‘Nevergreen’ and Academia’s Cancel Culture A fictional account of academic cancel culture mirrors a troubling reality on campuses today. Richard L. Cravatts

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/09/nevergreen-and-academias-cancel-culture-richard-l-cravatts/

In 2017, a controversy embroiled Bret Weinstein, a self-described liberal, white professor at Evergreen State College, who was vilified by students when he refused to stay off campus on the School’s Day of Absence, an annual event during which Evergreen’s white students and faculty are urged not to come to campus. “On a college campus,” Weinstein told students, “one’s right to speak—or to be—must never be based on skin color.”

In response to what was perceived to be his astounding audacity in questioning what had become black students’ opportunity to banish whites from campus in order to promote their self-determination, Weinstein was denounced for his “anti-blackness,” faced calls for his dismissal, and even confronted threats to do him physical harm, as student thugs, armed with clubs and baseball bats, roamed the campus looking for Weinstein and other administrators who prostrated themselves before the social justice warrior hordes who virtually took over the entire campus and, as a reward for their criminal behavior, wrestled a bundle of concessions from the feckless administration. 

Professor Weinstein was one of the first—and one of the most visible—victims in the cancel culture that has now engulfed many university campuses, paroxysmic moral orgies in which virtue-signaling students and faculty—usually, though not exclusively, on the left—censure and public humiliate anyone who has voiced unacceptable opinions, written forbidden thought, taught dissenting views that challenge or question the prevailing orthodoxy of race-obsessed universities.

This troubling trend forms the basis of a satiric, yet dark new novel from Professor Andrew Pessin, Nevergreen (previously reviewed at FrontPage Magazine by the insightful Daniel Greenfield), a book whose own title gives a nod to the Evergreen affair and which follows the tortured protagonist, J., a middle-aged, burnt-out professor who finds himself on the Nevergreen island campus as a guest speaker, and ends up in a nightmarish Orwellian pursuit by students who “hate hate” and wish to violently purge all haters from their midst.

The Corrupt University and 9/11 Ideas have consequences. Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/09/corrupt-university-and-911-bruce-thornton/

In the Nineties I wrote frequently about the role of multiculturalism, leftist politics, and postmodern theory in the degradation of the humanities and social sciences. It was clear to many of us tracking these developments that since the Seventies, foundational skills and knowledge had been slowly eroded, their place taken by politics and dubious theory. Back then, the danger seemed confined to the elite groves of postgraduate education. As a consequence, liberal education, the “free play of the mind on all subjects,” as Matthew Arnold put it, and “the instinct to know the best that is known and thought in the world,” was being replaced by the “boots are better than Shakespeare” philistinism of political activism, and the “higher nonsense” of postmodern theory.

But our government’s feckless response during the Nineties to al Qaeda’s serial attacks, and the gruesome slaughter on 9/11 that climaxed those errors, made me realize that much of our foreign policy failures reflected some of the pernicious ideas that had escaped from the diseased groves of academe. The smoldering ruins and 3000 dead was a graphic reminder that ideas do indeed have consequences.

The foundational idea of both Marxist theory and postmodernism is the “hermeneutics of suspicion,” the assumption that what we perceive as the true nature of things is a false narrative contrived by hegemonic power to keep us pliant and obedient as it pursues its nefarious, oppressive policies and practices such as colonialism, imperialism, racism, and sexism. In time the list would include homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia, and a generalized bigotry against “people of color,” a category based on the old, reductive taxonomy of “scientific racism.”

From this perspective, the achievements of Western Civilization were a mere fictive construct designed to mask that history of bloody oppression. “Facts” and “truth” likewise were mere components of a “discourse regime,” arbitrary linguistic signs with no foundation in reality. “Multiculturalism” and “diversity” became the weapons for dismantling this regime by elevating and privileging the “other” of “color.” All political analyses were reduced to the Leninist “Who, whom”––Who is the oppressor, and whom does he oppress.

