The McConnell Meltdown

Breitbart ^ | 10/1/15 | David Bossie

[ckilmer]

we should look at the epistemology which dominates these institutions coming out of places like The Frankfurt School.
.............
I recall a spirited discussion of the Frankfurt School here at FR. But I’ve since forgotten the details.

Can you refresh my memory?

[V K Lee]

Like McConnell, they, too, seem to have their heads tucked in snugly. There must be something to the old saying...the one about Kentucky and education. They seem to be lacking a good bit of sense. How else would they elect something like this over and over and over again? IQ please? The smart ones moved years ago out of Kentucky and over to TEXAS!

[Rockpile]

It would have been nice if Bitch could have at least brought a Kentucky long rifle to the conference.

[nathanbedford]

The best treatment, although admittedly a polemical treatment, seems to be

Who Placed American Men in a Psychic 'Iron Cage?' Part II The Thread of 'Cultural Marxism'

Delivered by Gerald L Atkinson at the Naval Academy in 1998.

If you believe that what we do starts with what we believe, this essay is right on point.

By way of disclaimer, I do not hold that the effects of The Frankfurt School have been so widely disseminated through our culture by way of conspiracy. To hold that position is to instantly marginalize it. But the pervasive influence of the philosophy is undeniable, it permeates our media, our education establishment, our culture and, inevitably, our voting booths.

[Stand Watch Listen]

Sen. Cruz: The Real Story of What Is Happening in Washington (Sep 28, 2015 – 59:47)
……… AKA... “Mr Cruz Goes To Washington”

Ted Cruz couldn’t get anyone in the Senate to back him tonight as he tried to get a ban on Planned Parenthood funding and a linkage of the Iran Nuclear deal in a government funding bill. He stood alone on the Senate floor:
Cruz’s amendment would place a one-year ban on federal funding for Planned Parenthood. It would also ban the Obama administration from using funds from the short-term bill to implement the Iran nuclear deal or any “assessed contributions” to the United Nations until lawmakers receive the “side deals” between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The “side deals” have been a key point of contention among opponents of the deal. Cruz and House Republicans have suggested that the 60-day congressional review period for the Iran nuclear deal hasn’t started because the administration hasn’t given lawmakers the agreements.

After the procedural back-and-forth, Cruz slammed Republican leadership, suggesting they repeatedly “surrender” to President Obama.

“You know, President Obama has negotiated a catastrophic nuclear deal with Iran. Republican leadership goes on television all the time and rightly says this is a catastrophic deal,” he added. “I would suggest that if we actually believed the words that are coming out of their mouths, then we should be willing to use any and all constitutional authorities.”

After this Cruz launched into an hour speech, one that Mark Levin just tweeted out saying it’s a MUST LISTEN.

[Stand Watch Listen]

[Theodore R.]

I don’t want to hear the speech, for I know truth will be soundly repudiated by the American people and their “leaders”.

[21twelve]

“...for I know truth will be soundly repudiated by the American people and their “leaders”.”

Well - for some of the people. But that is the entire idea behind the speech - the “leaders”, Democrat and Republican, refuse to listen to the people. And Ted talks about how it is a “volcano” of disgruntled voters out there. Vote conservatives into the house, then win the senate four years later. But NOTHING changes.

[nathanbedford]

http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

[Vision Thing]

Atkinson’s essay only points out how the Frankfurt School gave America two problems: 1. political correctness via cultural marxism and 2. radical feminism.

However, he offers no solutions.

To me if political correctness is a problem, then the solution is political incorrectness.

As for the problem of radical feminism, then the solution is for the American male to reassert himself.

No one except for one guy seems to show us the solution to both problems, but based on your posting history, you may not like the answer.

Nonetheles, here it goes: Trump is both politcally incorrect and he is assertive in his masculinity.

You also mentioned in your earlier post that the uniparty (or democrats) failed to change us, so now they’ll just change the voters. Via immigration, illegal or legal.

Again, Trump offers the strongest solution for this as well.

I’m not completely sold on Trump yet because although I think he can win, the question that holds me back from going all in with him is “does Trump really want the presidency or is he doing this for something else?” I still can’t figure out the answer.

Nonetheless, Trump completely destroys the Frankfurt School’s techniques and plans.

So he looks like the strongest solution to our Frankfurt School problem.

[nathanbedford]

Arthur McGowan has recently pointed me toward the stricter definition of political correctness meaning the illegitimacy of potentially offending a protected class usually including African-Americans and feminists. I would now add homosexuals and Hispanics.

But, of course, the phrase crept into our vocabulary with much broader application and, whatever the definition you are quite correct, it should be resisted wherever possible. One of the broader definitions that we tacitly adopt when we use the phrase means something approaching etiquette or polite discourse.

Whichever definition we choose, strict or broad, Donald Trump certainly violates political correctness in spades (no political incorrectness intended although such professions of innocence do not necessarily exculpate the sinner). If one is thinking about political correctness in terms of etiquette it is likely that the boorishness of Donald Trump comes in for praise. I think that is misplaced. The trick is to get your point across without leaving your flanks vulnerable to attack for boorishness. Discussing Megan Kelly's menstrual cycle and then lying about it certainly qualifies for boorishness.

So the question arises, is boorishness and offensiveness to women the best way to combat political correctness when the privileged class to be protected is women? I think there are better ways and I think that Donald Trump is sowing the seeds of his own destruction. The question is, will that destruction come before or after the nomination, it comes after the nomination it will not just be his own candidacy but the Republican Party, conservatism and the Republic who pay the price.

The fight against political correctness is a fight against intellectual totalitarianism. It is a war for the freedom to think and to express oneself. The forces arrayed against that liberty are mighty, insidious, and ubiquitous. A fight should be couched as a fight for liberty so that we do not fall victim to victimology.

Here is anotherlink recounting the history and elements of political correctness.

[nathanbedford]

This author, Lind, seems to support your version of the proper method of resistance:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005_docs/PC1.pdf

[Theodore R.]

People in KY are again sticking with their friendly incumbents. After holding on with McC, they are reelecting his 2014 opponent, Ms. Grimes, in 2015.

[Theodore R.]

Cruz is a great speaker who must engage in brilliant but essentially useless rhetoric for a campaign already repudiated by the American people.

[Vision Thing]

So the question arises, is boorishness and offensiveness to women the best way to combat political correctness when the privileged class to be protected is women?

Trump is the epitome of the Golden Rule at both ends of the spectrum: He is nice to nice people, and he is rude to rude people.

Trump won't treat you badly unless you first treat him badly.

And he didn't treat megyn badly until only after she treated him badly, when she, of all things, wanted him to be -- gasp -- politically correct. If you recall, Trump actually called out by name the meme megyn was deploying: He actually said in his reply that it was political correctness.

And Trump went one step further: He said political correctness is bad.

Trump did to megyn what we all conclude we should be doing: Stuffing political correctness back down the pie hole from which it came!

In this war against political correctness, a pushover won't win. And Trump is no pushover. He won that battle against megyn. And he won it easily.

But to get back to the original issue quoted above: Trump's offensive behavior against women is a bad way to combat political correctness.

I reject the premise that Trump is offensive against women.

Instead, Trump is a gentleman to polite women, but he is an attack dog against rude radical feminists like rosie and most especially megyn.

This points back to Atkinson's list of the two problems caused by The Frankfurt School: 1. Political correctness, 2. Radical Feminism.

These are two things we all agree must be defeated and destroyed.

And when Trump successfully countered megyn's politically-correct, radical-feminist attack during the first debate, he killed those two birds (political correctness and radical feminism) with one stone.

And through it, Trump gave all of us who want to fight political correctness hope: not only can you attack political correctness, but you can survive the counter attack. And not just survive the counter attack, but ultimately win.