Recently there was a ‘strike’ of students to protest against climate change. This strike was inspired by a 16-year-old girl, Greta Thunberg . We heard them say things like why would they go to school if they had no future in their marches.
The shooting at the Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida now comes to mind , after which some students like Emma Gonzalez and David Hogg became activists against the powerful NRA, the American rifle association and in favor of the illegalization of Firearms.
Both causes are worthy and these young people are passionate defenders of their cause. The detractors of these courageous teens say they are too young to understand the complexities of these issues. It has been proven, in the case of the Florida teenagers, that there was a large lobby, not precisely of teenagers, behind the publicity that was given to them in the days and weeks after the shooting. Could it be that there is a concerted effort to ‘show’ people they ‘right’ way to think and be, starting as early as possible?
There have been several cancellations of conferences in universities of people for being politically incorrect. Some are unknown to the general public but others are figures as well known and valued as Germaine Greer, the historical feminist , to whom are attributed inappropriate attitudes or intolerance by saying things like a trans woman does not know what it is to be a woman because she has not lived as a woman or suffered the discrimination that many women suffer. In addition, now it seems that in order not to discriminate we must allow trans women , pre gender reassignment, to compete in the feminine category of any sport or that a person with a beard and baritone voice should be adressed as a lady because she identifies as a woman, under penalty of being reported for discrimination. ‘ Deadnaming ‘ deserves a special mention : if before a person was called Pepe and now they are Maria, although you’ve know him all your life, you must call her Maria and not use ‘dead name’ because it is psychologically traumatic.
Professor Brett Weinstein of the Evergreen University in Pennsylvania was fired from his post after more than a decade because he questioned the modification of a tradition of the university, the Day of Absence, in which students and teachers of color were voluntarily absent so that their contribution could be noticed through their absence, in the manner of the feminist strike where the aim is to visualise that the lack of a part of the community affects everyone. The students in charge of organizing the Day of Absence thought that it was a good idea that instead of people of color being absent, people of Caucasian ascent should be absent. Where before the absence was voluntary, in this case the whites were told not to go.
It seems that at universities, those places where it was once possible to talk, debate and listen to different points of view, it is no longer allowed because it is more important not to offend anyone, especially certain people who are (self) perceived as victims and / or harmed by comparison. with the norm. There is a narrative that everything that offends or can be interpreted as racist / sexist / xenophobic / anti LGBT + has to be eliminated, censored and that those who dare to proffer views that dare at odds with the predominant narrative can never have a voice or reason or excuse.
All this reminds me of a discussion between a self confident teenager, sure of his ideas, as is usual, and his parents. His sense of justice is egocentric and partial. What suits him is fair and what bothers him cannot be mentioned. They believe that they are the first to see and understand the injustices of the world.
The world elites and their sidekicks , the bourgeois bohemians , are in favor of globalisation, which they understand as the elimination of national borders, the mixture of cultures and not only the tolerance but the praise of all cultures, especially the non-European ones. The bobos, as the French call them are interested in keeping their maids and their waitresses from other less fortunate countries contented. They appear to have a great concern with the poor of the world when in reality what moves them is their desire to live as comfortably as possible and to emphasise their virtuousness when they talk about their Polish maid, their Spanish nanny or their Chinese cook. European cultures are seen as the cause of the world’s ills and exempt from any qualities worthy of being preserved. We are witnessing the decline of Europe, at least the Europe of humanistic values, based on reason. Some believe that it is only fair, the price to pay for the colonialism that European countries used in the past to increase their power. Europe is responsible and therefore must let all those who want come here in search of a better life arrive and should not put obstacles to it.
The EU, as a clearly globalist institution, is responsible for imposing its policies on all member countries, as if the idea of the United States of Europe had always been the end goal. There are many people who confuse Europe with the EU. They speak with ill-concealed pride in their own virtue of the benefits of the European Union as if belonging to it was the most desirable thing to which a country can aspire. They praise its supposed virtues and minimize or deny the shortcomings. All together we must do penance for our past mistakes. Before, we were barbarians who colonized all corners of the planet. Now we must let them colonize us. But make no mistake, the EU is in fact a great colonizing agent. It has already established in the subconscious of millions of people that the EU is equal to Europe. We are supposed to know the difference but it gets smaller every day and many even find it annoying to have this fact pointed out to them.
The obstacles to the free expression of ideas that do not conform to the politically correct are increasing and will continue to do so as the dumbing down agenda crushes the cultures of nations (not necessarily of European states) and replaces them with a non-culture in which what will define us will be our affiliation to a pretentiously aseptic ideology and our favorite sportswear brand.
Such a tangled issue, isn’t it? I think you’ve covered so much here. I wish we all could try to find the similarities between us and work from there, don’t you?