As Orwell writes in “Politics of the English Language”:
“[I]f thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
The progressive invention of micro-aggressions is all part of the culture-eroding, gaslighting, social fabric–disintegrating humiliation Theodore Dalrymple describes:
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
Children reared under helicopter/bulldozer parenting who learn to fear the minutest offenses grow up with mental health challenges (more profitable for BigPharma) and dependence on authorities to solve their manufactured problems instead of developing self-reliance, resilience, and responsibility—these are precisely the sort of citizens who can be corralled into enslavement and a totalitarian biosurveillance state for their own “safety.”
—
Robert, I owe you a belated THANK YOU for sharing Tess Lawrie’s heart-splitting reading of my poem and helping us *destroy* the Overton window as we shift the narrative from amnesty to accountability, as I described in this piece yesterday:
Well said! And I wholeheartedly agree! There is hope, though, as evidenced by the backlash. It’s just time for the silent majority to wake up and speak up! Enough is enough.
Absolutely right, Bob. We learn from the Asch Conformity experiment that people will subjugate their judgment to the will of the majority, but it only takes one other person corroborating your viewpoint to embolden you to resist the gaslighting:
I hate the phrase ‘speaking their truth’. There is only one ‘truth’… all else are opinions and perspectives. That does not necessarily make them wrong. I also think that those of us who were taught to question authority and to think for ourselves can also be deceived by those who pander to this tendency of distrust. Psychological warfare plays both ends of the field, creating a situation whereby you trust no one and are confused.
Discerning what we believe to be Truth when we have no direct physical evidence is a difficult task, but possible based on the logical consistency of other witnesses and whatever incentives they have to lie or tell the truth. The inability to actually see Truth is not evidence it does not exist, and the fact that something may be difficult does not relieve us of the responsibility to make the effort and even acknowledge error when presented with additional evidence.
I wasn’t referring to not having any object or direct physical evidence. In those situations we can say, 'I believe (or think) this is what may be going on.’ It has more to do with those trying to force you to believe or speak lies. "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
There can be more than one truth. Toxic DDT is a good example. DDT was banned in the US before Africa had a chance to use it on scale. As a result Famine and insect borne disease in Africa continued to be rampant and many deaths were attributed to famine and disease that DDT would have alleviated. Which was the right course, death by starvation/disease or death by chemical poisoning? I am not pro DDT,
I am using this is an example of a conundrum of what is the truth.
In "A Civil Action" by Jonathan Hard, the lawyer for the complainants, the members of the local community poisoned by the W.D. Grace Company, Jan Schlichtman tells Grace's lawyer Jerome Facher he's trying to get to the truth. Facher replies, "The truth is at the bottom of a bottomless pit". His meaning here is obvious, and Schlichtmann has no come-back for it, but even, so truth can be difficult to ascertain with great certainty as our perceptive skills are always a bit defective in ways we can't be aware of. It is far easier to spot untruth than to identify truth, and we certainly have had more of our shares of manifest untruths in the past several years.
While I agree in the sense of an absolute, many points of contention arise when the matter at hand is not an absolute.
For example during the pandemic
From where I sat, the severity of the disease and its dangers had not yet been settled.
The merits and dangers of the 'vaccine' were not yet clear
The need to resolve at that moment was not justified.
The Truth was yet in question. Investigating and evaluating - thinking for ourselves - was well justified.
When I was fired, fled from and screamed at I simply carried on (on the theory we each had a right to our view of matters). In the end, though not acknowledged I'm confident we all transitioned to more tolerant conclusions.
Haha, indeed. Reminds me of this great comment one man left on the YouTube version of Tess's and my video collaboration:
"A wonderful woman of integrity. As a man, I believe all men should automatically stand up against tyranny to protect those close to us. Tess puts every man to shame here, she has shown more courage than any bloke I know ❤️" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueUXNL-A3Zg)
The Dalrymple quote is EXACTLY what we need to hear. And to use. Do not let them make you cower and pretend things are true when they are not. Speak up. I.e, The only “them” when referring to a single person is when that person has multiple personalities. Period. Like that.
