Qui genus humanum ingenis superavit
Posted on 11/25/2017 11:19:51 PM PST by DeweyCA
Bret Weinstein is the former Evergreen State College biology professor who became the focus of a social justice witch hunt on campus earlier this year. Weinstein and his wife later sued for several million dollars but agreed to a settlement for $500,000 in exchange for leaving the school. All that to say, Weinstein is the voice of experience when it comes to the mob of social justice warriors on campus.
In this brief interview recorded late last month, Weinstein argues several interesting points. First, he believes the social justice warriors are winning their battle to control campuses. “I don’t think that we can say that the entire educational apparatus is a failure,” Weinstein said. He continued, “But we can say that the part of the apparatus that is a failure is taking over more and more territory.
“The number of classes in a university that are immune to this extremely broken way of thinking is ever smaller. And I think we can even see from here the day in which it will be no classes that are immune because every class is going to be subject to some set of rules that is built around this very naive notion of privilege and white supremacy and all of that. So that day is coming.”
This all goes back to one of the reasons Weinstein became a pariah among the far left on his former campus. He objected to a new “equity” platform introduced at the college which would have made social equity a factor in all future hiring decisions. He argued at the time that professors teaching in STEM fields should be hired based on academic qualifications without regard to social justice concerns. And as we all know, he was eventually branded a racist and students demanded he resign.
“If there’s one thing that people fail to appreciate about the social justice movement where it interfaces with the academy is that just because what is being said is crazy to the point of absurdity does not mean that the strategic plan is absurd,” Weinstein said. He added, “The strategic plan is far more effective than you would expect based on the sophistication of the ideas that are being promulgated.”
This is an interesting distinction. As I’ve pointed out before when writing about this topic, the goal of this movement is often vague, the leadership difficult to pin down. What is always clear however is the demand for attention and dominance. When SJW’s shut down a conservative speaker (aka no platforming) the talking points are all about students safety and their feelings, etc. But the real goal is dominance, i.e. to claim ownership of the space and with that ownership the right to exclude the unwanted.
Going back to the Occupy movement, one of the popular chants was “Whose streets? Our streets!” Today that has been replaced with “No Trump, no KKK, no fascist USA” and of course “Shut it down.” In both cases, the goal is dominance and exclusion.
In August I wrote about a professor at Evergreen State College who, in the midst of the student takeover there, had students surround her and demand to know where she was going. When she tried to talk to them, they refused to engage in a conversation. “The only thing which they would accept was my obedience,” she later wrote of the experience. At the same exact time, white students were being told they were not allowed to speak at a student meeting in the campus library because they were white. Again, the goals are dominance and exclusion.
As to how the SJW movement has become so powerful on campus, Weinstein has an interesting theory about that as well. He suggests the left’s talking points have undergone 25 years of evolution.
“Heather and I encountered the post-modern stuff in 1992 at the University of California Santa Cruz,” Weinstein said. He went on to say, “Those ideas have been morphing and bubbling through a quadrant of the university system since that point and of course a bit before.
“Each cohort [of students] that has encountered them has wielded them in some circumstances. And those arguments that were hard to defeat persisted and those arguments that were easy to defeat have perished. Which means that the new crop of students shows up and they’re handed this toolkit of argument that are incredibly hard to confront, not because they’re true but because of the way that they’re structured.
“Each of these definitions can’t be pinned down. You can’t figure out what they mean be equity. On the other hand, if you start asking questions about equity you’re going to run afoul of a booby-trap that’s gonna have you portrayed as a white supremacist.”
At this point, Benjamin Boyce who is conducting the interview interjects, “It’s brilliant!” Weinstein agrees, “It’s brilliant, but it isn’t brilliant on the basis that those who are wielding it are brilliant. It’s brilliant on the basis that selection has weeded out those parts that didn’t work.”
I think he’s got a point. Going back to what I was saying about the call for dominance and exclusion, I think the “booby-trap” is another step that helps complete the SJW’s vicious arguments cycle.
