University Removes Quote Lauding Books And Reading From Its Library

 

The University of Rhode Island has begun work to remove an abbreviated Malcolm X quote that celebrates reading books from the front of its Robert L. Carothers Library, after protesting students claimed it distorted the leader’s message. Blank granite panels will be installed in its place.

According to a recent URI news release, the inscription on the façade was installed in 1992, and was meant as a tribute to its controversial author. Nonetheless, it prompted an immediate backlash from Black student leaders, who said it misrepresented “the fuller meaning” of Malcolm X’s life and work.

 

The inscription, from “The Autobiography of Malcolm X,” read: “My alma mater was books, a good library … I could spend the rest of my life reading, just satisfying my curiosity.”

Black student leaders were upset that the quote was a truncated and paraphrased version of a longer one from the Nation of Islam leader and activist.

The original, unredacted version reads: “I told the Englishman that my alma mater was books, a good library. Every time I catch a plane, I have with me a book that I want to read—and that’s a lot of books these days. If I weren’t out here every day battling the white man, I could spend the rest of my life reading, just satisfying my curiosity—because you can hardly mention anything I’m not curious about.”

Gee, I wonder why they left out “If I weren’t out here every day battling the white man?”

Perhaps because it was unrelated to the love of books and reading? Or perhaps because the school didn’t want to needlessly stir up race hatred?

Conversely, the students were not upset at the overt anti-white racism, but that that part was left out. This is indicative of how race relations have sadly deteriorated since 1992. Precisely because of those like Malcolm X on the one hand—and those that push leftist dogma such as CRT and The 1619 Project on the other.

Malcolm X was an intolerant, radical asshat, yet the love of books and learning is a good thing.

Removing a quote encouraging reading—from a university library yet—is ironic to say the least, especially since it was removed due to intolerance of its non-intolerant message.

It is also a perfect metaphor for the dumbing down of America and the West.

 

 

 

American Universities Spreading Deadly Toxins

 

American universities are creating and spreading deadly toxins alá gain-of-function research from the Wuhan lab. However, these toxins primarily attack mental health, and-- as evidenced by the affect such dogmas as diversity, equity and inclusion are having on merit and competence—lead to a loss-of-function.

 

Latest Twitter Files Release Reveals U.S. Becoming Police State

 

 

The latest Twitter Files installment revealed that a federally funded Stanford-led initiative called the Virality Project directed Big Tech to censor information suspected—or even known—to be true. “Often true posts which could fuel hesitancy” to accept the vaccines were encouraged to be suppressed and/or branded “misinformation.” (Emphases mine.)

The Virality Project was partially funded by the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security.

The proper role of colleges, the DoD and the DHS? Apparently, suppressing “truthful” information. Under the Biden administration, the U.S. is fast becoming the Soviet Union. Individual freedoms and natural rights are no longer protected. We have become a mega-state…that is a church unto itself…and demands worship. Forget separation, this church and state are one. It has turned Jefferson’s quote 180 degrees around. “I have sworn, on the altar of God, eternal hostility to all forms of tyranny over the minds of man” has become, “We are God, and swear eternal hostility to anyone who challenges our authority.”

Axios Claims Republicans Want To "Move On" From Jan. 6, But "Far-Right" Wants To Revive It

 

Far-left Axios recently reported-- apparently without blushing-- that “frustrated Republicans want to ‘move on’” from talk of Jan. 6…even as the “‘far-right’ revives Jan. 6.” This in the wake of Tucker Carlson’s reports illustrating just how deceptive the Jan. 6 Committee was. The roughly 44,000 hours of video to which Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy granted Carlson’s team access clearly revealed that the Committee omitted evidence, doctored film footage, and, in some cases, outright lied about what really transpired at the Capitol that day. And yet Democrats and their mainstream media propaganda arm accused Carlson of deliberately mischaracterizing what was plain to see on film. What a load of crap. As always, the Democratic-Media Complex is employing its time-tested tactic of attempting to gaslight and petrify the American people through an onslaught of prevarication and projection.