I"m glad you are addressing language, Margaret. The language of these people is innately 'colonizing,'--too use their terminology. They have a premise and a conclusion and you have to agree or you are the enemy. This kind of language is based on the syllogism (if. . . then . . . ) which forces the listener to agree or disagree. Aristotle says that Plato was the first to consciously use this method. It was about that time, c. 450 BCE, that colonizing religions first appeared.
The original speech pattern was called "phasis" ("description of the appearance of the phenomena") or "letting the thing speak for itself." This is called "explanatory" speech by Jerry Stannard (1967) in "Presocratic Speech," virtually the only treatment of the subject I have ever seen. (For those not put off by astrology, the only other treatment of this I know of is on robertschmidtastrology.com).
Explanatory speech is the way indigenous societies originally spoke--the very people these colonizing Western cultural fanatics are supposedly trying to save. As they said on the remote reservation where I learned my language skills, "too much Jesus." (Ironically, Jesus himself used explanatory speech--"the kingdom of heaven is like. . . "). The stereotypical expression, "white man speaks with forked tongue" expresses the problem with the syllogism.
Another technique the colonizers use is the repetition of nouns (and now, pronouns). Again, Aristotle says (On Grammar), nouns make the mind stop while verbs make it run on, like: bird singing, horse running, colonist speaking. . . . This is how I was taught that incantation works by an indigenous speaker. The repetition of the same nouns reinforces the brainwashing/enchantment/fantasy these people suffer under.
Thank you for your insights, Matthew. One of the reasons I focus so much on (re)framing and the coining of terms such as “philanthropath” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams) is because I know how effectively the propagandists use it to control our perceptions, thoughts, and behavior.
George Lakoff has aided and abetted the enemy by developing framing to define politically expedient narratives, and we must employ the same cognitive tools to shift those narratives back toward truth.
To call any political movement anything certain is like calling someone who believes in the Bible an Amish? Every political group has members and philosophies going from extreme liberal to Fascist, Including the Hari Krishna group. We need to be identified by whatare our core values and basic core values that support the common man can be found in every political spectrum and we who have these values have to be open to accept people from every political group who hold these values, The name they put on their header is just a name. What is in a person's heart is what we are looking for? is this not true. Any political group has anti fascists and anti war and anti tyrannical government people.
I’m not clear on what you’re referring to—I’m guessing you’re objecting to Dalrymple’s characterization of communism? If so, there is a distinction between an ideology and its followers; yes, its adherents may possess a range of beliefs within certain parameters, but the ideology of communism is very clearly articulated by Marx, Engels, and its practitioners (Lenin, Trotsky, et al), so it is perfectly reasonable to judge that ideology by its articulated principles and practices.
That said, I agree with your statement that core values are what truly matter, whereas political tribes are used to divide us, so I’m all for jettisoning those superficial distinctions and uniting over core values like pro-freedom/anti-tyranny.
Well said, seems to dovetail with Vance Packard's observation in The Hidden Persuaders that everyone lies all the time in their perceived self interest.
That definitely boosts my motivation! Problem is it’s not on audiobook, and I have long since given up hope of being able to enjoy the luxury of reading a book without multitasking (please don’t tell my younger bibliophile self 😆).
There are no adults in the room. Campus administrators and faculty (and parents) have allowed (encouraged?) an entire generation of young people to grow up with all the maturity and self-control of a two year old who pitches a tantrum when he doesn’t get his way, and is promptly appeased by those who should be helping him become a responsible adult. Appeasement does not work. The little tyrants grow up to attack absolutely everyone who dares disagree with them, eventually including each other. Unfortunately those little tyrants have now risen to positions of authority on campus, in corporations and in government. Rome burns while we try to prove who is woke enough to satisfy the two year olds.
Reminds me of a possible sitting assignment I interviewed for. The family had a large, heavyset female cat (who it turned out hated women). It went to attack me. The husband grabbed it and held it close. He told it, it was alright and fed it a couple treats while petting to sooth it. I recall it sitting at the top of the stairs as we were leaving, the sun spilling over its shoulders, with a Cheshire smile. A male sitter took the assignment and was VERY careful of their relationship. One problem is the agitators get sympathized with and reinforced.
