»Home | »Philosophy  | »Advocacy | »Weblog
:: The Rule of Reason ::

:: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 ::

Islam by a Thousand Cuts 

:: Posted by Edward Cline at 11:07 PM



Lingchi língchí; ling-ch'ih, alternately transliterated ling chi or leng t'che), translated variously as death by a thousand cuts, (shā qiān dāo/qiāndāo wànguǎ), the slow process, the lingering death, or slow slicing, was a form of torture and execution used in China from roughly AD 900 until it was banned in 1905. It was also used in Vietnam  In this form of execution; a knife was used to methodically remove portions of the body over an extended period of time, eventually resulting in death.

Death, in the context of this column, means Islam. Islam is a death worshipping cult. Death is the end of Islam for anyone who encounters it, Muslim or non-Muslim. One exists and lives for the sole purpose of dying to meet Allah in Paradise. Allah owns your life and it is your duty to obey his every command and whim, even if it means….death.
Celebrating Death: Shia Muslims love self-flagelation

“Death to America!” is the familiar chant of Muslim demonstrators, from New York City to London to Berlin and Cologne, from Cairo to Gaza to Damascus, from Kuala Lumpur to Sydney and Kabul. Death is what is intended by the Muslim Brotherhood. It states that quite explicitly in the 1991 Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Brotherhood in North America. Here is what it says:

·         In order for Islam and its Movement to become "a part of the homeland" in which it lives, "stable" in its land, "rooted" in the spirits and minds of its people, "enabled" in the live [sic] of its society and has firmly-established "organizations" on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain "the keys" and the tools of this process in carry [sic] out this grand mission as a "Civilization Jihadist" responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country.

·         The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.

So, how is Islam “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within”? By working every little gambit to dissolve Western institutions, principles, traditions, and norms, and replace them with Islamic ones, first as “co-equals,” and eventually as the dominant ones

By applying a thousand little, barely noticed and hardly earth-shattering concessions by the West to Islamic demands for “respect” or the enforcement of Islamic religious observation or deference to Muslim sensibilities and prejudices, the Brotherhood agenda is on schedule. There will always be the spectacular, headline-grabbing massacres to remind us that Islam declared war on the West long, long ago and that the bombings and beheadings and stabbings are not forgotten as the end-all of life for infidels and those who do not submit to Islam. Islam means, after all, submission.

But it isn’t those which are rotting the West “from within.” The West is definably “miserable” because it will not stand up for itself, will not take the steps necessary to preserve its existence as a life-loving as opposed to a death-worshipping political system. Whose hapless “hands” are aiding and abetting the incremental assaults? They are many and legion. CAIR simply advises the EEOC of a case rich in conflict, presumably because it knows that CAIR in an unindicted co-conspirator with terrorist organizations and refuses to condemn Hamas. Better these stupid Americans give other Americans the hot foot.

We can start with the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which works hand in glove with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to ensure that employers conform to Muslim expectations and prejudices, and also inures American employers to Islamic religious dress “codes.” The EEOC will agree with CAIR that a Muslim has been “discriminated” against and penalized (either fired or not hired) because of his “religion.” Case in point: Abercrombie & Fitch vs. a Muslim woman who wanted to violate the store’s dress code for employees by wearing her hijab.

The Muslim teen worker who scored a legal victory in an anti-discrimination suit against Abercrombie & Fitch, which cited its dress code in insisting she not wear a hijab to work, says the retailer’s policy is “very unfair.”

A federal judge issued the ruling last week that Abercrombie & Fitch discriminated against Hani Khan, 18, when she was fired from its Hollister store in San Mateo, Calif., in 2010 because she refused to remove her head scarf on the job…..

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit on Khan's behalf in 2011. A trial on the company's liability and punitive damages is scheduled for Sept. 30.

Another nijab case went to the Supreme Court. In June 2015, the High Bench ruled in favor of the Muslim and against Abercrombie & Fitch. The Guardian reported:

The US supreme court on Monday ruled in favor of Samantha Elauf, a Muslim woman who was denied a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store in Oklahoma because she wore a headscarf for religious reasons.

The justices decided the case, which united Christian, Muslim and Jewish and other religious organizations, with an 8-1 vote, ruling in favor of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which sued the company on behalf of Elauf.

