraded through Rome with the artifacts he stole including the great seven armed candelabra (see image below). This was supposed to be the end of the Jews as many were taken to Rome as slaves. Another seventy years later and thousands more Jews were sent to the far corners of the Roman Empire and the Jews were given the same treatment as the Carthaginians and numerous other Roman enemy tribes who were rebellious against Rome.

 

Islam in its current Jihadi form refuses to permit the colossal works such as Titus’s Arch on the Via Sacra in the Forum Romanum, Rome, Italy (above) or the Arc de Triumph stands in the center of the Place Charles de Gaulle (originally named Place de l'Étoile), at the western end of the Champs-Élysées, Paris, France (below) as such works either predate Islam, Titus’s Arc, or have no reference or meaning in Islam, Arc de Triumph, thus are simply distractions from Muhammad and Allah and as such are deserving of destruction. These also represent great victories or are standards or national monuments and as such must be brought low before they inspire some future generation to reassert their national pride. Without such reminders of a past independent from Islam it is far easier to keep the people in a state of submission.

Titus Arch

 

The name of the Carthaginians remains solely because of the Punic Wars and Hannibal and his elephants taken over the Alps. Why are there no Carthaginians to be found today, or more amazing, why are there still the Jews? We can answer that question with a single word, Torah. Judaism does depend on a land to flourish and the land depends on the Jews to produce, it is a marriage arranged by Hashem. But the land of Israel belongs to Hashem and the Jews are tasked with caring for the land belonging to Hashem. Our covenant is written in a single document that describes what is expected of us and how we are to live, Torah. We can carry our binding law and all we need with us and as long as there are Jews anywhere near, we will become a community. While we follow Torah, we will thrive; to not follow Torah will lead to our downfall. By the way, idle talk such as gossip is one of the things we are taught to avoid, both speaking and hearing and especially being the conveyance of such. Gossip cost us our Temple, our homeland, our communities but Torah saved us from extinction. Torah will bring our lands and communities back and Israel will thrive as long as we follow and do as we are expected by Hashem, it is all in Torah. That too is a challenge and takes understanding and often the accepting differences of opinion. As some claim, give me two Jews and they will produce at least three opinions. If you read the Talmud, you might be pressed to believe that to be true.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

September 3, 2017

Silencing the Right Over the Violence

 

There has been a rash of “Free Speech” rallies and “Support the Constitution” rallies which have had their permits pulled due to the inevitable rioting which appears to be part and parcel of their coming together. Who can blame any protection oriented city council and mayor for pulling or refusing a permit to gather and hold a rally to any group which might erupt into violence and destroy their downtown or other area. The intended “Patriot Prayer” Rally which was cancelled in San Francisco was a perfect example. Only a day earlier the rally to celebrate the Trump Presidency at the Berkeley campus became a melee where the chief organizer of the “Patriot Prayer” Rally, Joey Gibson, according to police reports, had to be taken into protective custody as he became a specific target of some of the protestors and was endangered. This was reported by Lizzie Johnson on her Twitter Feed where commentary that follows depicts two opposing views of the events. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your positions and review of the video, the entire scene was videoed and can be viewed below. The man with his hands raised and backing away, while being assaulted intermittently and having something sprayed towards his face, is reported to be Joey Gibson. He apparently was accompanied by a large gentleman in American football shoulder pads apparently attempting to protect and guide him eventually turns him over to the police where we lose him behind the police wall (see video below). At about the 0:49 second mark a brick like appearing object bounces off the guard’s head with little apparent affect.

 

 

The violence against the pro-Trump rally attendees was the given reason for the cancellation of the “Patriot Prayer” Rally by the city officials of San Francisco. San Francisco is not alone, as other cities have stated intent to disallow right-wing rallies, as they will result in violence which the city officials claim is sufficient reason to prevent such rallies. Nobody has made any references to cancellations of leftist rallies but, then again, there has been no violence at leftist rallies, only at right leaning rallies such as pro-Trump, Free-Speech, Prayer, pro-Military and similar such right-wing rallies. This tendency was further proven at the Boston Free-Speech Rally where over twenty-thousand protestors threw urine-filled bottles and other objects at police as they were kept well over two-hundred-meters from the stage and the organizers who basically gave their speeches to one another. There was rioting at another pro-Trump rally, only this time in Phoenix, Arizona. The same has been reported from a Costa Mesa pro-Trump Rally in Orange County fairgrounds where police were posted around the entire area and the Fairgrounds Board of Directors announced they were changing their criteria for approving gatherings such that only those without any threat of violence will be granted license. Another Trump Free Speech Rally drew hundreds of demonstrators to a public square near City Hall in Portland, Oregon on June 4, 2017, where a far larger throng of counter-protesters and onlookers massed on three sides of the park in a heated encounter that grew tense but at least physical violence was avoided thanks to a heavy police presence. There have been violent protests disrupting virtually every free-speech, prayer, pro-veteran, Republican Townhall meeting and pro-Trump rally since the election of President Trump. The catch is the media is covering these violence prone rallies now more so than before the election. If we remember back, there was a cancelled Chicago Trump rally due to threatened violence and violence at virtually every campaign stop made by either Trump or Pence as well as numerous Republican candidates’ gatherings if they were endorsed by Trump.