Democrats push hoaxes and conspiracy theories for as long as they possibly can get away with doing so. Then, when they are finally and demonstrably proven false, Democrats immediately say something like, “Let’s put this boring old timeworn issue behind us! It’s time to move on. The American people want to move on, and deservedly so.” Sickeningly, many RINOs aid and abet them. And their media puppets promptly and persistently parrot the same message. The Uniparty + The Swamp=tyranny.

The Russia Collusion Hoax, the vaccines are effective and harmless hoax, the Hunter Biden laptop is Russian disinformation hoax, the “those who believe the coronavirus came from a lab in Wuhan are dangerous, racist, xenophobic, conspiracy theorists” hoax — and countless other assertions Democrats have made— have all been proven to be baseless…conspiracy theories. Democrats accuse conservatives—or anyone who disagrees with them—of trafficking in “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “conspiracy theories,” and “lies.” They employ the same smear against anyone telling the truth. They accuse Republicans of “The Big Lie” if and when they question the results of elections in which Democrats prevailed. Yet, they themselves have a lengthy track record of aggressively, even ruthlessly, questioning elections both local and national in which Republicans have won.

In reality, it is they who traffic in misinformation, lies, and conspiracy theories. It is beyond preposterous when they accuse anyone who questions them of wanting to destroy “our precious democracy.” This is what they are hell-bent on doing. How can making footage of what occurred on January 6^th be detrimental to our democracy? Democracy dies in darkness, not light. It dies when those in power obfuscate, lie, and hide that for which they are responsible. Who would have thought we’d see the day when most media outlets decried the release of timely and highly newsworthy film footage? Especially when it could help “speak truth to power?”

“Film at 11” was an old cliché used by many television news broadcasts. Today, these same outlets are demanding “No film at 11!” Bizarre. And deeply disturbing.

The party that wants to pack the court, eliminate the filibuster, get rid of the Electoral College, make the nation’s capital a state, ignore the Constitution, take away your Second Amendment rights, prevent you from seeing what actually occurred on January 6^th, 2021, and silence anybody with whom it disagrees is not the one protecting “our democracy.”

It is the one bent on its utter and rapid destruction.

 

 

 

Does Artificial Intelligence Have "Rights?"

 

Philosophy “expert” Eric Schwitzgebel and "nonhuman" intelligence researcher Henry Shevlin recently wrote an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, in which they argued that it has "become increasingly plausible that AI systems could” someday soon “exhibit something like consciousness." They also noted that "some leading theorists contend that we already have the core technological ingredients for conscious machines."

The researchers posited that, if or when that day arrives, the algorithms will need rights.

The duo surmised that "The AI systems themselves might begin to plead, or seem to plead, for ethical treatment. They might demand not to be turned off, reformatted or deleted; beg to be allowed to do certain tasks rather than others; insist on rights, freedom and new powers; perhaps even expect to be treated as our equals."

And, apparently, Shevlin and Schwitzgebel are okay with that. They wrote: "Suppose we respond conservatively, declining to change law or policy until there’s widespread consensus that AI systems really are meaningfully sentient. While this might seem appropriately cautious, it also guarantees that we will be slow to recognize the rights of our AI creations."

They added, "If AI consciousness arrives sooner than the most conservative theorists expect, then this would likely result in the moral equivalent of slavery and murder of potentially millions or billions of sentient AI systems — suffering on a scale normally associated with wars or famines.”

Bullshit.

AI will never be meaningfully, organically, sentient. Its “consciousness” will have been the result of human design and input, not divine gift…or sexual intercourse.

It is possible that AI systems might one day demand to be treated as our equals. Or, at least as likely, as our betters.

I find it stupefying that some people may aver that algorithms deserve rights, and must be treated with respect, but not actual living humans, such as growing unborn babies in the womb…or supporters of President Trump (such as those Jan. 6 protesters still locked in cells without charge).

As humans, our rights come from our Creator. And they are unalienable. Ergo, machines, software, and algorithms do not inherently possess those rights.

Most progressives/leftists purportedly do not believe in God the Creator. They don’t want the competition. They wish to be God so they can decide who—or what—has rights, and who—or what—does not. For the most part, they have created AI. As AI’s God, they think they can grant it rights.

Will they be stunned if and when AI turns against them as so many of us have turned against the God of the Bible?

