In light of all the “shocked, shocked, I tell you” reactions to the video 0f an Oklahoma frat house’s racist chant, I pulled up some other instances of “hate speech” at American universities that somehow passed muster.
None of the people in these cases was in their teens, none was drunk, none was speaking to a private group of like-minded associates, as the Oklahoma boys were.
1. A black activist and visiting professor at North Carolina State University addressed a Howard University Law school panel in 2005 and advocated exterminating all white people on the planet as the only solution to black problems.
2. After the Washington Navy Yard shootings, a tenured professor at the University of Kansas tweeted that he hoped that the next shooting victims would be the sons and daughters of the NRA (National Rifle Association) since, in his view, they were responsible for the Navy Yard massacre.
He was put on indefinite leave, the only one on this list who was punished.
3. In 2012, Dr. Richard Parncutt advocated the death penalty for influential deniers of global warming.
4. In 2001, Mary Daly, a feminist professor at Boston College, advocated an evolutionary process that would result in a drastic reduction in the male population, as the only way to “decontaminate” the world.
5. Pete Singer, renowned bioethicist, argued in a published book that “Killing a defective infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person,” and “Sometimes it is not wrong at all.” Princeton gave him tenure in 1998.
6. The chairwoman of the University of Michigan’s Communications department wrote an oped whose first line was “I hate Republicans.” Further on in the piece, she referred to what she felt as “loathing.”
7. University of Rhode Island history professor Erik Loomis said this about the National Rifle Association’s executive vice-president, Wayne LaPierre: “I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick.”
8. Rutgers University professor and poet Amiri Baraka has written, “”I got the extermination blues, jew-boys….” and “We want dagger poems in the slimy bellies of the owner-Jews.”
None of the views expressed above (even number 7, which was surely an actionable threat) received any serious punishment, except no. 2.
However, the next two views did get a swift and severe response from the university:
9. A tenured professor at Marquette University (a Catholic university, mind you) was fired for having criticized a graduate student who refused to allow any opposing view on gay marriage in her classroom.
10. An offer of tenure at the University of Illinois was rescinded after the candidate tweeted angry comments about Israel’s Gaza offensive in the summer of 2014.
So what’s the distinction between the first eight incidents and the last two?
The first eight all conform to the larger goals of the New World Order elites; the last two constitute obstacles to those goals.
Thus,
1. and 8. Race hatred against whites distracts from the elites who manipulate whites and non-whites.
It drives a wedge between the two groups, preventing their alliance against the real enemy. Inflammatory racial rhetoric against the right groups is never discouraged by the elites.
2. and 7. Hatred of gun advocacy promotes gun-control. The NWO needs the population to be disarmed and cowed by the police and the military.
3. Indoctrination in global warming orthodoxy prepares the public to accept the social and economic controls being imposed on it in the name of climate change.
4. Hatred of masculinity provides the justification for female tyranny and privilege and the redistribution of wealth from the private sector (dominated by men) to the public(driven by feminist/female votes).
5. Radical abortion and infanticide constitute a form of depopulation, another elite goal. They also destroy maternal feeling and undermine the family. Atomized individuals without strong family bonds are more easily manipulated by propaganda, military recruiters, and gang-leaders; they are more easily addicted to drugs and pornography both big money-earners for the New World Order elites.
6. Polarizing party politics prevents the population from thinking outside the prescribed binaries and diverts attention from the elites. Inflammatory, personalized political comments make great “noise” drowning out more serious analysis.
On the other hand, oppose gay marriage or the foreign policy of the Israeli state and you invite reprisals.
Greater Israel and the higher sodomy are both central dogmas of the New World Order.
No hate speech on American campuses?
Not for a moment. Hate is just fine in the classroom, so long as it’s the right kind.