Wednesday, May 5, 2021

So there you go

My old Patheos editor Sam puts out the final word on this leftist fundamentalism and censorship movement. 


Yep.  The forgiving side of me would like to think he's joking; that he's being like Colbert used to be, and trying to do a mock-up of a caricature of someone who is fighting to defend the banning of wrong-think.  That's the forgiving side of me.  After all, I'd hate to think a professor in higher education would write something like this for any reason other than humor. 

Still, the side that has seen him unload on Bishop Barron over the bishop's concern about this wave of  Leftwing 451, I'm inclined to think that it's at least partially anger on his part, and he at least means some of it. 

In any event, I have it on the best of authority that many who are bothered by the Left's donning of their merry McCarthy do, in fact, read and study books.  In fact, it's the reading of books that makes them a bit squeamish about the whole leftwing support for banning offensive culture since I know they'll never do it to me.  

I should add that I'm sure there are some who rely on common sense rather than book learning to understand it's ignorant to assume censorship will only apply to those bad people over there.  Likewise, I'm absolutely sure that if many who support this new wave of censorship  haven't avoided books, they nonetheless have read and studied all the wrong books. 

11 comments:

  1. It's funny because I was on a random message board the other day when a discovery of Kipling broke out. Some of us old-timers started quoting "Gods of the Copybook Headings" and the younger members all became amazed that such a poem was written not only a hundred years ago now, but even more of Kipling's writings as they were inspired to go and find more of his work.

    If reading was the purview of the left, then why weren't these kids exposed to Kipling in school? Why was it a more "open" environment, where conservatives and liberals both are allowed to speak and fight it out, that they finally learned something of old books?

    Like Shea it doesn't take long to realize that their strawman has nothing to do with reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think those kids aren't reading Kipling for the same reason a fundamentalist wouldn't read Playboy. To them, it's altogether evil and unclean. Per my sons, the growing tendency in their college is to assume if it came from the West, it was white, which means racist, which means irredeemable deplorable. But just like the fundamentalist, they wouldn't attribute it to close mindedness, just good morals.

      Delete
    2. Well "it's evil" is maybe the reason the schools are giving, but I was trying to say, once exposed to it, the younger generation was amazed and found it full of wisdom and good sense.

      Certainly you are right, there are plenty trained in the cult mentality of avoiding evil at all costs so you have to be clever in trying to get something past the habitual blockade.

      Delete
  2. The fact that Sam would unironically phrase his statement the way he has is actually hilarious. What the heck is he even saying? It sounds like a parody.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's what I said. It was so over the top I had to think some of it might be playing for humor. But again, I check it with his savaging of Bishop Baron (often a fave of more progressive Catholics), and it makes me hesitant to dismiss it as a joke.

      Delete
  3. Rudolph HarrierMay 5, 2021 at 5:44 PM

    The move in response to this support of statement is to ask to see which works the right is supposedly ignoring.

    There's two possible responses:
    -An honest list of classics which contains things that could get canceled, and thus put Rocha in trouble with the very cancel culture that he says isn't a problem.
    -A list of leftist approved modern works that reveal that he isn't trying to preserve traditional culture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. Assuming it wasn't a joke, some specifics might help. Though I don't know how much he's fighting to maintain the idea he's trying to preserve traditional culture.

      Delete
  4. It's the rhetorical equivalent of fire for effect. He's marking the ground to see if he's close to hitting an enemy target. If no one reacts, he'll fire off another word salad volley.

    He should never be mistaken for a good faith interlocutor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Word salad. I'd say. Again, it's so ridiculous I'm inclined to think it was meant as humor. Yet reading other things he's written over the last couple years, and especially regarding this issue, I can't help but feel it was at best humor used to cover rage.

      Delete
  5. "Word Salad".

    There has been a plethora of Word Salad Chiefs popping up these past few years in the Catholic blogosphere. Sam being a trailblazer that he is, living the American dream in Canada.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He certainly has changed since I ran into him many years ago. But then, I notice those who swing left invariably do, and almost always in the same ways. And never for the better. I'm sure others going different directions can as well. It just seems far more consistent among those veering left of center.

      Delete

Let me know your thoughts