Skip to main content

Oberlin retrospective

It seems like such a weird thing. Ten years ago getting accused of racism was the worst possible thing. Anyone I knew did everything they could to avoid it and even the merest suggestion would create incredible stress. It was the *worst* thing that could happen to your reputation.

Now, well, a lot of people stopped caring so much because the accusations became the default, and attached to anything and everything that had nothing at all to do with race. (If everyone is racist, then no one is.) And then even the definition changed so racism wasn't dependent on opinions or actions anymore but simply on who you are... or who you weren't. The woke happily carry on with their public theater of racist confession because it requires nothing of them, no change in their behavior because they aren't (in their mind) actually guilty of anything. It's all show.

So when they go on to accuse someone of a "long history of racism" they aren't any more serious than if they were confessing their own long history of racism, which doesn't bother them at all because they're LYING.

"Well, why does it bother you if it's not true?"

"The fact that you're so mad means that you must be racist."

How exactly does that work? A 90 year old man isn't supposed to be bothered by a FALSE attack on his reputation, he's only hurt and angry if the attack is true?

"You must be racist if you don't accept this injustice toward yourself for the greater good. Compared to what people of color have gone through, this is just an inconvenience and the fact that your inconvenience is more important than All Of History, just proves how racist you are."

I could channel "woke" all day long but I still can't quite get my mind around how a person GETS there.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Suzanne Brockman lost me.

I just finished reading the latest paperback from Suzanne Brockmann. _Dark of Night_. I'm disappointed and that's a sad thing because I've absolutely loved her series of romances about SEAL team 16 and the Troubleshooters. Aparently I'm not alone. My complaint isn't the same as most of the others... I'm great with Sophia and Dave. I even am okay with Tracey being people smart. She and Decker did seem to come out of left field. I thought Decker was great even if I thought his overwhelming conflict was pretty lame. What I didn't care for was the politics. I read for escapism, for studly dangerous men acting like men, for sex, and adventure with guns, where our military are the good guys and the SEALs are supermen and military contractor's are heroes, too. (I wonder if Ms. Brockmann realizes that the Troubleshooters ARE Blackwater?) I do not read sexy action adventure to be presented with a *cause*. It's small things but they don...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

The Shooter

I just watched the DVD. When I saw trailers for this I wanted to see it. It's the sort of movie that I usually enjoy. It wasn't bad. In fact it was pretty good in some ways and the annoying bits weren't too hard to ignore. The end was sort of bad. Not the choices that I'd make. It took conspiracy a bit too far, away from conspiracy to "this is the way the world works." It *should* have been enough to expose the Senator and his fellows. Where was the press in this? The idea wasn't too bad. The speech his spotter's widow gave about her dead husband's choices was good. (Though why she'd go back to using her maiden name I can't imagine.) Among all those willing to look the other way were several people who were... righteous. But overall it wasn't a "conspiracy" movie. There wasn't a "conspiracy" there was only finding out the "truth" of reality. In this world president Bush re...