The comparison between the anti-communist measures of the 1950s and today’s response to "Social Justice Fundamentalism" (SJF) is fundamentally flawed. The fears that drove the Red Scare were largely a product of Cold War tensions, lacking the evidence of institutional capture that we see today. (One could almost suspect a deliberate effo…
The comparison between the anti-communist measures of the 1950s and today’s response to "Social Justice Fundamentalism" (SJF) is fundamentally flawed. The fears that drove the Red Scare were largely a product of Cold War tensions, lacking the evidence of institutional capture that we see today. (One could almost suspect a deliberate effort to avoid such scrutiny... of course, however improbable... Consider, for example, the documented trend of increasing ideological homogeneity within certain academic departments and administrative roles. Coincidence?). In contrast, we now have clear, provable instances of progressive ideologies permeating our universities, the executive branch, and even the judiciary. ( figures like George Soros and the Open Society Foundations funneling vast sums of money into DA races and related initiatives) This shift has taken place over generations, creating a deeply entrenched ideological landscape that is not merely speculative but well-documented. Im reminded of Sun Tzu, "the most effective way to achieve victory is not through direct confrontation, but by undermining the enemy's will and ability to resist." Of course this is a key element of the "long march through the institutions," a strategy often associated with Marxist thought - And also another great reason why teachers need to teach history...(so strange Sun Tzu isn't taught anymore... almost as if someone didn't want us to learn these things... but I digress...).
While the anti-communist measures were reactions to an external threat, the current concerns about SJF arise from a long-term ideological transformation with dark money within American institutions. The nature of this threat is rooted in domestic developments rather than foreign influence. Unlike the often exaggerated claims of communist infiltration in the 1950s, the progressive capture of institutions is openly acknowledged and evidenced by those within these systems. It's practically a PowerPoint presentation at this point. [Slide 2: "Mandatory Sensitivity Training: Microaggressions - Researchers Disavow It. Science Doesn't Support It. Pay Up."]
Thus, equating today’s political responses with the excesses of the Red Scare is disingenuous. While there are valid concerns regarding civil liberties in some actions taken by the current administration, these actions are addressing a **real and pervasive ideological influence rather than an imagined threat.** Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurately assessing our current political climate and its challenges. Unless, of course, the goal is not to accurately assess the situation. But, again, I digress.
Well said. We are in a dog fight and we are late to the fight. The enemy, and they are indeed an enemy, fights dirty and has been fighting quietly behind the scenes for 60 years. We must not become like our enemy but we must pull out all the stops within the confines of liberal democracy and the rule of law.
The comparison between the anti-communist measures of the 1950s and today’s response to "Social Justice Fundamentalism" (SJF) is fundamentally flawed. The fears that drove the Red Scare were largely a product of Cold War tensions, lacking the evidence of institutional capture that we see today. (One could almost suspect a deliberate effort to avoid such scrutiny... of course, however improbable... Consider, for example, the documented trend of increasing ideological homogeneity within certain academic departments and administrative roles. Coincidence?). In contrast, we now have clear, provable instances of progressive ideologies permeating our universities, the executive branch, and even the judiciary. ( figures like George Soros and the Open Society Foundations funneling vast sums of money into DA races and related initiatives) This shift has taken place over generations, creating a deeply entrenched ideological landscape that is not merely speculative but well-documented. Im reminded of Sun Tzu, "the most effective way to achieve victory is not through direct confrontation, but by undermining the enemy's will and ability to resist." Of course this is a key element of the "long march through the institutions," a strategy often associated with Marxist thought - And also another great reason why teachers need to teach history...(so strange Sun Tzu isn't taught anymore... almost as if someone didn't want us to learn these things... but I digress...).
While the anti-communist measures were reactions to an external threat, the current concerns about SJF arise from a long-term ideological transformation with dark money within American institutions. The nature of this threat is rooted in domestic developments rather than foreign influence. Unlike the often exaggerated claims of communist infiltration in the 1950s, the progressive capture of institutions is openly acknowledged and evidenced by those within these systems. It's practically a PowerPoint presentation at this point. [Slide 2: "Mandatory Sensitivity Training: Microaggressions - Researchers Disavow It. Science Doesn't Support It. Pay Up."]
Thus, equating today’s political responses with the excesses of the Red Scare is disingenuous. While there are valid concerns regarding civil liberties in some actions taken by the current administration, these actions are addressing a **real and pervasive ideological influence rather than an imagined threat.** Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurately assessing our current political climate and its challenges. Unless, of course, the goal is not to accurately assess the situation. But, again, I digress.
Well said. We are in a dog fight and we are late to the fight. The enemy, and they are indeed an enemy, fights dirty and has been fighting quietly behind the scenes for 60 years. We must not become like our enemy but we must pull out all the stops within the confines of liberal democracy and the rule of law.