Beyond the Cusp

May 9, 2017

Universities Where Students Major in Feelings

 

College just ain’t what it used to be unless your major field is one of the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields. These courses, for obvious reasons, still require students to know how to reason, problem solve and prove their work with complete documentation on how they arrived at their answer. The STEM curriculum is as strict and thorough as it ever was. Outside of STEM is an entirely different world where feelings are examined and every answer is valid and no proof is ever required as long as your position is correct. The reality of the problem is covered very neatly in the fact that at the United States’ largest university system, California State Universities, nearly 40% of incoming freshmen require remedial math and English courses after failing the entrance competency tests. That is 40% failing both math and English, the individual numbers are difficult to come by but if we remember correctly the numbers approached 60% needing remedial English and over 75% required remedial math after failing the entrance exams nation wide if one leaves out students enrolling in STEM course majors. What is even more disturbing is what follows once they begin to take actual college courses, for some starting in their second year, that the courses are watered down and grades often inflated in order to not deter the students from continuing to pay the outrageous tuitions and also allow the universities to collect Federal monies provided by the department of education to cover costs of required courses in politically correct course work with such courses stressing identity-politics emphasizing racial, sexual and religious fault lines and newthink definitions where words mean what you wish them to mean and not necessarily what your parents knew them to mean.

 

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

 

The reality is that students currently owe over one-trillion dollars in student loan debt, and hold diplomas in subjects so weak and leaving them completely unprepared for the workplace as they were for college upon arrival taking competency exams which remanded the majority to taking remedial courses just to achieve a minimal entrance level of competence. Many major employers have been required to hire teachers very often from STEM courses to provide remedial education for entrance level positions due to the lack of qualified entrance personnel. So, students graduate high school and gain entrance to a college, often their state university system as they are required by statute to accept every high school graduate with a grade point average above 2.0 or possibly as low as 1.5 or as high as 2.5 depending on the state. These students grades were inflated in high school and upon reaching college require remedial classes in order to be capable of even doing freshman basic courses. They then graduate college and apply for a job and many major employers are required to give college graduates remedial education such that they can perform entrance level jobs. Is it just us or does this indicate a problem somewhere in the education system from the very beginning to the very highest levels?

 

When there are reports of teachers in grade school teaching about alternative sexual identities and how the students should question their sexual identities, as they may not actually be the gender their chromosomes forced upon them, this is a problem. Having condoms available for the asking in elementary schools is a problem. Allowing students to arrange for an abortion through the school without parental consent or even parental notification even after the fact is a problem. Teaching sexuality and sexual positions in junior high schools is a problem. Having teachers and counselors having prescriptions for psychotropic drugs such as Prozac and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to treat ADHD or antidepressants is a problem. These are not medical professionals and the physicians who proscribe such drugs largely on the recommendation of teachers and counselors is simply dangerous and can seriously harm these young students irrevocably. That is dangerously wrong. When teachers in any level of public schools tell their students that their parents should not be permitted to ground them and that restricting their rights such as the right to use a phone, watch television, listen to music, watch whatever shows they wish, send them to their room or any form of punishment and that any student who is suppressed by their parents in such a manner can simply tell the teacher and they will see to it that the situation is remedied such that their parents will be counselled and will never try to harm them again, that is a problem. When the school tries to replace the parents in raising the children and use the power of child protective services to threaten parents with the loss of their child, that is seriously wrong. These are things which either we or people we have spoken with have experienced with public schools in the suburbs of some of the major cities in the United States. Perhaps the increasing numbers of children being home-schooled is a direct result of the degrading of the education in the public schools where instead of an education students are receiving indoctrination and instead of being taught to think, they are being instructed what to think.

