In the midst of the (social) media firestorm over the New York Times’ hiring of Sarah Jeong and CNN’s Jim Acosta ranting and whining about the Trump administration’s treatment of the media, the academic set has joined the fray to, as they say, “learn us benighted.”
The NYT brought aboard Jeong despite a lengthy Twitter trail of virulent anti-white comments, including calling Caucasians “groveling goblins,” “bullshit,” “miserable,” and “dogs.”
Regarding the first epithet, Jeong asked “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?”
How can the people trust you are non-biased when you put people like this in your editorial board? #SarahJeong pic.twitter.com/Gg0uVs2zrE
— Ben (@BenGDressen) August 2, 2018
It’s bad enough the Times twisted itself into a pretzel rationalizing Jeong’s hire; worse still when so-called big brains do it.
Take CUNY professor and “advocate of American student activism” Angus Johnson, for example: “If you’re tsk-tsking about that Sarah Jeong compilation screenshot, you’re endorsing a deliberate hatchet job and you’re a punk.” He also retweeted the following:
Sarah Jeong will outwrite, outthink, and outlast all you motherfuckers but good luck being fragile racist misogynists
— Helen Rosner (@hels) August 2, 2018
Others posted or retweeted the story titled “Dear White People, Please Stop Pretending Reverse Racism Is Real” with the sub-headline “It’s literally impossible to be racist to a white person.” It’s based on the taken-as-gospel-in-intellectual circles critical “theory” that, because whites hold most of the power in American society, they cannot be victims of racism.
Academics and other progressives keep pressing this notion, and then are legitimately dumbfounded at the reaction — and pushback — from normal America.
CNN’s Jim Acosta is the same way when it comes to the mainstream media. He and his myriad like-minded colleagues just cannot comprehend why so many people either laugh at or pshaw all their whining about Donald Trump’s “attacks” on the press.
I walked out of the end of that briefing because I am totally saddened by what just happened. Sarah Sanders was repeatedly given a chance to say the press is not the enemy and she wouldn't do it. Shameful.
— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) August 2, 2018
The Atlantic recently solicited several academics to bolster this obtuseness. For example, the University of North Carolina’s Kenneth Payne chimes in on the president’s continued assertion that the Mueller probe is a witch hunt: “When a statement is repeated, it starts to feel more familiar. That feeling of familiarity is easily interpreted as the feeling of truth.” (Sort of like … “collusion,” maybe?)
Tom Stafford of the University of Sheffield adds “If you start arguing about whether something is or isn’t a witch hunt, you’ve basically conceded that it’s plausible that it’s a witch hunt, or that that’s the right term to use.” This means people begin to subconsciously believe that the witch hunt allegation is somewhat legit — “even when there’s no evidence to substantiate that claim.” (Sort of like … “collusion,” maybe?)
Over at The Hill, Boston University’s Tobe Berkovitz says the current American political polarization — “on steroids” — lies squarely on Trump’s shoulders: “It continues to accelerate because Trump has the perfect foil: the media. And he continues to be overtly aggressive with his aggravation, insults and accusations of fakery.”
Syracuse University’s Robert Thompson seems to be on the right track in terms of understanding the antipathy towards the media. He says “If you would have asked me two years ago, I would say [Trump’s is] a bad strategy and he’s not going to win because in previous times it wouldn’t work.”
“But,” Thompson continues, “we’re consistently seeing more and more people for whom that message is working.”
The question remains: Why would that be?
Academic critical theorists constantly lecture white people that they must accept their notions of white privilege, white supremacy, non-color-blindness, and to get over their “white fragility.” Note I say “their notions.” Which are out in left field.
Fair-minded (white) people can recognize that yes, they do have certain advantages in American society that blacks and other minorities do not yet fully realize; they just have a big problem being called names like those which Ms. Jeong uses … and with being lectured that they have to keep their mouths closed and take it.
https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1025480446812020739
Similarly, folks like Jim Acosta will howl until The Revelation that they’re fair and balanced in their reporting, but the same fair-minded people know that such a claim is utter drivel.
Critical theorists and mainstream media demand we take them seriously, but they offer not a single morsel of introspection. Their buckling down results in an ever-increasing quantity of things which are “racist” and/or “intolerant,” or in the media’s case mounting complaints that “American democracy is in the cross-hairs” (or some other such dopey hyperbole like the Washington Post’s ridiculous motto).
I simply can't imagine why people don't trust the media. It is such a mystery. An enigma. A puzzlement. https://t.co/Z0GxC70q2H
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 3, 2018
But most of all it will result in President Trump’s — and similarly minded politicians’ — continued success, despite their innumerable flaws, personal and political.
MORE: Critical race theory and free speech limits based on feelings
MORE: Sign of hope? Yale racism workshop gets ‘meager’ attendance
IMAGE: Giulio Fornasar/Shutterstock.com
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.