This is right on. Ironically, pointing this out will be regarded as a micro aggression by the very loons who shut down the judge, the swimmer and countless others. The same people think the riots burning down cities after George Floyd’s death were peaceful. The Bible points out that words will be inverted and right and wrong will be switched. Every one of us who still maintain our sanity and know the obvious difference between truth and lies needs to speak against this folly at every opportunity. Passivity will allow the world to devolve into a
It was extremely important to erase Christ from the public square, and decades have been spent doing this. The FBI is working with Pope Francis to rid the last vestiges of traditionalists from the Catholic Church. The Protestant affiliated churches have spent the last 60 years morphing from Christ is God there is sin and repentance, to Christ did-good-works and loves you as you are. This was the vacuum required, one in which Truth about humans does not exist, to usher in depopulation required by the re-ordering of society – NWO. We have been living in this new society for at least 15 years. Bud Light push back, it does not care, it’s part of a cult -
These people are bullies. There has only ever been one way to stop bullying. I remember it well from grade school. I encountered several bullies in the 6th through 8th grade, the ‘bullying window’ for boys for a long time. I remember one encounter in the 7th grade when one of the bullies started hitting me(hard) while the entire 7th grade class was waiting in line in the hallway. There were no teachers in sight. In self defense I hit him back. No words were exchanged. The bully hit me again, harder, after I hit him back. I hit him again(harder) and this exchange went on for 5 or 6 punches, until, I believe the bully figured out I could hit as hard as he could and he thought better of it and stopped. This will not stop until their is courage and fortitude from one side and respect from the other. It has always been so with bullies.
We raised our sons to never start a fight, but if cornered…END it. All three were black-belts in Tae Kwon Do before they hit high school. Strength under control.
Same holds true for verbal bullying. Encountered some in the military and simply did not let it bother me to the point that not bothering me really bothered them
Yes. There is also this issue of a power imbalance. That was always present inside of militaries throughout history and it could be abused with impunity under the right conditions.
We are being bullied largely because of this power imbalance as we have no political power, no political party representing us that wields any power. There is only one team on the political playing field. And they know it and are taking full advantage of it. That means it’s even more important that we as individuals stand firm and resist their bullying, that we just say No. If we don’t no one else will.
Agree completely. “Fight fire with fire” comes to mind. “Microaggressions” are like “small arms fire” in war. One “takes cover” or seeks “concealment” but if not countered with the requisite counterforce, the attacked dies or is wounded. Unless these bullies (Marxists et al) feel pain and suffering themselves they will continue and escalate the battle with even more powerful weapons. Who’s ready to step up?
Thank you for this in-depth article! I never heard of “micro-aggression” until I read the story of this wonderful surgeon who was attacked by his hospital administrators for “micro-aggressions”.
Jozef Vala this story shows some of the evil goings on at a hospital (written by a surgeon)
I also read this yesterday, Kathleen. Sadly, I was not at all surprised, as similar things have happened to many ethical doctors over the last 3-years. Based on how hospitals & large corporate medical organizations & their administrators have treated patients as well as the ethical members of their staff has been beyond comprehension. I say this as a retired registered nurse who worked for many years as a hospital staff nurse. Multiple members of my family as well as my husband's worked tirelessly for many years as medical professionals, so I have a broad basis for comparison. My father was a family practitioner for 30 years. My mother was a registered nurse. My husband is a retired anesthesiologist, who worked for 40 years at a large teaching hospital. My father-in-law was a cardiologist with a large practice in the Phiippines before emigrating here. He taught for many years at a regional medical school. He is also in the Who's Who of medicine for the research he conducted in Switzerland of the effects of Vitamin B on the heart. My mother-in-law was an operating room nurse. Not one of these fine upstanding members of their local & medical communities would have behaved in this manner. They are all dearly departed, but must be rolling over in their graves, based on what has transpired over the last 3+ years.
Thank you for sticking up for words! As a retired professor I even feel threatened by cancel culture for not recognizing the latest version of it. I see my emeritus status and its associated benefits at risk, whether it’s lab space or use of the University library. I should be able to express my opinion openly on topics from mandates to abortion to digital passports but dare not. Perhaps my opinion might have helped prevent someone’s vaccine injury or aided in improved Covid recovery. Your courage, Dr. Malone, has been a great model for me. Thank you.
Thank you for pointing out how pervasive this is and how aggressive (violent) it has become. Reminds me of police everywhere beating the crap out of people for not wearing a mask out in the fresh air. ! I had never heard of "micro-aggression" until a few days ago. And now to learn this nonsense has been peddled since at least 2015 is even more surprising. The road to where we became the past 3 years was long in the making.
Offense is a choice made by the alleged "victim" of the offense. I was alerted to this 20 years ago by a psychological counselor. He pointed out that the emotional responses of fear and anger result from the cognitive recognition of a danger. Thus, you first see the bear, then process that category against a database of learned stories about maulings. Only then do you become afraid. It you choose to ignore those stories, you will not be afraid. Similarly, if you choose to exaggerate the "micro" into a big deal, you may be "offended." Other than widely accepted epithets such as n_gg_r, f_g or h_nky, it's all BS intended to shut up your perceived "enemies" and prevent real communication.
While I was meditating, I figured out a way to deal with the woke movement. They're focused on everything that's wrong with America, so according to the Law of Attraction, they're just getting more of what they're complaining about. That's why I've decided to start focusing on what's *right* about America, and here are my top three: The Declaration of Independence, the First Amendment, and the Civil Rights Movement. Care to join me?
I don't think I have ever agreed with or appreciated a feminist as much as I do with this woman. She has really done a great service exposing who is driving this insane push.
As Haidt and Lukianoff brilliantly explained, it’s the precise opposite of CBT. Cognitive behavioral therapy is a proven and successful technique to help overly anxious people take their mountains of worries and turn them into molehills… modern wokism and “micro aggression” deliberately inverts that, encouraging people to turn molehills into Everests!
It is quite purposefully designed, like so much of modern medicine, to *create* mental illness in the young! Evil, evil stuff.
It may seem they are parasites living off of their hosts or a disease harvesting fruits of others. No, it is beyond that. It is the foundation families using the system to stop unwanted population growth. They MUST have abortions, MUST have gays and transgenders because there must not be any more children that are not of their choosing. Epstein and his believers like Gates and the like, were cloning themselves to be the future ruling population so their god-like presence lived on. What do we do? We selectively pick and then bitch about the latest shiny object of our choice repeatedly making us haters. This is not a winning strategy. Put fidelity to the word of God back in the pulpit of all Christian denominations. Speak the truth about humanity, nature and biology. Talk about sin, repentance, and redemption. We let is slip away over the decades…….
I am reminded that when my mother was in a nursing home for terminal cancer, (30 + yrs. ago) I counselled her about using correct language in being around people of color. (oops, did I say that right?) She "got it". The next thing I hear her say to a person wheeling her out of an elevator was," You have such beautiful skin, we try and try to get skin that color and end up with cancer!" She was so sincere, we all laughed. (I was concerned about abuse if she said the wrong address to someone)
Dr. Malone. I am 100% in support of you and this movement. I was not raised in the south but my Grandparents were and I often herd this kind of speaking. I also have used personal definitions because of the misuse of words. So I want to point out her that calling this Democrat administration, "Left" Is also a miss-use of words , By definition, you are left? Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished. We need a new word for this kind of Political Monster. I have been calling them Neo-Liberal? Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy. Almost the exact opposite of a liberal?
As Orwell writes in “Politics of the English Language”:
“[I]f thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
The progressive invention of micro-aggressions is all part of the culture-eroding, gaslighting, social fabric–disintegrating humiliation Theodore Dalrymple describes:
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
Children reared under helicopter/bulldozer parenting who learn to fear the minutest offenses grow up with mental health challenges (more profitable for BigPharma) and dependence on authorities to solve their manufactured problems instead of developing self-reliance, resilience, and responsibility—these are precisely the sort of citizens who can be corralled into enslavement and a totalitarian biosurveillance state for their own “safety.”
