Ultra-navel-gazing moment: My Oberlin College classmate Bill Scher reminisces about bright college days:
As I have mentioned before, Michelle and I went to Oberlin together in the early 90s and are still friends.
Outrage against “P.C” reached a critical mass while we were there. (1990 was when Newsweek ran its “Thought Police” cover story.)
While this hysteria was way overblown nationwide, Oberlin was the kind of place where P.C. unofficially reigned. Offering a contrarian viewpoint — especially when using bombastic language — could lose you friends. I speak from experience, and I know Michelle has her stories too.
…So I don’t understand.
In any event, “Conservative Correctness” should be called out for what it is. Mischief making.
For whatever excesses have occurred under the umbrella of “P.C.,” at least the intentions were generally honorable — mainly, trying to rid society of debilitating bigotry.
“Conservative Correctness” is not well intentioned. It’s simply just about intimidating people who disagree with you.
And it will not end with this episode.
I didn’t know her in college, but Michelle Malkin’s brand of hysteria-mongering seems very familiar to me because of the environment that Bill speaks of. And actually, it always seemed to me that the PC left learned their tactics from McCarthy and the religious right. There’s nothing new under the sun.
Maybe this gives some idea as to why “civil debate” is a big deal on this site.
How’s that for a thoughtful response to your post? But boy was I with you on the PC thing, although I think I predated you guys. I was there in the early eighties, helped start the DSA chapter there (then DSOC) so I certainly possessed progressive bona fides. But there was a constant, as my friend put it, looking over one’s shoulder at other people’s values on the left that drove me nuts. I remember one furious argument I had once where I took down a tattered old flag that had been hanging in my co-op because I thought it was disrespectful to those for whom the flag means something important, and people attacked me for supporting a symbol of “fascism.” Yawn.
<
p>
But the difference between what happened there, and what Malkin and her freakish accomplices do, is that I think that at Oberlin, people actually believed what they were saying. I don’t think for a second that Malkin and her cohorts believe any of the crap they sling, but are using, as Sher says, a tactic.
<
p>
There was one group though, the “Sparticists,” that purported to be “left”, who acted exactly like Malkin and her ilk. So much so, we often said, that we were sure that they were merely an FBI or CIA front.
Big, big communist. Like, actually physically big. And weird as all hell.
Seriously. They were all scary as hell. You were never sure whether they were gonna disrupt your meeting and call you a capitalist roader or pull out AK-47’s and kill you all.
You can disparage their stances and ideas, but not their sincerity.
<
p>
Shoe on the other foot – would you call Al Sharpton a media troll? A liar who promoted the Tawana scare to get a moment’s airtime? A scheming strategist who doesn’t give a damn about young black men, but talks about a draft to score cheap ideological points?
<
p>
No, you say?
<
p>
Then why is it so inconceivable that people skew equally far to the right in a sincere fashion?
If they were so concerned about the vulgarity of the bloggers they decried, they would be equally outraged about the ravings of a William (?) Donohue who says things “everybody in Hollywood likes anal sex” etc. No, their outrage is as faux as almost everything else about them.