Because They Are Leftist Echo Chambers

This is really rich over at the homophonically-racist website, the Daily Noose. Professor of Philosophy and Law, Leslie* Green, tells us that when the right refers to universities as “liberal,” they mean universities filled with people who believe the following:

Species arose through natural selection.
No author of any gospel ever met Jesus.
Homosexuality is a normal variant in human behaviour.
The United States lost a war against Vietnam.
Human activity is a significant cause of climate change.
The United States has worse public health than do countries with nationalized health care.

Yet these beliefs are not the real threats to conservatives or the right. The true threats are the “habits of thought, modes of inquiry, and sensibilities of outlook,” which lead to such beliefs, in other words, conservatives feel threatened because “[universities] are universities.”

Got that? No, you say? Then let me mansplain it to all-y’all backwards readers of this humble blog: Them dumb tobacco chewin’ conservatives are threatened by the fact that there are all them smart fellers in them Iv’ry towers with that book learnin’ and stuff. It has nothing to do with the fact that at the Iv’ry towers they take as Gospel the following claims, with dissent met not with argument but ridicule:

-The only mechanism of common descent is natural selection.
-No authors of the Gospels ever met Jesus.
-Homosexuality is a normal [sic] variant in human behavior
-The war against Vietnam had little to do with stopping communist aggression of the north Vietnamese against the South and was not a political defeat but a military one.
-We should reduce fossil fuel use quickly by giving the government more control or else face disastrous consequences (#ClimateChangeIsReal).
-If you believe in yourself enough, you can be anything you want to be, including a man, woman, or whatever else you choose.
-You should be called an “Islamaphobe” if you denigrate Islam.
-Mexico is giving us their best and Trump is a racist (#RESIST). Because…
-Only whites can be racist.
-If you’re white, you come with a special cape that gives you “privilege power” no matter how dumb or poor your parents were.
-There is a serious problem of police injustice against blacks in the West. #BLM
-The “gender wage gap” is mostly to be explained by systematic injustices against women by (white) men.
-If you have four or five daughters, one of them is bound to get raped in college.
-Everyone should be able to go to college.
-There (REALLY) is a Constitutional right against the states to unlimited butt sechs.
-If you deny the above then you’re a bigoted bigot-faced bigot.

I’m sure I’ve missed a few. Perhaps some professors will help us fill in the gaps.

*Note: Not knowing Leslie, I don’t know if they identifies as a man, woman, or The Other. Thus, I have used the white, colonialist, capitalist, toxically masculine, gender-neutral, pronoun, “he” and various other forms  to maximally be”on the wrong side of history.”

 

 

AR-15

A former police officer, AR-15 (or “AR”) knows the difference between an assault rifle and home defense rifle. AR now fights with other weapons and demolishes arguments. He agrees that the pen is mightier than the sword, but he isn’t so stupid to bring a pen to a gunfight.

View All Posts

13 Comments

  1. Nice! That about sums it up. I think they’re rattled. Every so often they release something stupid and outrageous like this just to test the waters in order to see how much resistance they’ll get if they unveil the next piece of their agenda. Significant blowback against it will at least forestall things.

  2. You forgot about equivocating between bourgeois values and white supremacy.

    And there is a right against the state to unlimited butt sex. What business is it of the state’s? It’s also a constitutional right under a reasonable application of the 9th amendment.

    • “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” For the love of God and all things non-Hillary, the people didn’t retain a right to unlimited butt sechs against the U.S. That certainly wasn’t retained.

  3. There is also a dishonesty in Green’s choice of the 6 (all of 6!) supposed conservative beliefs. They’re all among the less defensible beliefs usually held by conservatives (educated or otherwise), but they don’t nearly exhaust the list of conservative beliefs. (This is how Leiter’s touting Green on his blog is in keeping with his usual pattern of intellectual dishonesty.) What about beliefs like Amy Wax’s. Is Green clueless?

    • When I first read Leslie’s missive my initial thought was that he doesn’t know hardly anyone on the right. His beliefs about the right are filtered through his echo chambers.

  4. On the contrary, I think the fact that Green ridicules those beliefs should only encourage observers to research them for themselves with an impartial mind. They might be very surprised to discover what they do.

    When someone like Green belittles something, that alone should be one’s first clue that perhaps it is true after all…

  5. “Species arose through natural selection.”

    Of course, this isn’t all that “liberals” believe on the topic.

    They also believe things like “Human groups that evolved in very different environments and in reproductive isolation for 60,000-100,000 years are exactly the same psychologically and intellectually (even though they plainly differ morphologically and neurologically and genetically)”, and “Anyone who doubts that they’re they exactly the same psychologically is a disgusting bad person who deserves to be shouted down by a baying mob and, if possible, fired”. No doubt (((Leslie Green))) thinks anyone who belongs in a university will naturally end up holding these beliefs too, given merely the enlightened “habits of mind” and “modes of inquiry” of the true scholar.

    • “They also believe things like “Human groups that evolved in very different environments and in reproductive isolation for 60,000-100,000 years are exactly the same psychologically and intellectually (even though they plainly differ morphologically and neurologically and genetically)”, and “Anyone who doubts that they’re they exactly the same psychologically is a disgusting bad person who deserves to be shouted down by a baying mob and, if possible, fired.”

      This is too true lol. The statistical/mathematical likelihood that such traits would be at parity over that time span is infinitesimally small. Yet, people won’t accept it. Also, either:

      (1) Psychological and intellectual traits are wholly socially determined. In which case, perfect parity requires an authoritarian and paternalistic state to socially engineer on a mass scale.

      or

      (2) Psychological and intellectual traits are partly determined, in a significant sense, by non-social factors. In which case, the only way you best evolutionary history and arrive at perfect parity is through genetic,and other biological types, of engineering. Which will then just require an authoritarian and paternalistic state to accomplish.

      It’s a nightmarish, Rawlsian paradox for a progressive. Which do you hate more: the reality of non-parity or systemic paternalism?

  6. Hi Jordan,
    Unfortunately, “progressives” don’t seem to hate authoritarianism or paternalism. Do they even pretend to be against these things nowadays?

    If the US government declared tomorrow that white people no longer get to vote–to compensate for ‘systemic racism’, let’s imagine–would any “progressives” complain? Or if the government made it mandatory for 12 year olds to try being transgender or gay for a few months as part of public education–to broaden their horizons, raise awareness, teach inclusion–would “progressives” complain about that?

    My impression is that most of them would be just fine with that kind of thing. (Same for gulags and re-education camps, mass executions of “white supremacists”, etc.)

    • Yeah, it was a bit tongue in cheek. Regressive leftist activists don’t seem to care about paternalistic behavior in the current climate (since the current climate favors them). However, the ‘straight white male privileged systemic paternalism blah blah blah’ is the rhetorical glue of X-studies articles in the humanities, so in that sense, they do care about paternalism.

Leave a Reply (Be sure to read our comment disclaimer)