—
Robert, I owe you a belated THANK YOU for sharing Tess Lawrie’s heart-splitting reading of my poem and helping us *destroy* the Overton window as we shift the narrative from amnesty to accountability, as I described in this piece yesterday:
• “Mistakes Were NOT Made: One Poem to Wake the World” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/mistakes-were-not-made-one-poem-to)
Well said! And I wholeheartedly agree! There is hope, though, as evidenced by the backlash. It’s just time for the silent majority to wake up and speak up! Enough is enough.
Absolutely right, Bob. We learn from the Asch Conformity experiment that people will subjugate their judgment to the will of the majority, but it only takes one other person corroborating your viewpoint to embolden you to resist the gaslighting:
• “Are You a Good German or a Badass German?” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/are-you-a-good-german-or-a-badass)
I hate the phrase ‘speaking their truth’. There is only one ‘truth’… all else are opinions and perspectives. That does not necessarily make them wrong. I also think that those of us who were taught to question authority and to think for ourselves can also be deceived by those who pander to this tendency of distrust. Psychological warfare plays both ends of the field, creating a situation whereby you trust no one and are confused.
Discerning what we believe to be Truth when we have no direct physical evidence is a difficult task, but possible based on the logical consistency of other witnesses and whatever incentives they have to lie or tell the truth. The inability to actually see Truth is not evidence it does not exist, and the fact that something may be difficult does not relieve us of the responsibility to make the effort and even acknowledge error when presented with additional evidence.
I wasn’t referring to not having any object or direct physical evidence. In those situations we can say, 'I believe (or think) this is what may be going on.’ It has more to do with those trying to force you to believe or speak lies. "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
There can be more than one truth. Toxic DDT is a good example. DDT was banned in the US before Africa had a chance to use it on scale. As a result Famine and insect borne disease in Africa continued to be rampant and many deaths were attributed to famine and disease that DDT would have alleviated. Which was the right course, death by starvation/disease or death by chemical poisoning? I am not pro DDT,
I am using this is an example of a conundrum of what is the truth.
I was not disagreeing with you. I was expanding on what you wrote.
In "A Civil Action" by Jonathan Hard, the lawyer for the complainants, the members of the local community poisoned by the W.D. Grace Company, Jan Schlichtman tells Grace's lawyer Jerome Facher he's trying to get to the truth. Facher replies, "The truth is at the bottom of a bottomless pit". His meaning here is obvious, and Schlichtmann has no come-back for it, but even, so truth can be difficult to ascertain with great certainty as our perceptive skills are always a bit defective in ways we can't be aware of. It is far easier to spot untruth than to identify truth, and we certainly have had more of our shares of manifest untruths in the past several years.
While I agree in the sense of an absolute, many points of contention arise when the matter at hand is not an absolute.
For example during the pandemic
From where I sat, the severity of the disease and its dangers had not yet been settled.
The merits and dangers of the 'vaccine' were not yet clear
The need to resolve at that moment was not justified.
The Truth was yet in question. Investigating and evaluating - thinking for ourselves - was well justified.
When I was fired, fled from and screamed at I simply carried on (on the theory we each had a right to our view of matters). In the end, though not acknowledged I'm confident we all transitioned to more tolerant conclusions.
🎯
Hard times create strong men
Strong men create good times
Good times create weak men
Weak men create hard times.
Where are all the hard men---time to do some ass kicking.
Haha, indeed. Reminds me of this great comment one man left on the YouTube version of Tess's and my video collaboration:
"A wonderful woman of integrity. As a man, I believe all men should automatically stand up against tyranny to protect those close to us. Tess puts every man to shame here, she has shown more courage than any bloke I know ❤️" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueUXNL-A3Zg)
I share this with dozens of family/pals/work acquaintances/ very moving and accurate. R
🙏🙌
What a smart dude! (And so handsome!)
😆
The Dalrymple quote is EXACTLY what we need to hear. And to use. Do not let them make you cower and pretend things are true when they are not. Speak up. I.e, The only “them” when referring to a single person is when that person has multiple personalities. Period. Like that.
I"m glad you are addressing language, Margaret. The language of these people is innately 'colonizing,'--too use their terminology. They have a premise and a conclusion and you have to agree or you are the enemy. This kind of language is based on the syllogism (if. . . then . . . ) which forces the listener to agree or disagree. Aristotle says that Plato was the first to consciously use this method. It was about that time, c. 450 BCE, that colonizing religions first appeared.