Of course, it is easy to see the fundamental contradiction in this narrative. If truth is just a construct that enables oppression, on what grounds can the postmodern theorist embrace, or even articulate, any political cause? Where is his privileged space existing apart from the hegemonic discourses that allegedly have so much reach and power over us for obscuring its malignant machinations? If language is reduced to the play of signifiers that can never communicate a meaning, what happens to “human rights” or “liberation” or “national self-determination” or the “workers’ paradise”?

The Unsung Death of ‘My Body, My Choice’ By Jack Cashill

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/09/the_unsung_death_of_my_body_my_choice.html

Just 79 minutes after Harris breathed new life into it, President Joe Biden put the mantra out of its misery

As late as 3:43 p.m. on Thursday, September 9, the long-lived mantra of the pro-abortion movement, “My Body, My Choice,” was still showing signs of life. It was at that time, that the White House published the remarks made by Vice-President Kamala Harris at a “Reproductive Rights” roundtable.

“The President and I are unequivocal in our support of Roe v. Wade and the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, and the right of women to make decisions for themselves with whomever they choose — about their own bodies,” said Ms. Harris.

“And, needless to say,” Harris continued much too quotably, “the right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is not negotiable. The right of women to make decisions about their own bodies is their decision; it is their body.”

So far is Harris out of the White House power loop that she may not have known the mantra had less than two hours to live. 

If the China Story Is True, Milley Has to Go By Andrew C. McCarthy

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/09/if-the-china-story-is-true-milley-has-to-go/

At the very least, we must stop the corrosive politicization of institutions that we need to keep nonpolitical — including the military.

I agree with our editorial that General Mark Milley should be aggressively investigated and, if the Washington Post reporting is verified, removed from office. In fact, I think he ought to be pressed, as a preliminary matter, about whether the reporting is substantially accurate; if he concedes that it is, he should be suspended immediately pending an investigation.

But we need a real investigation. I carry no brief for Milley, who personifies the politicization of institutions that must be apolitical in a properly functioning republic. Nevertheless, conclusions about his alleged behavior have gotten way out in front of the evidence.

As our editorial notes, Bob Woodward has a dubious history. As a foundation for admissible evidence, his reporting methods — particularly, encouraging sources to speak without attribution — would be laughed out of a courtroom.

To be sure, the Woodward MO of portraying the most voluble leakers as his story’s most valuable players would strongly suggest that Milley is one of his main sources. On this occasion, that would add credibility to Woodward’s account, on the legal theory of declarations against interest. That is, in touting himself as the commander who bravely reined in an unhinged commander in chief, Milley would have (however inadvertently) admitted misconduct that could subject him to discipline. (Statements against interest, though hearsay, are generally admissible in court because they are presumptively reliable: When people acknowledge actions that put them at risk, they are usually not lying.)

Afghan Tragedy, Border Blunders, Vaccine Disaster – Now Biden & Co. Want To Spend Us Into Socialist Oblivion Lew Uhler, Peter Ferrara, and Joe Yocca

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/16/afghan-tragedy-border-blunders-vaccine-disaster-now-biden-co-want-to-spend-us-into-socialist-oblivion/

West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin had it partly right when he called for a “strategic pause”. But now it is clear that the $3.5 trillion price tag seriously understates the Bernie Sanders/AOC/progressive reconciliation bill through which they will try to remake America into their socialist image.

Early on, Sens. Rick Scott, R-Florida, and Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., both recognized that the price tag was artificially low for all these socialist goodies revealed in the initial budget resolution. And that’s just the start. They and many others are pegging the actual price tag at $5 or even $7 trillion. The reason for the discrepancy is found in the entitlements, the actual details of which are still embargoed in the massive 10,000-page bill.

What we do know comes from the budget resolution that outlines the Bernie Sanders/AOC “leftist wish list” and seeks a complete remaking of the American economy. It is key to remember that congressional budgets are blueprints for the actual spending – advanced ultimately in this case in a reconciliation bill – which will take place later this month.