 

Where we once had the three R’s; Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic, the schools have replaced them with the three new’s; newthink, newspeak, and newfacts. George Orwell and Aldous Huxley and even Albert Camus would understand the new school systems, and that is far from being a good thing because these are three authors the students will never be recommended to read by their school. These are too precocious and controversial plus they are the wrong gender, race, religion and simply unacceptable. Most public schools no longer give assignments which require students to read literature, to read books, instead they receive handouts which are mostly political opinions and always environmentally sensitive and gender sensitive not to mention politically correct through and through. Often these handouts are to be left at schools and not taken home as that might arouse a nosy parent to read the handout and maybe become concerned. The schools do not want concerned parents, they like the parent to remain unworried and when they have parent-teacher conference they usually talk about the behavior of the child and the concerns of the teacher and the schools and possibly they will have a counselor to add their expertise. The really unfortunate parent is the one who asks too many questions as they will need to be reminded who the child belongs to, which is the school. The school must not be questioned and students who have their education augmented at home and will ask questions when what the school teaches does not quite match what the child was taught at home, well, that is when the real problems begin. That child is labeled disruptive and the parent is warned that the child has been displaying an unhealthy attitude in class and questions authority. Children must never question the school’s authority, only the parent’s authority is questionable. Lucky is the parent who has their children’s trust and whose children believe them over the schools.

 

The major question is when will this system collapse in from lack of integral support? Industries are requiring better-trained employees and the major universities are turning out protestors and snowflakes who cannot even take a discouraging word, let alone rebuke. The universities are so busy providing safe spaces and trigger warnings and addressing micro-aggressions that they have no time for actual education. There are legions of professors and indoctrinated “sensitive” students ready to react should, heavens forbid (and do not mention the concept of heaven at one of these universities, too Christian), a speaker get invited who lacks the proper temperament, attitude, world view, politics or anything which might sound adverse to the propaganda taught in their classes, there will be an upheaval to prevent their polluting these butterflies delicate minds which are as fragile as are their wings on which they have yet to learn to fly. They are told only the political correct, ecologically friendly, earth preserving, liberated views which must be preserved and protected from contrary truths as the students are taught that the ideas and views they are presented in their gentle classes is the only truth and all else which does not agree with the university leftist teachings are evil and monstrous and require being shouted down and never permitted to gain traction as once that occurs their entire world will collapse.

 

That actually might be the single truth they are being told, that once reality breaks through the painted glass windows on which the drawings of butterflies, kittens and puppies are drawn for their protection, that will start the end of their safe and warm little world and the truth that they have been robbed of an education will tear their world apart leaving these fragile adult-children shaken and bruised. They will hopefully feel rage filled form of anger that will drive them to self-teach those things they should have been taught so far back in their education that it is scary. One thing that will rip holes in their lives is when they realize they were never taught to read, only to recognize the words that their educators desired they know. Being taught whole word recognition is not learning to read, it is being indoctrinated and denied the ability to learn on your own. The learning will begin there, with the painful path of learning to read all over again, this time by simply saying the letters of each word together faster and faster until it sounds like a word you have possibly heard in a song or on a television show. Then the lights start to go on and education will finally start for real. Slowly at first, the words come and then reading becomes easier and a pleasure and then one can read the forbidden works. May we recommend the gentlemen we named earlier, George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Albert Camus. For George Orwell we recommend Animal Farm and 1984 where in the second you will recognize some of your educational indoctrination and understand newspeak, which is nothing but whole word recognition and political correctness. And for Aldous Huxley we recommend Brave New World where you may recognize the betas of the society and begin to feel deeply for the savages and one in particular as well as his mother who sought her heaven in little blue pills and became a Soma version of a Snowblind Friend (Steppenwolf, song below). Albert Camus is a bit more difficult to recommend as he has written so much worth reading in philosophy, novels, short stories, but perhaps starting with collections of essays such as “Resistance, Rebellion, and Death,” then move on to short novels such as “The Stranger” and “The Silent Men.” From here, the classics are fair game such as “The Count of Monte Cristo” by Alexandre Dumas, which is a great adventure and “Last of the Mohicans” by James Fennimore Cooper and our last recommendation will be “Gulliver’s Travels” by Jonathan Swift. For those more into love stories or relations there are numerous novels such as “Great Expectations” by Charles Dickens and for science fiction there is Jules Verne and H. G. Wells and lastly, for the macabre there is always anything by Edgar Allen Poe. On a side note about Poe, one of the most beautiful love poems ever written is his Annabel Lee.

 

 

Also read newspapers including ones your professors warned you were evil, new ideas cannot actually hurt you, only ignorance can be dangerous. Seek out information and then reason what you read and hear and come to your own conclusions. Once you get a basis, return to school, take STEM courses, and learn skills that cannot be replaced by a robot in five to ten years. The education the university likely gave you would not even get you a job cleaning up behind a robot, which would be performed by a robot anyway. The age where robots take over jobs that do not require free thought is coming at us very quickly and when you and others out of university before you realize some truths and demand the minimum wage be increased to fifteen dollars an hour, then we will see robots all the faster as robots are a relatively high initial investment but then pay for themselves within a decade and then they keep working with minimal complaints making profits and not demanding promotions or higher pay or even a coffee break or lunch hour or overtime and work twenty-four seven with only brief downtime for upgrades and periodic maintenance. It really is no wonder that increasing the minimum wage will price workers right out of their jobs, and that is not a joke but a reality. Education, a proper and real true education is priceless and knowledge is the one commodity for which employers are willing to pay. Skills are the other commodity that will get you a position that pays well. Repairing robots will be a decent paying job, actually a profession. The only problem is within the next twenty or so years there will be robots which repair robots including repairing any malfunctioning repair robot. Then only Einstein types will have jobs and the robots will keep the more entertaining from amongst us as pets and the rest, well, that is something we had best hope the robots are programmed to care for us and like us or we will soon become extinct after inventing our replacement. Can anybody say Cylons?

 

Cylons Both Original and the Newer Version

Cylons Both Original and the Newer Version

 

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.

 

May 10, 2015

American Anti-Semitism Alive and Flourishing

Filed under: 2016 Elections,Absolutism,Advanced Weapions Systems,Amalekites,Appease Islamic Interests,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab World,Armed Services,Assimilation,Battle of Khaybar,Beheading,Blood Libel,Calaphate,California,Cartoon,Cartoons,Catholic Institutions,Celebrate Terrorism,Civil Disobedience,Civil War,Civilization,College,College Campus,Colombia,Columbia University,Conflict Avoidnce,Consequences,Cornell University,Corruption,Courts,Coverup,Ditherer in Chief,Domestic NGOs,Europe,European Governments,European Union,Executive Order,Fascism,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Germany,Government,Halal,Hate,Havard,History,International Politics,Intifada,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israeli Interests,Jews,Jihad,Leftist Pressures,Main Stream Media,Mainstream Media,Muslim World,Nazi,New York Times,Night of Broken Glass,Nuclear Proliferation,Oppression,Palestinian Pressures,Pamela Geller,Pogroms,Politicized Findings,Politics,President Obama,Protests,Regulations,Rioters Pressure,Saudi Arabian Pressure,Secular Interests,Sharia Law,Threat to Israel,Tribe,Union Interests,University,University of California,Washington Post,Weimar Republic,Weimer Republic Germany,World Media,World Opinion,World Pressures — qwertster @ 2:27 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