The original speech pattern was called "phasis" ("description of the appearance of the phenomena") or "letting the thing speak for itself." This is called "explanatory" speech by Jerry Stannard (1967) in "Presocratic Speech," virtually the only treatment of the subject I have ever seen. (For those not put off by astrology, the only other treatment of this I know of is on robertschmidtastrology.com).
Explanatory speech is the way indigenous societies originally spoke--the very people these colonizing Western cultural fanatics are supposedly trying to save. As they said on the remote reservation where I learned my language skills, "too much Jesus." (Ironically, Jesus himself used explanatory speech--"the kingdom of heaven is like. . . "). The stereotypical expression, "white man speaks with forked tongue" expresses the problem with the syllogism.
Another technique the colonizers use is the repetition of nouns (and now, pronouns). Again, Aristotle says (On Grammar), nouns make the mind stop while verbs make it run on, like: bird singing, horse running, colonist speaking. . . . This is how I was taught that incantation works by an indigenous speaker. The repetition of the same nouns reinforces the brainwashing/enchantment/fantasy these people suffer under.
Thank you for your insights, Matthew. One of the reasons I focus so much on (re)framing and the coining of terms such as “philanthropath” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-philanthropath-dreams) is because I know how effectively the propagandists use it to control our perceptions, thoughts, and behavior.
George Lakoff has aided and abetted the enemy by developing framing to define politically expedient narratives, and we must employ the same cognitive tools to shift those narratives back toward truth.
Yes, the problems are big and they are deep. . . to the roots of thought and speech.
To call any political movement anything certain is like calling someone who believes in the Bible an Amish? Every political group has members and philosophies going from extreme liberal to Fascist, Including the Hari Krishna group. We need to be identified by whatare our core values and basic core values that support the common man can be found in every political spectrum and we who have these values have to be open to accept people from every political group who hold these values, The name they put on their header is just a name. What is in a person's heart is what we are looking for? is this not true. Any political group has anti fascists and anti war and anti tyrannical government people.
I’m not clear on what you’re referring to—I’m guessing you’re objecting to Dalrymple’s characterization of communism? If so, there is a distinction between an ideology and its followers; yes, its adherents may possess a range of beliefs within certain parameters, but the ideology of communism is very clearly articulated by Marx, Engels, and its practitioners (Lenin, Trotsky, et al), so it is perfectly reasonable to judge that ideology by its articulated principles and practices.
That said, I agree with your statement that core values are what truly matter, whereas political tribes are used to divide us, so I’m all for jettisoning those superficial distinctions and uniting over core values like pro-freedom/anti-tyranny.
Well said, seems to dovetail with Vance Packard's observation in The Hidden Persuaders that everyone lies all the time in their perceived self interest.
That book has been on my to-read list for probably 20 years!
This may help boot it to the front of the line it is one of the funniest books I ever read enjoy
That definitely boosts my motivation! Problem is it’s not on audiobook, and I have long since given up hope of being able to enjoy the luxury of reading a book without multitasking (please don’t tell my younger bibliophile self 😆).
There are no adults in the room. Campus administrators and faculty (and parents) have allowed (encouraged?) an entire generation of young people to grow up with all the maturity and self-control of a two year old who pitches a tantrum when he doesn’t get his way, and is promptly appeased by those who should be helping him become a responsible adult. Appeasement does not work. The little tyrants grow up to attack absolutely everyone who dares disagree with them, eventually including each other. Unfortunately those little tyrants have now risen to positions of authority on campus, in corporations and in government. Rome burns while we try to prove who is woke enough to satisfy the two year olds.
Reminds me of a possible sitting assignment I interviewed for. The family had a large, heavyset female cat (who it turned out hated women). It went to attack me. The husband grabbed it and held it close. He told it, it was alright and fed it a couple treats while petting to sooth it. I recall it sitting at the top of the stairs as we were leaving, the sun spilling over its shoulders, with a Cheshire smile. A male sitter took the assignment and was VERY careful of their relationship. One problem is the agitators get sympathized with and reinforced.
