December 6, 2017
MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey
Can Blacks and Whites “Get Along” in an America Where Cultural Marxism Rules?
MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey
Can Blacks and Whites “Get Along” in an America Where Cultural Marxism Rules?
On November 19 MY CORNER took up the topic of race and racism, and the use of those “devil terms” in American politics and culture as ideologically weaponized concepts to advance a cultural Marxist agenda and basically silence and exile any opposition to that agenda. Those comments came as something of a response to a widely-reported op-ed published in The New York Times by a black law professor, Ekow N. Yankah [ November 11, 2017]. In that essay Professor Yankah declared that when he instructed his children “on the ways of the world,” he taught them that white people cannot be trusted and that blacks cannot befriend whites. In short, white folks are evil, supremacist oppressors, not just by their traditions and history, but by their very intrinsic nature.
Then, just the other day, several items came my way that relate how an editorial writer for the student newspaper at Texas State University at San Marcos, one Rudy Martinez [a Latino], demanded that white people “die.” “Your DNA is an abomination,” he wrote in the student newspaper, the University Star [See article, “Whiteness: Your DNA is an Abomination,” November 29, 2017, [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5134429/Texas-student-paper-blasted-anti-white-article.html]:
“You were not born white, you became white…You have been estranged from yourself and, in that absence, have been instilled with an allegiance to a country that was never great. One that has continuously attempted to push non-whites into non-existence through crusades that have been defended by the law.”
Martinez, who is a senior philosophy major [!], continued his garbled screed by accusing white Europeans of unjustly possessing privilege and having actively “built…an oppressive world.” “I see white people as an aberration,” he wrote, and promised “a constant, ideological struggle…to deconstruct whiteness.” Martinez declared that he and his allies would “win” that struggle, and that “goodhearted liberals, apathetic nihilists and right-wing extremists” should accept the “death of whiteness as liberation for all.”
There was push back, of course, from both the university administration and from the fearless student body president, Connor Clegg, who condemned Martinez’s essay—but that only got demands from groups such as the Pan African Action Committee [PAAC]and other powerful on campus organizations that Clegg resign as student president because he was “openly biased and racist.” [“Texas State Student President Will Not Resign After Condemning Campus Newspaper Article Calling for ‘White Death’,” Free Beacon, Dec. 5, 2017, http://freebeacon.com/culture/texas-state-will-not-resign-condemning-campus-newspaper-article-calling-white-death/
It would be comforting to think that incidents such as this one were rare and uncharacteristic of American college campuses—and American higher education. But the facts are that what occurred at Texas State University is far more representative of the Marxist ideological veneer—or, better, the Marxist straightjacket—that dominates and, in fact, throttles what passes for “education” these days. The examples that can be cited are literally countless and would fill volumes.
And what is a singular and salient characteristic of this situation is that it has as much to do with the professoriate and academic over class as it has to do with the students. The chilling fact is that since the late 1960s, the PhDs—the future professors, teachers and university administrators—turned out by our colleges and universities have—most of them—been imbued with a Marxist outlook and philosophy that now pervades nearly all academic disciplines, but most especially history, sociology, philosophy, English, anthropology, and political science, in other words, the liberal arts.
As a Jefferson Fellow grad student at the University of Virginia in the 1970s, I observed this process metastasizing at a gallop. Virginia—UVa—was still a fairly conservative school at that time. Indeed, when I was there we had a number of whom I would call “refugee” grad students who had transferred to the university from places like Columbia, Berkeley and Huntingdon College to escape from the early outbreaks of Marxist violence and revolution on those campuses. Some were outright “conservatives,” others just students who wished to avoid the upheavals. We even captured control of The History Club….for a while.
Yet, many doctoral candidates at UVa had already imbibed a Marxist vision and narrative. The student body president, I recall, was a fellow named Tom Breslin. He had, if I remember correctly, been a seminarian, but had been “converted” through his reading of texts such as The Wretched of the Earth, and Black Skin, White Masks, by black French revolutionary and anti-colonialist writer Frantz Fanon. Eventually, he made his way to Mao’s China, which he claimed was the ultimate “peoples’ paradise” on earth, something to be emulated here in the United States and in Europe.
What impressed me about these Marxist students was not just their fanatical zeal and seriousness, but that they were far more “radical” and revolutionary than any of those stodgy Soviet Communists who then ruled Russia and who exercised control over Eastern Europe. I had met some of those types as an exchange student in England a few years earlier—they parroted the Moscow Communist “line,” but would not have been caught dead advocating “sexual liberation” or same sex marriage, certainly not like those I encountered at UVa in the 1970s, or that we encounter today.
This variant of Marxism was and is a much more virulent strain, a zealously globalist brand that owes far more to Leon Trotsky than to Josef Stalin, and that understands the value of emphasizing “racial liberation” as well as “sexual liberation” in the struggle against the West. The Christian West is to be undermined, not just because of its “economic injustices” and its “oppressive Capitalist system,” but because of its “white supremacy and colonialist oppression” of minorities (mostly blacks) and its “sexual oppression and exploitation” of women.
Ironically, just as the Soviet Communist system finally fell (August 1991) after seven decades of totalitarian rule and Eastern Europe was being self-liberated from its forty-five year yoke under Moscow’s boot, what Dr. Paul Gottfried has labeled quite correctly “cultural Marxism” was triumphing in Western Europe and in the United States. In fact, Marxism did not disappear with the exit of its octogenarian Soviet commissars, but resurfaced in a significantly more dangerous and infectious formulation, and largely domestic form here in America, soon dominating our campuses, our entertainment industry, our pulpits, our media and now our politics.
And its major ideological weapons of choice are: the imposition of a race-based narrative culturally and politically, and the demand for sexual liberation, specifically concerning the role of women in society.
A couple of weeks ago the local PBS station (WUNC-TV) featured a program they called “Focus,” featuring a discussion of historic monuments honoring Confederate veterans and “what should be done about them.” Of the approximately seventeen participants in this on-camera “dialogue,” only two represented what I would term the opposition to taking down those monuments. Of the supporters for removal, one young black woman gave away the whole narrative and plan: American history, she explained, was totally infected, based in and on, “racism” (as well as “sexism”). Thus, that history needed to be “cleansed” and purified, and that must be begun with the removal of those obviously “racist” reminders of the Southern Confederacy, since, as “we all know,” the “war was about slavery…and that was why the South was fighting.”
This was, now fully blown, the excited but jejune theorization I had first heard forty-five years ago in graduate seminars at the University of Virginia, then spouted by young doctoral students who would in a few decades’ time occupy the endowed chairs in history, philosophy, English, and other subjects at our major universities. This was the narrative that also had infected the thinking of university administrators and basically turned our academic institutions into Marxist “communes” dedicated to the indoctrination of those students sent off, at exorbitant tuition expense, by parents who believed the “myth” that all you had to do in life to succeed was get a college education.
It was and is a dogmatic standard, a new canon of faith, that indicts white (read=European) Christians, mostly (but not always) males, making them the culprits and responsible parties for the near entirety of the defined (by Marxist theory) “ills of the world.” Into our vocabulary have some such terms as “white supremacy,” “white racism” (there is no other kind), “white oppression,” “white privilege,” and the “need to deconstruct ‘whiteness’.” And as dogma it must be imposed, no questions asked…with so-called traditional “academic freedom” discarded by the wayside if it stands in the way.
The most prominent group in the violent tearing down of the Confederate veterans’ monument in Durham a couple of months ago was a Marxist organization self-denominated the Workers World Party (www.workers.org) whose essential platform includes the following points: “Abolish Capitalism – Disarm the Police & ICE Agents – Fight for Socialist Revolution – Support Black Lives Matter.” And their overarching template is: “Smash White Supremacy.”
There have always been such fringe groups on the far Left, but what gives the Workers World Party and groups such as Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and others like them more cache’ and prominence in America in 2017 is that one of the nation’s two major political parties, the Democratic Party, basically buys into their narrative, at least politically, and the opposition, the Republican Party—most of its leadership—is deathly afraid of entering any type of negative discussion involving “race,” for fear of being accused of that dreadfully unforgivable and inexpungeable “sin” of racism—by far the worst offense that any politician or public figure can be guilty of in our modern society.
Creating a standard and unquestionable narrative on race (and also on sexual issues) has been undoubtedly the most successful strategy of cultural Marxist theory and its theoreticians. It first captured the academy, from which it was able to dictate the education of several generations of Americans. It has shaped and limited debate, defined parameters, which always continue to evolve, and always toward additional “deconstruction” and “liberation,” which, in fact, means the continued marginalization and destruction of our historic European and Christian civilization.
It should have been clear decades ago what was occurring—there were visible signs and markers. We had seen the disastrous experiences of “de-colonization” in Africa and revolution in Latin America (e.g., Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, etc.), inspired largely by Marxist-dominated religious thought. In the United States a few farsighted conservative critics of the “civil rights movement” understood that its implications could be just as severe and revolutionary. But those voices were soon muted, by the 1980s as the self-denominated “Neoconservatives” forcibly seized control of the “conservative movement” and soon served as the intellectual brain trust for GOP politicians. As the Neocons shared in the same philosophical origins—Trotskyite globalism—as the “farther Left” cultural Marxists, their intellectual parameters and ability to argue fundamentals was severely curtailed.
Until the Marxist template of “race and oppressive racism” as the critical factor underlying all of American history and the necessary imperative to erase, correct and make reparations for racist “injustice”—“white guilt”—are overturned and rejected—until our very language of communication on this topic is recaptured and reformed—we shall continue to be at the mercy of this cultural “gestalt” that despoils our heritage, perverts our history, and infects and deforms our very existence.
Dr. Paul Gottfried’s impressive study, Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt, stands out as an incomparable examination of this condition. And more recently, Ilana Mercer’s volume on what has happened in South Africa, Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa is a chilling story of what transpired in that once-prosperous society after “de-colonization” and what lessons there are for the United States.
In addition to the two items on what took place at Texas State (with links above), let me highlight another column written by Ilana on recent occurrences in Zimbabwe—another case of historic Western cowardice in the face of a triumphant - and disastrous - Marxist template. [https://townhall.com/columnists/ilanamercer/2017/11/30/why-all-three-southafrican-presidents-supported-robert-mugabe-n2416210 ] It’s excellent background reading—and a warning.
Lastly, our friend John Derbyshire wrote something about five years that serves as an excellent counter-piece to Professor Yankah’s editorial. It is well worth retrieving and reading, perhaps not pleasantly so, but then the truth is not always comforting. It can be accessed at this link: https://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/the-talk-nonblack-version/