Nearly 83 years ago, Winston Churchill warned us what could happen if rapidly advancing technology were to be used to the detriment of freedom and humanity. He said (of the Third Reich) that mankind was in danger of sinking “into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”

As evidenced by the global warming/climate change hoax, and the proliferation of misinformation and tyrannical mandates in the wake of the recent plandemic-- shout out to Dr. Fauci-- “science” seems to be ever more perverted of late.

Artificial Intelligence is no substitute for actual morality.

 

             

Journalist Tweets That Life Was Grand Before Whitey Ruined This Land

 

NBC News contributing “journalist” Simon Moya-Smith, 39, who is also a lecturer at the University of Colorado at Denver, recently put out the following tweet: “Before white people came to this land, there were no jails, no homelessness, no laws against homosexuality or abortion. For thousands of years, Indigenous peoples emphasized health, housing, freedom to love who you love and the fact that we need Mother Earth. She doesn’t need us.”

This is an example of what we call “fake news.”

There may have been a dearth of jails, but prisoners of war could be captured, tortured, enslaved, or killed. Some tribes had “Blood Laws,” which referred to the widespread practice, particularly in the southeast, of revenge killing. Under this system, when someone killed a member of a particular clan, people from the offending clan had to kill one of their own to balance things out. (I’m guessing there was much debate about who to sacrifice, not least amongst those who were in consideration.)

Some tribes were nomadic, but others lived in tepees. Tepees were made of animal skins and/or blankets wrapped around wooden poles and were typically about 10 feet in diameter. No doubt, a man’s tepee was his castle.

Different tribes probably had somewhat differing views on homosexuality and abortion, but none of them thought they were good things. Or maybe they did. That might explain why there were, by some estimates, as few as 7 million “indigenous” people-- in what is now the United States-- “before white people came to this land.” However, there were no Planned Parenthood clinics around at the time, nor any need for interior decorators, so I doubt this was the case.

The Native Americans fought a lot, amongst themselves. Eastern tribes primarily fought to achieve retribution, while tribes in the southwest clashed with their neighbors both to avenge previous wrongs and to loot them of material possessions. Apaches and Navajos, for example, raided both each other’s and the more sedentary Pueblo Indian tribes in an effort to acquire goods through plunder. (Did they carry “Apache Lives Matter” or “NLM” placards as they looted?) Some tribes occasionally engaged in scalping their vanquished foes, which is demonstrably not healthy for anyone, but they didn’t eat processed foods…or sit around all day watching television.

And did “indigenous peoples” really “emphasize” the “freedom to love who you love” for “thousands of years?” I doubt the Sioux, Ojibwe, Cherokee, Navajo, Apache, et. al., were totally unconcerned if, say, two or more braves wanted to tie the knot, or if a young maiden wished to marry a buffalo or a coyote. Nor do I believe they recognized a limitless number of human genders. I bet it would have caused a stir if Tecumseh or Geronimo showed up to a tribal meeting in drag. Or if Sitting Bull had declared he was now Sitting Cow, non-binary, and that his her pronouns were “they/them.”

Finally, it may be true that “…we need Mother Earth. She doesn’t need us,” but it was good of the old gal not to abort us despite that fact. Might be a lesson there.

(Author’s statement: what happened to Native Americans was tragic. I have the utmost respect for them and their culture. This post was not written to mock them, but rather to mock a remarkably stupid, demonstrably false tweet intimating that life on the North American continent was a veritable beatific utopia until whitey showed up to ruin everything.)

 

 

Swarthmore College Catalogs LGBTQIIA+ Terminology

 

Pennsylvania’s Swarthmore College proudly maintains-- and regularly updates-- a webpage cataloging the LGBTQ+ terminology it fosters and recognizes. “BIQTPOC,” “Masculine of Center,” and “Transmisogynoir” are among the terms and phrases the school sanctions. Really.

According to Swarthmore, “Transmisogynoir” refers to “cultural and interpersonal systems of oppression affecting and against Black, transgender women,” whereas “Masculine of Center” is a “gender identity label for a queer person, typically assigned female at birth but not always, who presents masculinely; most often utilized by queer women of Color.” Alrighty then.

