Liberal ghosts

Thanks to Kathy Shaidle, whose ill humor makes me seem like Will Rodgers, I ran across an article about the problems facing Canadian educators in dealing with a new crop of immigrants: Gypsies. It is now PC to call them "the Roma people", but they're Gypsies. The article is written in excruciatingly PC style and content. And it is bullshit.

Are there any indications that the Gypsy/Roma are much different today than they were fifty or a hundred years ago? No sedentary civilization has been able to assimilate them and their neighbors uniformly loathe them. All the hand-wringing and PC hectoring comes down to two things: a blind belief on the part of liberals that everyone is, at heart, like them and yet, that (certain select) people who are not like them must be properly assessed and placed in the victim/oppressor paradigm, accommodated, and alternately celebrated and sympathized with.


This twinned paradox is at the heart of liberalism's moral disarmament in the face of anyone it considers "underprivileged" : a combination of narcissism and self-hatred. As Burnham pointed out, the liberal faith allows people who are in the process of deteriorating to believe that they are doing it out of higher ethical motives.

One of the things I hated most about liberalism was its requirement that I deny what was in front of my face when it suited the agenda. On the one hand I was required to believe that "our schools were failing our (sic) African-American youth" when in fact it is their own cultural decay which makes many of them uneducable. However, no such blinders were required when assessing the various social pathologies of Redneck Whites, and no such sympathetic effluvium was forthcoming. Much to the contrary. Eventually I began to see that the liberal worldview was riddled with such lies and in the end that it was founded on them.

In the meantime, the Gypsies, as they always have, will waste civilized people's time and use up civilized people's treasure, some of which they will destroy or steal.

A note on language. I have said this before, but it bears repeating. One of the very successful means by which the cultural Marxists have continued their Gramscian march is by regulating our language and thereby regulating our thinking and feeling. When we are told by our elites that all our words for "the oppressed and marginalized" must be replaced by new and correct words, the implied and powerful meta-message is that everything in the Old Dispensation was wrong, mistaken, self-serving, insensitive, and evil. In essence, prior to the last 50 years or even less, the Western world was one vast factory of error, bigotry and oppression. The result is to make educated Westerners ashamed of their own culture and ripe for the lies of multiculturalism, feminism, and all the other interlocking diseases of the liberal project.