“The EEOC applauds the Supreme Court’s decision affirming that employers may not make an applicant’s religious practice a factor in employment decisions,” said EEOC chair Jenny Yang, in a statement.

“This ruling protects the rights of workers to equal treatment in the workplace without having to sacrifice their religious beliefs or practices.”

Next comes the Islamic assault on The Citadel, a military school in South Carolina with a strict dress code for its cadets, on and off school grounds. A Muslima applied to the school and insisted that she be able to  wear her nijab with her uniform. On April 22, the Washington Post reported:

When news spread that The Citadel was considering the first-ever exception to its strict uniform requirements to allow an admitted student to wear a hijab in keeping with her Muslim faith, reaction was intense. Some welcomed the possibility as an important symbol of religious freedom, but for many in the tight-knit community of cadets and alumni, the very idea of an exception was anathema because the ideals of loyalty, uniformity, and corps-before-self are so central to the storied public military college’s mission and traditions….

On Friday, Brett Ashworth, a Citadel spokesman, said the school is considering two specific requests from the student: That she be allowed to wear a hijab and that she be allowed to cover her arms and legs.

The school is still mulling over whether or not  to grant the Muslima’s wishes (the hijab in uniform, her own separate room, special clothing during physical exercises, etc.; I wonder if she gets to break classes and drill to bow to Mecca and has special meals prepared for her in the mess hall). The cadet who leaked the story to the press, was punished.

Citadel Cadet Nick Pinelli, the cadet who leaked the story of the school’s consideration of a Muslim student’s request to wear a hijab, was reportedly punished with 33 hours of marching according to a post on Jihad Watch….

According to an article in the Post and Courier The Citadel spokesman, Col. Brett Ashworth, declined to confirm whether or not Cadet Pinelli was being punished over leaking the story citing FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act).

Next up is our court system. CAIR issued a press release about a Louisiana traffic court judge who ordered a Muslima to leave the courtroom unless she removed her nijab. The Florida Family Association reported in late April:
 CAIR issued the following press release: 

CAIR Asks Louisiana Judge to Ensure that Courtroom Hijab Ban Not Be Repeated

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 4/28/16)
– The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today called on a Louisiana judge to ensure that the recent removal of a Muslim woman from court because she wears an Islamic head scarf, or hijab, not be repeated.

CAIR said the Muslim woman, who does not want to be identified, says she removed from Jefferson Parish Traffic Court on Tuesday after a bailiff asked her to remove her hijab and she refused. The woman stated: "I started to cry because I felt so embarrassed and humiliated." Judge Raylyn  Beevers, who admitted that she asked the Muslim woman to leave the courtroom, now says she did not realize the head covering was worn for religious reasons.

It is not known if Judge Beevers relented and allowed the Muslima into the courtroom wearing the nijab. The CAIR letter to the judge implies that she regretted her decision to ask the woman to leave, and hoped the “misunderstanding” was not repeated.

Next up, the Muslim truckers. On June 2nd, Daniel Greenfield reported in “Obama Inc Sues Trucking Company for Firing Muslim Drivers Who Refused to Deliver Alcohol” from the DougRoss@Journal:
 Star Transport, Inc., a trucking company based in Morton, Ill., violated federal law by failing to accommodate two employees because of their religion, Islam, and discharging them, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed today.

The lawsuit alleged that Star Transport refused to provide two employees with an accommodation of their religious beliefs when it terminated their employment because they refused to deliver alcohol.

Greenfield commented:

A trucking company may be obligated to accommodate religious observance by providing time off for holidays or prayers. It is not obligated to excuse employees from doing their actual job. And delivering alcohol is part of what being a truck driver means. If it's against your religion, find a job that doesn't involve delivering large quantities of foods and beverages.

In fact there is no actual prohibition that bars Muslims from driving a truck full of alcohol. There are prohibitions on drinking alcohol. Every Muslim corner store I have ever seen sells alcohol, alongside smuggled cigarettes and lottery tickets. Many Muslim countries allow the sale of alcohol.

