A Variation on “The Emperor’s New Clothes”

 

 

A professor at Georgetown University’s law school recently lost her job because she was recorded commenting on the academic performance of black students in her classes.  Specifically, she said such students were “just plain at the bottom”.

Alas, the candid, private comment to a fellow staffer was not subject to serious consideration of its accuracy.  Rather, it was condemned as “insensitive”.  And, of course, in today’s left-wing  academia, adherence to sensitivity trumps encouragement of honest assessment.

In the old days, before “progressive” ideology took hold on the Left, the “cancel” remark might have generated the following intelligent queries:  (1) was the assessment accurate? (2) if so, what explains the poor performance and (3) what can be done to remedy the situation?

Instead, large segments of American society seem  so obsessed with not giving offense that they pattern their behavior after the crowd viewing the naked emperor parading his “new” clothes in Hans Christian Andersen”s famous fable.

Seldom, these days, do we hear from the child in the crowd giving voice to the obvious.

 

Rioting… Again!

 

 A white police officer shoots a black person (justifiably or not, it seems) and all hell breaks loose.

The consequences are that people die, others are wounded and property is destroyed.

For what purpose?

Rage, of course, is mindless and beyond reason, therefore.  But what is portrayed as “rage” by the Left and media apologists occurs with such regularity that it’s fair to ask whether such displays of anger have a calculated element which is to foment hostility to the police.

Certainly, encouragement of such “senseless” violence (think BLM) or its sympathetic tolerance (think CNN) is counterproductive to the communities where the “rage” displays itself.

It would seem that political calculation and liberal guilt combine to make a toxic brew for the broader society, but more particularly for the afflicted minorities who are more likely to be poisoned by the social disintegration it produces.

Where are the community leaders – local and national – calling for a halt to the rioting?  (Heard from Al Sharpton lately?)

Are members of the black community excused from following the general social proscription of seeking justice “in the street” instead of the courthouse?

It seems so.

And is it not racism to expect less of blacks than others?

[An aside:  Where is the outrage in our general society over the media’s preference to cast the event of a law enforcement shooting in a racial context?  Why is it newsworthy that a “white” officer shot a “black” suspect?  The implicit meaning of the use of such adjectives is the reason why the shooting occurred.  Is the use of such racial identities intentional or unthinking?  Regardless of the motivation, the consequences are damaging to our society’s well-being.

Older readers may recall that it used to be common for newspapers to identify criminal suspects by race, as if to imply that, of course, the accused was black.  That practice was harmful, too, and properly abandoned.]

 

Is American Democracy Fragile?

In the wake of the Capitol Hill riot of early January, many media pundits (referring to the rampage with the loaded term “insurrection”) said so.

Ridiculous.

Self-government in our country remains strong indeed.  Democracy not only has roots in our land long predating the War of Independence, but is now composed of 50 separate state governments practicing self-rule. So even if the Federal government were to fall victim to an anti-democracy coup, the states would be able to thwart the usurpation of the U.S. Constitution, just as the Founders expected them to do in such circumstances.  The commitment to democracy is inbred in our culture.  Americans are accustomed to voting for their leaders from an early age.  Do you remember raising your hand to support your choice for class monitor in kindergarten?

Our history matters.  Earlier generations fought in WWI to make the “World  Safe for Democracy”; twenty years later, Americans fought to defeat tyranny.  Support for democracy is in our blood.

[We Americans are a well-meaning – but often tragically naïve – people who want other lands to share our democracy and liberty.  Foisting those principles on other people can create democratic practices for a while but without the target country having a significant history of self-rule, that democracy is fragile indeed.  Iraq and Afghanistan are but recent examples of such American arrogance and hubris.]

However, caution about American democracy’s longevity is an appropriate concern.  History is not necessarily prologue.  It’s a cliché, of course, that nothing lasts forever.

But those of us, like The Sensible Conservative, who want to extend the life of America as being subject to a government which respects individual liberty and is bound by a constitution which limits power, have cause for concern.

Our nation’s founders, through The Federalist Papers and other writings, made clear they knew of human nature’s failures but also expressed the view that Americans would take their role seriously in a self-governing society.  They would be informed on political matters and participate in the affairs of their community.  And, perhaps, most importantly, they would choose from among them those most suited by education, intelligence and virtue to be their leaders.

By the standard of education and smarts, recent presidents would mostly qualify.  But virtue?  Without it, the other qualities of leadership will be misused – as they certainly have been by the Trumps and Clintons on our presidential roster.  Americans are failing – at our peril – to follow the guidance of our founders.

Poll after poll shows an abysmal ignorance among Americans about our national history and government.  One can lament this void – its causes are many with the lessened focus on teaching high school civics certainly being a major reason - but the consequence is an increasing lack of understanding of what has made the United States of America exceptional in truly positive ways. (I will assume that readers of this blog don’t need reminders of what those include.)

Further, that empty space in historical memory is now being filled – for many – by the Left’s distorted view of America’s past as being primarily symbolized by slavery and racial animosity.  Is it any wonder that many of us display a loathing for America when the message of our past is so negative?

If people don’t believe in the essential goodness of America, how can they be expected to support it?

No, the few hundred crazies of January 6 are not an “existential” threat to the survival of America’s liberal democracy of limited constitutional government.  The trends of the Left – which can fairly described as hostile to traditional American values – are.