Posted on 07/25/2020 9:21:00 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
For quite a while now, we've been treated to the demoralizing and unedifying spectacle of media outlets and corporations bowing down to the mob's cancel culture demands. Authors have been banned, editors fired, Trader Joe's products renamed, statues dragged down, and much more, merely because spoiled, entitled, college-educated snowflakes, secure in their victimhood, have said words or products hurt their feelings and made them feel "unsafe."
Thankfully, after the first shock of this Maoist attack on American institutions, some are beginning to recover their backbones.
First, Goya Foods stood up to the mob. Then Red Bull refused to back down. And now the Wall Street Journal has declined to allow its baby journalists to hold its editorial page hostage.
The back story to the Journal's courageous stand is that 280 employees in the News department signed a letter to the publisher, Almar Latour, criticizing the paper's opinion pages. The letter is a marvel of Orwellian writing. It opens by expressing support for the First Amendment and then spends three pages explaining why the paper's opinion page needs to stifle itself because it publishes material with which the letter's signatories disagree. Not coincidentally, they invariably disagree with conservative content.
The greatest offender, according to the letter, was Heather Mac Donald's piece about a pair of academics' cowardly decision to withdraw from publication a study showing the absence of systemic racism when it came to the police shooting blacks in America. The academics wanted to withdraw the piece because Mac Donald had relied on its findings. (N.B.: Mac Donald had not twisted the results; she had merely relied on them.)
Mac Donald wrote about this academic game in the Wall Street Journal's opinion pages, something the letter-writers found unacceptable.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The article you quoted was from 1984 for crying outoud.
And BLM is not an illegal immigration organisation. It’s made up almost entirely of native born Africa Americans.
WSJ Editorial vs WSJ “News”
Like I said, everything. BLM is just a renaming of the same old communist movement that the WSJ openly supported back then.
Communists are not concerned with seeming anachronisms. As the Manifesto said, in their view “the present controls the past”.
Your polemic stance does not answer whether or not the WSJ has really repented of their left-wing views; after all, you responded to my post, not vice versa. There are lots of left-wing college professors who find themselves having to “stand up to” the cancel-culture monster they helped create or get consumed by it; this is not a repentance from their own views.
I started to watch the Twins game last night but couldn't get past the national anthem.
Idiots kneeling in protest to the greatest civilization with the highest quality of life mankind has ever built! And they remain free citizens. The irony!
This is a special kind of stupid. It nauseated me and I had to turn it off.
Show me even one communist country that ever abolished it's borders. Even when we had the Warzaw Pact countries, national borders were firmly held in place and controlled.
East Germany, Poland, Bulgaria etc all had distinct borders with border controls where you had to show your passport.
All the Russia did After WW II was steal land from other countries and add it to Russia and then take over Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan etc and create a new country and call it the Soviet Union.
And even within the Soviet Union they still had 13 Republics with distinct borders, cultures and languages.
That, of course, would include abolition of borders within already-established communistic societies; but if insisting that a nation-state regarded as the enemy abolishes its borders as a means for being conquered more rapidly, then that is what they will do because the end justifies the means (or as David Horowitz put it, “the issue is always the revolution”).
- Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?
No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society.
In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.
FWICS, this thread is about the “cancel culture” in general, which BLM is just one segment of; most of this is driven by left-wing politicians and left-wing corporation executives.
And with all due respect, the 1984 editorial is not the only instance where the WSJ has espoused communistic principles. And this was prior to Murdoch’s ownership, under Dow Jones ownership.
When I bought my groceries last week I looked for the Goya products. Wiped out. I did get the last two cans of red beans.
Stoped by the local Kroger yesterday and same results. Goya sold out.
Four shoppers were asking the clerk when they were getting more in. Clerk said they were having trouble getting it from their warehouse.
I agree. I find them to be good neighbors, apart from their voting habits. I had lunch with a Jewish friend recently and related to her how I don't feel comfortable in my church anymore because it's gone so far to the left. She's a Dem, but she told me that she's had the same experience in her synagogue. She feels like she can't speak freely because it's gone so far to the left and that they're intolerant.
That’s super! I stopped off at our local food coop this morning and saw a BLM sign out front. I asked the manager whether that was just a sign of support or whether they were actually sending them money from the sales of the coop. She said no money was going to them; it was just symbolic. She asked whether I’d stop shopping there if they were financially supporting BLM, and I told her that I would. I figure people need to hear from the other side. I don’t want my food shopping purchases to fund a political organization. I’m not too happy about the sign either, and will probably shop accordingly.
Yeah, if I see a BLM sign or even shirts I get back in the car and go elsewhere. Not that it happens in my area. Much more likely to see a Trump sign or flag. :)
Please don’t come at me with proof by repeated assertion. There is nothing pro-capitalist about open borders, an explicitly communistic tenet. Have a nice day.
A couple thoughts:
1. WSJ published an op-ed from the idiots who attacked MacDonald for using their own research
2. WSJ merely allowed MacDonald a letter in reply, not a full op-ed (seems like a cave to me)
3. I had a long conversation with a WSJ letters editor who told me that he used to work on the news team, we’re talking 10-20 yrs ago, IIRC. Even back then, he said, he was the only conservative. News and editorial are completely different.
4. WSJ commenters are generally great. You can tell when the left is in a hussy bc they unleash their seminar commenters, but it’s so obvious as to be painfully stupid. Otherwise, there are all sorts, but the readers are mostly conservative.
Sorry but WSJ only stood up to their own reporters. They still restrict the articles that commentary is allowed on.
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.