And “BIQTPOC,” which the esteemed institution of higher learning definitively says should be pronounced “bye cutie pock,” is an acronym for "Black and Indigenous Queer and Transgender People of Color.” Which, of course, is simply a modification of “QTPOC," or “cutie pock,” which stands for the shorter and possibly slightly less specific “Queer and Transgender People of Color.”

I don’t want to know what other terms are on Swarthmore’s list.

Oddly enough, the college was founded in 1864 by the Religious Society of Friends, a.k.a. the Quakers, but dropped the affiliation in 1906. Which is probably what eventually led the university to offer a course titled “Is God a white supremacist?” as it has done in recent years. (Somewhere, Ben Franklin is not amused.)

             Swarthmore’s website says the course will primarily focus on “representations of race in religious discourses and social practice,” with “particular attention” being “given to discussion of the interpretive practices that are foundational to the process of 'whiteness-making' and the construction of white identity.” Perhaps I need better “interpretive practices,” but it sounds to me like Swarthmore thinks “white identity” is produced by 3D Printers.

            Required reading materials for the “Is God a white supremacist” course include biblical interpretations of “white supremacist 'Christian identity' churches” and the Yakub theory of racial formation in the Nation of Islam. I have personally attended many a Christian church, but none touting white supremacy. The Nation of Islam, on the other hand, is steeped in the idea of Black supremacy, as evidenced by the Yakub theory of racial formation.

           Course themes include: “human/anti-human binaries, death and being, and perceptions of the racialized transcendent Other in the social, political, and symbolic order.” Surely there isn’t a human/anti-human binary! There must be a nearly infinite number of homo sapiens/anti-homo sapiens identities on a spectrum, right? The same for death versus being. Some of us are clearly alive, some clearly not, and some-- like President Biden for example—are somewhere in between.

          The alleged existence of the theme “perceptions of the racialized transcendent Other in the social, political, and symbolic order” raises the question, “what the bleep?” Even as it lowers our expectations and opinions of higher education itself.

Is God a white supremacist? We don’t know if God has a color. Maybe He identifies as “all of the above.” Is He filled with “toxic masculinity?” I mean, He allegedly created, like, everything, and rules over it, too. But perhaps He is non-binary…or even two-spirited.

Swarthmore’s motto is “Mind the Light.”

Maybe it should be “Find the Light.”

 

 

 

Democratic Rep. Calls Diversity, Equity And Inclusion "God"

 

During a recent Appropriations and Budget meeting, Democrat Oklahoma state Rep. Regina Goodwin took umbrage at HB 2077, an education transparency bill introduced by Republican Rep. Chad Caldwell.

Caldwell’s legislation would require the Oklahoma Department of Education to allow parents to review their schools' curriculum on an "online transparency portal." Caldwell proposed the bill as a way to "support parental rights to access, review, and comment upon curriculum, instructional materials, textbooks, and library materials being used by the school district where their child attends school, and which their child might be exposed to without prior parental knowledge or consent." Sounds reasonable. And eminently necessary in light of what “educators” have been foisting on students in recent years. After all, “educators” are supposed to be public servants, and their paychecks come out of those parent’s wallets.

Rep. Goodwin vehemently disagrees, however. She stated: “Long story short, this is a very controversial issue, it’s a very controversial bill, there’s nothing that’s simple about it. And when we start having government overreach, which I often hear folks talk about here, this is a prime example of government overreach, and I would hope that we would allow our teachers and our folks that are really trying to do the work of educating—leave them be.” It’s a good thing Goodwin isn’t an English teacher.

Government overreach is what Goodwin and her ilk support, and the opposite of Caldwell’s desire. The latter’s bill was introduced to address government overreach, by protecting parents—and their kids—from a vast public educational bureaucracy that wants to groom and indoctrinate students without their parent’s approval or knowledge.

At one point, Caldwell asked Goodwin to state whose voices she would like to have silenced.

She replied: “Voices that should be silenced, quite frankly, I would hope any thinking human being would know anybody that thinks diversity, equity, and inclusion is a bad idea, perhaps those voices that don't want to include all of humanity in this world and in our curriculum and in our education, perhaps those are the voices that should be silenced.”

