I must admit, I do enjoy liberal hysteria especially from academia. Nothing is more satisfying than reading an op-ed from some pampered and pasty professor lecture the working class about “democracy” and our obligations to faculty lounge utopianism.
Gene Nichol, a distinguished professor at UNC Chapel
Hill, wailed about Tar Heel rejection of a progressive island in a New South. North Carolina was supposed to transform into
another New England, until the hayseeds took over and kicked out “enlightened”
liberals who believe in an Obama-esque executive and a meek, irrelevant General
Assembly. Progressives love a thug when
it comes to shoving their agenda down our throats; that’s what passes for a
democracy in liberal circles.
You ask, what are the latest lamentations from the
cloistered world of academia? The answer
is the same. Mr. Nichols bemoans the
lack of commitment to public education.
You would think his primary concern should be about educating children. Wrong!
Here is an excerpt from his op-ed:
Shall
we abandon North Carolina’s historic, enabling and almost visceral commitment
to public education? The commitment that, more than any other, has worked to
separate us from much of the South. Do we mean to allow this jettison? Can’t we
at least be candid that the dismantling of public education is a principal,
unrelenting goal of our General Assembly? Or are all the vouchers, charters,
budget cuts, wrenching salary limitations, tenure and teaching assistant
eliminations, rhetorical attacks and constantly pronounced school failures
actually meant to accomplish something else? When we settle in to the lowest
funding regime among the 50 states, will we still boast a proud dedication to
learning?
According to the esteemed professor,
failure should be rewarded while innovation and competition eschewed. As for
this nonsense about North Carolina being the lowest funded in the 50 states is
rhetorical hogwash. I refuted this
argument back in 2014. Two of those posts are sourced below.
Had you read my referenced post on
the state of education, we can pretty much determine Professor Nichol is economically
illiterate. We can probably deduce the
same when it comes to history. He, like
many libtards, has completely bastardized the 14th Amendment. Here is another excerpt:
Do we
strive to become a society deeply committed to the full dignity and membership
of all? Put another way, do we relish and celebrate the 14th Amendment command
of equality or do we begrudge it and rue its seeming shackles? Much political
energy and legislative output, over the last five years, have taken aim at the
prospects of racial minorities, lesbians and gay men, immigrants, women, the
poor, the refugee.
We
constantly have to disabuse ourselves of the above nonsense perpetuated by
progressives. We must remember the 14th
Amendment was designed to ensure ex-slaves and their progeny were afforded due
process and equal protection of the law, it does not guarantee equality. There is a big difference. For instance, under this same amendment,
Southerners who participated in the rebellion were disenfranchised. They weren’t allowed to vote or hold public
office without approval from their northern masters. Is that equality? I would say that is an emphatic, NO!
If you
thought this equality nonsense is outrageous, read the following:
Are we
a confident democracy, welcoming engagement, casting our fate on the side of
full and generous participation, proud and optimistic in our founding premise
of self-governance? Or are we to be a crabbed, fearful, querulous and excluding
lot – ever-worried that our group may not always enjoy the ascendancy of its
past? Lincoln died in the belief that “allowing all the governed an equal voice
in the government, and that only, is self-government.” Finely crafted
gerrymanders, biased ID requirements, poll closures, registration restrictions
and structural municipal manipulations wage war on Lincoln’s premise.
Curtailing democratic participation expresses an anomalous faithlessness in the
actual American promise.
First
of all, this is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. Second, this crap about Lincoln is a
bastardization of history. Lincoln invaded the South. He sanctioned murder, pillaging and razing of homes and complete towns. His legacy should be a denial of self-government,
a suspension of rights and wanton destruction that impoverished the
South for decades. Lincoln was this
country’s first tyrant.
And of
course, what would a leftist tirade be without the usual environmental
pablum. You will have to read that for
yourself. But I’m sure you already know
what’s in it.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment