Archive for November, 2004

What Censorship Is

The first rule of REAL censorship is that you don’t read about it.

Where would you read about it?

If you ask the average person about censorship, he will talk about the suppression he reads about a lot. He will ask you if you are talking about Michael Moore or the Federal Government refusing to sponsor pornographic “art.”

Those incidents of “censorship” are well-known because people read about them all the time.

When the Canadian authorities seized Why Johnny Can’t Think: America’s Professor-Priesthood I was not “outraged.” This is standard practice. I have dealt with it all my life.

Some people said, “Bob, you should take this to the press.”

Yea, right.

How?

This is not Michael Moore-type national press discussions of “censorship.”

This is the real thing.

You can join the mob and scream about “censorship” when prayers are banned in public school and the fact is trumpeted nation-wide. This is what I call “famous censorship.”

Famous censorship is not real censorship. The whole point of real censorship is to keep things from becoming famous.

Making a big thing about students’ right to pray in school is easy and it makes the people who do it feel brave. You have a billion-dollar evangelical compex to trumpet that call. Those evangelicals have bought their right to media access by pushing third-world adoptions.

Those protestors of students not being allowed to pray in school wouldn’t touch the suppression of a book like mine. They could lose their respectability that way.

Let me repeat: real censorship is what you DON’T hear about.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

3 Comments

11/27/04 Insider Letter

*** Bob’s Insider’s Message ***

(reprinted from 11/27/04)

In last week’s message I wrote about the heroic professor in Arizona who is under attack for standing up for white Americans. Mexicans are demanding that he be fired or disciplined for exercising his rights as an American. Whose country is this, anyway?

The college is being sued, and I’ve been asked to contact the Chancellor and others on the board regarding this. Here is what I will send them.

Dear Sir,

I was heartened to read in the November 13th Arizona Republic that you and the others in charge of the Maricopa Community College System are taking your jobs seriously, and resisting the bullying tactics of MALDEF and other special interest groups who come here to take advantage of the many great things our country has to offer while spitting in our faces. How dare these guests “demand” an end to our first amendment rights of freedom of speech because they don’t like what some people say.

Would these people consider my saying that they “demand an end to our first amendment rights” to be “discriminatory,” “racist,” or otherwise “hateful” or “hostile”? Or would they ask, as any student interested in real learning, “Are these statements factual?” Why do they come to America – to find a better way of life here (meaning a better place than they left) or to bring us light in some missionary effort? Has Mexico ever made a serious claim to being self-governing? Don’t all the multi-culturalists tell us that America is ONLY valuable because it is self-governing, and owes nothing at all to the unique characteristics of its founding people? Don’t these same multi-culturalists tell us that our self-government is limited to one choice when it comes to immigration – “Celebrate it, roll over for it, never criticize or try to limit it”? If not, then how do they expect Americans exercising their constitutional rights to disagree? “Oh, we are just not worthy of such wonderful folks.”

As a former student, professor, and author of a book on universities and the state religion of Political Correctness, I understand the difficult position you have been put in by this monstrous situation. You may well consider yourself a “liberal.” But you are making the only stand you can make. You must stand for academic freedom in a real sense, in the same way a man stands for his honor and a woman her virtue. To do otherwise is to become a hypocrite, a coward, a whore.

Those who despise our Western civilization will not understand your decision. They cannot fathom what moral courage is, much less the teaching of our Lord that having done our duty, we are still the “unprofitable servant.” They can say this outlook is not “superior” to the dog-eat-dog world they came from. Maybe they just don’t know any better. But you do. Let us not cast our pearls before swine.

You can count on my standing with you. I and thousands of others who are coming to the place of no longer tolerating this assault on our heritage and our future. We are not requesting, but DEMANDING an end to the religion of Political Correctness on our campuses. We pay the taxes that pay your salary and fund these schools. We will not have them be used as weapons against us.

May God be with you.

Robert W. Whitaker

This best way I know of to give thanks for the blessings we’ve been given is to fight to keep them for our posterity. Thanks to all of my loyal readers for your support of WOL and Why Johnny Can’t Think. May God bless you and your families.

Bob

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

6 Comments

HS is a Computer, Richard is a Freak

No sane person would write this blog. No sane human being would regularly comment on this blog.

That makes me proud.

In the article below I explained that, since HS is either a Bible-believing Christian who does not think that HS is the Voice of God, or HS must be a computer. I therefore refer to HS as “it.”

Richard L. Harrison is not a computer like HS and he is not basket case like me. Richard is a freak.

Richard knows what the Septuagint is, but he is a Bible-believing Christian. The first requirement for anybody who calls himself a Bible-believing Christian is that he does know that the last centuries of the Old Testament were written in Greek.

Even worse, Richard knows what Manichaeism is.

But it gets worse. Richard is not a Calvinist, but he has actually READ The Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin’s tome.

The Institutes started small, but by the time Calvin died, it was ten thousand pages long.

I would not lie to you. I was in politics.

So if you read the blog and the comments, you will find we have a basket case, a computer and a freak.