This is right on. Ironically, pointing this out will be regarded as a micro aggression by the very loons who shut down the judge, the swimmer and countless others. The same people think the riots burning down cities after George Floyd’s death were peaceful. The Bible points out that words will be inverted and right and wrong will be switched. Every one of us who still maintain our sanity and know the obvious difference between truth and lies needs to speak against this folly at every opportunity. Passivity will allow the world to devolve into a
It was extremely important to erase Christ from the public square, and decades have been spent doing this. The FBI is working with Pope Francis to rid the last vestiges of traditionalists from the Catholic Church. The Protestant affiliated churches have spent the last 60 years morphing from Christ is God there is sin and repentance, to Christ did-good-works and loves you as you are. This was the vacuum required, one in which Truth about humans does not exist, to usher in depopulation required by the re-ordering of society – NWO. We have been living in this new society for at least 15 years. Bud Light push back, it does not care, it’s part of a cult -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pREbLxGl3Kk&t=2s
These people are bullies. There has only ever been one way to stop bullying. I remember it well from grade school. I encountered several bullies in the 6th through 8th grade, the ‘bullying window’ for boys for a long time. I remember one encounter in the 7th grade when one of the bullies started hitting me(hard) while the entire 7th grade class was waiting in line in the hallway. There were no teachers in sight. In self defense I hit him back. No words were exchanged. The bully hit me again, harder, after I hit him back. I hit him again(harder) and this exchange went on for 5 or 6 punches, until, I believe the bully figured out I could hit as hard as he could and he thought better of it and stopped. This will not stop until their is courage and fortitude from one side and respect from the other. It has always been so with bullies.
We raised our sons to never start a fight, but if cornered…END it. All three were black-belts in Tae Kwon Do before they hit high school. Strength under control.
Same holds true for verbal bullying. Encountered some in the military and simply did not let it bother me to the point that not bothering me really bothered them
Yes. There is also this issue of a power imbalance. That was always present inside of militaries throughout history and it could be abused with impunity under the right conditions.
We are being bullied largely because of this power imbalance as we have no political power, no political party representing us that wields any power. There is only one team on the political playing field. And they know it and are taking full advantage of it. That means it’s even more important that we as individuals stand firm and resist their bullying, that we just say No. If we don’t no one else will.
Agree completely. “Fight fire with fire” comes to mind. “Microaggressions” are like “small arms fire” in war. One “takes cover” or seeks “concealment” but if not countered with the requisite counterforce, the attacked dies or is wounded. Unless these bullies (Marxists et al) feel pain and suffering themselves they will continue and escalate the battle with even more powerful weapons. Who’s ready to step up?
Thank you for this in-depth article! I never heard of “micro-aggression” until I read the story of this wonderful surgeon who was attacked by his hospital administrators for “micro-aggressions”.
Jozef Vala this story shows some of the evil goings on at a hospital (written by a surgeon)
https://open.substack.com/pub/amidwesterndoctor/p/an-honest-doctors-experiences-on?utm_source=direct&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
I also read this yesterday, Kathleen. Sadly, I was not at all surprised, as similar things have happened to many ethical doctors over the last 3-years. Based on how hospitals & large corporate medical organizations & their administrators have treated patients as well as the ethical members of their staff has been beyond comprehension. I say this as a retired registered nurse who worked for many years as a hospital staff nurse. Multiple members of my family as well as my husband's worked tirelessly for many years as medical professionals, so I have a broad basis for comparison. My father was a family practitioner for 30 years. My mother was a registered nurse. My husband is a retired anesthesiologist, who worked for 40 years at a large teaching hospital. My father-in-law was a cardiologist with a large practice in the Phiippines before emigrating here. He taught for many years at a regional medical school. He is also in the Who's Who of medicine for the research he conducted in Switzerland of the effects of Vitamin B on the heart. My mother-in-law was an operating room nurse. Not one of these fine upstanding members of their local & medical communities would have behaved in this manner. They are all dearly departed, but must be rolling over in their graves, based on what has transpired over the last 3+ years.
Kathleen, I just sent that post to several people I know. Great example!