 

Top Berkeley Trump Rally Members and Promise Keepers Clash with Protesters Bottom Anti-fa with Red Communist Flags Group Before Assault on Trump Berkeley Rally

Top Berkeley Trump Rally Members and Promise Keepers Clash with Protesters
Bottom Anti-fa with Red Communist Flags Group Before Assault on Trump Berkeley Rally

 

The idea that any rally or gathering by conservatives or those who support conservative causes can be made to appear bad in the media if rioting should break out, especially should there be injuries to any leftists who can then make a full report of their encounter to the media is nothing new. This was the script during much of the late sixties and early seventies anti-war movement and other leftist causes. The left learned early that violence gets covered while nice, polite, quiet and peaceful rallies get next to no coverage beyond the people who attend them. The left learned that if you wish to be heard across a wider range of people and audiences, then simply riot and force arrests and make as much noise and created mayhem as humanly possible. Some of the most militant leftist groups such as the Weather Underground resorted to real violence and murdered police and bombed police stations and even conservative rallies in order to gain publicity. The left believed that all publicity is good publicity, and that included bad publicity. Back then, it was all about making sure they were heard from whether it was for their message or for the protest turned riot. Now the whole idea is that nobody they disapprove of be heard or even permitted to speak.

 

The left, actually the extreme left led by Anti-fa, have found their magic eraser with which they believe they can squelch all speech which offends them. What is even more frightening is that a plurality of college students questioned believes that the First Amendment should only apply to approved speech which meets speech codes and is proven inoffensive. Even more disconcerting is that they believe that their college leftist professors’ idea that speech must offend nobody before it can be permitted to be spoken in public is the best course to maintain a decent society. They have proven their great inability to be offended by the most basic ideas to such an extent that their universities and colleges have put in place safe spaces where students can gather and not be challenged by any terse or edgy talk or comment and have specific places on campus well off the beaten path where conservative and other controversial speech can be screamed to one’s hearts content without reaching an ear which may be offended. The entire liberal arts university scene is designed not to challenge the unquestioning minds of the student population but rather to protect them from those things which they may find disturbing. These poor young children are sensitive and must not be disturbed or made distraught. They are to be coddled and after four years, they will go out into the “big bad world” and demand to have their world made safe and their ideas spoon fed just as it was in university. These youth are going to be the future of the United States and will be the ones making and enforcing the rules within the next ten to twenty years. Imagine the method in which the First Amendment will be interpreted and applied in such a manner that speech codes will be applied and people fined for using speech deemed challenging to people’s sensitivities. The Second Amendment will be completely turned on its head such that instead of the people being armed to prevent an overreaching government, the government will have all the weapons and the people will be unable to reach for liberties they once enjoyed. We can forget about the Fourth Amendment as all your papers and personal information will be stored in the cloud where the NSA can read anything anytime. The Fifth Amendment’s disallowing self-incrimination will be ineffective as the government will see all, hear all and know all within reason and beyond so there will be little if any secrecy, well, unless you live out in the woods and completely off the grid in a well camouflaged residence which also prevents heat signatures from being detected from above and are knowledgeable of when satellites will be overhead and thus schedule your outside activities around these times. The new age and the college educated new age wunderkind will destroy all freedoms for which the Bill of Rights was demanded. What a sad commentary it is to hear that free speech must have strict restrictions so people are not offended which is a commentary on the coming future, such a far cry from the people of the era of the founding Fathers who understood individualism and freedom. Now the schools start from first grade conditioning the students to work in groups such that nobody can be judged and everybody will be considered as a member of the group and the group will be judged as a whole. This way nobody can be considered inadequate which might endanger their self-image, and that would be terrible for their sensitive temperament. We can see a world where students are grouped at an early age and then proceed through life as a group, are hired as a group and get fired as a group and each member is responsible for the other members of their groups and these groups follow them through their entire lives. Well, except for those terribly unfortunate experiences where one may get injured or otherwise leave the group for a period or permanently, then the entire group will require deep counseling, that we can assure you. Yes, should the New World Order that the Anti-fa desire enacting come to pass and all their earth-shattering new concepts become reality, well, if I am still breathing I will be on the first spaceship leaving the new Eden and off to elsewhere.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