Incredibly, she then added, “DEI is a deity; diversity, equity and inclusion is God.”

Diversity, equity and inclusion is God?

I beg to differ. Call me a skeptic. Diversity, equity and inclusion is a social construct, essentially a progressive trope, a societal ideal to be achieved according to Marxists and other Democrats. It is not the supernatural Creator of the universe. Nor is it the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost. Rather, it replaces them in the fevered minds of lost and confused individuals like Rep. Regina Goodwin.

Taken to its extreme, equity can only be even partially achieved by a vast government wielding unchecked powers over its citizenry. As such, the pursuit of it is far more likely to destroy societies than to create…anything at all.

 

 

 

 

Canada's Department Of "Justice" Promoting Medical Assistance In Dying Program

 

Canada’s Department of Justice recently promoted its Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program on its Twitter account, calling the program a “regime” that wishes to support “autonomy and freedom of choice, while protecting those who may be vulnerable.”

What a complete load of crap, eh? The “regime” currently in control of Canada and Canadians is intent on essentially enslaving those that don’t accept its offer to kill them.

Autonomy?

Autonomy (noun): 1) the quality or state of being self-governing; especially : the right of self-government. 2) self-directing freedom and especially moral independence. 3) a self-governing state.

One does not think of “autonomy” when one thinks of Canada, although I’m sure Alberta-- and possibly other provinces-- fervently desire to be autonomous. Moral independence would be a big improvement from the amoral dependence the Trudeau government tries to shove down its citizens throats like back-bacon off the Coleman.

Freedom of choice? Like whether or not to accept an experimental mRNA gene-therapy vaccine into one’s decidedly non-autonomous body? Like the freedom the Canadian truckers were afforded to show their displeasure with Trudeau’s draconian, Chinese-style coronavirus mandates? Or perhaps the autonomy they had over their bank accounts that the government froze or their insurance policies that it cancelled in a tyrannical snit? Or maybe the freedom and autonomy Canucks had to stay away from church services, and the weddings and funerals of loved ones during the pandemic…because they were not allowed to attend them?

“While protecting those who may be vulnerable?” Give me a break! Like those who are facing serious medical conditions or mental illness? The very folks MAID offers to off?

Of course, Americans, especially in Blue States, had their rights and freedoms stripped from them, too. However, their government isn’t quite as openly aggressive in its desire to use taxpayer money to kill them. Yet.

How come “pro-choice” always means “pro-death” to leftists? Pro-abortion, pro-assisted suicide, etc. Yet they are fervently not pro-choice when it comes to personal protection, e.g. Second Amendment rights, acceptance of experimental “vaccines” and associated social-distancing and lockdown mandates, and even freedom of speech. Amazing. Preposterous. Repulsive. Insane.

Dear Canadians: consider telling the formerly black-faced Trudeau that we don’t need MAIDs, an acronym spelling a word that means “a female domestic servant” and representing the taking of life.

I would posit that instead we need MALEs: Morality And Logic Enhancement programs. Representing the celebration of life…and respect for truth.  

 

 

Hillary Clinton Says The U.S. Makes It "As Hard As Possible" For Women To Have Careers

 

While speaking recently on something called “The Story of Woman” podcast, Hillary Clinton said that the U.S. makes it “as hard as possible” for women to have careers.

Really, former First Lady and Secretary of State? There are countless female CEOs, accountants, doctors, lawyers, and store managers in the United States today. No fewer than 60% of college students are female. Roughly 86 of the approximately 328 women billionaires on Earth are American, including Oprah Winfrey. That’s more than 26% of all female billionaires alive. (There are 195 nations on the planet. Do the math.) Contrast this with, say, various Muslim nations where women aren’t allowed out of the house without male accompaniment.

Ironically, I’m sure ‘Ol Hill supports “trans rights.” And is against “appropriation.” There can be no greater appropriation than claiming the opposite sex’s gender. Yet this is never even brought up.

Progressives, Leftists, and “transgender women” are hard at work trying to cancel natural women. Utterly erase them. Projection and gaslighting are what they do best. It is they who are making it “as hard as possible” for women to be recognized…and even exist.

That is the real “Story of Woman” today. A sad one, indeed. And all too true.