“The “losers” in this particular ideological war now have their own choice to make. Do we bend our principles to match our short-term ambition and work to claw our way back into the good graces of the strongman, justifying our moral flexibility with the allure of a “seat at the table?” Or do we double down on serving principle, making the arguments for the ideas that we believe represent the best hope for national recovery and cultural renewal? Choosing to serve doesn’t make you a “loser,” it makes you wise. Yes, there will be those who choose to reign. Let them reign over the ruin they’ve created. The servants will wait to rebuild.”
The liberals are the little boy who called wolf. For years, leftists have been calling any conservative patriotic person a fascist bully. They called George W. Bush that all the time. He wasn’t, but that didn’t help him any. The shriller the rhetoric, the more it won. And for the most part, conservative leaders rolled belly up. The regular folks get frustrated. Then Trump shows up, and he is a bully with fascist tendencies. And now—there really is a wolf—but who will listen now?
In some ways the whole thing is like a Greek Tragedy. Utopian Leftism, with its vigilant mental censorship and intellectual condescension to the lower working classes, ends up creating the very fascist reactionaries it decries. You can only silence and mock people for so long.
And if you automatically call people fascist haters 100 times, the 101st time they might believe you. I think it is the same reason Chinese businessmen are poisoning babies to make a quick buck on fake baby formula. These are three generations of Chinese kids who were raised on communist propaganda that told them that all businessmen were soul-less capitalists with categorically no morals. So then, when they finally become a businessman…guess what?
The same goes for the warrior ethos. If you say there is no morality in war, no honor in combat, that any man with a gun is as good as a baby killer….then guess what happens?
If you say all patriotism is the equivalent of Nazism and brutality and that our fathers and forebearers were all brutal jingoists, and that we have no name to be proud of and no honor to maintain…then guess what happens?
Yes, you have convinced them, and look at them now. Waging your war on religion and on patriotism and on chivalry was the biggest mistake you ever made.
Welcome to your new world of fascist reaction, void of religious scruples and starry-eyed patriotic idealism that wanted to save the world. Those things were the safeguards. And now its all falling like a house of cards and a world on fire.
Even the NYTimes itself is saying it too, so yes, everyone knows it now. I’ve spent 9 of my past 10 adult years in Academia, and it’s been like swimming upstream the whole way.
On one hand, it’s kind of nice that it’s finally out in the open and I don’t have to struggle swimming upstream and also hear smug people mocking my kind for “being paranoid”. On the other hand, it shows we’ve really really lost when they can openly talk about it. When the card game is over, the hands are shown. Only when your enemy is finally powerless is it safe to show your pity. Yes, they are king of the (Academia) mountain, and we are lying flat on our back somewhere far below the hill, wind knocked out of us.
Its not that we ever wanted to be king of the mountain for the heck of it–but we all know that who is king of the mountain in Academia does get the first pass at influencing (e.g. indoctrinating) the minds of the best and brightest, and hence shaping the next generation. I know the progressives meant well–we all think we know what is best for the young. You have your progressive paradise and now I’m just bracing myself for it to come tumbling down like a flaming house of cards. It is not going to be pretty–and no, there is no pleasure in saying “I told you so” when it will be accompanied by so much costly human suffering. (I see reactionary fascism, totalitarianism, and world wars). I’m not sad and I’m not mad. I’m just so damn tired.
WE progressives believe in diversity, and we want women, blacks, Latinos, gays and Muslims at the table — er, so long as they aren’t conservatives.
Universities are the bedrock of progressive values, but the one kind of diversity that universities disregard is ideological and religious. We’re fine with people who don’t look like us, as long as they think like us.
O.K., that’s a little harsh. But consider George Yancey, a sociologist who is black and evangelical.
“Outside of academia I faced more problems as a black,” he told me. “But inside academia I face more problems as a Christian, and it is not even close.”
I’ve been thinking about this because on Facebook recently I wondered aloud whether universities stigmatize conservatives and undermine intellectual diversity. The scornful reaction from my fellow liberals proved the point.
“Much of the ‘conservative’ worldview consists of ideas that are known empirically to be false,” said Carmi.
“The truth has a liberal slant,” wrote Michelle.
“Why stop there?” asked Steven. “How about we make faculties more diverse by hiring idiots?”
