Skip to comments.Why The Left Is Not Ashamed
Posted on 05/08/2002 7:30:18 AM PDT by LavaDog
I RECEIVED the following response to my article on the political repression of conservatives at Vanderbilt University from an academic named Marcus Verhaegh of Emory University in Atlanta. If there was ever a doubt in anyones mind that the totalitarian mentality is alive and well on American campuses, this smug little apology for the ideological campus should put such uncertainties to rest. Too many conservatives are under the delusion that academic leftists are misguided "liberals," that they dont really understand what theyre doing. Au contraire. Academic leftists are Gramscian communists whose quest for control over universities, churches, media and other institutions of the political culture is part of a grandiose effort to destroy the foundations of American society and replace it with a "socially enlightened" totalitarian state.
Those who are not radicals actively plotting social destruction are often fellow travelers like Marcus Verhaegh or Chamberlainesque appeasers. If academics who described themselves as liberal (and who were not simply concealing totalitarian agendas) really cared about the intellectual freedoms and academic ideals they give lip service to, they would be protesting a state of affairs in which conservatives, libertarians, Republicans and religious believers are effectively barred from collegiate faculties and academic values are subverted in favor of those suitable to a political party. They would be appalled at an institution that pays lip service to diversity while harassing and isolating non-conforming scholars and students to the point where they can only feel comfortable or safe in their careers by concealing their personal beliefs.
This Orwellian state of affairs is the product of an academic McCarthyism that effectively prevents the hiring of anyone deemed politically incorrect. It is illegal and unconstitutional, but unchallenged and therefore pervasive. The lack of concern by Marcus Verhaegh and other academics for an injustice that strikes at the heart of the intellectual enterprise, reflects his contempt for the principles of his own society and perfectly mirrors the attitude of even less radical colleagues whose collusion is sealed in their silence.
Of course what is suppressed in the university by totalitarian forces is far more than "pro-free market stances," as the writer suggests. In fact, economics departments are among the least affected of the academic fields the left has corrupted. The connection of economics to real world behaviors and its dependence on mathematical models seems to have had a discouraging impact on the lefts ambitions for the field. While economics departments are relatively free of radical influences they are not bastions of conservatism either. They share with physics and mathematics departments, professional schools and the hard sciences a devotion to more traditional academic ideals. But what the false reference to "pro-free market stances" reveals is that the writer of this letter is satisfied if only one university out of thousands teaches free market economics. For him it is more than okay if the rest teach flat-earth Marxism or some equally destructive crackpot doctrine so long as it is politically left.
The teaching of economics does not begin to define the scope of the problem. The corruption of the university by the Gramscian left extends through the entire range of subjects that affect social activity and the attitudes shaping the next generation of the nations elites. These include the historical revisions that portray America as an oppressive leviathan, and the hate-America mythologies that have already created a campus fifth column in solidarity with the terrorist enemy.
The defenders of academic McCarthyism argue that destroying the university culture, politicizing institutions of learning and converting them into centers of indoctrination for the political left is not only okay, but noble. "Why do I and other academics have little shame here? We are not the only game in the marketplace of ideas. We are competing with journalism, entertainment, churches, political lobbyists, and well-funded conservative think tanks." But the leftist university is not competing with the other institutions of American culture. What is doing is corrupting journalism, the churches and so forth. The Gramscian left is at war with America and it has made the politically correct university an instrument of its war. They think nothing of destroying hundred-year old academic traditions, of abusing the trust of parents who send their children to them to be educated not to get a political indoctrination, of taxpayers who are not interested in funding totalitarian sects and bloodstained ideologies. What wealthy conservative think tank competes with Harvard and its $18 billion tax-free endowment?
The only way this situation is going to be corrected is when its victims -- conservatives, libertarians and others -- mount as strong and as focused an effort to restore fairness and intellectual diversity to university hiring practices, as the lefts effort to subvert them.
Heres the text of Verhaeghs letter:
I am not really very disturbed by the lack of pro-free market stances at universities, although a quick visit to the University of Chicago ought to disabuse Horowitz of the notion that such ideas are only to be found at universities offering a Christian education. Why do I and other academics have little shame here? We are not the only game in the marketplace of ideas. We are competing with journalism, entertainment, churches, political lobbyists, and well-funded conservative think tanks. Anyone with any sense of the situation realizes that, absent the university, all major sources of culture are in the hands of free-market groups who corrupt the political process through their hegemonic ownership of the press and mass funding of their ideology in other areas. The university is doing its job when it fights back.
As to the success of the left at the university on issues of race, religion, and gender: this is much more disturbing. Here, there is no real opposition outside the university except for certain marginalized religious conservatives. Speech-codes regarding race and sexual behavior have had their chilling effect. There is no doubt about this, or about the power of the cultural movements that implemented those codes.
There is also the general relativism of American pop culture, which makes students quite willing to believe that all forms of cultural expression are equally a matter of personal preference and all worth taking a look at.
It seems to me that only religious groups are likely to take back the occupied territory of politically corrected universities. Beyond this, atheistic but euro-centric individuals are likely to continue to play a role in defending free debate on cultural issues, but I do not see their role growing apart from religious allies.
This speaks volumes and really is not a freudian slip. These people are cowards and use lies and clever intimidation to undermine the very country that provides their freedom.
When you think about it this guy and his like-minded colleagues are pu$$ies and need to be reeducated by the people who put their blood and life on the line everyday for the U.S. Of course they target youth for their crimes because children are innocent and vulnerable. They can't face adults with their blasphemy and America won't be well until they are purged. Too bad we don't deport them to Russia so they can enjoy the misery that their ideologies have wrought!
This may have been a Ted Nugent quote.
That's a big part of it, but I think what Horowitz is trying to accomplish by spending so much time and attention on college campi, is to stir up the same kind of indignation and outrage on the right that he himself originated and helped propagate on the left some forty years ago. He'd just love to see sit-ins, protests, and strikes by conservative students whose rights really have been violated and, truthfully, so would I. Maybe that would begin to really change things.
For some reason it's just not happening though, and I have yet to figure out why. Must frustrate Horowitz to no end, like: "...what will it take to get you people mad enough to fight this? Do they have to toss your butts into concentration camps or what?"
The only thing I can guess, is that there are more "nice people" on the right, that don't wish to disturb others. Also, they're more likely to be economically productive, leaving less time for leisurely sit-ins. Tending to be more "goal" oriented, there isn't as much time to focus on themselves. The "silent majority" concept, except, unlike 30 years ago, we're nowhere near the majority.
Anyone else care to speculate?
If Conservatives won't fight fire with fire, we only have ourselves to blame.
Well said, but you forgot "pathologically narcissistic."
The same reason we have problems with people showing up for FReeps.
Conservatives have (non-taxpayer funded) jobs.
As a student, he is still on the outside of committees, administration, etc., and knows not know what he speaks about.
I am sure that, had Horowitz known more about the writer, he would not have honored him with such a response.