A couple of years ago, my running friend suggested that we listen to books via Audible and discuss what we have read while we run. For two women who are always trying to multi-task, this was the perfect solution to exercise while being part of a ‘book club’. We took turns recommending books until we got to her recommendation to read “White Fragility” by Robin Diangelo. I honestly had no idea what I was getting into when she suggested this as a reading to discuss. I faithfully listened to the entire piece and can’t think of a way that I have wasted more hours of my life.
First of all, it is written in a form that comes across to me as a word salad. Sentences often lacked coherence but when they did, she would just restate the same thing over and over but using different words. I do not think there was one thing that I could find in slight agreement with the author. I do think we have a mutual purpose and that is the fact that we want all people to feel respected and appreciated. That we want to empower people to recognize their individual skills and integrity. We just approach our goal from opposite ends of the spectrum…one is to victimize and the other is to take personal responsibility.
As my friend and I discussed this book, I brought up a topic that I learned is not to be spoken from a Leftist’s point of view. What topic you ask? The every growing fatherless children within certain communities. I told her that if we really wanted to discuss a way to help these people, we would discuss ways to encourage marriage and family. Just look at what some dads did in Louisiana when they took to a stand against the violence and fighting in their local high school. The conversation went off the rails after this and the end result is we discontinued our ‘book club’. But what she did offer me, is an insiders view of the how the Left thinks of men and the family unit.
As I have dug deeper into this issue, I learned that Left has been trying to deconstruct masculinity because ultimately it is a threat to their love and lust for power. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri gave this wonderful speech entitled “The Future of the American Man”. The speech is 26 minutes long, powerful and insightful. I am surprised that it did not get more media attention (said sarcastically)!
Thomas Klingenstein of The American Mind wrote this piece about Hawley’s speech. He praises him for bringing up the topic and for speaking so eloquently on something that needs to be said. But, he accuses him of not going far enough. If you have not read much about the Left using the destruction of masculinity in their toolbox for power, Mr. Klingenstein offers some good advice and insight.
As good speeches do, his speech surprised his listeners. We no longer hear talk about manliness in public. The radical left, whom I call the “woke communists,” have forbidden it. The great virtue of Hawley’s speech is that he talked about this forbidden thing, and in doing so gave others permission to talk about it. Hawley knows—as the woke comms know—that politics is ultimately about what it means to live a good life, and therefore what it means to be a human being and what it means to be a man or a woman. The woke comms are determined to destroy traditional sex roles as part of their project to destroy America. Hawley’s speech on masculinity must be understood in this larger context.
Like all totalitarian ideologies, woke communism is self-righteous and intolerant, built on lies and the silencing of those who challenge the lies. The woke comms decide what is true and what is false; indeed, the woke comm regime seeks to abolish the capacity for distinguishing between truth and falsehood. Woke communism has a scapegoat (white males, whom the woke comms say oppress all minority groups) and a utopian vision of society, one where there are equal outcomes for all identity groups in every area of human life. This is the woke communist vision of a just society, which they call “social justice.”
Senator Hawley should make “outcome equality” his rallying cry. He will do us a great service by explaining how outcome equality leads to our present discontents. He should explain how the ideology of outcome equality keeps inner cities fatherless and crime ridden, teaches white children to hate themselves and all children to hate their country, reduces excellence across the board, explains socialism, the attack on so-called “toxic” masculinity, the taking down of statues, transgenderism, defunding the police, and flooding the country with illegal immigrants. He will do us a service us as well by explaining how the desire for outcome equality leads to the destruction of the nuclear family, depopulation, and the weakening of our military and of our resolve to defend ourselves. He must make it clear how each of these goals is connected to outcome equality. He needs to connect the dots.
I agree with "We just approach our goal from opposite ends of the spectrum…one is to victimize and the other is to take personal responsibility." and add my own observation as a corollary:
"We just approach our goal from opposite ends of the spectrum…one wishes to control the actions / thoughts / words of others whilst victimizing, the other is to take personal responsibility."
eg: only some African Americans are victims, the others are to be shunned as right wingers. And if you don't vote for Brandon, well you ain't black. Come on, man!
I hope you are well.
Latest stats from CDC (I know, CDC..)
https://cnsnews.com/article/national/terence-p-jeffrey/cdc-405-us-babies-born-2020-had-unmarried-mothers-420-born