What say we close the week with just enough societal dada to pole-vault the readership into a snifter of its favorite spirit.
The student government at UC Irvine has resolved to remove the American flag from its campus “inclusive space.” Now I’m not certain exactly how this term is defined, though it probably means a designated area where views expressed on this blog can receive a fair hearing. So I’m in support.
The bill, R50-70, was authored by Social Ecology Representative Matthew Guevara, and accuses all flags, especially, the American flag, of being “symbols of patriotism or weapons for nationalism.”
I would imagine this flag in particular grieves Mr. Guevara:
Flags construct paradigms of conformity and set homogenized standards for others to obtain which in this country typically are idolized as freedom, equality, and democracy.
The American flag doesn’t represent any defense of my interests, and we are equally unimpressed by empty invocations of freedom, equality, and democracy in lieu of those. Who could have guessed The Kakistocracy’s influence has even permeated the philosophy of revanchist mestizos?
What else is happening in the academy?
There’s a conservative student group at George Washington U that declined to absorb BLT sensitivity training. This conscientious objection wasn’t particularly well received by the acolytes of tolerance. Here’s a sample of considered rejoinders.
If GW YAF refuses to participate in safe zone trainings that are aimed at increasing safety and understanding, then they should be considered a hate group, and thereby, be revoked of all funding from the Student Association at The George Washington University.
Reflecting on its advance into formerly innocuous organizations, I smile at the realization there’s really nowhere hate can’t insinuate itself. Even milquetoast color-blind collegiate conservatives are succumbing. Soon enough the impotent avuncular toadies at National Review will be red-eyed haters. And then all republicans, then white democrats, then their infants, and then I win.
The Young America’s Foundation is a political organization, not a religious one, so they cannot seek a religious exemption. And their refusal to use preferred gender pronouns should be considered an act of violence and a violation of the non-discrimination clause required in all GW student organizations’ Constitutions.
This is how wars will be fought in the future: with asymetric gender pronouns. It’s largely what has constrained Russia and China’s ambitions to-date: our military’s qualitative advantage in advanced pronoun systems. Though there’s something that nags at the back of my mind. If hypothetically facing a band of machete-wielding Hutus, which pronoun should be used in defense? I’m sure young tolerants will supply the answer.
Allied in Pride also criticized the YAF chapter for inviting former-Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) to speak on GW’s campus. According to Allied in Pride, the YAF chapter invited Santorum the day before “Trans Day of Visibility” which “underscores [YAF’s] intolerance and pattern of hate.”
Alright, they have a point there. What supremacist bigot will they invite next, George Will?
Amore. Three homosex men have married in Thailand. I mean all three of them. Each to the other two. It would require a stone-hearted monster to not feel a pleasant frisson at that photo.
Do you recall the discredited “slippery slope” theories promulgated by old southern segregationists resisting miscegenation? Well that didn’t ultimately lead to gay marriage, which certainly won’t lead to what we see above, or any other of the innumerable permutations that our dreams may render. None of which will have any impact on the nuclear family structure supporting the whole of Western Civilization. So that’s as settled as banana farms in Boston once global warming catches up to the models.
Finally, here’s a video of some intrepid jesters with attenuated actuarial tables. Their shtick is to mildly tweak justgettingtheirlifetogethers while filming the interaction surreptitiously. I have no idea if it’s been doctored for amplified effect. But upon watching I’m sure you’ll agree the agents provocateur are going to draw few social security benefits. Though however in disregard of safety and decorum, it’s simply shocking to watch the blinding progression to violence from their victims. While white mores typically demand a structured escalation, allowing both parties ample opportunity to face-savingly disengage, for this cohort of blacks it’s simply step 1 question, step 2 attack.
Good White People (as Rev. Right characterized) are not going to contemplate this, but no modern society can function with this level of on-the-ground viscosity. Modes of informal conflict resolution are embedded into western behavior and act as never discussed cultural lubricant. Outliers are ostracized or imprisoned. Though when neither occurs, society deteriorates quickly. The sort of spontaneous blood-lust displayed in the video creates ambient friction that deeply degrades living standards, civic engagement, and of course The Economy.
Though perhaps if we could focus more on elevating black self-esteem they would be less inclined to flail at perceived slights. Yes, I’m sure that’s it.