April 27, 2017

Losing Free Speech Would be a Costly Mistake

 

Free speech as protected in the First Amendment does not protect “Hate Speech,” or so says Howard Dean. This is kind of funny as my remembrances were that unpopular speech was exactly the speech the First Amendment was meant to protect, and “Hate Speech” would most certainly be very unpopular. The proof of this is exactly what is playing out at University of California, Berkley Campus, often referred to as the home of free speech. It was at Berkeley in the 1960’s that freedom of speech was first tested and protected with the anti-war movement. It was back during this tumultuous time when the five rights delineated in the words of the First Amendment: ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Seems simply stated though courts have recognized that certain logical limits should be applied to “Freedom of speech” such as yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire as such could lead to bodily harm. Causing bodily harm was an important limitation to most rights; you could continue any right up to the point of harming another soul. As distressing as it might be to hear honest and actual “Hate Speech,” it has been a right defended time and again as this is exactly the speech which is protected which is largely behind the reason that the ACLU defends the rights of the American Nazi Party to march and speak in public in the famous Skokie Case which occurred in Ohio.

 

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes formulated the clear and present danger test for free speech cases. In that case, Socialist Party of America official Charles Schenck had been convicted under the Espionage Act for publishing leaflets urging resistance to the draft. Schenck appealed, arguing that the Espionage Act violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. In Schenck v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected Schenck’s appeal and affirmed his conviction. This conviction continued to be debated over whether Schenck went against the right to freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., writing for the Court, explained, “the question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”* Included in these evils would be bodily harm to individuals or a group of individuals. This is real and measurable harm, not like some other qualifiers in our society where it comes down to the desired opinion of the individual in question.

 

The problem with Howard Dean goes further than denying protections of the First Amendment to “Hate Speech” in his definitions. Mr. Dean defines “Hate Speech” in this case as the upcoming scheduled speech by conservative journalist Ann Coulter. We at BTC do not agree with Miss Coulter on any number of her positions but defend her right to speak to the group which invited her and anyone else who desires to hear her speak. But, Howard Dean desires that a committee of like-minded people such as himself be appointed to decide what constitutes “Hate Speech” and thus ban that which they disapprove. Should such be permitted, then how long before we are facing 1984 and Big Brother Watching for INGSOC (English Socialism) and its trinity of newspeak; “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery” and “Ignorance is Strength.” These were considered “double-plus-good” and deviating and becoming emotional was considered you’re becoming a threat which is very much “double-plus-ungood.” This was presumably the Achilles Heel of INGSOC and the loose thread that if pulled hard enough, everything would unravel. Mr. Dean believes that the little snowflakes attending University of California Berkeley cannot handle reality given at face value. It is the leftist indoctrination and the permitting of the college indoctrination keeping these snowflakes, otherwise called students, from ideas which their professors would consider to be outside their own message and thus as “Hate Speech.” This would be when the professors inform the easily influenced snowflakes that they can escape Ms. Coulter and her viscous “Hate Speech” by running to their designated safe zone. This begs the question of what are they afraid of?

 

Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter

 

