It should not be controversial to state that the United States is
the greatest country in the world.
It is far from perfect.
However, it surpasses every other nation in its level of tolerance and
the benefits it offers. Our
underclass suffers far more fatalities from obesity than starvation. A high percentage of them have cell
phones. According to the Census
Bureau 22,000 people living in “poverty” have a heated swimming pools or Jacuzzi. Poor neighborhoods
have an abundance of beauty salons and liquor stores although they may be supermarket
and hardware store deserts.
There are few countries that are more tolerant of homosexuals, where
women have a higher status, or where blacks have a higher standard of living
and acceptance. Yet there are few
places where the level of discontent has reached such a high level. What is the origin of this discontent? Vladimir Lenin might provide the answer:
There is no single segment of the industrial society, no class in the
population without a circle, however small, of discontented and maladjusted and
alienated individuals-predisposed target audiences for radical hate
propaganda-who can be hooked up to a revolutionary mass movement.
Much of this discontent is manufactured by “community organizers.”
It appears that people are often protesting for the sake of
protesting. In the classic movie, The Wild One, the character played by
Marlon Brando is asked, “Hey Johnny what are you rebelling against?” His response was, “Whadda Ya Got?” This is similar to 1960s radical Jerry
Rubin’s statement, “Satisfy our demands, and we’ve got twelve more. The more demands you satisfy, the more
we got.”
Recent college protests are reminiscent of the protests of the
1960’s. The establishment
responses to these protests are also similar. Students make “non-negotiable demands” and the
administration immediately caves in.
Homosexuals have protested for the acceptance of homosexual marriage and
a variety of other homosexual demands.
Black Lives Matter has not only protested against police brutality but
against place names and statues of historical figures. Accusations of racism elicit fear
similar to the results of charges of witchcraft in 17th century
Salem.
These protests have achieved a high level of success as they did in
the colleges and universities of the 1960s. Protesters are aware of the weakness of their
opposition. David Horowitz, who
took part in the protests of the 1960s, stated, “In our attacks on the
‘repressive’ institutions of the university culture, we were pushing largely on
open doors.” Sociologist Edward Shils wrote in Dreams of Plentitude,
Nightmares of Scarcity, “Where authority abdicates through failures,
ineptitude, and weakened self-confidence, it invites aggression against
itself.” If this weakness were confined to the universities it would be bad
enough. However, it appears that
this weakness has permeated our entire society. Alexander Solzhenitsyn has remarked, “from ancient times a decline in courage has been
considered the first symptom of the end.”
At some point the answer to “Whadda Ya Got?” becomes a problem. The universities have acceded to every
demand and protesters have run out of legitimate issues to protest. What else can be demanded? Here is where it becomes
Kafkaesque. Students at Oberlin College in Ohio are protesting what they consider poor
efforts at multicultural cooking.
They are accusing the campus dining department and Bon Appétit
Management Company of “cultural appropriation and cultural insensitivity.” Students from the Afrikan Heritage
House are demanding more fried chicken.
Other students protested the fact that General Tso’s chicken was made
with steamed instead of fried poultry.
Michele Gross, Oberlin’s director of dining services, responded, “in our
efforts to provide a vibrant menu, we recently fell short in the execution of
several dishes in a manner that was culturally insensitive.” Harvard will no longer use the term “House
Master” to describe those people who are in charge of the residential and
educational facilities called “Houses.”
In the view of the protesters the term “master” evokes slavery, and thus
must go. Harvard quickly acceded
to their demand. Harvard’s House
Masters unanimously agreed that the title was offensive.
Where does it end? It
does not. As Jerry Rubin stated, “Satisfy
our demands, and we’ve got twelve more.”
We have already witnessed the removal of many religious symbols. There have been large protests over the
celebration of Columbus Day. There
have been several incidents where the American flag has been banned or burned
due to its offensive nature. Even
the name of the nation’s capital might need modification. After all, is it not named after a
slave owner?
No comments:
Post a Comment