Posted on 04/20/2009 4:28:11 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last week, I was away speaking at Michigan State University. While I was gone, my inbox filled with requests that I write about the recent disruption of Tom Tancredo’s speech at UNC-Chapel Hill. I am pleased to do so. As a professor in the UNC system, I’m also pleased to explain why this embarrassing incident occurred.
If one is to understand the Tancredo incident one must be familiar with ten rules that apply to free speech and to other rights in the UNC system. One must also understand the origin of at least some of these ten rules. Once one is properly educated in these rules, it becomes obvious that Tom Tancredo is not a victim in any sense of the word. In fact, it is Tancredo, not the protestors, who should be embarrassed.
1. Groups, not individuals, possess rights. Many observers are confused into thinking that Tom Tancredo’s constitutional rights were violated last week in Chapel Hill. This is based on the antiquated notion that free speech is an individual right. Because our Founding Fathers owned slaves (read: violated individual rights) those rights have now been transferred from individuals to groups.
The rights of any given group are determined by the extent of historical oppression the group has suffered. Obviously, as a group, African-Americans now have rights because of slavery. Illegal aliens also have rights, as a group, because the conditions that caused them to become “illegal” were oppressive.
3. Oppression need not have occurred in this country to produce rights in this country. Some will note that the oppression that produced illegal immigration occurred in another country implying that this does not create any rights here in this country. This criticism assumes the legitimacy of the term “countries,” which like the term “laws” is suspect. It should also be noted that prior to any discussion of how to patrol our border, the term “border” is designated as oppressive. This helps us to think globally.
4. Jews are exempt from rule #3. Jews have suffered a lot throughout history. But most of that suffering occurred in other countries. Since the Jews now control so much of America and probably planned 911 there is no need to grant them unnecessary rights.
5. Rights do not compel responsibility. The notion of responsibility is antithetical to the notion of collectivism. Notions of responsibility help to advance capitalism, which help to advance oppression. In other words, it is irresponsible to advance responsibility because it is responsible for a lot of group oppression.
6. Whites may establish rights temporarily by acting as spokespersons for oppressed groups. The fact that most of the people protesting Tancredo were, like Tancredo, whites in the country legally, is irrelevant. They had free speech rights because they were speaking up for the oppressed. Tancredo did not because he was speaking out against the oppressed and, hence, advancing oppression.
7. Oppressed groups need not give consent to their spokespersons. White liberals always know what is best for minorities who do not always know what is best for them.
8. Vandalism is a permissible form of expression. Jonathan Curtis, a UNC administrator, aided and abetted the theft of the conservative Carolina Review in 1996. He went unpunished. Since then, the administration has been reluctant to suggest that lawlessness is illegal. Lawlessness can be a good way of showing how laws are oppressive. This includes pounding on windows and shattering glass while people are trying to speak.
9. An effect may precede its cause. The protestors claimed that the Tancredo incident was the fault of the police who sprayed pepper spray to disperse the crowd. It should not matter that the disruption happened first. These kids have taken sociology courses where they are taught that labeling someone “delinquent” causes delinquency. They have taken education courses where they are taught that labeling someone as “slow” causes bad grades. These assertions are not backed up by longitudinal studies that can separate cause and effect. That would constitute “evidence” and evidence is oppressive. In fact, the videotape of the protestors smashing a window is oppressive.
10. The law is an instrument of oppression and criminality is a form of expression. Tom Tancredo supports the enforcement of the law. He is an oppressor. The protestors were breaking the law as a form of expression. In the same way, illegal immigration is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment and unaffected by antiquated notions like “citizenship.” Citizenship is oppressive.
Now that you have heard the rules and know something of their origin you may decide to sympathize with the protestors. Or you may decide that I’ve been right about what I’ve been saying in this column for the last six years. And why I often feel like an alien in a strange land speaking a language no one understands.
This is a great list. I’d love to see it carved in stone and mounted in the public squares of all the major universities in America.
Heh!
Sadly, this hits the mark.
The idiots would take it seriously.....Heck, they do now....
For decades Republicans failed to understand that universities are breeding grounds for the leftist scum that eventually took over the country. Along with Hollywood they indoctrinate people to reject traditional American values and ideals (like freedom of speech and individual rights). They were silent, letting these conditions fester unopposed and now we have paid the price.
It is a great list. Mr. Adams definitely understands what is going on.
Makes you wonder why anyone would want to attend college, which is where these ideas were cultivated into an epidemic plague.
Ok, some college degrees are still useful, like in the sciences. Except that science is now politically compromised on matters such as global warming. There will be other examples.
And perhaps someday the medical profession will have its equivalent political compromise. There are already some possibilities.
Someday?
There are already some possibilities.
They were silent, letting these conditions fester unopposed and now we have paid the price.
Sadly, the bill has’t reached the table.
The price we will have to pay is as yet undetermined.
The parents of these now brainless, useless lemmings who faint at the very thought of the empty suit in the WH, have totally failed their own off spring.
I believe the responsibility of parents is as follows.
Provide food and shelter
See that they are educated by making them attend school (whether the schools are good or bad is a discussion for another time)
Teach them right from wrong and then enforce this by making it plain through punishment and reward that they will be held fully responsible for their actions.
Be consistent. Wrong is wrong whether it is a Monday or a weekend. Set rules and boundaries and enforce them. If curfew is 10pm then there will be punishment administered at 10:05 pm unless a valid excuse is forthcoming.
Never try to be a friend to your children when you are raising them. They have their own friends and would much prefer them to you any day of the week. Children are in some ways like terrorists. They continually push the envelope and will regard any back tracking from the rules as a weakness. They will then take even more liberties, ie go on the attack.
Do not negotiate with your children. They have NO rights, no input on the rules and regulations YOU set down in your own home. When your kids whine that you are not being fair, as mine often did, I use it as an opportunity to teach them history by telling them one of our presidents, JFK said "Life is not fair", adding to that my own claim that "sometimes life sucks and then you die". In any case never make any attempt to justify the rules you set down for their behavior. You are the boss so act like it. Believe me if done at an early age and done with consistency it works.
Children want and need discipline and boundaries. Children left to their own devices will instinctively seek out authority figures in their own peer group and substitute them for the leadership you have failed to give them. The problem is that their peers are as helpless and clueless as they are and no good comes from this.
At all times make them feel loved and cherished, even when they are being punished (this hurts me more then it hurts you sort of thing). Explain that it is Because you love them so much and care about their future that the punishment is necessary.
If they threaten to run away, offer to help them pack a bag.
When they graduate HS either they go to College or get a job. If they get a job they pay a % of their pay to the household as long as they are living at home. If you can, save this money and when they leave on their own, make it a gift to them. If it is needed then use it. They must learn there is no free lunch.
Bring God into their lives early and never let then forget what he did for all of us, but don't be a fanatic about it. A quiet faith is much more convincing then a ranting, fire and brimstone type of delivery.
Do the above, pray for them and hope for the best. It's all you can really do.
“I believe the responsibility of parents is as follows.”
That matches my philosophy almost exactly. My three daughters are grown up now, and I still get compliments on what great kids they are. Hardly a moment’s trouble in 27 years.
There have been two interesting speakers in Erskine Bowles' UNC System, at ECU, this year:
1. George Freeman, vice president and assistant general counsel to the New York Times
2. Joe Wilson
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.