What happened to Pamela Geller with her being raked over the coals for provoking the attack by a pair of ISIS wannabes by insulting Muslim sensitivities and asking to be assaulted as she had invited people to draw the prophet Mohammad and was honoring those instigators from Charlie Hebdo who also provoked an assault by Islamic enforces of the Sharia. Pamela Geller had gone beyond accepted speech and had all but yelled “fire” in a crowded theater or its equivalent which was unprotected speech. After all, did not Ms. Geller have this coming as she had been tweaking the noses of Muslims everywhere at every opportunity with her support for the Apartheid State of Israel and its genocidal policies towards the Palestinians whose lands they occupied. She had been a defender of the indefensible, a stick in the eye of every sensible person, an itch which just had to be scratched out of existence and came close to finally getting her just rewards there in Garland, Texas. The real problem with these provocative actions of Pamela Geller was the fact that she always had innocents who she would inevitably place in danger and this time one of the guards who checked the invitations of the participants who received a bullet to the leg before the off-duty traffic cop who managed to shoot and kill the two ISIS wannabes in a flash of an exchange of bullets where the two would-be jihadists were encased in full body armor armed with AK-47 .30-calibre high powered rifle rounds capable of penetrating straight through the light chest-protector armor worn by the officer who was shooting back with the Glock version of a M-1911A-1 semi-automatic pistol firing .45 caliber pistol rounds which was incapable of doing more than leaving the smallest of indentations to the heavy body armor and would only prove effective by a shot to the head or a number of shots to the exact same location fired at close range. The wannabe-Jihadists likely thought they were invulnerable against the handgun used by the officer who, unbeknownst to the world, was probably the highest scoring officer in his department every year during qualifying as he placed head shots, the only place the officer could strike the assailants and do any damage, on both assailants as they moved towards the entrance dispatching both to Allah within fifteen seconds from the first shot. Pamela Geller is so absolutely fortunate that the officer at the front entrance was so cool under distress and engaged in a lethal firefight with all the odds stacked against him yet he calmly set his aim at the one place the assailants were vulnerable, a target of less than a square foot on each attacker and struck them both while under a hail of bullets fired from the two AK-47s which would have proven lethal if any round had struck the officer in the torso or head; yet he remained uninjured and saved the day for all inside the event, a real and perfect hero whose name must remain unspoken such that he does not become a target for other Jihadists but who knows he is a hero.

 

The above is the gist of the coverage Pamela Geller has received from the mainstream media from both ends of the political spectrum. She has been berated by both those on the left and those on the right though a few brave individuals on the right have bothered to place the blame where it belonged, to the two heavily armored jihadists who came guns blazing with ineffective fire and were put down by very effective and well placed shots which put an end to their assault almost before it began. So few, Fox News’s Megyn Kelly and CNN’s Piers Morgan both proved the exception and stood with Pamela Geller and the First Amendment guarantees of the freedom of speech, all speech, especially political and controversial speech as popular and easy, uncontroversial and uncontested speech needs no protection, only that speech which is likely to draw opposition or hatreds with threats of violence to silence one is the speech which requires protection from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. How soon we forget that the speech which requires protection is solely such speech which is most likely to ruffle some tail-feathers which requires protection such that freedom of speech is one of the five protected items in the First Amendment and the officer at the front entrance used the Second Amendment for the exact reason it is the Second Amendment and the enforcer of the First Amendment freedoms and the rest of the rights listed within the Bill of Rights and those from without but still guaranteed free men everywhere though some will face the scorn of their governments and its peoples who, like the majority of the United Stated mainstream media, refuse to step-up to protect the very Amendment which guarantees their very existence and rights to deliver the news, all the news and not just the light news of flower shows and other events having no controversies, having no enemies of freedom who will always attempt to silence those who brace the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune and outrageous speech needful of the protection of the Second Amendment and the willingness for the rest of us to protect by echoing their words loudly bringing them into the light where the haters fear to tread.

 

