When the great American experiment in liberty officially comes to an end, there will be plenty of finger-pointing and blame-assigning taking place. Plenty of Founding Fathers observed that the natural progression of things was for government to grow and liberty to contract. But when we’re wanting to pinpoint what institutions, what things played the biggest part in facilitating the demise of freedom, I am going to predict that a fair reading of history will show that few entities had a bigger hand in destroying our civilization than the American university system.
With far too few exceptions, college campus culture has become little more than a radicalizing agent seemingly designed for the sole purpose of deprogramming its clientele of any appreciation or respect for the history, heritage, accomplishments, and values of Western society. It has become an intellectual dumping ground for radical theories and failed ideologies, espoused as gospel from the lecterns of professors whose expertise is confined to the narrow bubble of academia alone – a bubble that is dangerously insulated from the hard realities of real life, and immune from the responsibility to adjust or rethink positions that prove untenable in practice. Nothing is practice there – it is all theory. The consequence of utopian promises fed to gullibly idealistic youth, untethered from any moral foundation but full of boundless passion and self-assuredness.
This was the sorrowful reality underpinning a recent anonymous letter written by a frightened professor at UC Berkeley, one of the hotbeds of this campus-driven ideological virus. It laid forth actual science, logic, and reason, juxtaposed against the narrative pushed by the faculty and administration of Berkeley, relative specifically to the unfolding Black Lives Matter movement: that the problems of black Americans are the fault of whites, or at least a systemic white supremacy embedded into our institutions. This is the groundwork for the common BLM refrain: “The system isn’t broken, it’s working exactly as it was intended to.”
The anonymous professor disassembles this faulty premise with relative ease, demonstrating the absurd logic utilized in making the case. For instance,
[C]onsider the proportion of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However, if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it is anti-black.
Would we characterize criminal justice as a systemically misandrist conspiracy against innocent American men? I hope you see that this type of reasoning is flawed, and requires a significant suspension of our rational faculties. Black people are not incarcerated at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict.
Beyond crime, the professor exposes the flimsy unsustainability of the white supremacy narrative:
If we claim that the criminal justice system is white-supremacist, why is it that Asian Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian Americans are incarcerated at vastly lower rates than white Americans? This is a funny sort of white supremacy. Even Jewish Americans are incarcerated less than gentile whites. I think it’s fair to say that your average white supremacist disapproves of Jews. And yet, these alleged white supremacists incarcerate gentiles at vastly higher rates than Jews. None of this is addressed in your literature. None of this is explained, beyond hand-waving and ad hominems. “Those are racist dogwhistles”. “The model minority myth is white supremacist”. “Only fascists talk about black-on-black crime”, ad nauseam.
These types of statements do not amount to counterarguments: they are simply arbitrary offensive classifications, intended to silence and oppress discourse. Any serious historian will recognize these for the silencing orthodoxy tactics they are, common to suppressive regimes, doctrines, and religions throughout time and space. They are intended to crush real diversity and permanently exile the culture of robust criticism from our department.
This is what is happening on college campuses – amongst the adults. Is it any wonder that the young people being trained in such an environment replicate that ignorance outward? Why is it that black lives only seem to matter when they are taken by a white perpetrator? It’s a question verboten at our institutions of higher learning, our media, and thus in the public square. The professor highlights this:
The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people. There are virtually no marches for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is.
No discussion is permitted for nonblack victims of black violence, who proportionally outnumber black victims of nonblack violence. This is especially bitter in the Bay Area, where Asian victimization by black assailants has reached epidemic proportions, to the point that the SF police chief has advised Asians to stop hanging good-luck charms on their doors, as this attracts the attention of (overwhelmingly black) home invaders. Home invaders like George Floyd.
The letter goes on, and I encourage you to read it all. And I encourage you to share it with your college-aged children and friends. It may be the only exposure to non-groupthink they will get in the four or five formative years they spend in these intellectual cesspools.