And, the Muslim truckers won the suit. The Washington Post reported on October 23rd:

One more data point on the “When does your religion legally excuse you from doing part of your job?” question — like it or not, under American law, employers sometimes do have to excuse employees from tasks that the employees find religiously objectionable. Tuesday, two Muslim truck drivers who were fired for refusing to deliver shipments containing alcohol were awarded $40,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages by the jury in their discrimination claim.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought suit on their behalf (EEOC v. Star Transport Co., Inc. (N.D. Ill.)), arguing that the employer had failed to provide “reasonable accommodations” to the employees — i.e., accommodations (including an exemption from job duties) that could be provided without “undue hardship” to the employer or others. The court noted that Star Transport had indeed often “swap[ped]’ loads between drivers,” and Star Transport conceded that it could have easily accommodated this request, too, but argued (unsuccessfully) that it shouldn’t be liable for punitive damages.

It’s now doubtful if the Muslim non-truck-drivers will ever collect their award. The Post article concludes:

But as the Peoria Journal Star (Andy Kravetz) notes, “Whether the men collect their money is another story. Star Transport went out of business earlier this year and it’s unknown who is now responsible for the judgment….

To underscore the assertion that Islam is a death cult, Daniel Greenfield also writes about what Muslim women who hanker for Paradise can expect upon expiration of their worldly existence. They would be no contest with “90 Foot Islamic Virgins” awaiting the male Jihadist “martyrs.”

The 90-foot-tall transparent creature with visible bone marrow and none of the functions of life is a giant skeleton. The love that Muslim terrorists have for it is a love for death.
 
ISIS is recreating the Islamic paradise on earth by capturing and handing out girls of “tender age” to the Jihadists. It forces them to take contraceptives and conducts forced abortions so that, like the 72 virgins, the captured girls will never actually have children. It even conducts reconstruction surgery after the rapes so that their victims will more closely resemble the eternal virgins of Islamic paradise.

The Islamic State isn’t just Islamic. It’s a hellish attempt to create an Islamic heaven on earth.

Finally, there is this unkind cut from our House of Representatives, as first reported on Gates of Vienna December 29, 2015 and reprinted in the Counter Jihad Report on the 30th, “HR 569: CAIR’s Standard Operating Procedure” for applying the scalpel to America.

The author of the Gates of Vienna piece argues that HR 569 will not pass; the numbers are against it. After reprinting the pious language of the Resolution, he remarks:

Once again, this will not pass. However, the fact that 82 Democrats have co-sponsored it will be used to validate the Muslim Brotherhood (CAIR, ISNA, MPAC, etc. etc.) claim that hate crimes have increased (and of course they haven’t for Muslims, although they may have increased against Jews in America, who are historically identified in FBI statistics as victimized in hate crimes five to ten times more frequently than Muslims in America)….

So it won’t pass, but it’s still useful to the Muslim Brotherhood to validate their claims among their own constituency, as well as to the media and the Low Information Voters, or those who just respond to any kind of “virtue-signaling”. And it’s useful to the 82 co-sponsoring Democrats, and the Democratic National Committee as a whole, to claim that all Republicans who did not co-sponsor are therefore, by definition:

  • racist;
  • Islamophobic;
  • bigoted;
  • engaged in hate speech, by the sin of omission of not cosponsoring; and
  • engaged in incitement to hate crimes, by the implied sin of hate speech resulting from the sin of omission of not co-sponsoring.
It’s also worth noting that there are 188 Democrats in the House of Representatives, and 246 Republicans. So unless this gets a lot of new co-sponsors in 2016, a counter-argument against the DNC on this Resolution would be that it has met with overwhelming bi-partisan opposition from the majority of Democrats (106) and all Republicans in the House.

But yes, it is a successful effort for the target audiences at which it is aimed, including the foreign funders for CAIR, ISNA etc., all of whom will be tickled pink that this bill has 82 co-sponsors. As will the OIC, who might have helped a bit in drafting the Resolution.

There are dozens of pages of the “cuts” that have been inflicted on this country, many, if most, aided by the eager interference of a Federal agency, the EEOC. I could go on for twenty more pages just to list them. The country is being bled dry, and the wounds will not heal until the EEOC is defunded, Americans see Islam as the death cult it really is, the ISNA, the ICNA, the MSA, and all its terrorist-affiliated ilk are booted out of the country, and the current principals of CAIR are finally indicted, tried, and sent to jail with bread and water as their only solace. All Muslims currently living in this country – legally or illegally – should be disenfranchised, so as to not provide our native statists with an extra power base.