Therein lies the secret. One could ask the professors exactly what is it that they and Howard Dean are so afraid the children in their care might hear, dissenting opinions and arguments backed up with convincing facts and references to refute the lies they have been foisting on impressionable minds such that they can indoctrinate them and fashion them into fellow leftists. This education format is dangerous as it instills a singular outlook on the world which lacks the fullness of depth and only allows for understanding the leftist outlook. This leaves these students unprepared for the real world and the demands it will throw their way. Unfortunately, many of these delicate flowers find themselves a job in the middle of a flower patch full of fellow flower power advocates and never leave their comfort zone. Others will often need to lose a few jobs before they start to realize that there is an entire world out there just waiting for them to study and learn of other opinions which permeate the workplace. They will find that there really are men and women with diverse ideas and concepts which their college indoctrination did not prepare them for and unless they begin to receive such as potentially valid and weigh everything testing the concepts against the real world finding new ideas which work as well or better than what they had learned, they will live a life restricted and void of the ability for comparative reason. Once they are freed to become whomever they eventually define themselves as being, their lives will grow from that point. What is so pathetic is that in all too many instances, especially in the soft sciences, the outlook in such a college atmosphere is limited to singular leftist opinions integrated so as to replace any normative lesson with one based on a strictly limited leftist outlook. With “Trigger Warnings” and “Micro-Aggressions” (whatever in the world these are) demanded to be placed on any material which might shake up their world, the snowflakes are restricted to living life in their leftist cocoon. Many of these students tend to be hard sciences-challenged as they cannot accept that there are such items as correct and incorrect results. They have been taught that it is the effort that matters and not the correct answer. These sensitive and fragile egos cannot handle having to produce actual results as reaching the correct value in an answer has become more subjective in this new world being foisted upon all too many college students. What is remarkable is today’s speech police demanding the banning of all speech which contradicts or questions any of the leftist ideologies, were the very people demanding open and free speech be upheld when their speech was the undesirable ideas. When their ideas were the ones challenging the status-quo, the demand was to honor the spirit of the first amendment and permit all speech. Now that theirs is the established speech and the former status-quo has become the challenging speech, these former guardians of the freedoms of the First Amendment become stuffy old fuddy-duddy holders of the line, they now demand that only “Approved Speech” which will not hurt their little future indoctrinated leftist army by forcing them to think. You need understand one principle of this new age, groupthink must be maintained and all speech which counters groupthink must be banned and kept from ever reaching the ears of their subjects. That is the truth; they are no longer students in these institutes of higher indoctrination but are merely subjects there to be programmed and sent out in an as-is condition and most companies are required to retrain college graduates on how to perform their jobs. Remedial training at many technical companies includes simple algebra and geometry problems, as such skills were never taught effectively from kindergarten on through college. Other subjects no longer taught in anything resembling a rational or reasoned manner and especially not the traditional manner are such little items as history including, American history, Ancient History, Modern History, Civics, English, and any of the Humanities. Many classes now avoid inclusion of any men, especially white men and never any white men who had slaves. This makes the coverage of the founding of America rather different from traditional teaching of the subject. English no longer believes that any of the traditional white male authors or their compatriots such as Mary Shelley as she committed the crime of co-writing with men of her era. Other authors considered too Christian or traditional include William Shakespeare, Chaucer, Oscar Wilde, Edgar Allen Poe, J.R.R. Tolkien, Brothers Grimm, Alexandre Dumas, Aesop or even the story of Beowulf as it is too simplistic depicting good and evil and degrades women as Grendel’s mother is shown as evil despite her only crime presumably was being a woman, or so the argument is made. There are hundreds of authors, composers and masters of the arts who are now considered unworthy simply because they expound on the ideals of good and evil and the Judeo-Christian, white male perspective even if they may have been women as it is the good and evil ethics of Judeo-Christianity they cannot couch. When your belief system is that all things are in all ways equal you have no belief system, you have a cop-out refusing to experimentally compare and contrast one set of ideas against another and judge which one is more erudite, more morally correct, and honors humankind treating all equal (or as equal as such treatment was due people in the period in which one lived as it is completely unfair to judge a person from 1776 or from 1492 or from 92 or before that sometime BCE such as around 1050 BCE, approximately when King David conquered Yerushalayim and made it the Capital City of Israel from that time forward through time).

 

The willingness of the professors of the colleges and universities to deign whether anything or anyone is worthy of attention solely if they measure up to the standards of the modern secular humanist leftist version of quality is Stalinesque. Their idea of equality is no better than Charlemagne had a handle on it as the Inquisition followed him across the continent of Europe and felled many an innocent, thus is the reality when one utilizes an arbitrary system in deciding whether one is worthy of life or consideration. Students today are not even required to read philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Homer, Jules Verne, Ernest Hemingway, Bram Stoker, Isaac Asimov, Carl von Clausewitz or others. Instead, many classes only read often solely from obscure poets and writers from Africa and Asia with recent additions in many schools of Quranic based education in the public schools, apparently there is no separation of Mosque and State as there is Temple, Church, Synagogue and state, respectively. The classics in writing, music and art are considered now to be poisonous to student sensitivity. They are simply taught that their entire heritage, providing their heritage came from a Judeo-Christian basis, is to be destroyed and discarded as retaining any piece of Judeo-Christian ethics is a thought crime for which one will face ridicule and be ostracized. All that our modern society is built upon is taught to be contaminated and rotting through and through and the sooner we allow refugees from across the third world, the place of variety and where there are beautiful ideals to be explored and exalted as they are completely foreign to Western thought and custom and thus they must be superiorly equal, the sooner our societies can grow under new influences which will be simply wonderful, or so it is promised. I never thought that this phrase could ever actually fit in an article about modern society, but it can be said that as all civilizations and all philosophies are claimed to be equal but Judeo-Christianity and Eurocentric histories are to be considered to be of a lesser nature and to be cast down because some civilizations, some philosophies, some religious writings, some traditions are simply more equal than others and these are the ones which have nothing to do with Western culture and the developed world’s actual roots. The university campus is a self-hating reactionary place where normative thought is considered gauche and to be rejected with everything to do with Judeo-Christian history and development as that is the wrong path for the future. Really?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

* Our thanks to WikiPedia for the previous examples from the life of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.