Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Campus Protest Coincidences

    Posted by Michael Hiteshew on November 12th, 2015 (All posts by )

    A question I keep asking myself: Is this sudden explosion of campus activism related to larger political trends in the USA? Has the Obama White House and the Democratic Party looked out at the unfolding political landscape and surmised that a year from now the Democrats may have less political power than anytime in the last 75 years, and decided stir up trouble? In other words, if they can’t succeed via the ballot box, can they succeed through intimidation, social upheaval and violence? Are these professors and students their Brownshirts? Are the campuses both the ignition points and rally points? Consider, universities are the one social structure almost completely under Leftist control, and they have in their hands freshly indoctrinated young people under their control and authority.

    As evidence, I read stories like this Top UM Race Activist…Made Several Visits to White House and wonder if these people are being manipulated, encouraged, or organized at a national level.

     

    18 Responses to “Campus Protest Coincidences”

    1. Jonathan Says:

      Probably.

    2. CRino Says:

      It’s like asking if 0 is a muslim. It really doesn’t matter. What matters is that one can be reasonably forgiven for thinking so.

    3. Assistant Village Idiot Says:

      Assent to CRino, essentially. However, I see a little something else. I don’t think they really believe that their actions cause all this hatred. They are convinced that they are the bearers of peace and joy, and it is only because their opponents are so evil and bigoted that things all end up in conflict and even violence. They may think there is a risk of some discomfort, because change is hard and their opponents are so volatile, but they absolutely do not see themselves as fomenting violence in order to create change. Or at least, most do not.

      I think that narcissism makes them even more dangerous. Those who are simply jockeying for power can be bargained with. But these people cannot relent, cannot settle, because of their moral certainty.

    4. I. C. Things Says:

      Wow. I guess every right wing website needs its Alex Jones so, Mike, you go, boy!

      Wow.

    5. Michael Hiteshew Says:

      There are none so blind as people who will not C.

    6. Mike K Says:

      A troll is easy to spot as their ID is anonymous.

    7. Jonathan Says:

      See Michael Ledeen’s PJ Media column. Many of his readers’ comments in response are also worth reading.

    8. vxxc2014 Says:

      Yes.

      The important thing being of course they’re acting while the Right wrings their hands.

      BLM of course is advocating cop killing with DOJ Civil Rights Division top cover, but the key meeting was 12/2/14 at the White House. They came out of the post Ferguson strategy meeting demanding dead cops and they got them 18 days later in NYC.

      Action instead of words wins every time.

    9. Sgt. Mom Says:

      A commentor over at Sarah Hoyt’s place used the term – “academic puppy-milling” which seems pretty appropriate to me in describing the institutions in question.

    10. RON M Says:

      smacks of the red guard

    11. Robert Schwartz Says:

      If I were running the DNC, I would be doing my best to suppress the kind of nonsense that is coming out of the Colleges right now, to suppress the “Black Lives Matter” movement, and to cut off any inner city rioting. That kind of stuff made the Democrats radioactive at the polls in the 1970s, and they will again.

      Therefore, my guess is that these outbursts represent despair and overreach by those constituencies, not any central planning.

    12. Veryretired Says:

      I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so back during the occupy Wall Street frenzy a while ago that it was a recruiting drive for a organized pool of activists and demonstrators who could be turned out as desired for civil disturbances or, in these latest cases, campus protests.

      Control of college campuses and urban areas is vital to the progressive drive for ever more social control over what people are allowed to say publicly about political and social issues.

      The “street warriors” who are organizing these media events are very probably former activists for occupy, as many of the BLM are also.

      This is all leading up to the all-out street warfare we will be seeing continuously as the 2016 elections get closer.

      Who do you think it benefits when the media are consumed with endless stories about this demonstration or that protest, instead of any exploration of serious issues or candidate examination?

    13. Christopher B Says:

      Robert, I don’t think it’s the DNC calling the shots. I’m sure some of them aren’t happy about it but they’ve got this tiger by the tail and don’t dare let go.

      I’ve got a take similar to Veryretired though not quite as extreme.

      I don’t see anything like continuous street warfare (possible but only at a very low level) but this is an opportunity to rehearse and organize for possible post-election protests if we have another GWB/Gore scenario. The Left was caught flat-footed back then and they want to be ready if Hillary is caught in a recount in a state important to the Electoral College, or if she wins the popular vote but loses in the EC. I have no doubt that sustained protests in FL and nationwide would have resulted in the USSC allowing the disputed FL recounts to find enough Gore votes to put him over the top rather than ruling 5-4 that they needed to stop.

      I don’t think it’s a coincidence that OWS was ginned up in the fall preceding an election year. This gives the organizers time to determine communication plans, identify sympathetic media and develop relationships with them, as well as testing how well groups will respond to various appeals.

    14. DirtyJobsGuy Says:

      There is a small group somewhere around which the current consensus forms. It does not need to be a single person. The old Communist parties had essentially instantaneous coordination with the party line from Moscow. The message discipline was astounding. I think today the old party cell leader role is filled by very hard left university professors. They can then feed some guidance to students. Look at the anarchists who were causing all the trouble at world trade meetings a few years back. Their mentors were largely university professors.

    15. dies irae Says:

      Hitler was not born in Germany and Obama was not born in the USA. Both men are socialists. Both were community organizers. Hitler created the Sturmabteilung aka the SA or Brown Shirts. Obama has the SJWs whom many refer to as nazis. Otherwise SJWs and SA have behaved the same. Both hate jews. Note that most of the banks Obama hates, like Lehman, have jewish names.

      Both Hitler and Obama got elected – Hitler to Chancellor and Obama to President. Both rule by decree. Both have the biggest military in the world.

      Hitler created a police state where Germans dreaded the Gestapo knock in the night. Under Obama Swat teams and DEA don’t knock.

      One major difference so far. The Reichstag was burned down by terrorists. So far, congress has not been burned.

    16. dearieme Says:

      At what point did Hitler have a bigger military than Stalin?

      Obama was born in the Hawaii, as far as I can tell. He has obscured much about his life, I’ll grant you, but the tale that he was born in Kenya seems ludicrously unlikely. If there’s a case that he was born in, say, Canada that would be interesting. Anyway, wherever he was born is he not a US natural born citizen by virtue of his mother’s US citizenship, or is there something in the small print that weighs against that?

    17. Mike K Says:

      One comment from the Ledeen post is interesting.

      In early 1944 the military expansion was cut back to avoid having too many guys doing nothing.

      This is exactly right. At the time of the Battle of the Bulge, the US Army was very short of infantry and the draft boards had shut down conscription because everyone, including Congress, was certain the war was over.

      I don’t think we would have done better than a draw with Japan if we had not had the atomic bomb.

      What is now going on in Paris is going to have incalculable consequences. That plus the Russian airplane bomb will blow up Hillary’s campaign among other things.

      All Hell us about to beak loose.

    18. Michael Hiteshew Says:

      I. C. Things Says:
      November 12th, 2015 at 9:48 pm
      Wow. I guess every right wing website needs its Alex Jones so, Mike, you go, boy!
      Wow.

      And now…NEW YORK POST: College protests being organized by Obama group Organizing For America.

      Guess we’ve answered that question.