Until then, the cuts will continue in furtherance of the pursuit of death.

:: Permalink | 0 Comments ::

 

:: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 ::

Poisonous Peas in a Pod 

:: Posted by Edward Cline at 6:56 AM

The Chancellor was a terrorist
The Washington Examiner on April 24th, in its article, “Obama: Germany’s Merkel is right on refugee welcome,” reported President Barack Obama’s European musings on immigration:

President Obama says German Chancellor Angela Merkel is “on the right side of history” in how she has responded to the influx of thousands of Syrian refugees surging into Europe.

At a press conference Sunday, the president said he is “proud” of Merkel and the German people for their open-door policy of migrants fleeing violence and uncertainty in their home country.

“She is on the right side of history on this,” Obama said as he stood next to Merkel in Hannover, Germany. “And for her to take on some very tough politics in order to express not just a humanitarian concern but also a practical concern, that in this globalized world, it is very difficult for us to simply build walls.”

And now many Europeans are fleeing their home countries for points that do not welcome hordes of destructive and hostile Muslim barbarians who have boasted that Germany and other Western countries are “dead meat.”  Doors are opening all over the Continent. However, they are swinging doors that can snap back to strike Merkel harshly on her electoral derriere.

Obama again:

Obama’s praise comes after Merkel faced fallout in a referendum of sorts on her immigration policy. In last month’s state elections, Merkel’s party, the Christian Democrats, took a beating. An anti-immigration party made significant gains.

Obama has promised to admit 100,000 Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the U.S. this year. He faces pushback from Republicans who fear a possible security threat. GOP presidential candidates, like front-runner Donald Trump, have attacked Obama’s pledge to allow refugees into this country.

But it is not just a security threat in back of those concerns. The literal invasion of the U.S. by hordes of Muslims – especially Syrian, Iraqi, and Somalian Muslims – poses a cultural and political threat, as well. The introduction of so many hostile and assimilation-resistant Muslims is part and parcel of the Muslim Brotherhood’s overall plan to subvert the country from within, per the General Memorandum of 1991. The country can be rotted from within through demographics and an overall plan to perpetuate the welfare state.

The ideological symbiosis between Obama and Merkel is worth exploring. Obama and Merkel are political leaders determined to “remake” their countries in conformance with their mutual ideologies. Obama’s motivation has been repeatedly demonstrated to be rooted in an undiluted malevolence for America, one closely allied to his Alinsky/Communist agenda. He wants to swamp America and Western culture with hordes of people “of color” more amenable to the welfare state (at least, that is his premise) so that the demographics shift to perpetuate the welfare state, statism, and the Democratic grip on the country. He wants to create the “new American” who isn’t automatically “white.”

Dare, if you will, accuse Obama of racism, of racism by explicit policy and little disguised malice. Obama’s “resettlement” program, paid to Christian “charities” with tax dollars, is community-organizing along ethnic lines. It differs little from Merkel’s except in scale.

I am the "new American man"
Merkel is largely motivated by her East German Communist upbringing. Her Communist ideology is proof against all reason. The collapse of Soviet Russia in 1989-1991 with its East European satellites, including East Germany, left her in an ideological void, as an outlander. In her life, there was no “yearning to breathe free” of tyranny. Her desire and career path were to become a member of the East German Communist establishment. How could she “relate” to freedom? There was no way she could truly sympathize with what millions of East Germans wanted and what West Germans had enjoyed for decades. She could not “relate” to it without voluntarily undergoing a philosophical and moral sea change, in her politics and in herself. And that was not going to happen. She was in her mid-thirties when the Berlin Wall came down. Too much energy had been invested in pushing the collectivist line. The girl can’t help herself.

You can take the statist ideologue out of tyranny and place him in a relatively free political and social environment, but, after a certain age, you can't take the statist out of the person, together with a tenacious need and compulsion to control things and people. The ideologue isn’t going to be impressed or persuaded by the cornucopia of wealth available in a free country. He will enjoy them, and even extol them, but he will always stump for a “higher” purpose for living other than enjoying life.

Merkel’s grand design is to fabricate the “new German man” who will be of the old stock of Germans somehow amalgamated with immigrant Muslims. Germans are proving highly resistant to the shotgun marriage.