Reconciliation was originally adopted as a provision of law to cut overall government spending to fit into the federal budget. But today it is a chance for another bite at the apple for tax increases and for new entitlement spending that cannot be cut since entitlement spending is automatic as provided by law. Today reconciliation serves another purpose: adoption of new regulatory policies that effectively operate as taxes by imposing new costs on businesses.

California, You Blew It Again

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/15/california-you-blew-it-again/

Not only did California Gov. Gavin Newsom survive the recall election, the vote margin was tilted so far in his favor by Wednesday morning that he’s likely to see the results as a mandate to issue another round of harsh pandemic rules. What is certain is that he will consider it a signal to press the Blue State agenda that’s made California a miserable experience for so many.

Recalling a Democratic governor in a state where roughly twice as many Democrats are registered to vote as Republicans was always going to be a nearly impossible task. At one time, polls indicated Newsom could be ousted. It appeared a chance to climb out of the wreckage had arrived. But in the final poll that matters, voters changed the narrative. On the morning after, results were showing 64% said no to the recall, only 36% said yes.

It wouldn’t be loco to think that Newsom is now going to seek revenge on those who voted to remove him. A likely place to start is to put California back under a tight and unforgiving pandemic lockdown regime even though it had never fully escaped Newsom’s iron fist over the summer. If not for the heat he felt from the recall polls, the life-has-been-handed-to-him governor would have surely reinstated the freedom-robbing policies he had ordered in 2020 after the Delta variant arrived in June.

There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, Newsom’s constituents are supportive of lockdowns, mask mandates, and government-required coronavirus vaccinations, while those who voted to rid themselves of this meddlesome prince of privilege were hungry for the liberties he’d so cruelly taken. Now he’s free to punish those who dared challenge him, and will do so with the gushing approval of the affluent progressives of California who are his most ardent supporters.

Another COVID ‘Fact’ Turns Out To Be A Wild Exaggeration

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/16/another-covid-fact-turns-out-to-be-a-wild-exaggeration/

We keep hearing how hospitals are being overrun with COVID patients because of those dastardly unvaccinated. This has certainly made the Delta variant look highly dangerous, helped keep people in a state of panic, and ginned up support for draconian vaccine mandates. But is it as bad as we’re being told?

Two studies suggest that all the talk of mass hospitalization from the COVID outbreak is a huge exaggeration. Researchers found that a substantial number of those admitted to hospitals – adults and children – either have minor symptoms or were checked in for something else but happened to test positive for COVID after being admitted.

Of course, that’s not the message the public is getting. Instead, we are being treated daily to headlines such as:

“Child Covid-19 hospitalizations soar, filling pediatric wings, data show”

“COVID-19 Hospitals: overrun with COVID patients”

“As Idaho hospitals ration care, doctors fear a COVID peak may still be weeks away”

When the death rate from COVID plunged, the media started focusing on the number of people hospitalized as the “better” indicator of how serious the current COVID outbreak is.

The North Korea Nuclear Temptation Carrots and sticks have both failed to stop Pyongyang’s advances.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-north-korea-nuclear-temptation-kim-jong-un-joe-biden-missile-tests-11631548034?mod=opinion_lead_pos4

A pattern has emerged in President Biden’s dealings with weaker adversaries: He opens with tough talk but fails to follow through. This has been most conspicuous with Iran, Russia and the Taliban, but North Korea could be next.

Pyongyang fired two short-range ballistic missiles into the sea between the Korean Peninsula and Japan Wednesday, its second major set of tests in a week and third this year. The country launched new long-range cruise missiles over the weekend and short-range ballistic missiles in March. More provocations will follow as Kim Jong Un tests President Biden’s resolve.

South Korea tested a submarine-launched ballistic missile Wednesday. And last month the U.S. and South Korea held joint military drills despite a North Korean official calling them an “act of self-destruction for which a dear price should be paid as they threaten the safety of our people and further imperil the situation on the Korean peninsula.” The State Department also approved a $258 million sale of precision-guided weapons to the South in August.

Expect more histrionics as Pyongyang continues to use military provocations to coax the U.S. into new negotiations. The North’s patron, China, is already calling for resuming talks with the North, as Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi said on a visit to Seoul this week.

