White Equals Bad and Freedom Equals White So Freedom Equals Bad

A Political Misuse of the Transitive Property That Would Surprise King, Gandhi, and Mandela

Thanks again to the American Thinker for running this item. You can visit the website at: https://www.americanthinker.com/

From the inky print of the Washington Post to the digital pages of Teen Vogue, an astonishing movement is underway. 

Simply put, the argument being made is that since what we know as “freedom” is an historically white/colonialist/patriarchal (emphasis on the white) construct and white/colonialist/patriarchal concepts are intrinsically evil therefore, by an illiterate corruption of transitive property, the very idea of freedom is bad (again, emphasis on the white).

Just as if asking a person what 2 plus 2 is and they respond with the word “harbor” can indicate that that person has at best a loose grip on reality, it is tempting to dismiss this latest line of, um, thought as so off base as to be otherworldly in its inexplicability.

But, sadly, that may not be possible as the people making this argument have access to resources,  media exposure, and the levers of power that are manifestly unavailable to the very people they would demonize.

The scribblings of Teen Vogue can be taken less seriously with a private dismissal along the lines of "maybe they should stay in their lane and keep writing pieces on 'Which Rom-Com Role You Are Based on Your Zodiac Sign.'"  However, flippantly ignoring the Washington Post and other outlets is less simple.

Silly ideas are nothing new in the WaPo world, but they are rarely this self-destructive. Freedom is not just a stand-alone ideal – it involves many very specific aspects: freedom of movement, freedom of thought, freedom of speech and its megaphone corollary freedom of the press - to read a denigration of that right in the Post leaves one with the distinct and unnerving feeling of having just glimpsed the first draft of a suicide note

It is distressing to know that there are members of the press who so loathe that which they cannot directly control that they are willing to put their whole enterprise – the entire meaning of their existence – at risk.  Imagine an op-ed by Dr. J calling for the banning of the dunk in the NBA or a piece by Picasso stating that the only good art is the strictly representational kind – the inherent psychological contradictions in holding those positions would, except for a sociopath, be impossible to internally justify.

Others are taking the notion even further, claiming that extolling the virtues such freedom is not only racist but inevitably leads to violence and terrorism – again, a chilling train of thought.

For centuries it has been posited that all humans have an innate desire for freedom, for the ability to say, think, control their own destiny, and do what they believe is best - just ask King, Gandhi, and Mandela, none of whom, if memory serves, were white.  It has clearly not always worked out that way, for any number of reasons, but this ideal has been the driver of so much history that it should be wished away for transitory gain.

It is true that the past two years have shown that far from everyone holds this view and that far too many individuals are perfectly fine with adhering to the whimsy of the moment of the empowered, but if the pandemic has in fact changed society that much we could be facing something far worse than we have endured up to this point and could be staring into the abyss of the long COVID of the soul.