To me, the conversation illuminated primarily liberal arrogance — the implication that conservatives don’t have anything significant to add to the discussion. My Facebook followers have incredible compassion for war victims in South Sudan, for kids who have been trafficked, even for abused chickens, but no obvious empathy for conservative scholars facing discrimination.
The stakes involve not just fairness to conservatives or evangelical Christians, not just whether progressives will be true to their own values, not just the benefits that come from diversity (and diversity of thought is arguably among the most important kinds), but also the quality of education itself. When perspectives are unrepresented in discussions, when some kinds of thinkers aren’t at the table, classrooms become echo chambers rather than sounding boards — and we all lose.
Four studies found that the proportion of professors in the humanities who are Republicans ranges between 6 and 11 percent, and in the social sciences between 7 and 9 percent.
Conservatives can be spotted in the sciences and in economics, but they are virtually an endangered species in fields like anthropology, sociology, history and literature. One study found that only 2 percent of English professors are Republicans (although a large share are independents).
In contrast, some 18 percent of social scientists say they are Marxist. So it’s easier to find a Marxist in some disciplines than a Republican.
George Yancey, a sociology professor, says he has faced many problems in life because he is black, “but inside academia I face more problems as a Christian, and it is not even close.”
Nancy Newberry for The New York Times
The scarcity of conservatives seems driven in part by discrimination. One peer-reviewed study found that one-third of social psychologists admitted that if choosing between two equally qualified job candidates, they would be inclined to discriminate against the more conservative candidate.
Yancey, the black sociologist, who now teaches at the University of North Texas, conducted a survey in which up to 30 percent of academics said that they would be less likely to support a job seeker if they knew that the person was a Republican.
The discrimination becomes worse if the applicant is an evangelical Christian. According to Yancey’s study, 59 percent of anthropologists and 53 percent of English professors would be less likely to hire someone they found out was an evangelical.
“Of course there are biases against evangelicals on campuses,” notes Jonathan L. Walton, the Plummer Professor of Christian Morals at Harvard. Walton, a black evangelical, adds that the condescension toward evangelicals echoes the patronizing attitude toward racial minorities: “The same arguments I hear people make about evangelicals sound so familiar to the ways people often describe folk of color, i.e. politically unsophisticated, lacking education, angry, bitter, emotional, poor.”
A study published in The American Journal of Political Science underscored how powerful political bias can be. In an experiment, Democrats and Republicans were asked to choose a scholarship winner from among (fictitious) finalists, with the experiment tweaked so that applicants sometimes included the president of the Democratic or Republican club, while varying the credentials and race of each. Four-fifths of Democrats and Republicans alike chose a student of their own party to win a scholarship, and discrimination against people of the other party was much greater than discrimination based on race.
“I am the equivalent of someone who was gay in Mississippi in 1950,” a conservative professor is quoted as saying in “Passing on the Right,” a new book about right-wing faculty members by Jon A. Shields and Joshua M. Dunn Sr. That’s a metaphor that conservative scholars often use, with talk of remaining in the closet early in one’s career and then “coming out” after receiving tenure.
This bias on campuses creates liberal privilege. A friend is studying for the Law School Admission Test, and the test preparation company she is using offers test-takers a tip: Reading comprehension questions will typically have a liberal slant and a liberal answer.
Some liberals think that right-wingers self-select away from academic paths in part because they are money-grubbers who prefer more lucrative professions. But that doesn’t explain why there are conservative math professors but not many right-wing anthropologists.
It’s also liberal poppycock that there aren’t smart conservatives or evangelicals. Richard Posner is a more-or-less conservative who is the most cited legal scholar of all time. With her experience and intellect, Condoleezza Rice would enhance any political science department. Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian and famed geneticist who has led the Human Genome Project and the National Institutes of Health. And if you’re saying that conservatives may be tolerable, but evangelical Christians aren’t — well, are you really saying you would have discriminated against the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.?
Jonathan Haidt, a centrist social psychologist at New York University, cites data suggesting that the share of conservatives in academia has plunged, and he has started a website, Heterodox Academy, to champion ideological diversity on campuses.
“Universities are unlike other institutions in that they absolutely require that people challenge each other so that the truth can emerge from limited, biased, flawed individuals,” he says. “If they lose intellectual diversity, or if they develop norms of ‘safety’ that trump challenge, they die. And this is what has been happening since the 1990s.”