North Korea has pursued a predictable negotiating strategy for decades. First, misbehave and issue exaggerated threats. Second, tone down the rhetoric and agree to talks. Finally, pocket concessions before returning to the status quo ante. This happened under Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Barack Obama simply rebranded “do nothing” as “strategic patience.” Mr. Trump’s “grand bargain” summits were a diplomatic embarrassment but didn’t provide many concrete benefits to Pyongyang.

Waiting for General Milley The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has more explaining to do.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/waiting-for-general-mark-milley-china-bob-woodward-report-11631744398?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

Donald Trump’s behavior as a candidate and President unhinged some of America’s vital institutions, including the press and the FBI. It would be disturbing to find out that military leaders also responded to the President’s norm-breaking by betraying their institutional obligations.

That’s the implication of a report of national-security freelancing by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley at the end of Mr. Trump’s term. Congress needs to find out how much is true—not because of partisan demands for retribution against the general, but because even the appearance of attenuating civilian control of the military is damaging to democracy.

A forthcoming book by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa alleges that Gen. Milley called China’s top military commander shortly before the November election and said, “If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.” After the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and a call with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Gen. Milley tried to increase his control over nuclear launch procedures out of fear of what Mr. Trump might do.

Mr. Woodward’s opaque method makes it impossible to judge the accuracy of his reporting. He relates conversations he didn’t hear based on sources whose motives aren’t explained. Those on the right now demanding Gen. Milley’s head based on Mr. Woodward’s book were rightly cautious of the journalist’s insider accounts of GOP presidencies.

The TIME 100 is a confederacy of dunces Prince Harry looks as if he has been captured by a militant group and is being made to put out a hostage video

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/time-100-confederacy-dunces-meghan-harry/

To be chosen as one of TIME magazine’s 100 most influential people is usually an accolade worth fighting for. Yet this year, it seems to be the celebrity equivalent of the booby prize. Cockburn imagines that it was put together by various subversive elements within the publication who hoped to see the mass ridicule that its various choices, both of subjects and of writers, have led to. They will not be disappointed.

That an airbrushed photograph of Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex, takes pride of place in the ‘Icons’ section says all that you need to know. He, poor boy, looks as if he has been captured by a militant group and is being made to put out a hostage video, while she — quite literally — is wearing the pants. But it is the text about them by a celebrity chef named José Andrés beggars belief. ‘They turn compassion into boots on the ground…they give voice to the voiceless through media production.’ Dear God. Chef Andrés would be best advised to remain in the kitchen, sharpening his knives, if this is the level of his insight.

But he is not even the worst offender. The parade of sycophancy goes on and on, until the cumulative effect is almost hysterical. ‘She’s a saintly, even godlike figure’, Miley Cyrus gushes about Dolly Parton. David Beckham — a man not known for his Wildean command of the English language — writes of the footballer Tom Brady that ‘What I and his many friends also see is a great human being, a great father, family man, friend and partner.’ Rep. Liz Cheney is described by Cindy McCain as ‘the rarest species of politician yet, the ambitious officeholder who risks her office to speak the unwelcome truth to her own side’. And at a time when Joe Biden’s reputation is plunging into a new nadir, it is droll to see his one-time rival Bernie Sanders praise him for ‘restoring faith among ordinary Americans that their government can work for them, and not just for wealthy campaign contributors’.

There is the odd note of discord to all this mush, such as Nancy Gibbs saying of Donald Trump that his ‘only rule is ruthlessness; he sees norms as opportunities for vandalism, a window left open in our intricate constitutional structure that he can crash through’. But generally speaking, TIME offers a toothless roll-call of empty praise and prissy platitudes that will do little other than bolster the considerable egos of those featured. It is a list that lacks imagination and daring, and seems to have been designed merely to troll the American public.

All Cockburn can say is that if this motley selection are really the hundred most influential people in the world today, then hasten on, climate change, and lay waste to humanity before it’s too late.