Derek Hunter

On Aug. 28, 1964, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke the immortal words, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Amen.

The people judging his children by the color of their skin at the time were Democrats who ruled the south, birthed Jim Crow and lynched thousands. Today, 50 years after that speech, Democrats still judge people by the color of their skin but now have added sexual orientation, gender and any other way human beings can be subdivided to their list of prejudices – all in the service of their own power grab.

Democrats learned well the lesson of Abraham Lincoln’s, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” What Lincoln said is true. But those divided people can, when properly manipulated, be positioned to prop up that which manipulates them. That is the essence of the modern Democratic Party.

No party has better separated people more than Democrats. By every conceivable means, and some simply created anew for convenience sake, Democrats categorize by everything. The individual does not exist to Democrats, beyond props to be used at their events and speeches. To them, we are nothing but clumps of ethnicities, melanin, genitals and wallets.

Our ancestry, color, sexuality and income are but a few of the ways Democrats divide us. They then assign blame for whatever problem du jour presents itself to those who somehow don’t share their sameness. But with every bit of manipulation there are unintended consequences.

Academia has long been the petri dish from which progressives spread their divisive hatred. And spread it has, like a cold on a plane. The monster they created is now turning on the very institutions they’ve used to embed their hatred. To borrow a phrase from a well-connected progressive – their chickens are coming home to roost.

Dr. Progressivenstein is hard at work in places such as Western Washington University, where President Bruce Shepard recently performed the progressives’ favorite pastime – the racial head-count. “If we, 10 years from now, are as ‘white’ as we are today, we will have failed as a university in our commitment to meet the critical needs of our state.”

Which brings us to college debate tournaments. Society has norms, units of measure by which we are all judged. For instance, you dress up for weddings and funerals as a show of respect. But in college debate tournaments, the rules which have governed them for 100 years are being turned on their ear. “White privilege,” our progressive friends have discovered, provides some advantage in the contest.

So some debaters, having been marinated in liberal concepts of “if it feels good do it” and “everyone is oppressed by whitey,,” are ignoring the rules, cursing out those who try to enforce them, rapping, ignoring the debate topic, and pretty much acting like a 5-year-old who didn’t get the new Lego set at Target.

Somehow rules of debate, the measure by which a team is determined to be more persuasive than another, is racist and can be thrown out. Policy debates have devolved into sideshows and shouting matches. It’s Jerry Springer with trophies.

Speaking of stupid, now we have “micro-aggressions.” Micro-aggression is, well, damn near anything where people from two different groups interact and racism, sexism or homophobia occur, but in such a way that either or both of the participants are unaware of them. That’s right, a micro-aggression is, say, racism so subtle that no one involved is aware it happened until later or an uninvolved third party brings it to their attention.

UCLA had a bout of micro-aggression last year when a professor was accused of bias because “grammar and spelling corrections he made on their (students’) dissertation proposals as a form of ‘micro-aggression.’” Yes, correcting grammar and spelling is now racist and this outrage led to a sit-in.

As if that weren’t crazy enough, Williams College, an elite private university in Massachusetts, caused consternation with two students when someone named Chance the Rapper was invited to perform at a campus event and Michael Bloomberg was invited to be commencement speaker. According to these students Williams, an extremely liberal institution, “consistently fails to acknowledge and attack institutionalized and confounding forms of racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ableism, xenophobia and homo- and transphobia” through these invitations.

Read the whole thing, if you hate the next 10 minutes of your life. But be warned, it contains the description “social activist, writer, anti-racist, feminist and queer scholar” in a non-ironic way, and that’s not even close to the dumbest line in the piece.

These are but a few examples of the sprouts from the seeds of division Democrats have been cultivating for generations.

Soon, these martyrs will graduate and be unable to find work. In an honestly educated person, a dose of reality and their awful job prospects would cause them to rethink and question everything their liberal professors drilled into their heads. After all, Democrats are fond of saying “Question authority.” But the “Question authority” crowd is the authority, and has been for years. That’s why you don’t hear that much anymore.

Rather than questioning those who lied to them for $50,000 a year plus room and board, millions of Progressivenstein’s monsters will revert to their training and, with Pavlovian efficiency, chalk up their failure to micro-aggression, or some other “ism” or phobia that exists only to keep them from thinking and adapting.

Hopefully someday they will realize they’ve been lied to, that’s it’s hard to get ahead, or even get a job, when you’ve spent your life nailing yourself to a cross. Then maybe, just maybe, they’ll fully turn against the people who taught them how to hammer.


Derek Hunter

Derek Hunter is Washington, DC based writer, radio host and political strategist. You can also stalk his thoughts 140 characters at a time on Twitter.