1. Demand for dominance/compliance (because of lack of safety/perceived threat). 2. Dominance exercised through the exclusion of perceived threat. 3. Non-compliance/questions trigger accusations, i.e. racism, sexism, etc. (the booby-trap). 4. Accusations become proof of lack of safety/threat. 5. Return to step 1 and repeat.
This is the core of the SJW movement. It will continue to spread because few people in college leadership positions are willing or able to stand up to the mob.
THE SJWs use the simple trick that if you even question their assertions, then that automatically means that you are a racist or a Nazi. It’s not “brilliant.” It is simply a matter of name-calling to shut down any criticism of their lame arguments. They use intimidation, shaming, smearing, and threats of violence to censor their opposition, and they continue to get away with it ONLY because they have a sympathetic press and sympathetic professors and college administrators. If a conservative tried to use these tactics, they would be severely castigated by the press and the academy.
Qui genus humanum ingenis superavit
Well, that was the communist John Dewey’s plan when he destroyed the Classical Christian curricula and replaced it with satanism/paganism/communism, etc. The Leviathan was completed with Common Core—the final nail was implemented years ago.
As Bertrand Russell knew and ex-KGB Yuri Bezmenov explained, after years of weaponized curricula where boys are girls and Vice is Virtue, the minds of children will be incapable of “free will” and will be so devoid of reason and logic (being human) that they will believe “snow is black” and evil is good and boys are girls, so ignorant of Natural law (our Constitution). Cognitive dissonance is all that will occur in their mushy minds when exposed to the truth (God) or facts.
Their minds were filled with lies and misinformation and warped revisionist history so hate is embedded and “thinking” is impossible. They were raised in controlled artificial institutions where they were separated from their Natural Family and natural surroundings, that which creates individualism and identity and the ability to think outside the box.
Didn’t the Chinese “cultural revolution,” and all the mayhem that came afterward, start with university students?
Maybe it STARTED with them, but it didn’t ORIGINATE with them, you know.
You just have to call them out on their own hypocritical views. When having to deal with people who hate Thanksgiving or Columbus because of the treatment of the Indians, taking their land and violating treaties, I always point out that they're the biggest supporters of socialism, and therefore have no problem with taking the property of one and giving it to the other, and think the Constitution is a living, breathing document meant to be reinterpreted from time to time.
The roots of a genocide mindset has set in place amongst the left. They will eventually act on it.
It doesn’t have to be brilliant, it just has to be effective enough to shut down any opposition until the communists can take over society.
Q: What is Evergreen State College
A: A college that will soon be out of business.
My understating is that this Prof Weinstein is an accredited lib - ie, Dr. Frankenstein has figured out we’ve got a problem on our hands. Nice of him to finally notice.
If they adhere to the Wiki definition of genocide, I think they will sweep themselves away, inter alia.
He was probably ok with it until he realized that he was Trotsky.
I guess I get that ... the liberal commie, not commie enough.
Reserve government sponsored student loans for STEM students only.
Start using the DOJ civil rights commision to shut these people up.
White liberal’s tribal affiliation is with their ideology, not their skin colour. Many of them will be glad to.be counted amongst those involved in the genocide to come.
However, many will be surprised that it includes them as well.
My daughter is a junior in HS and she’s already been exposed to all that SJW garbage.
She’s so sick of it she doesn’t even want to go to college and might even enlist.
As I understand it, Trotsky was a globalist-communist, but he didn’t think violence was necessary to achieve the revolution. He thought continual government pressure could be used instead. He ran afoul of Stalin, who was a nationalist-communist and Stalin didn’t want to wait 100 years for the revolution to finish, so he resorted to extreme violence to secure his position and finish the work with Russia’s borders.
Well, Wiki cites “... an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group” , I guess “religious” comes closest, although Wiki does say that these are the “usual” categories. ... You used the term!
Someone should mail him an ice-pick (Trotski's death instrument), with a little note attached: "Nice to see that you now finally realize who the wolves really are!"
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.