But speaking to protect Israel and her people, the Jews, is no longer affordable speech and has been relegated to the darkness hidden in the shadows where it is spoken only in whispers for to do otherwise brings forth those who would slay us for less. On numerous college and university campuses whenever there is a counter protest in response to a pro-Israel rally, the pro-Israel rally is more often than not made to pack up and end their rally even if the pro-Israel rally had been set and received all the required approvals and the counter rally was apparently an impromptu response which occurred as a popular response. These counter rallies are often just as planned and have even been known to have approached the administration of the college or university demanding that when their demonstration begins it would be wise to close down the pro-Israel rally before anybody was injured as to allow the pro-Israel rally to continue would be an affront to their demonstration and a provocation to violence. A study performed by the Louis Brandeis Center in Washington resulted in findings that over half of Jews had been subjected to or witnessed an anti-Semitic act in the past year with a sizable number having witnessed or suffered multiple such acts. In the majority of instances the student was advised to let it pass rather than file a complaint. It is becoming more common on American university and colleges for Jewish students to be forced to prove their disapproval of Israel or face what can only be described as hate actions which will only be terminated once they have performed a mia-culpa and satisfactorily renounced any pro-Israel feelings. Student body election candidates have been requested to sign agreements whereby they promise to refuse any trips to Israel offered them by numerous Jewish organizations which have Zionist support but they are not made to sign any similar promise against Israel tours offered by pro-Palestinian or Muslim outreach organizations. When such petitions are brought to the attention of the administration there is often a lax attitude claiming such petition demands of the candidates cannot be turned away as such is simply freedom of speech issue. One can only wonder what their reaction might be if the petitions were made from the opposing viewpoint. Many of the anti-Israel campus efforts are well-organized, well-financed and often work in partnership with one or more parent organization which will arrange for additional support for any counter-rally in order to force the termination of any pro-Israel rallies. These coordination of events are mostly occurring on major universities and have turned particularly disconcerting in California university systems. The America college and university campus is rapidly becoming a hostile environment for Jewish students, especially any who are religious or particularly pro-Israel. One can only wonder how much longer before Jewish students are simply found unacceptable to attend college or university in many of the mainstream campuses in the United States. Another item to keep in mind and this is an item of great foreboding, or at least should be taken as such, what one witnesses on the university or college campus today will be main-stream in society a decade later. Imagine the average large sized company being slowly forced to let every Jewish employee go if they hope to keep order in their company and avoid unrest and potentially rioting at their front door threatening all their employees not to cross their demonstration lines and those who refuse the warnings find their vehicles damaged or destroyed when leaving that day. How many vehicles need be damaged before their employees are afraid for their lives and inform their superiors they will be unable to return to work until the demonstrators’ demands are satisfied? Whatever you so please do not make the same mistake the Jews in Germany during the Weimar Republic and even the initial two years after the Nazis initially took power and tell yourself, “It cannot happen here. We have an advanced and open culture where everybody is treated equally.” This is not true on many college and university campuses right now, how much longer before it invades the society when sufficient numbers of students have been so conditioned at their university or college? It most definitely can happen in the United States and has already started in Europe. How much longer before the United States society and governance is demanded to turn on Israel and then soon followed by demanding they turn against their Jews? Twenty years? Ten years? Five Years? Watch your local university and college campuses and see what happens should a pro-Israel individual be invited to give a presentation and see if they are permitted to speak freely. There was one instance last year where one such speaker was permitted to give his speech he had prepared but was told there might not be anyone attending their lecture. This was almost the case but a couple dozen students braved all opposition and the event was transferred at the last minute to a classroom and not the school’s auditorium. The even more frightening question is how long before these activities and hate campaigns move to the high schools and permeate the entire school curriculum. Think this is impossible? Check your school board or the textbook committees in your state and see what choices they have made for history and other course books. These school boards and particularly the state committees that choose the textbooks are often being infiltrated by people who choose books which omit mentions of Jews from their history lessons and show Jews in a dark light when they are mentioned. The history lessons and often the reading assignments in English classes include subtle anti-Semitic phraseology and in some cases outright anti-Semitism. This is an insidious creeping infestation of the secondary school curriculum and is slowly moving into earlier and earlier levels of education. Do not simply think that this is impossible and cannot happen in the United States as that has been the response throughout history and in just about every case it did happen here and the people eventually accepted it as an inevitability and would make the excuse simply asking, “What could I do against the whole of society?” It would do well for every person of good faith to remember and be mindful of the warning which was initially sounded by John Stuart Mill though also often credited to Edmund Burke which stated, “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” The variant most often heard and probably more familiar goes something like this, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” So, when you see this evil approaching do not rely on your neighbors to launch into action, take the charge and lead them to action, the feeling of empowerment to have acted and thwarted such evils is reward in and of itself, the gains of society are immeasurable.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: