UC-Santa Cruz Prof Calls Out the Hateful Campus Left in WSJ Column
“campus radicals make hatred part of the substance of their political thought”
John Ellis is a professor emeritus of German literature. This is so spot on.
From the Wall Street Journal:
America’s Campus Left Is Hateful to Its Core
In the aftermath of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, it’s often said that people with differing political opinions must learn to disagree respectfully with one another. A sensible admonition—except that it doesn’t begin to get at what political hatred on college campuses is about, or what it is doing to us.
If all that was involved were doctrinal political differences—say, free markets as opposed to central planning—it might be enough to say that the two sides of that argument should learn to be more tolerant of each other. But the politics that dominates college campuses is a different kind of beast.
It begins not with traditional issues of governance but instead by pitting different groups of people against each other. It starts off by identifying a group of people who are wronged and another who are the wrongdoers—the “oppressed” vs. the “oppressors.”
The former group are innocent and praiseworthy, the latter are evil and wrong. Mistreatment of the oppressed means that the other side must be condemned, hated, vilified. The radicals who dominate college campuses adopt Karl Marx’s oppressed vs. oppressor groups of workers and capitalists, but they also add others of their own making—such as people of color oppressed by “white supremacists” and homosexuals by heterosexuals. Conservatives are evil enough to be labeled fascists and Nazis, which makes them an oppressor group worthy of hate.
In this kind of politics, hatred isn’t a matter of style, of making arguments too aggressively, or of carelessly insulting people who think differently. No, campus radicals make hatred part of the substance of their political thought. Hatred is at its core.
If you ask a campus radical to give up hating, you would be asking him to give up his political framework, and that would be equivalent to telling him to give up his beliefs and his radicalism. You can’t ask radicals to seek common ground with intellectual opponents when the whole point of their political thought is to alienate people from one another.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
And he spent no time discussing how the colleges magically turned into giant hate factories in the first place? Inconceivable.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA
KGB defector warning to America-
The takeover of education, indoctrinating the children.
The civil rights movement was about “weaponizing” love. The current progressive movement is about “weaponizing” hate.
Civil disobedience requires discipline. Sitting in at a segregated lunch counter, refusing to move to the back of the bus, staging a sit in at a place of work that discriminates, all take considerable discipline. What enables people to do it is a faith that love in the end will win out. Talking about love, even for those who oppose you, played an essential role in giving people the courage to engage in civil disobedience.
Erika Kirk’s statement of forgiveness of her husband’s assassin was resonant with the civil rights movement of the sixties. It reflected the view that she realized that the assailant had been taught to hate by people far more powerful than himself. From what she said one can surmise that it was hard for her to assess total blame on him as in the words of the old Bob Dylan song “He was only a pawn in their game”.
You’ve missed the point of the article. It’s that the hatred of campus radicals isn’t going to be mellowed and ultimately overcome by love; it’s that hatred is an integral part of their politics.
UCSC too stoned to have radicals? Now that weed is legal they shouldn’t have anything to protest. They can’t get too worked up if they are getting baked before and after class.