On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin’s historic spaceflight shook the world, sending enthusiastic crowds of Soviet citizens onto the streets to celebrate. Just a few months later, the Twenty-Second Congress adopted new Communist Party program, which set the goal of building the foundations of communism in the Soviet Union by 1980. This all-out drive toward communism had two crucial components: the construction of a material and technical basis of communism, and the development of the “new Soviet man” – “a harmonic combination of rich spirituality, moral purity, and physical perfection.” Who better than Gagarin to embody this new ideological construct? From “New Soviet Man: Inside Machine: Human Engineering, Spacecraft Design, and the Construction of Communism.” Science, Technology and Society Program, E51-185, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139; April 2005)

From the October Soviet coup d’état of the Provisional government to the wheezy collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, Soviet citizens and East Europeans were indoctrinated on the vision of the “new Soviet Man.” He was a creature who would mindlessly fit into Communist ideology and be in every way compatible with it, not only in space, but on the ground in industry and agriculture and economic regulation. He would be “programmed” to make Communism be his only motivation, to help to make it work, and be instilled to labor ceaselessly to advance the triumph of Communism in Russia and everywhere else.

Reuters reported in August 2015 on the mass immigration into Germany:

The number of immigrants living in Germany rose by 3.7 percent last year to a record high of 11 million and a fifth of the population is of migrant background, the Federal statistics Office said on Monday.

The figures highlight Germany’s growing reliance on foreign-born workers to drive its powerhouse economy, Europe’s largest, as well as its acceptance of hundreds of thousands of refugees. Many of the immigrants came from other European Union countries, such as Poland, Romania, Italy, Bulgaria, and Hungary.

Last year, the number of people living in Germany of a migrant background had risen by around 1.5 million, or 10 percent, from 2011. The native population – excluding people of a migrant background – fell by 1.4 percent.

Poles, Romanians, and Hungarians might assimilate into Germany enough to be taken for Germans, and perhaps even “feel” German. But Muslims have proven relentlessly over time to resist becoming “German,” that is, to not surrender their Islamic identities, but who, not so ironically, expect their host countries to adapt and defer to Islam. Second generation Muslim immigrants, particularly Turks, are not the “new German men.” They are in the vanguard of Muslim activism and even terrorism. The only thing Muslims are busy doing is preying on European women, harassing European men, hanging around in refugee and asylum centers, trashing private property seized by the government to house “refugees,” and perhaps doing a little dope business on the side to supplement their welfare state handouts.

Refugees and asylum seekers coming to your town
About those rape statistics in Germany and Scandinavia, one must ask oneself: Are Muslim women so unattractive that they are not the usual victims of Muslim rapes?  Well, it might have something to do with their Islamic dress, which is to make them as unalluring as possible.

But Merkel, to Obama’s applause and pats on the back, sees the barbarians as the “new Germans.” They will become the new “workforce” of Germany.  Walid Shoebat and others disagree vehemately and pointedly.

German Municipalities estimates that just two percent of Muslim refugees in the rehabilitation program are ready to take a job. “You are not ready to work.” The stamp is the vast majority of refugees by the municipalities. Daniel Greenfield, in his article The Death of Europe, said: “The Muslim migrants are meant to be the retirement plan for an aging Europe. But the Mohammed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.” Politiken: The figures cover refugees who have been granted asylum in Denmark and 31 in December were doing an integration program in a municipality. The refugees receive either cash or integration performance.

Merkel also wants more propaganda spread through Africa inviting the diseased beggars there to come to Germany and learn a trade. Good luck with that. What Europe and America needs, in addition to “resettled” ISIS fighters, are the killers of Boko Haram and Al-Shabaab planted in our midst.

The retirement plan that Islam has in store for Europe is to end Europe by invitation from Merkel and her political ilk elsewhere on the Continent. Islam is in Europe. And Europe is now a satrap of Islam.

:: Permalink | 4 Comments ::

 

:: Monday, April 25, 2016 ::

Chomsky at the Bit 

:: Posted by Edward Cline at 5:47 PM

Fast on the heels of publishing “And the World Was Made Right” (Rule of Reason, April 23), which has had an incredible and positive response from many quarters, I happened to read Cliff Kincaid’s review of Michael Walsh’s The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West on AIM’s site (Accuracy in Media). The review is titled “Defunding the Marxist Madrassas.”
Mortar boards on freshly minted flatheads

Kincaid’s review of the Walsh book opens with some richly deserved swipes at Noam Chomsky, the MIT professor of everything under the sun. For decades, the name, “Noam Chomsky,” for me, at least, has evoked the image of a leftist college professor instructing his student victims to “thoroughly chew” his latest theory – say, of Cognitive closure, or of Psychological nativism, or of Recursion in language -- until they can memorize it and recite it back to him verbatim (preferably in a choral mode). That is, after all, the nature of an Islamic madrassa – to memorize – not to understand or critique the Koran and other Islamic texts – until one’s mind is completely subverted by masses of illogic and non sequiturs and one is no longer able to think. Once one has memorized by rote every little comma, simile, and metaphor of the Koran, one is ready to join the Taliban (Islamic students) to kill and terrorize.

And that is, more or less, what American students of Chomsky (and students of his ilk elsewhere in academia) to go out and do: become activists for Socialism, Social Justice, to Occupy Wall Street, occupy your home, occupy your business, and become the snowflakes for “safe places” and the hoarse hollerers for women’s restrooms being open to transgenders and LGBTs of every stripe. And also become advocates and demonstrators for Muslim immigration and trigger-warning sensitive freshmen.

Noam Chomsky, a Marxist professor who says he has been at MIT for 65 years, maintains that we need a new economic system. He has endorsed something called “the next system,” which is supposed to replace free enterprise capitalism. My counter-proposal is for a “next system” to replace Chomsky and other Marxists in academia. My old friend, “Jimmy from Brooklyn,” a legendary anti-communist, says what we need is the defunding of the “Marxist Madrassas,” otherwise known as college and universities.

The “next system” appears to be the total collectivization of the country, and especially of the realm of education. Here, at Alternet, is Chomsky caught with his socialist pants down:

An initial signatory to the Next System statement, Chomsky explores the connections between culture, mass movements, and economic experiments—which in “mutually reinforcing” interaction, may build toward a next system more quickly than you may think. 

Next System Project: As the Next System Project engages in dozens of university campus-based teach-ins across the country, what do you think of such approaches to engaging campus communities in deep, critical inquiry—can they help transform our society?

Doubtless Chomsky applauds Bernie Sanders, the socialist presidential candidate. But perhaps he instead regards Sanders as a doddering, buffoonish, semi-senile old fool suffering from genuine cognitive closure. That would be a fair assessment of the failure in carpentry.

And here is statement by “the next system,” a statement that dances around the term “socialism” and is an instance of sociological puffery:

We are at or near the bottom among advanced democracies across a score of key indicators of national well-being—including relative poverty, inequality, education, social mobility, health, environment, militarization, democracy, and more.

We have fundamental problems because of fundamental flaws in our economic and political system. The crisis now unfolding in so many ways across our country amounts to a systemic crisis.

Today’s political economic system is not programmed to secure the wellbeing of people, place and planet. Instead, its priorities are corporate profits, the growth of GDP, and the projection of national power.

Large-scale system change is needed but has until recently been constrained by a continuing lack of imagination concerning social, economic and political alternatives. There are alternatives that can lead to the systemic change we need.

Kincaid goes on:

Of course, Chomsky does not want to replace the system that pays his salary and provides a platform for his Marxism. A real alternative to the current economic system would take the taxpayers off the hook for subsidizing state colleges and universities that keep Marxists like Chomsky on the payroll and undermine traditional values.

It is said that Chomsky is a “philosopher, linguist, and social critic.” Whatever this means, it looks like he has more time to spout his Marxism than to teach his students anything worthwhile. Perhaps that is his intention. By failing to educate students in practical skills useful for real jobs, he leaves them hopeless and despondent about the system that he wants them to replace. His students are his cannon fodder for “the next system,” which is supposed to be brought into being by students who are turned into activists through brainwashing sessions organized by the likes of Chomsky.

Michael Walsh, as Kincaid reveals, offers a truly radical solution to today’s college “crisis” and the unimaginable debt assumed by college students and by the taxpayer: scrap the Ivy Leagues, state colleges, and community colleges, put the Marxists out of work, and patronize the plethora of existing and future online universities each of which would offer tuition costs infinitesimally lower than the standard costs of about $20,000 per year.

