A substantial number of today's self-styled "defenders of the principles of the Founding" would be horrified by what the Founders actually believed

Various people have made this point already in the context of the debate over the Satanic display in Iowa, but the idea that our "Founding principles" compel us to accept these provocations is absurd. This wouldn't have even been a subject of debate with the Founding generation.

We *are* compelled to accept public endorsements of Satanism by the post-1950s mangling of the Constitution, and the subsequent rewriting of the principles of the Founding.

But too many conservatives are mistaking that modern revision for the Constitution of the Founders.

The attack on Confederate statues and symbols was framed as a way to right an old wrong — to finally put the issue of racism and slavery to rest.

In reality, it was just the dress rehearsal for a far larger and more radical assault on American heritage.

https://twitter.com/jeremycarl4/status/1735732511014261215

In 2015, neoconservative Peter Wehner wrote that removing the Confederate flag from state grounds was "an opportunity" for the GOP "to finally put to rest an issue that has bedeviled their party."

Of course, as we know, it never put anything to rest. It was only the beginning.

The attack on Confederate symbols began decades ago. But even then, there were signs that this was about far more than just the Confederacy.

In 1992, New Orleans began stripping Confederate names from schools. By 1997, George Washington was being added to the chopping block:

A Tale of Two Harvard Presidents

In 2006, Harvard president Larry Summers was forced to resign.

His crime, among other things, was a speech he had given the year prior, in which he suggested that gender disparities in science and engineering might be the result of innate differences between men and women. The speech led to a furious backlash, and a no-confidence vote from Harvard faculty.

When Summers became president of Harvard in 2001, he boasted an impressive resume: He had served as the Secretary of the US Treasury, chief economist at the World Bank, and the youngest-ever Harvard economics professor to achieve tenure.

He had published six books and well over 100 academic articles. None of his work had ever been accused of plagiarism.

Fast forward to 2022: Harvard appoints Claudine Gay to serve as its newest president.

At the time, Gay had published a career total of 11 academic articles. For context, Summers published more than that in the single year of 1987.

Gay had never published an academic book. As David Randall of @NASorg noted when she was appointed, "very few professors can even get tenure with so thin a publication record — absent the tailwind from [diversity] quotas."

But Gay was able to ascend to the most prestigious position at the most prestigious university in the world.

Now, thanks to the reporting of @realchrisrufo and @realChrisBrunet, we know that Gay's anemic academic output wasn't even all hers. She lifted entire paragraphs of her work from other authors, without proper attribution.

As we saw with Larry Summers, Harvard presidents have been ousted for far less. But in spite of all that, the Harvard board is unanimously standing by Gay — and the legacy media is circling the wagons.

This is business as usual for modern academia: Political favoritism, racial preferences, and corrupt self-dealing. It's a racket. And if the polls are any indication, Americans are finally beginning to realize as much.

The latest data on American trust in higher education, published by US News & World Report today (survey was conducted December 8-10):

I should clarify that @aaronsibarium was the reporter who found that Gay had lifted entire paragraphs from other people's work and claimed them as her own — read his comprehensive @FreeBeacon report here:
freebeacon.com/campus/this-is…

The hate speech law that Ireland is preparing to pass is arguably the most radical legislation of its kind we've seen in the West.

It criminalizes the mere possession of materials that are "likely to incite violence or hatred" — books, videos, or even memes on your phone.

https://twitter.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1728435646044451205

The bill defines "hatred" as "hatred against a person or a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their protected characteristics."

Protected characteristics include "national origin."

Would criticizing Ireland's open borders even be legal under this bill?

Similarly, "gender" — another protected class in the bill — "includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female."

So criticisms of gender ideology — or even possession of "anti-transgender" materials — are now potentially criminal acts.

For over a decade, the ADL used undercover spies to conduct a vast, coordinated, and potentially illegal campaign of espionage against the John Birch Society.

Until this year, that campaign was a secret.

It was uncovered by a historian digging through historical archives. 🧵

In March, GWU historian Matthew Dallek published a book about the John Birch Society (JBS), a hard-right anticommunist org that was prominent in the 60s and 70s.

During the research process, Dallek was given access to a trove of internal ADL documents from that time period.

What Dallek uncovered was “a lengthy, multidimensional, and previously undisclosed counterintelligence operation waged by the ADL to infiltrate and dig up damaging information about” JBS, spanning from 1959 to the 1970s—and involving current and former US intelligence officials.

Just for fun, I asked the Midjourney AI to generate images using the opening sentences of books.

Here's "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck:

"To the red country and part of the gray country of Oklahoma, the last rains came gently, and they did not cut the scarred earth."

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams:

"Far Out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral arm of the galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun."

"Animal Farm" by George Orwell:

"Mr. Jones, of the Manor Farm, had locked the hen-houses for the night, but was too drunk to remember to shut the popholes."