Should universities offer affirmative action for conservatives and evangelicals? I don’t think so, partly because surveys find that conservative scholars themselves oppose the idea. But it’s important to have a frank discussion on campuses about ideological diversity. To me, this seems a liberal blind spot.
Universities should be a hubbub of the full range of political perspectives from A to Z, not just from V to Z. So maybe we progressives could take a brief break from attacking the other side and more broadly incorporate values that we supposedly cherish — like diversity — in our own dominions.
Trigger Warning: this post mentions traditional Christian ideas about sex
This last year was a bit of a bumpy ride for me ideologically. So first of all, yes, I’m fully aware I have tendencies towards melodramatic mood swings, and what my counselor called “black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking.”
But even just riding this one out, letting the months go by and the dust clear, this time my feelings were accurate.
So, this is 2016. Things that have changed since circa 2001:
(1) We (American evangelical Christians) lost the culture war. We really lost the culture war. In a big way.
(2) We lost our own people too. They’ve either gone hipster (basically, ex-evangelical-Christians who’ve lost their faith but not their self-righteousness) or Trumpist (too much pain here). And no, Trump is not an “extremist”. He is not even a conservative. Gosh-darn-it, I’m the extremist. Trump is (1) big government, (2) amoral (no traditional values), (3) isolationist. We used to call all those things liberal. Except he’s foul-mouthed and punkish. So people think he is conservative because “he isn’t politically correct.” Well, neither was Genghis Khan. That doesn’t make him a conservative.
(3) The Grand Experiment To Reinvent Sex has arrived, going from fringe, to mainstream, to now institutionalized and enforced. It is getting the kids, and eating them alive. There is going to be a horrendous amount of human suffering, as the West tortures its young and impressionable in its quest to alleviate the very suffering it creates. This began with the Sexual Revolution in the ’60s and is now melting down in crazed hyper-sexuality and millions of abortions and broken families and traumatized kids and shamed victims and suicidal pain and now the human experiments of LGBTQIA+++++ . . . It’s all the same thing, destroying one ancient safeguard after another. This revolution will not be satiated until it has attempted to erase all the cautionary wisdom of old wives’ tales and the faith of our fathers and even our genome itself, those ancient laws written in our blood that we transgress only to our own bitter sorrow.
Because, as a line from this ancient Hebrew poem, a thousands of years old:
In the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.
But they are getting rid of all that now, running ram-shod over ancient warnings like the eldest son in a fairy tale.
It’s not the adults who will suffer the most. It is the kids who will. They will pay for it, as they have been paying for it in our broken American homes and confused sex lives, and will pay for it more and more steeply with each new progressive advance. How many generations will suffer before we stop this ghastly experiment to Venus and Hathor, as she fills the earth with innocent blood and tormented survivors burdened down by crimes they were never meant to bear?
This is exactly why we rightwingers tried to fight the culture war, to stop this inevitable progressive advance.
The world knows we have failed. Yes, we have. Certainly failed.
The world thinks our day is done. Probably. It appears to be a fast collapse from here.
And the world thinks we are judgmental and arrogant. No, we just don’t like watching you eat your own arm, chomping away like a dedicated zombie, though you twitch from the pain. You are really a person, a child of the gods, full of more beauty in your soul than you ever knew. If only you knew who you truly were.
Even your selfish screams are dearly beautiful, like a two-month-old baby demanding milk at 4 a.m. Let Him carry you close to his heart. Give him all your Babels, your desires, your fantasies, and your traumas. The one who made every neuron in your head and every cell in your heart knows you better than you will ever know yourself. Just let Him carry you.
Recently I talked face-to-face with someone who supported Trump. It made me realize I had been a bit hysterical before. And very judgey, in a snobby kind of way. I’m sorry. That is, I still think Trump is a terrible man who would make an absolutely terrible Commander in Chief, but I think many of the Americans who support him are good, intelligent, thoughtful, decent human beings whom I would completely trust on a personal level during a zombie apocalypse.
(The same goes for some Hilary supporters I know too.)
America is going to hit some rough spots, there is probably going to be a cultural collapse at some point (maybe economic and governmental too). It will be ugly and it will be painful, but we are going to pull through this. Because it will never be the end of America, as long as there are good Americans.
So the majority of America seems to think this is a total dead-end. Iraq is crashing and burning, the Arab Spring is spiralling into sectarian violence, and back home in America almost everyone, liberal and conservative, is washing their hands of neo-conservatives. The liberals (sensitive to post-colonialism and Lenin’s Imperialism) always thought this was a bad idea, and now the conservatives have given up on it too. The two leading contenders in the GOP are currently Trump–who is just another liberal masquerading as a conservative–and Ted Cruz, who is a real conservative–but of the old isolationist variety.
I see why.
Our Bush Administration attempts at the democratic experiment in Muslim populations has failed absolutely.
So…the question is, why did it fail so bad?
The liberals have it easy. They can say they were always against the war before they were for it, or were conned by the evil Bush machine of lies, because after all evil-America-was-just-after-the-oil. It’s a comfortable myth: democracy hasn’t failed, just nefarious American greed. And if you are into Marxism, you can tweak this to be just another case of capitalist imperialism.
But the conservatives have it hard. We know we weren’t after the oil. We know the Bush administration had integrity and competence, we know we tried. So what happened?
Well… as a grey-haired Russian Israeli told the confident highschooler me years ago (during the Bush administration): “They are Muslims. Freedom and democracy will never work with them. Their culture is too different. They are not capable of it.”
I just smiled at him, with a smile that meant “you’ll see.” I was so sure he was wrong…. And here we are.
And so have the conservatives concluded, by and large. The Neo-conservative experiment is over, George W Bush’s legacy is thrown under the bus, and “it’s time to just stay away from those Muslim folks. We are through with them. We’ve packed up and gone home and are trying to recover from that traumatic affair the best we can, and by golly, we don’t want them coming here. Because, if they really are so incapable of democracy, then we need to keep them out to at least preserve this corner of the world. We tried to save theirs and failed, now let us just defend our own!”
And the liberals jump up and down and say, “see, we told you so, we knew you always were a bunch of xenopobic racists!”
But everyone is giving up too soon. We had a 15 year experiment, and now everyone is sure it was a failure. Fifteen years is a very short time. I’m only 28, and I vividly remember this whole GWOT from start to finish. I remember the twin towers like it was yesterday, the political wrangling in the senate, the interminable declarations, the invasions, the giddy victory, the elections and the purple fingers, the delirious happiness, and then it all crashing down. OK, so we learned you can’t set up a democracy cowboy style, with a quick hit and run, smashing the dictator and riding off into the sunset. We should have stayed (like Bush wanted to!), we should have stayed for a few more years. Because we did not give them a long enough chance. Can’t we just try it a little longer?
I can’t give up. Liberal non-interference (like the western anthropologist who watched the African woman get eaten by a crocodile) is not an option. Conservative isolationist nationalism is not an option.
The conservative response to the Syrian refugee crisis struck a raw nerve in me. I am an absolute, extreme conservative. And here I was disagreeing with my own people. Because the Syrian refugees… Look, refugees, that is what my family was. On my mother’s side — they were Koreans who owed their lives to American intervention not once but twice. First they were Koreans living under a brutal Imperialist Japanese occupation, which only ended because of WWII. And then they were Koreans running from the “North-Korean”(really, mostly Chinese) communists. If America hadn’t sent her men into “some foreign damn-fool war” as the isolationists yapper about, millions more would be dead or in slave labor camps. My Korean relatives fled from communists. And (in contradiction to western elites with their romantic marxist illusions) the communists were damnably brutal, they preached a creed of hate and treated men like animals.
And that is just on my mother’s side. On my father’s side– my grandfather was Jewish (though he converted to Christianity as a teenager). His mother’s family had fled from Russia/Ukraine at the turn of the century during the antisemitic pogroms (the same world as Fiddler on the Roof). And–if America hadn’t let them in–they certainly would have all been gassed by Hitler’s SS in the 1940s when the Third Reich took the Ukraine and Poland.
So if it weren’t for American intervention–multiple times–my ancestors would all likely be dead, or in some slave labor camp. When I see the image of the American Marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima, I see my saviors, who literally bought my freedom by their blood.
Look, I’m not being romantic here–in some ether land of ideals–this is a literal, physical fact. American soldiers bought my freedom by their blood.
Do you understand? Do you understand why I can’t accept the death of the neo-conservative movement? America, the world needed you and it still needs you. America, don’t give up now.
How I feel about conservative America right now (Trump is the knave, in case you were wondering), and the ghastly mess we made of Syria/Iraq/Middle East by pulling out of Iraq and this spurt of schizophrenic foreign policy:
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken–
And stoop and build them up again with worn-out tools.
So apparently the foreboding sadness of the last post was correct. Trump is by some madness is winning the primaries. For the love of God, at least Leftists just thought we were baby-killers, but this guy would make us into baby killers. He would defile the US military, he would defile everything we sacrificed for. Either non-conservatives are throwing the primaries to make us lose (they are mainly “open primaries”, so…), or conservative people have all gone stark raving mad. In which case, may God judge us.
There is some hope though: at least here is one person who is coming to their senses:
Let me begin by saying that I was wrong. Weeks ago I said on a number of radio interviews that while I opposed Trump in the primary, I’d back him if he won the GOP nomination. I hadn’t yet seen — or had been unwilling to believe — the full extent of his contempt for the truth, his fondness for far-left conspiracy theories, and his sheer malice. When I saw Trump in full, my decision was easy: Never Trump.
I have spent my entire adult life advocating against abortion and working to protect the unborn. I didn’t endure the taunts and jeers of my law-school classmates, work countless days and nights away from home to protect the free-speech rights of pro-life protestors, and defend the freedoms of the unsung heroes in crisis-pregnancy centers only to vote for a man who’s a walking Planned Parenthood commercial. Last night, even in his alleged “uniter” mode, Trump went out of his way to once again praise the nation’s largest abortionist — the killer of millions of children — and call his critics “so-called conservatives.” This language will never — not ever — unite the conservative movement.
While my own military service can’t compare to the sacrifices and courage of the true American heroes of the Iraq War, I didn’t leave my home and risk my life in the fight against the world’s worst jihadists to vote for a man who apparently believes that I was little more than the stooge of a vast conspiracy to lie our way into war.
Moreover, I cannot abide the notion of voting for a man whose “war strategy” is a child-killing war crime and who said out loud that more bombs plus two months of Exxon will defeat ISIS.
Too many people act as if we’re electing a symbolic middle finger rather than a commander-in-chief. I defy you to find a single shred of evidence that Trump has given the slightest thought to America’s military and strategic challenges beyond his obviously ad-libbed bravado.
But the true battle for our country isn’t political, it’s cultural and spiritual. In an era where fidelity and integrity are in increasingly short supply — with the breakdown of faith and family the chief factors in the struggles among America’s most vulnerable citizens — how can I responsibly cast a vote to give one of the nation’s foremost cultural platforms to a man who has openly, loudly, and unrepentantly bragged of his adulterous sexual conquests? How can I support a man who demonstrates such a breathtaking level of malice and cruelty in his treatment of his fellow citizens? Our nation can survive lost elections, but over the long term it cannot survive a decayed culture. And by God I won’t vote for a man who takes a wrecking ball to the core values I hold dear. Those of us in the #NeverTrump camp are saying all this now — in the heat of the primary — not because we’re taking our ball and going home, but because we’re laying down a marker. We will fight Trump through every state, to the convention, and beyond. #NeverTrump isn’t a sign of surrender but rather a rallying cry. The battle, after all, is far from over.
Although Trump has won the majority of the states so far, the delegate race is remarkably close — the New York Times has the spread at Trump 241, Cruz 222, and Rubio 110. Why? Because — as my colleague Jim Geraghty has noted — it’s tough to claim a mandate while winning only a combined 34.2 percent of votes cast. With this reality, the worst thing that Trump’s opponents can do now is signal that the stakes are low, that this is a normal race, and that we’ll all get along just fine when this thing is over.
No, the best hope for stopping Trump is to let his supporters know that he can’t possibly unite conservatives and then blanket the airwaves, the Internet, and social media with the truth. He’ll blast the Republican party apart not because he’s taking on lobbyists and politicians (indeed, many in the political class are rallying around him now) but because he’s taking on the people who’ve been working in the trenches — against an overwhelmingly hostile culture — to defend life and liberty, to uphold the values Trump scorns. There are those who say that the #NeverTrump crew should “get a life,” but we are opposed to Trump because of our lives: our life’s work, to be precise. No, not our careers — they will go on — but rather the long and vital work of building a conservative movement that represents our nation’s best hope for the greatness Trump claims to crave.