Governor DeSantis: Take the lead—SECEDE

“Biden declares that the COVID-19 pandemic ‘is over’ weeks before the midterm elections.”

So the perverted, decrepit puppet thinks totalitarian tyranny, threatening dissenters with a Hitleresqe speech and turning the FBI into a hybrid of the Gestapo and KGB will sell better than Faux Pandemic: The Sequel.

In other news:

“Now we see, in New York and D.C., they used to beat their chests when Trump was in office, saying they are sanctuary jurisdictions,” DeSantis said. “Then the minute Texas starts busing there, they get very bent out of shape about it.”

“These are just the beginning efforts,” DeSantis continued. “We got an infrastructure in place now. There is going to be a lot more that’s happening.”

Entirely justified (and minimal) retaliation against the worst tyranny since the 1940s: the lawless, out of control Biden regime.

America’s second civil war has started. It doesn’t have to be bloody, and I hope it isn’t. But I know it will be. These monsters in D.C. are a ruthless combination of fascism, Communism, and sheer mafia-like terrorism. They will get even more violent than they have been. There is nothing good about this, other than perhaps the fact that Americans who have been asleep might finally wake up to the reality of what serious trouble we are in.

Take the lead, Governor DeSantis. SECEDE.

Mob Rule, in a Nutshell (Asimov/Jefferson)

Trevize said, “I know what the word ‘skeptic’ means in Galactic, but how do you use the word?”

“Exactly as you do, Councilman. I accept only what I am forced to accept by reasonably reliable evidence, and keep that acceptance tentative pending the arrival of further evidence. That doesn’t make us popular.”

“Why not?” said Trevize.

“We wouldn’t be popular anywhere. Where is the world whose people don’t prefer a comfortable, warm, and well-worn belief, however illogical, to the chilly winds of uncertainty?”

from “Foundation and Earth” by Isaac Asimov

“A democracy is nothing but mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” Thomas Jefferson

Finally, a Republican besides Trump who Fights Back

Florida’s shipping of outlaws to Martha’s Vineyard is a brilliant tactic. It won’t win the civil war we are already in. The feds, an outlaw regime under Biden/Obama/Soros & co., will simply find a way to punish Florida and American dissidents more than they already are doing, and along the lines threatened in Biden’s Hitleresque speech. Then hopefully, Florida, Texas and a growing number of allied states will fight back even more forcefully.

But at least DeSantis fights. The Bidenistas are thinking we will go down without a fight.

DeSantis begs to differ.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Nobody Oozes Hatred Like a Leftist

Another example of leftist projection: They accuse you of “oozing with hatred” when you criticize the rampant irrationality, mass psychosis and totalitarianism overtaking our world.

Think about it. THEY are the ones who ooze hatred. They HATE America. Which means: they HATE freedom. They HATE liberty. They HATE self-responsibility. They HATE immigration, when it means self-responsible, courageous individualists entering a country with nothing but the shirts on their backs and having to learn how to take care of themselves, in total freedom. This very image makes them sick and causes them to shake with loathing. Hence the resulting rage, hatred and advocacy of dicatorship they now openly encourage, with all the masks off.

They cannot STAND the idea of independence, of competence, of achievement, of productivity, of wealth. And, of course, they LOATHE things that aren’t themselves. They LOATHE religion, even though their sycophantic allegiance to the unreasoned and unproven claims of Green religion tops the most fervent irrationality seen since the peak of the Middle Ages. They LOATHE happy families. They claim all families are dysfunctional by their very natures, and then they turn around and excuse or ignore — in some cases, even champion — child molesting and the physical mutilation of children before they’re old enough to have any concept of what’s happening.

They DETEST all who are not like them. They DESPISE people who don’t live in cities or in affluent left-wing suburbs. They openly say, in many cases, that America only needs the cities, not the truckers, the blue collar workers who voted for Trump, and certainly not anyone who owns a gun or a Bible or (in other cases) a copy of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged or (heaven forbid) a copy of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. They reserve their most robust HATRED for anyone whom they believe should be like them — a gay person, a black person, any other “person of color” — who dares to disagree with them. In their minds, those are the first to go to the gallows. Right now, it’s just in their minds; but if the tone and content of Biden’s inconceivably irrational and hateful speech of a couple of weeks ago (the American Nazi speech) means anything at all, the real gallows are coming.

THESE are the people — these tortured, twisted, irrational, amoral and utterly intellectually dishonest, irreparably crippled souls — who seek to make reasonable, decent people feel guilty or ashamed by saying things like, “You’re full of hate.”

Nobody oozes hatred like a leftist. It’s because leftism/progressivism (or whatever you wish to call the monstrosity destroying our worlds) is, by its very nature, based upon the idea of destruction and mutilation for their own sake. All that you hold valuable, and all that you potentially might hold valuable — materially, psychologically, spiritually — is what they are after. It’s deeper than politics. That’s why it’s everywhere, not just in the government but throughout the media, all levels of schools, entertainment, sports, music … Destruction and mutilation of all things beautiful is their quest. And — so far — it’s working.

Don’t let the bad guys make you feel guilty. THEY are the bad guys. THEY are the ones guilty of ALL the things they accuse you of. It’s such a ridiculous and obvious form of projection that it’s hard to generate the motivation to even say so. But we have to say so; because if we don’t, they win.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

How to Talk to a Wokester

Conservatives reply to woke objections with a modest offering of facts that undo the woke narrative—and get nowhere.
Here’s a better way.

If you’re invited to a friend’s house for Thanksgiving Dinner, and his daughter shows up and starts talking about America’s genocide of Native Americans, what do you say? Or if you’re in a discussion of classical education with other parents from your neighborhood and someone comments that classical education has a curriculum that lacks diversity and flirts with white privilege, how do you respond? 

These are standard woke gestures, commonplace and unsurprising. The language is always the same, the charges familiar. People voice them with a set script in their heads, one they have heard a thousand times in classrooms, on talk shows, and in social media. That hasn’t made them less difficult to answer, though. Our woke interlocutor has a point to make, an objection to raise, and more than that. She has indignation in her delivery, too, maybe a little outrage. Occasionally, she verges on a tantrum. The historical contention is one thing, the moral fervor another. It intensifies the exchange. What was a conversation has become a trial. She has put your conscience in the dock. Are you a bad person who perpetuates injustice? Or are you a good person out to end it? 

It sounds like a trivial occasion, but it’s really not. It happens too often not to be important. Woke attitudes have spread too widely for conservatives to avoid it. Not long ago, talk of “privilege,” “patriarchy,” and “transphobia” would have puzzled most Americans. Now, it echoes everywhere, in public and private and professional life. The choice a conservative faces on those occasions doesn’t depend on the truth of things. It’s a social matter, a crossroads. “Do I speak my mind and annoy the present company? Or just nod and move on?” 

The affect of wokesters pushes you toward the second option. They speak forcefully, haughtily. They may not know much about the founding, but they know the founders owned slaves, and that’s enough. They can’t name the U.S. presidents in order, but they know that none of them was a woman. They haven’t read news reports on the current chaos at the border, but all Americans are immigrants, they insist. These convictions put them on moral high ground. They also please the holder of them. Indignation can feel awfully good, especially when wokesters can fire it as an adversary and watch him squirm.  

People conscious of others’ feelings or raised with bourgeois manners find the affect hard to overcome. They don’t want to offend. I’ve seen conservatives reply to woke objections with a modest offering of facts that undo the woke narrative—and get nowhere. They don’t match the indignation of the wokester with a defensiveness of similar intensity, and so their facts lack authority. 

To say that in 1800 slavery existed all over the world, so we should stop treating the American practice as an unusual abomination, does nothing to lessen the blameworthiness of the American South. Noting that the absence of female leaders in ancient times may have something to do with the duties of a king back then to command an army in the field at any time has no persuasive power. Appeals to nature are hollow. 

It’s a losing game. Save your breath—don’t try to argue, don’t defend. The wokester is strong on belief and weak on knowledge, no matter how much she thinks she knows the real history of things. To be woke is precisely this claim of superior knowledge, a keener awareness than that of those still un-woke, asleep in their illusions of, say, American greatness. Knowing they possess the truth, wokesters have the blessing of moral courage, the dedication to speak truth to power. It gives them a noble role to play in the correction of the historical record. 

And there lies the weak spot of the woke brigade: the pretension to moral superiority through better knowledge. They believe they have better hearts because they have better minds, and that’s an assumption that easily collapses. It points the way to a different response than argument. 

Instead of challenging the wokester’s knowledge, let’s go with the wokester’s knowledge and draw it out. Let her school us, let her show us her certainty and let’s accept her duty to instruct the ignorant. She wants to be a pedagogue; we shall accept the position of pupil. 

The model is Socrates, who comes to many dialogues as one who knows nothing and desires enlightenment. He asks simple questions and listens closely to the answers. The other participants believe they grasp the truth firmly, but as his queries continue, their confidence begins to wane. They speak at first as ordinary folk who nonetheless possess common sense, or as experts in a subject, such as Ion the rhapsode on the topic of Homer. They are complacent until the dialectic leads them to acknowledge their error.

Take the same approach with the wokester. If she brings up the Native American issue, ask her in all innocence why those cavalry officers were often flanked by native scouts helping them track down other tribes. 

If she berates the founders as hypocrites, ask why Thomas Jefferson penned a document that became a rallying cry for civil rights forever after. Why would he do that? 

If she brings up the absence of female rulers in the old days, ask what would happen to a kingdom if it were threatened by a neighbor and the ruler were eight months pregnant? 

If she objects to Western Civilization as white supremacy, ask her to describe the whiteness of Beethoven’s Ninth, or ask her if she wants her children to read Hamlet, tour the National Gallery, and study the architecture of the Acropolis and the Pantheon. 

If America is shot through with systemic racism, you can say, why do so many people of color keep scrambling to come? Really, why?

Ask those questions in a spirit of education. The wokester has taken the podium. She can’t not answer. Her shtick is to catechize and berate, so give her the chance to amplify her contentions. The spread of woke knowledge should satisfy her, as should your willingness to be awokened. What could be better than a willing student, an open mind? 

What you will uncover, of course, displeases her more than your expected resistance. The knowledge she presumes will soon appear to come in small packages, biased and uncontextualized. She hasn’t listened to Beethoven’s Ninth or read Hamlet, can’t distinguish a Renaissance work of art from one created in the Romantic Period, and goes blank at the mention of the Acropolis and the Pantheon. In truth, wokeness doesn’t appeal to her intelligence and never did. It flattered her ego. Now, faced with questions directly related to what she has just stated, the certitude crumbles and the ego collapses. You have asked her for knowledge, and she hasn’t replied. She can’t. 

You’ve won. It’s time to hum a few bars of Beethoven, mouth some words of Polonius, praise the dimensions of Greek columns, and detail what the Comanches did to their neighbors, and see if she’s ready to listen.

About Mark Bauerlein

Mark Bauerlein is a senior editor at First Things and professor of English at Emory University, where he has taught since earning his Ph.D. in English at UCLA in 1989. For two years (2003-2005) he served as director of the Office of Research and Analysis at the National Endowment for the Arts. His books include Literary Criticism: An AutopsyThe Pragmatic Mind: Explorations in the Psychology of Belief, and The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future. His essays have appeared in PMLAPartisan ReviewWilson QuarterlyCommentary, and New Criterion, and his commentaries and reviews in the Wall Street JournalWashington PostBoston GlobeThe GuardianChronicle of Higher Education, and other national periodicals.