Those of you who follow this blog know that I’ve previously reviewed Kindly Inquisitors: New Attacks on Free Thought by Jonathan Rauch. Rauch was very concerned that Progressive Liberalism, aka Marxism, with its ideas of political correctness and hate speech codes was the greatest threat to freedom of speech in the West. Liberals promote political correctness in the name of not offending people (the humanitarian angle), but they also have prescribed ideas of what accounts as offensive dialogue and refuse to admit ideas or topics which run against their political ideology (fundamentalism). Hence, if you combine these two factors, one rightly dubs them “Humanitarian Fundamentalists.” Their philosophy is no less dangerous to free debate than Islamic fundamentalism or other kinds of religious fundamentalism.
Note that Rauch’s subtitle goes deeper than freedom of speech. The title calls out “New Attacks on Free Thought.” Words express ideas. If one cannot speak the words, the ideas attached to these unspoken words die a slow death. What good is a Christian who refuses to show his faith to others for fear of his peers’ opinion? A person who will not speak of his faith in times of peace will not defend it in times of persecution. Political correctness with its litany of sins (sexism, racism, xenophobia, transphobia, homophobia, Islamophobia, etc.) tries to prevent people from voicing legitimate concerns when dialogue sheers away from mindless equality. The very fact that there are men and women, different races, different cultures, different expressions of sexuality, and different religions implies inequality. If all was the same, why would we have names to mark distinctions?
I recently discovered that the term “new KKK” has been applied to Black Lives Matter. That’s a valid jibe against an organization which has instigated riots, but the term could more aptly apply to Anti-Fascist Action and the other violent protesters of recent weeks. After all, Antifa goes around wearing black clothing and masks. How would they look if they wore white instead? Perhaps a change of color would help the Democratic party understand the viciousness and illegitimacy of Anti-Fascist Action–despite its noble sounding name. (Sort of like how all the most oppressive countries refer to themselves as “Democratic People’s Republics.”)
One has not heard more than a peep from liberals condemning the protests at UC Berkeley. (That peep comes from Peter Beinart of The Atlantic.) One cannot help but be reminded of the silence and denials of Southern Democrats concerning the KKK during Reconstruction. Antifa deserves to be called “the Invisible Empire” every bit as much as the KKK. Worse, we’ve experienced riots and violent protests from the left frequently over the past three years; yet the Democratic hierarchy and their Leftist media are more than willing to justify groups like Black Lives Matter and Anti-Fascism Action and to place the blame on the Alt-Right or conservatives for expressing their opinions. After a similar length of time, the hierarchy of the Old South had become disturbed with the KKK and been convinced that it was a liability. And so, Nathan Bedford Forrest disbanded the KKK in Tennessee (the organization’s birthplace) during the fall of 1869 with other states following suit over the next several years. It would not rise again until Woodrow Wilson’s administration, and this time in a more prejudiced and sinister form.
Below, I link to a cogent article written by Jack Donovan on political correctness. It is certain that political correctness is evil because it forces people to adhere to a narrative rather than seek the truth for themselves. You’re sure to have your mind broadened by reading Donovan’s perspective on it.
And, click here if you want to read my reaction to Donovan’s book, The Way of Men.
Many of my dear readers may have heard of George Takei’s outrageous insults directed against the honorable Clarence Thomas. (Considering the nonsense which spews forth from the mouths of so many movie stars, one thinks that the Romans acted very wisely in denying actors suffrage.) One of my friends expected me to castigate George Takei for his idiocy, but Mark Levin has already perfectly exposed him as a blockhead. Instead, I wish to highlight something which Takei’s comments reveals about leftists.
George Takei stated that Thomas’s claim that slaves had dignity was ridiculous. He even went so far as to say that his own parents, forced into internment camps during WWII, were stripped of their dignity. On the other hand, Mark Levin stressed that what Clarence Thomas meant by slaves having dignity was that every human being has God-given dignity, which government action can neither add to nor divest. Every man bears the stamp of God’s image and likeness and will one day appear before the Just Judge, who is no respecter of persons, in order to give an account of his deeds. Before God, it does not matter whether one is a slave or a king.
This fact slipped Takei’s mind, because his mindset does not reflect Enlightened Judeo-Christian ideals but those deriving from leftist ideology. To a leftist, one’s earthly existence is the only existence, and the greatest power affecting one’s life is the state. Since the state holds the place of God in leftist ideology, it makes sense that they believe the state is capable of giving and taking away dignity. Yet, the state is composed of men like ourselves. How is it that one’s fellow men have the capacity to alter one’s dignity as a human being? Is government authority, the power to coerce, everything? No wonder we see leftists cleaving to a program of political correctness and so eager to be considered “orthodox” by their fellow leftists! Their very humanity depends upon the honor afforded them by the state and their faction.
The only thing sadder than living in a leftist utopia is actually having the leftist mentality. Because the state is their God, they stop at nothing to change the state to run according to their principles. Keep that in mind before you give up voting or paying attention to politics!
I have just finished Charlton Heston’s The Courage to be Free. In many ways, this work is similar to many other conservative political works on the market. It highlights that America has two main political cultures at a state of war. Each side of the culture war wishes for America to take on a particular image. The liberal or progressive image wishes for more government intervention in people’s lives, the loss of personal initiative, and the loss of personal freedom. On the other hand, the conservative vision embraces a culture of self-reliance, freedom, and the ways Americans have inherited from our ancestors. Heston remarks on how liberals live in a society of fear and isolation (represented by city dwellers), while conservative societies, represented especially by rural communities like the one Heston grew up in, tend to be more neighborly and trusting of one another.
Charlton Heston adds his own personal touch to his advice and exhortations to preserve the American way. During the Civil Rights movement, he marched with Martin Luther King in Washington. Ever since, he has not been afraid to risk his Hollywood career for the sake of defending American values. One of my favorite parts of the work covered how corrupt and immoral rap lyrics are. (Heston does not shy away from quoting rap lyrics in full–profanity and all.) As a shareholder at Time Warner, he took a stand against that company marketing Ice-T’s songs, which advocated violence against women, police, and others. This led to certain of Ice-T’s songs being removed from an upcoming album. Heston also remarks on how political correctness attempts to squash public debate. People are afraid to stand for the truth because they might get ostracized for it.
All in all, The Courage to be Free stands as an excellent primer on political activism. Heston gives a thorough outline of all the problems facing our nation and what steps may be taken to solve them. The way Heston weaves in his life and personal experiences into the material gives further force to the message he wished to convey. The most important message to my mind is that cowardice is not the true opposite of courage: indifference is the true opposite of courage.
Charlton Heston received the Medal of Freedom from George W. Bush in 2003.
Let me end this article listing his “Ten Covenants of Courage” for influencing America for the better:
- Find ways to influence the government in all its forms.
- Be willing to disobey [unjust government actions or the mandates of political correctness].
- Take resolute and absolute pride in your own values.
- Defend America as the peerless ideal–period.
- Fiercely preserve all the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights.
- Find the way to your loudest possible voice and speak.
- Embrace change.
- Find myriad avenues to pass on your convictions.
- Accept that sacrifice is just part of the deal.
- Commit to the daily process of private prayer.