Here is a public program I did last week. I start at minute 17, so move the cursor there if you like. Someone emailed me and said I was "terribly condescending".

This is actually an improvement since a couple years ago, I went on this program and someone emailed me and called me "fat a$$". Well as my late father always told me "son, know who you are and make the most of it".



http://www.newsandviewswithtomandsadie.com/september-23-2015-goodbye-yogi-a-look-at-the-economy-with-ecu-economics-professor-randy-parker/

The more I listen the more I like this guy.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/24/blacklivesmatter-sanders-clinton-anger-column/32055507/

Welcome home Herbert Marcuse....

Let us hear from the great Marxist scholar (a contradiction if ever there was one) himself from his monumental work Repressive Tolerance (and how's that for a title?):


Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.

Surely, no government can be expected to foster its own subversion, but in a democracy such a right is vested in the people (i.e. in the majority of the people). This means that the ways should not be blocked on which a subversive majority could develop, and if they are blocked by organized repression and indoctrination, their reopening may require apparently undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.



Now let's hear from the great sociologist at Washington State University from her syllabus as discussed in yesterday's post:


Gross generalizations, stereotypes, and derogatory/oppressive language are not acceptable. Use of racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, classist, or generally offensive language in class or submission of such material will not be tolerated. (This includes “The Man,” “Colored People,” “Illegals/Illegal Aliens,” “Tranny” and so on - or referring to women/men as females or males) If I see it or hear it, I will correct it in class since it can be a learning moment for many students. Repeated use of oppressive and hateful language will be handled accordingly – including but not limited to removal from the class without attendance or participation points, failure of the assignment, and - in extreme cases - failure for the semester



Well there you have it ladies and gentlemen, there you have it! My fellow speech Stasi I salute you!

That's right...you are forbidden from using the terms male/female and he/she.

Read it for yourself. It is in black and white. I guess the angle is that if you use words like male and female and have figured out who you are, it is oppressive to use those words to those who have not figured out who they are, at least where gender is concerned.

How about this....you don't oppress my freedom of expression which the first amendment protects, and which I in no way mean to be offensive when using the words male/female and he/she and I'll help you along on your life's journey and let you be who you are and protect you against those who wish to do you harm while you are living it and working these things out.

Do we have a deal?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423375/washington-university-ban-syllabus-male-female-Breikss-professor

I miss this guy....

Christopher Hitchens is gone now and that is too bad. Although I frequently found him to be unnecessarily acerbic he was a brilliant mind. Well, I finally got to his book God is not great. It will certainly shake your faith, but there are many ways for that to be done. I have never bought the line that one must believe all the doctrines of a particular religion ... lock, stock and barrel ...or you are not a "true" believer. Pssshaw to that. This is when religion can be the "metal shackle" that Hitchens long claimed it to be.

Anyway he has true wisdom here that I am going to quote at some length. Here he is talking about his abandonment of Marxism:

"Those of us who had sought a rational alternative to religion had reached a terminus that was comparably dogmatic. What else was to be expected of something that was produced by the close cousins of chimpanzees? Infallibility? Thus, dear reader, if you have come this far and found your own faith undermined-as I hope-I am willing to say that to some extent I know what you are going through. There are days when I miss my old convictions as if they were an amputated limb. But in general I feel better, and no less radical, and you will feel better too, I guarantee, once you leave hold of the doctrinaire and allow your chainless mind to do its own thinking."

He went on in the book to say that he would be willing to posit that religion does some good in the world if the same religious people were brave enough and willing to say that religion was and is a source of great evil.

Here here old boy, and God bless your soul Hitch.

My faith is shaken but neither subverted nor abandoned. And I will not let it be a mental shackle. The crusades for an equitable income distribution and the scourge of corporate and personal taxation penance are all the mental shackles this country needs at the moment. Throw in the "(insert suitable color here) lives matter" gobbledygook and our national residence in purgatory is set for some time to come.