The idiot savants at the Stately Manor yip like maddened dogs when our liberal-progressive-socialist acquaintances accuse us of hearing conservative dog whistles. Why? Because they’ve got their own.
However specious their argument, however bereft of fact or anemic in logic, our adversaries need only spit out the term “Koch Brothers” and their fellow Lefties howl like the Hounds of Baskerville. Know when our acquaintances have lost the argument? It’s when they litter their discourse with catch phrases like “Fox News,” “Bradley Foundation,” “ALEC,” and “talking points.” And of course, the race card.
They really believe that conservatism, as the Hildabeast once fantasized, is One Big Conspiracy — a monstrous plot devised in gold-plated catacombs deep beneath the earth’s crust. When Scott Walker speaks, you can see Diane Hendrick’s tonsils. Kochs and Bradleys are pulling invisible strings to make small-town Wisconsin Republicans — farmers, real estate agents, insurance salesmen — dance like sideshow marionettes.
Their conspiracy mongering sure beats coming up with an actual message. Or, for that matter, candidates who resonate off the university campus. The topper was the Voice of Progressivism claiming the debate over conservative speakers was going just fine until, somehow, the Kochs and Bradleys entered the conversation. The First Amendment puts no quota on speech, although our Leftist acquaintances would like to enact one.
If conservative organizations came to the rescue of free speech, it is because liberals countenanced — when they did not actively encourage — repressing free speech. That’s no exaggeration. Here is The Nation (John Nichols’ day job) encouraging the black-shrouded antifa terrorists.
Banging the drums of ignorance
Yes, your Humble Squire is spitting buttermilk over a seriously paranoid screed entitled “Bradley Foundation, Kochs threaten free speech.” Seriously, how does this kind of agit-prop help the progressive cause? Especially since The Capital Times has been silent when it hasn’t been actually complicit in silencing conservative speech?
Don’t think free speech — intellectual inquiry — is under attack at University of Wisconsin-Madison has a free speech? Then why did a small university group feel the need to host a speech by social scientist Charles Murray off campus on private property Wednesday night (5-10-2017), weeks after protesters violently disrupted his lecture at Middlebury College?
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported the day of the event that an effort was planned to assemble drums, whistles, pots and pans outside the Madison Club to disrupt the event (which managed to proceed nonetheless).
Earlier, the mere scheduling of Milo Yiannopoulos left UW-Berkeley burning. Heather Mac Donald was shouted down at Claremont McKenna. But The Capital Times blames the Koch brothers for antifa’s window smashing?
This is nothing new. In 2010, your scribe wrote about the young woman who chaired the campus Republicans at UW-Madison who was hounded for inviting David Horowitz to speak. So hounded by intolerant Lefties was she that the university assigned her a bodyguard. The university sent her the bill. (“UW-Madison’s diversity problem.”)
‘No denying the leftist political bias’
The campus speech nazis did not arise fully formed out of Mother Earth. They load up on intolerance in the lecture hall. In the afore-mentioned article, I asked the dean of letters and science to name a conservative. He offered Donald Downs. Professor Downs has since retired. (He led the fight to overturn, in the courts, the UW’s repressive speech code. No help from The Capital Times. And he supports)
Which is why we turn today to the Wall Street Journal, wherein the president of Wesleyan University writes:
There is no denying the left-leaning political bias on American college campuses. As data from UCLA’s Higher Education Institute show, the professoriate has moved considerably leftward since the late 1980s, especially in the arts and humanities. In New England, where my own university is located, liberal professors outnumber their conservative colleagues by a ratio of 28:1.
The issue, however, isn’t whether the occasional conservative, libertarian or religious speaker gets a chance to speak. That is tolerance, an appeal to civility and fairness, but it doesn’t take us far enough. To create deeper intellectual and political diversity, we need an affirmative-action program for the full range of conservative ideas and traditions, because on too many of our campuses they seldom get the sustained, scholarly attention that they deserve.
… This fall, our own academic departments and centers will begin offering courses and programs to cover topics such as “the philosophical and economic foundations of private property, free enterprise and market economies” and “the relationship of tolerance to individual rights, freedom and voluntary association.” — “The opening of the liberal mind.”
The Blaska Policy Werkes has been lobbying for the equivalent of a Hoover Institution on the Madison campus. A Condi Rice and Thomas Sowell, or two, might counter the idiocy of banging drums and blowing whistles every time liberals hear the Koch Brothers whistling.