Average, semi-literate college student,
now smothered in Federal kudzu debt

Michael Walsh is the latest to document the influence of cultural Marxism in academia and American society at large. His book, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West, examines how American institutions have been taken over by the likes of Chomsky. The solution, however, cannot rest simply with exposure or even reform. The cultural Marxists will not cede power over the minds of the young. Instead, the solution is to establish new institutions that attract parents and young people to educational alternatives which promise marketable skills and jobs in the real economy.

Those alternatives are usually grouped under the rubric of online learning. These low-cost alternatives to brick-and-mortar colleges and universities can also address another pressing problem for many young people—massive college debt through federal loans that in 40 percent of the cases are not repaid. The current federal student loan debt stands at a staggering $1.2 trillion. The current system is unsustainable.

It is unfortunately true that many of these online or vocational schools are already in hock to or dependent on federal and government financing schemes for their students (such as Kaplan and ECPI). The ultimate solution is to get the government out of education altogether.

Writes Kincaid:

Judging by the success of Sanders in the presidential race, it would appear that the real crisis is that higher education has failed to prepare young people for the future and has instead left them struggling to pay tens of billions of dollars in student loan debt. However, those turning out for Sanders have been led to believe that more taxes and debt are the solution. This approach leaves Marxists like Chomsky, still ensconced in academia, agitating for the “next system” of socialism that will leave young people even more hopeless.

Even if their debts are “forgiven,” and the federal debt monkey is off their backs, most of these students will be ill-prepared to live independent, productive lives in the real world. Kincaid writes:


This process of subversion has been going on too long to hope for reform of the academic institutions that have been captured and rotted from within. We need to defund those that already exist, and create new institutions to replace those in the hands of the cultural Marxists. Some of them are online structures such as Amberton University and Western Governors University.

My friend "Jimmy from Brooklyn" says we need to go further, in regard to existing colleges and universities, and demand a "separation of Marx and state," so that affirmative action for conservative professors can be implemented to strive for some sort of equality and real "diversity."

Michael Walsh’s The Devil’s Pleasure Palace is a must read for anyone who is concerned about the costs and the direction of higher education. Today, in America, “higher” education more often than not means brainwashing on psychedelic drugs of the Marxist kind.

Academics like Noam Chomsky should be put out to pasture with Bernie Sanders before they destroy more minds.  

The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West, by Michael Walsh. Jackson, TN: Encounter Books, 2015.  280 pp.

:: Permalink | 5 Comments ::

 

 

» Recent Posts

» Islam by a Thousand Cuts
» Poisonous Peas in a Pod
» Chomsky at the Bit
» And the World Was Made Right
» Review: Dangerous Men
» How to Not Talk About Islam
» Death Cults in the Culture
» Preview: Civic Affairs
» The Walking Dead: An Obituary
»

» RSS Feed


» Capitalist Book Club
Purchase the essential texts on capitalism.


» Feedback
We want to hear from you!

 


Blogs We Love:
» Alexander Marriot
» Armchair Intellectual
» Best of the Web Today
» Daily Dose of Reason
» Dithyramb
» Dollars & Crosses
» Ego
» Ellen Kenner
»
GMU Objectivists
» Gus Van Horn
» Harry Binswanger List
»
History At Our House
» How Appealing
» Illustrated Ideas
» Intel Dump
» Instapundit
» Liberty and Culture
» Michelle Malkin
»
Mike's Eyes
» NoodleFood
» Objectivism Online
» Outside the Beltway
» Overlawyered
» Powell History Recommends
» Quent Cordair's Studio
» Randex
» Sandstead.com
» SCOTUSBlog
» Scrappleface
» Selfish Citizenship 
» Southwest Virginia Law Blog
» The Dougout
» The Objective Standard
»
Thrutch
» Truth, Justice and the American Way

» Link Policy
» Comments Policy


SPONSORED LINKS


 

Copyright © 1998-2013 The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism. All Rights Reserved.
Email: 
info-at-capitalismcenter.org · Feedback · Terms of Use · Comments Policy · Privacy Policy · Webmaster