Thursday, June 1, 2017

A Peek At The Left’s Strategy Guide

     Hans G. Schantz, author of The Hidden Truth — if you haven’t read it, repent of your sins and get to Amazon at once! – has a sequel coming out: A Rambling Wreck. He plans to launch it at LibertyCon in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on July 1. In it, he presents (among other things) a glimpse at the Left’s overall strategy for advancing its aims in these United States. Gomulka, the speaker in the following excerpt, is a Professor of Social Justice at Georgia Tech.

     “Of course, it wouldn’t be appropriate for us to use class time to organize for specific political action,” Gomulka observed, “so let’s discuss, hypothetically of course, the kinds of steps students at other campuses have taken to effect social change, within the general framework that underlies all activism.”

     He wrote, “TARGET,” on the board. “First we have to ask ourselves, who is the target of our activity. If our targets are individuals, we want to change their attitudes or behaviors. If our target is a group or organization, we may want to change the group structure, power hierarchies, or secure greater participation and control for our allies. If our target is a community, we want to change intra group relations such as discrimination, or attitudes, or beliefs. Finally, if our target is society at large, we want to impact policies like globalization, education, the economy, health care, the environment, and so forth. Campus activism can take on any of these targets. Our focus is on a group, the administration, and to a lesser extent, the public whose support they require, and the individual reactionaries who oppose social justice.”

     He added, “AGENT,” below it. “Then, we have to consider who the agents of social change are. The agents of social change can be leaders, directors, politicians, the people in charge. Or it can be the supporters or backers on whom the target relies. Or it can be the grassroots volunteers, employees, or interested citizens.” He smiled benevolently at the class. “That’s you – the idealistic student advocates for social justice. You need to keep it simple, maximize cooperation by maintaining good relations, and be ready to show how change benefits the target. Which brings us to…”

     Then, he wrote, “AGENT ==> TARGET,” on a third line. “How does the agent relate to or impact the target? The target may already be well-converged toward social justice convergence and only require a modest nudge. Pre-converged targets are in the grasp of reactionaries and require a change in beliefs, attitudes, or values. Finally, anti-converged targets are actively opposed to social justice. They may dominate and oppress the agents, requiring more forceful measures.”

     Finally, he wrote, “SUPPORT,” at the bottom of his list. “What actions are required to gain public support for your goal? Social change is easiest when the target is already well-converged: acknowledges the problem, agrees change is needed, is open to assistance, and willing to change. That’s the case in most campus advocacy. We already have allies and fellow travelers in the administration who recognize that true equality requires more than head counting and quota checking. Equality requires fundamental changes in beliefs and attitudes that can only be achieved through changes in how and what we teach our students. The administration needs our help to overcome and silence the determined opposition of reactionary voices. Well-converged targets only require empirical evidence – information journalism, reports, studies. They can transform that information into the right action.” He wrote, “CONVERGED = RATIONAL/EMPIRICAL,” on the board.

     “Pre-converged targets need re-education. They need to be taught to adopt new values and new norms, either through the carrot of rational or emotional means, or the stick of facing the consequences of their poor choices. The holdouts, the reactionaries, the opponents of social justice,” he smiled, “and no campus is without a few of those, they respond best to non-violent methods – strikes, protests, rallies, sit-ins, publicity, advocacy journalism, public shaming, boycotts – those are the principal tactics.” He added “PRE-CONVERGED = NORMATIVE/RE-EDUCATIVE,” on the board.

     “Anti-converged targets require coercive strategies and raw power, up to and including riots, revolution, and terrorism.” He added “ANTI-CONVERGED = POWER/COERCIVE,” on the board.

     “Campus advocacy will typically employ rational/empirical and normative/re-educative strategies for social change. Power or coercive strategies are not appropriate. Why?” He pointed at Madison.

     “Because the administration is on our side already and we want to cooperate with them,” she answered.

     “Exactly!” He beamed. “You’re providing cover for them, giving them a justification to do what they want to do already because ‘the students demand it.’ Now, of course, all I’ve been saying is true of campus activism most everywhere, including here at Georgia Tech. As I said, it would be highly inappropriate of me to organize activism here in class. I’ve covered all I need to say today, so class is over.” A few students started to gather their things. “However,” he loudly interrupted them, “if you find yourselves gathered here and want to take advantage of the opportunity to organize outside of class time, why, I see no reason why anyone would object. I’ll see you next time.”

     That is as comprehensive a statement of the methods of the “social justice warriors” as will fit into a thousand words – and it is priceless. It could only be more valuable to us in the Right if we could trace it verifiably to an official publication of one of the major Left-wing organizations.

     Giving true coloration to the Left’s methods, by pointing out the patterns and the most striking examples thereof to normally sensible persons unwisely entertaining their pronouncements, could be the most effective purely rhetorical tactic available to us. Ponder it. Measure it against the events of the recent past, and contemplate how you might use it when one of the subject areas mentioned above enters conversation.

     No, it wouldn’t have any effect on a committed Leftist. For him, there’s nothing you could possibly do...except to hit back twice as hard when he dares to raise a hand to you. But I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know.

No comments: