Thatz eezy. Its cuza skulez.
It’s all the fault of those Christian zealots, don’t cha know.
I read the article. It doesn’t say “Why” leftist thought is predominant in America. It just says that it is.
Good article though.
Welcome to the forum.
It actually meant “Central” America.
“Leftist thought” is an oxymoron.
“There is a saying that nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come. If conservatives do not respond, it could soon be the false, left-wing idea now taking root in our culture.”
This statement pretty much sums it up.
Where can I find parts I II and III?
“For about 20 years, left-wing academicians”
You must be relatively young. I can guarantee to you that it started WAY before 20 years ago.
In the mid-50s when Khrushchev was in power, in the then U.S.S.R., he said, paraphrasing, “Your children will be taught and you and they won’t know they are being taught.”
Because the men with balls are dying off and wussies are replacing them.
Unless more conservatives become members of what Robert Bork calls the "chattering classes," America will become a totalitarian society.
These are people who want power and go after it.
Or people who go into fields that they don't think are well paid and start looking for power or revenge as a compensation.
They aren't going to go away, but they probably won't make the country totalitarian any time soon either, because most Americans have a natural reaction against the excesses of such people.
NEA, MSM, LGBT.
I would love to read the other three parts of this series, do you have a URL to those?
Excellent piece. Thanks.
Hooray Mike! Great article! How about links to parts I II & III.
Thanks for your work, EnigmaticAnomaly!
GRRRRREAT thread! Thanks to all contributors.
That Every Man Be Armed:
The Evolution of a Constitutional Right
by Stephen P. Halbrook
While this sort of thing happens in political fields like "global warming", it also happens in things like the fine arts. What sophisticate would want to admit that all he sees in a Jackson Pollock painting is a bunch of splatters of paint whose varied density offers some degree of visual interest, but no real artistic vision?
One of the key aspects of Liberal Mind Fog is that its sufferers believe it desirable to see things that not everyone else can see; the clarity and brilliance of the vision is far more important than its relation to reality.
Excellent column!! The amount of smug mutual congratulation and pompous self-importance among “progressive” leftists ensures that they will never be able to consider criticism seriously. In cases like the Bellesiles fraud, the left just “moves on” as soon as they have to give up the ghost of defending one of their pals.
Is anyone familiar with the infamous “Social Text” affair? That episode in 1996 revealed the utter intellectual fraud at the heart of some of the most “progressive” precincts of the contemporary academy — but of course virtually all of the fraud artists who perpetrate that sort of thing have been allowed to simply “move on” — no one gets fired for being a wildly incompetent leftist academic. Well maybe Ward Churchill, but that was the rare exception to the rule.
The Sokal affair (also Sokal’s hoax) was a hoax by physicist Alan Sokal perpetrated on the editorial staff and readership of the postmodern cultural studies journal Social Text (published by Duke University). In 1996, Sokal, a professor of physics at New York University, submitted a paper of nonsense camouflaged in jargon for publication in Social Text, as an experiment to see if a journal in that field would, in Sokal’s words: “publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors’ ideological preconceptions.”
The paper, titled “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”, was published in the Spring/Summer 1996 “Science Wars” issue of Social Text, which at that time had no peer review process, and so did not submit it for outside review. On the day of its publication, Sokal announced in another publication, Lingua Franca, that the article was a hoax, calling his paper “a pastiche of left-wing cant, fawning references, grandiose quotations, and outright nonsense”, which was “structured around the silliest quotations I could find about mathematics and physics” made by postmodernist academics.
The resulting debate focused on the relative scholarly merits or lack thereof of sociological commentary on the physical sciences and of postmodern-influenced sociological disciplines in general, as well as on academic ethics, including both whether it was appropriate for Sokal to deliberately defraud an academic journal, as well as whether Social Text took appropriate precautions in publishing the paper.