RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.newsweek.com/toxicity-dei-tale-newton-massachusetts-opinion-1795907

A white grievance backlash has arrived in Massachusetts, to hear the liberal media tell it. Well-funded and well-connected GOP power players masquerading as aggrieved parents have been “harassing educators for policies they deem unfair to white students and antithetical to their values,” per a Boston Globe columnist. It’s “white backlash politics” that’s “clearly coordinated, with right-wing money” and engaged in a campaign of “whipping suburban parents into a frenzy” to win elections for the Republicans.

Sounds sinister! But if you talk to the parents at the center of the ongoing fight over Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in public schools in Newton, Massachusetts, you’ll find something very different. You won’t find MAGA Republicans opposing DEI in the schools, but rather liberal Democrats who have noticed a shift in their children’s school system priorities. And their complaints have nothing to do with being white.

One parent had a child excluded from an affinity group (a race-based social group), while other parents were dismayed to find an accelerated math program that was in place for years had been scrapped due to equity concerns. Still others were troubled to learn that their children’s English and History instruction was filled with language dividing everyone into categories of oppressor or oppressed.

When these parents questioned the school about these issues, they were told that their complaints targeted aspects of their children’s education that were consistent the values of Newton Public Schools (NPS). That was true: In 2022, NPS shared these values in their Statement of Values and Commitment to Racial Equity. With imperatives like “Take immediate and sustained action to dismantle racism in our schools and communities” and “It is essential to give voice to those who have traditionally been underrepresented and historically marginalized,” the Statement of Values consists of typical progressive antiracism language, which leaves you with no doubt that blacks and other minorities are marginalized and have no agency, and adheres to the highly subjective findings of unconscious bias.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/04/the_biden_administrations_attack_on_free_speech.html

If it weren’t for Tucker Carlson, I wouldn’t have known about a disturbing story that Glenn Greenwald broke: The Biden administration is finding ways to stifle speech supporting the Russian position in the ongoing strife in Ukraine. 

I guess I should say up front that I am neither pro-Russian nor pro-Ukrainian. I dislike both sides equally and reserve all my compassion for the innocents caught in the crossfire (including the hapless Russian conscripts). My greatest concern is the one Donald Trump articulated during his interview with Tucker Carlson, which is the fact that we’re witnessing two nuclear powers squaring off against each other—and (which Trump didn’t say) one is ruled by a megalomaniac and the other ruled (for nuclear purposes) by someone who seems to have incipient dementia. I also have no dealings with or respect for black socialists, who are usually antisemitic, too. My sole focus here is on free speech in America.

On Wednesday, Greenwald, a leftist who is also a First Amendment absolutist, tweeted that members of a Black nationalist group were just indicted for spreading pro-Russian propaganda.

Yeshitela sounds exactly like the Reverent Jeremiah Wright, doesn’t he? 

According to the DOJ press release about the indictment, charges were filed against four U.S. citizens and three Russian nationals. The charge is that Aleksandr Viktorovich Ionov, a Russian, founded something called the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia (AGMR), which was headquartered in Russia and which the Russian government funded. He was aided by the two other Russian defendants. One of their illegal activities was to spend money to affect a candidate running for a local office in Florida.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/04/transportation_secretary_pete_buttigieg_proposes_spending_20_million_taxpayer_dollars_on_female_crash_test_dummies.html

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has proposed that the Department of Transportation include  $20 million for female crash-test dummies in its 2024 fiscal budget. That Buttigieg — famous for his love of females though he may be — wants to spend vast sums of taxpayer dollars on feminine crash dummies seems odd in the current cultural climate in which we salute all things non-binary.

Nonetheless, Mayor Pete’s proposal has already garnered support from several House Democrats. For example, Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut praised Buttigieg’s plan during a recent House Appropriations Subcommittee meeting. DeLauro stated that the use of female crash dummies would be a major step forward in the fight against “gender inequity”.

Say what? Unlike humans, who are either one sex or another, crash dummies can’t be gendered…as they are not living beings. But, in today’s world, nothing can stand in the way of insanity.

How will manufacturers make crash dummies “female?” Will they be shorter and lighter? Have big breasts and wear lipstick? Carry a purse? Will they tell the “male” crash dummies to slow down and ask for directions? This would seem kind of stereotypical and/or misogynistic in this day and age, wouldn’t it?

How can we even have female crash test dummies if we don’t even know what an actual woman is?

And who’s to say “female” crash dummies don’t identify as male? Particularly since they are arbitrarily “assigned” their gender at birth when they are made.

https://victorhanson.com/wokism-and-history-part-three-the-commissariat/

Under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany divided up Poland. Germany invaded first from the north, west, and south, the Soviet Union subsequently from the east. By early October the war was over. A victorious Germany concluded that while its forces had learned much about Blitzkrieg and needed improvement, Soviet Russia in comparison seemed inept.

That impression was solidified by the so-called “Winter War” of November 30, 1939–March 13, 1940, when the Soviets invaded neutral Finland. Although technically a victory, Russia lost nearly 500,000 dead, wounded, missing, and captured, compared to 75,000 causalities of the so-called losing Finns. Hitler concluded that his new ally Stalin’s Russia was a paper tiger, a view enhanced by the vast and continual improvement in German war-making for much of 1940–41 with the victories in Norway, the Low Countries, France, Yugoslavia, Greece, and North Africa.

Germans assumed that the Russian officer corps was largely to blame for these embarrassments, especially given that during the 1937–38 Stalin purges, some 30,000 officers were executed on the pretext of anti-Stalin, anti-communist sympathies.

Among them was over 75 percent of Soviet generals and admirals—at precisely the time Stalin was vastly expanding and modernizing his armed forces and in dire need of competent officers.

Given these exempla, Hitler turned on his ally on June 22, 1941, and foolishly invaded the vast Soviet Union. The initial three-pronged attack was stunning, and nearly knocked out the Soviet Union in the first three months of the invasion, inflicting somewhere between 4-5 million casualties, with perhaps over 2 million immediate dead. Hitler was at first convinced that Stalin had wrecked his military and Moscow would be in German hands by early September.

What followed December 1941—Hitlerian strategic blunders, German overextended logistics and manpower shortages, vast resupplies of Anglo-American Lend-Lease war material to Russia, intact Russian industrial production beyond the Urals, and improving Soviet generalship—had doomed Germans to defeat by late 1943.

By 1943 Stalin had reversed course, reviving the Russian Orthodox Church to lend religious zeal to the war, and increasingly turning over the day-to-day decision making, both tactical and strategic, to an array of talented Soviet generals, most famously Georgy Zhukov, Ivan Konev, Vasily Chuikov, and Konstantin Rokossovsky. Both Konev and Rokossovsky had been purged between 1936–38 but were by 1941–42 “rehabilitated.” In short, once the Soviet Union de facto ended the commissariat/ideological control of the military and allowed it to function more on the basis of military efficacy, the Soviets began to take advantage of inherent German weaknesses.