September 6, 2020
MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey
Cancel Culture and the Religious Origins of the Revolution in the Streets
These violent times in which we live are in some ways unparalleled. Various writers and commentators have attempted to describe them. In many cases, these authors reach back into history for analogies or parallels. But ongoing history never offers the same event repeated exactly.
Of course, the riots of 1968, ostensibly over the Vietnam War, figure in these historical comparisons. And on a literary level, we recall the works of George Orwell on the growth and results of totalitarian Communism and collectivism (Nineteen-Eighty-Four and Animal Farm) or the late Jean Raspail on the very real peril of mass immigration which would overwhelm our civilization (The Camp of the Saints, 1975 and 1995). And there are other examples, especially on the infiltration and perversion of academia and of our entertainment industry, which come to mind.
But none of these literary classics or historical analogies can measure or describe fully what we are witnessing today. It is unique.
A work—a film—that I own came to mind recently, and in so many ways I think it encapsulates as no other artistic or literary work has the period we are passing through. No, I am not thinking of the riots and the looting: they are, I would suggest, a derivative, a by-product of the mentality that reigns today nearly everywhere, in our politics, in our media, in entertainment, and most particularly in that most critical element of society (and its continuance), education. There are reasons behind those frenzied and unhinged “mostly peaceful” demonstrations, and those reasons are not just the financial largesse of a George Soros or of Hollywood and Silicon Valley mega-millionaire elites.
That movie is a Russian opus, Burnt by the Sun (1994), directed by the Russian anti-Communist (and monarchist) Nikita Mikhalkov. It is set in 1936 more or less at the height of the Stalinist purges, and its main character is Comrade Sergei Kotov, a devout Communist, a hero of the Russian Civil War, an “Old Bolshevik.” But Kotov commits one small error: as Soviet tanks on maneuver are about to trample the wheat fields that belong to the local village collective, with his senior status in the Party he orders them to halt. A family friend, Mitya, arrives; Mitya is working with the Soviet secret police, the NKVD, and because of Sergei’s action he arrests him on a trumped up charge of treason. A black car with NKVD agents arrives and whisks him away. He is forced—indeed, does so willingly in the name of the party and the ideals of Communism—to confess to his “crime” and is executed.
Comrade Kotov’s mental attitude is indeed very much like that of our modern-day revolutionaries. If monuments to Frederick Douglass and the Abolitionists are now defined as “racist,” then they must go, they must be brought down (not to mention those to Robert E. Lee or other Confederates). If a textbook says faintly favorable things about Columbus (or Fray Junipero Serra), then it must be banned or purged. And, thus, the film Gone with the Wind and perhaps any number of John Wayne movies need to be removed from view, or at least contextualized.
The sweep of this destructive vision is immense. It shapes and determines the mindset of millions, bending them to its will, even for those who were entrusted ostensibly with the very defense of our civilization. They cower in silence or fear, if not going along with the Revolution.
This vision, as Mikhalkov underlines in Burnt by the Sun, is motivated essentially by a type of religious fanaticism, a kind of Anti-Christianity, with its own emblematic symbols, sacred teachings, parables, saints (and sinners), a confessional (and repentance) system, and accompanying manufactured history. In that sense, it mirrors in a very dark and evil way the traditional faith which for two millennia has informed and annealed our civilization. It is that civilization—our Western and Christian civilization—which is the target, and no manner of half-measures on the part of our supposed conservative opposition can stem or defeat it.
In previous essays I have called those who now rampage not just in the streets but intellectually and culturally, “Insaniacs,” that is, those possessed—and that indeed is the proper word—of an outlook and vision that is antithetical to the traditions and heritage of our civilization, the opposite of “normal.” They are to quote G. K. Chesterton, “insane,” in the sense that they reject the living reality and foundations of our history. They are thus outside reality. They feverishly attempt to create a new “reality” which is disconnected from the laws of Nature and the past, and owes almost nothing to two-thousand years of Christian tradition. They are driven by an all-consuming madness—it is impossible to reason with them, it is impossible to compromise with them. No act, immoral or vicious as it may be, is beyond their use in their quest to destroy. Everyone, including their own adepts, must bend to the will of the Insanity. For it is a new paradigm, a new religion far more insistent, demanding and dogmatic than any church of the past.
Just like Sergei Kotov, very recently a major left wing political activist (devoted to rooting out racist “imperialism and colonialism”), Jessica Krug, a professor of African-American Studies at The George Washington University (Washington, DC), came clean. For years she had claimed that she was black, but now blubbering, she admitted her “sin”—Krug confessed that it was all a lie: she is actually white and Jewish. She had been prevaricating for years: “I am not a culture vulture. I am a culture leech,” Krug wrote tearfully. “I have thought about ending these lies many times over many years, but my cowardice was always more powerful than my ethics.” She continues: “You should absolutely cancel me, and I absolutely cancel myself.”
At first it was her zealous desire for this new form of “salvation” (and possible advancement)—she would become black or a minority, which in the new religion is equivalent to a kind of reserved sainthood, a special and elevated place of predilection for the Elect. But now, recognizing her immense “sin” against the new faith, comes her abject “confession” and public announcement about engaging in multiple lies, her guilt, which like Kotov and any number of those Bolsheviks shot in 1936-1937, she accepts with the same zeal as those victims of Stalin’s purge exhibited as faithful and illustrious party members.
“You should absolutely cancel me, and I absolutely cancel myself,” she cries, perhaps seeking some form of expiation. But unlike in traditional Christianity, with its loving and forgiving God, Krug may not get forgiveness from her progressivist allies.
She illustrates in a certain very disturbing manner what we face: it is not just unchained violence and looting in the streets—it is not just an unhinged anti-Trumpism politically in the media or in academia—it is not even just the hysterical hatred by our defecated elites. In a way Krug is emblematic of the age-old spiritual war between the Children of Faith, the inheritors of our civilization and culture entrusted to them by their ancestors, and those programmed minions, those dark demiurges out of Hell itself who answer not to God but to the Evil One.
This, then, is the conflict we find ourselves in, and just like our Crusading ancestors we must answer the Call. Failing that, we shall perish and future generations will curse our names.
I pass on an article about Jessica Krug’s lies and deception, plus a piece on the purging of non-Progressivist academics and professionals. Be afraid, be very afraid…then prayerfully suit up the armor of the Crusaders and go forth chanting: “Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus regnat!” – Christ conquers – Christ reigns – Christ commands!
‘Black’ professor admits she is actually white in self-published essay
ELYSE WANSHEL Sep 4th 2020 8:59AM
A history professor and political activist at The George Washington University has publicly admitted that she is actually white and Jewish — despite claiming to be Black for years.
Jessica A. Krug — whose “African American history” and “imperialism and colonialism” — came clean in a self-published essay titled “The Truth, and the Anti-Black Violence of My Lies” on published Thursday. In the confessional piece, Krug said that she has deceived friends and colleagues by falsely claiming several identities like “North African Blackness, then US rooted Blackness, then Caribbean rooted Bronx Blackness” for “the better part of my adult life.”
“I am not a culture vulture. I am a culture leech,” Krug wrote. “I have thought about ending these lies many times over many years, but my cowardice was always more powerful than my ethics.”
Krug continued: “You should absolutely cancel me, and I absolutely cancel myself.”
A representative of The George Washington University, located in Washington, D.C., told HuffPost in an email, “We are aware of the post and are looking into the situation. We cannot comment further on personnel matters.”
HuffPost reached out to Krug but did not receive an immediate response.
In her essay, Krug said that she’s been battling “unaddressed mental health demons” for most of her life and began assuming a false identity as a child.
“But mental health issues can never, will never, neither explain nor justify, neither condone nor excuse, that, in spite of knowing and regularly critiquing any and every non-Black person who appropriates from Black people, my false identity was crafted entirely from the fabric of Black lives,” she wrote.
Krug has been teaching classes such as “Topics in African History “ and “Africa and the African Diaspora” at the George Washington University since 2012, according to the university’s website. She has also written extensively on the subject of Blackness, including two books.
It’s unclear why Krug decided to write and publish her essay. Twitter users, who included people claiming to know Krug, have theories — along with reactions to the news.
Many people compared her to , who was exposed as a white woman in 2015 after pretending to be Black while heading an NAACP chapter in Washington State.
To read their responses, scroll down.
Educated Young Leftists Most Likely To Fire You Over Politics
Posted: Aug 14, 2020 10:14 AM
A new surveyhas major implications for woke capitalism. The survey has revealed the extent to which the artificial corporate monoculture has poisoned our discourse and made it perilous for anyone outside the left to be open about their views.
One of the key take-aways from the survey was that 62% of those polled said they were afraid to openly discuss their political opinions. The numbers get worse the further down the political spectrum you go: 77% of self-identified Republicans felt that they could not be honest about their politics, whereas 52% of self-identified Democrats felt the same way. The only group that felt they could be honest about their views were “strong liberals.” Liberals, moderates, and conservatives all feel to some extent that they have to self-censor, and that if they were honest about their political views, their careers would suffer.
Perhaps the most distressing aspect of this report is just how many respondents, particularly those on the left, reported being willing to punish their political opponents. Half of self-identified “strong liberals” said they would support firing Trump donors (only 36% of “strong conservatives” said they would support firing Biden donors). There is also a distinct generational divide – younger Americans are more willing to punish Trump or Biden supporters than older Americans.
The problem of an artificial ideological monoculture is exceptionally prominent among the well-educated. According to the Cato study, if you’re a Republican with a graduate degree, there’s a 60% chance you are worried that being open about your politics could cost you at your job, while only 25% of post-graduate Democrats felt the same way.
In summary, virtually every major political group feels some amount of external pressure to keep their mouths shut, and a troubling proportion of people find the idea of firing people because they donated to the wrong politician defensible – and these problems are particularly severe for young, well-educated people. While political bias within corporations is an extremely widespread phenomenon, the big tech companies – Apple, Facebook, Twitter, etc. – are almost endemically left-wing, and these Silicon Valley companies are disproportionately likely to be run by young people.
In light of this study, the widespread ideological monoculture in big tech is not a shocking anomaly. The cause is obvious: Conservatives cannot openly challenge any dogma of the political left, because they might be fired, as happened to James Damore at Google, if they tell the truth. An internal group called “FB’ers for Political Diversity” was formed inside Facebook, consisting of 100 employees who believe that the company was systemically biased against conservatives. A senior engineer at the company wrote in a memo, “We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views [….] We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are quick to attack — often in mobs — anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.” Undoubtedly, a culture that forces conservatives to form tiny support groups would influence how a corporation operates. According to 2ndVote, which tracks political bias in business, Facebook is almost monolithically left-wing.
*Source: 2ndVote. Scale from 1 to 5, 1 being the most left-wing, 5 being the most right-wing.
On everything from abortion to religious liberty, Facebook is completely embedded within the left. There is no viewpoint diversity at these companies because they make no effort to encourage dissenting or deviation from the accepted doctrines.
They may be deeply committed to diversity in a facile and superficial sense, but they have no concern for diversity in its most meaningful sense: diversity of viewpoint. It is not considered desirable by corporate management to maintain a workforce that consists of people who view the world differently. When shareholder rights groups have tried to fix this problem through resolutions that support ideological diversity, corporate management shoots them down. Amazon, Apple, Twitter, and Google all rejected shareholder resolutions calling for more ideological diversity, evidently preferring to let their workers stay in petrified silence than do anything that might allow moderates and conservatives to speak freely.
The conservative movement should find this report deeply concerning. It indicates that left-wing bias in corporations is even more widespread and deep-seated than we thought it was. As far as we can tell, companies such as Apple are doing nothing to make employees who disagree with the consensus feel comfortable being honest about their views. It is now incumbent upon investors to pressure woke capital, particularly big tech companies, to protect and promote ideological dissent. The left-wing monoculture in corporations is both bad for business and offensive to human dignity.