If you keep commenting, you too will get an ego-boosting compliment just like Richard and HS got.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

4 Comments

HS is a Rare Bird

HS is a regular commenter here who is unique. He or she is a regular Bible Christian, but when I disagree with HS, HS doesn’t have a fit.

As soon as a person says his entire world view is based on God, we all stop talking to him and start humoring him. He is totally incapable of realizing that his world view is based on HIS OWN VIEW of God.

He thinks he IS God.

A person who says his entire world view is based on the Word of God is saying that he IS God, in exactly the same way that a judge who says he is “interpreting” the Constitution is saying that he IS the Constitution.

If you “interpret” the Constitution, you ARE the Constitution. If you interpret God, you ARE God. I said HS may be a he or she. It is also possible that HS is an IT.

How can a person who is convinced they represent God also be a reasonable person who can allow a heretic like me to disagree with the Voice of God? I never met a theologian like that. It is very hard to find a human who calls himself a Bible Christian who is like that.

This leads me to believe that HS is a computer. HS must be an IT.

The point of all this nonsense is to point out a fact we all know but nobody says. We are all terrified of trying to speak rationally with people who call themselves pro-lifers or Biblical Christians.

What I have just said is NOT limited to evangelical, “Bible-believing Christians. I have a cousin who is a very, very, very, very, VERY Modern United Methodist Minister. I simply cannnot get a straight answer from him.

I met with Michael Novak, the theologian of National Review, many years ago. He had written a book called The Unmeltable Ethnic, praising the conservative ethnic Catholics in America. He was the man who invented the term WASP, meaning White Protestant Anglo-Saxon. He was very famous.

I had worked in ethnic areas. I am an honorary Boston Southie. I lived in a campaign headquarters in the Polish steel district of Chicago. In most ways, they were just like us unapologetic Southerners.

Novak knew my history. So I asked him if what he called White Anglos-Saxon Protestants was really just what a Boston Southie would call a “Yankee,” a pro-busing suburban yuppie.

He said, “Yes.”

I pointed out that most of us Southerners are White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, so it was unfair to confuse us with the Yankee-type WASPs.

He said “Yes.”

It didn’t bother him in the slightest. A vicious insult to tens of millions of people would make a mere human feel guilty. But Novak is not a mere human. He is the Mouth of God.

In my opinion as a lifetime interrogator, every professional theologian I have ever met is a psychopath. The fact that Novak (Michael, not Robert) had flatly stated he was being unfair to tens of millions of Southerners was of no importance to him at all.

If Novak had said “Yankee” instead of WASP, he would not have been praised by National Review. National Review is an East Coast Catholic magazine. He told National Review and New York what they wanted to hear.

New York does not like white gentiles. National Review does not like Southerners. So Novak said what they wanted to hear.

As a theologian, it never occurred to Novak to worry about this. He is a theologian, the Voice of God Almighty.

So when one Southern redneck reminded him that he was committing a sin here, he almost laughed out loud.

My Bible says that what Novak did is a sin.

I think it’s called, “bearing false witness against thy neighbor.” But what does a ridiculous simplistic quote like that mean to a Great Theologian?

The Mouth of God is immune to illiterate, lay criticism like mine.

HS doesn’t seem to have that sort of immunity from giving a straight answer. All the people who tell me their beliefs are based on the Word of God feel that they are automatically exempted from answering any challenges from us mere humans.

But HS doesn’t.

HS has GOT to be a computer.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

7 Comments

Irredeemably American

It is interesting that both of us have a similar view of education. (A mutual friend of ours in grad school) did what an “educated” man is supposed to do, he adopted all the attitudes and outlooks all the other “educated” people are required to have.

(This mutual friend was a Mississippi boy who became a good total liberal when he got his PhD).

The British educational system was aimed at making all Scotsmen and Welshmen into good Englishmen with the Etonian or Cambridge outlook. The aim of Medieval education was to make everybody a good Latin intellectual. They all adopted Latin names.

It is interesting how all Easterners agree with the idea that an “educated” person has to have a standard Yuppie attitude, which is what Eric Hoffer — back in 1950 — called “the European outlook.”

(Hoffer said New England, like Canada, was part of Europe, not America. Hoffer talked about what we have now finally seen as the “red” and “blue” states. But he was talking about them fifty years ago.)

(Please don’t ask me how you can find some of Eric Hoffer’s writings. You go to Yahoo and look under “Eric Hoffer”)

(Back to the e-mail I was quoting.)

But you and I came out of school exactly the same way we went in. For us education was a tool, not an indoctrination.

That is very American. We do not expect a person who trains to be carpenter to adopt “a carpentry world view.” Being an intellectual is to us just one more career choice.

But in the Middle Ages a person who learned to read was supposed to adopt a “literate” point of view. Nothing has changed — in Europe.

The (you) and Bob Whitaker who learned all that economics and history and mathematics are now (you) and Bob Whitaker who know a lot of economics and history and mathematics.

We could have learned carpentry or medicine. We chose another profession. That’s all.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

No Comments