Thank you for sticking up for words! As a retired professor I even feel threatened by cancel culture for not recognizing the latest version of it. I see my emeritus status and its associated benefits at risk, whether it’s lab space or use of the University library. I should be able to express my opinion openly on topics from mandates to abortion to digital passports but dare not. Perhaps my opinion might have helped prevent someone’s vaccine injury or aided in improved Covid recovery. Your courage, Dr. Malone, has been a great model for me. Thank you.
Thank you for pointing out how pervasive this is and how aggressive (violent) it has become. Reminds me of police everywhere beating the crap out of people for not wearing a mask out in the fresh air. ! I had never heard of "micro-aggression" until a few days ago. And now to learn this nonsense has been peddled since at least 2015 is even more surprising. The road to where we became the past 3 years was long in the making.
Offense is a choice made by the alleged "victim" of the offense. I was alerted to this 20 years ago by a psychological counselor. He pointed out that the emotional responses of fear and anger result from the cognitive recognition of a danger. Thus, you first see the bear, then process that category against a database of learned stories about maulings. Only then do you become afraid. It you choose to ignore those stories, you will not be afraid. Similarly, if you choose to exaggerate the "micro" into a big deal, you may be "offended." Other than widely accepted epithets such as n_gg_r, f_g or h_nky, it's all BS intended to shut up your perceived "enemies" and prevent real communication.
While I was meditating, I figured out a way to deal with the woke movement. They're focused on everything that's wrong with America, so according to the Law of Attraction, they're just getting more of what they're complaining about. That's why I've decided to start focusing on what's *right* about America, and here are my top three: The Declaration of Independence, the First Amendment, and the Civil Rights Movement. Care to join me?
Into an Orwellian nightmare
I don't think I have ever agreed with or appreciated a feminist as much as I do with this woman. She has really done a great service exposing who is driving this insane push.
What woman are you referring to ?
As Haidt and Lukianoff brilliantly explained, it’s the precise opposite of CBT. Cognitive behavioral therapy is a proven and successful technique to help overly anxious people take their mountains of worries and turn them into molehills… modern wokism and “micro aggression” deliberately inverts that, encouraging people to turn molehills into Everests!
It is quite purposefully designed, like so much of modern medicine, to *create* mental illness in the young! Evil, evil stuff.
But big pharma ain’t complaining…
Gaty.substack.com
It may seem they are parasites living off of their hosts or a disease harvesting fruits of others. No, it is beyond that. It is the foundation families using the system to stop unwanted population growth. They MUST have abortions, MUST have gays and transgenders because there must not be any more children that are not of their choosing. Epstein and his believers like Gates and the like, were cloning themselves to be the future ruling population so their god-like presence lived on. What do we do? We selectively pick and then bitch about the latest shiny object of our choice repeatedly making us haters. This is not a winning strategy. Put fidelity to the word of God back in the pulpit of all Christian denominations. Speak the truth about humanity, nature and biology. Talk about sin, repentance, and redemption. We let is slip away over the decades…….
I am reminded that when my mother was in a nursing home for terminal cancer, (30 + yrs. ago) I counselled her about using correct language in being around people of color. (oops, did I say that right?) She "got it". The next thing I hear her say to a person wheeling her out of an elevator was," You have such beautiful skin, we try and try to get skin that color and end up with cancer!" She was so sincere, we all laughed. (I was concerned about abuse if she said the wrong address to someone)
Dr. Malone. I am 100% in support of you and this movement. I was not raised in the south but my Grandparents were and I often herd this kind of speaking. I also have used personal definitions because of the misuse of words. So I want to point out her that calling this Democrat administration, "Left" Is also a miss-use of words , By definition, you are left? Left-wing politics typically involve a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished. We need a new word for this kind of Political Monster. I have been calling them Neo-Liberal? Neoliberalism is contemporarily used to refer to market-oriented reform policies such as "eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets, lowering trade barriers" and reducing, especially through privatization and austerity, state influence in the economy. Almost the exact opposite of a liberal?
I tend to agree but man, you are poking the bear.
wow, so what do you call them? You guys? You gals? It? Them? Everybody?
Know what to call the clowns whining about micro whatevers. Dr. M. had an essay recently here with that term in its title