Imagine the totally fictitious scene of being a teenager that loves school, especially the math class. I say fictitious because the scene never happened as I describe it, but happened close enough on several occasions to be awkward.
So then,
it happened one day that you heard two adults haggle interminably about a
problem they cannot solve, and you interjected with a comment that went like
this:
Actually
the temperature went neither up nor down because when you work out the math,
you’ll find that 65 degrees Fahrenheit, translate into 18 and a 1/3 degrees
Celsius, which is what this thermometer is indicating.
Instead
of being praised and encouraged by the adults, you were reprimanded — not
because you contradicted them or interrupted them, but because you did not have
the qualification to make such a judgment. But what exactly would be the
necessary qualification? It would be a degree in mathematics or the environment,
according to the adults.
Scenes such as that happen all the time – and
not just in math but in all fields of knowledge. In fact, whether you are young
or old, you’re not supposed to speak on any subject unless you can show that
someone has certified you as being knowledgeable in the field. That is, you
have to have a degree on the subject or have extensive experience practicing a
trade associated with the subject you’re tackling.
What has
this trend—which started in North America in the decade of the sixties—done to
the culture? The answer is that it has done what Clifford D. May is complaining
about. He did so in an article that came under the title: “Extremist ideologies
proliferate in a world where anything goes,” published on December 13, 2022 in
The Washington Times.
As you
read through the article, it slowly dawns on you that Clifford May is a prime
example of what he complains about. What alerts you to this reality is that despite
the fact he is a lawyer and a journalistic commentator, he could not ignore the
Jewish method of rejecting having a debate on the fundamentals of the subject
being discussed, favoring instead having a superficial discussion that describes
the events which prompted the discussion in the first place.
Thus, in
the same way that when you read articles written by Jews, you get inundated
with statics and descriptions of events pertaining to the inhuman treatment they
are subjected to on a daily basis – Clifford May is inundating his readers with
superficial descriptions of events that happen on the world stage. But he makes
no attempt to dig deep in search of the causes for what happens. Why is that?
That is
the case because the Jews have long rejected the principle of uncovering the
truth via the method of exchanging ideas. Instead of trying to build a
consensus by putting together the best of that’s offered by each debater, they
get into a shouting match known as haggling, thus allow each side the chance to
avoid losing the debate that was never conducted.
Whereas
the Jews normally engage in haggling among themselves, they do something else
when talking to non-Jews. They engage in frivolities because time has taught
them that their ideas are such outliers, they cannot win a debate that’s conducted
rationally. And so, they stay on the safe side by rattling off statistics and complaining
about being treated badly by a human race they say is stricken by a disease they
call antisemitism.
Living
for half a century with Jewish lawyers, journalists and politicians in its
midst, the American culture became so imbued by the outlier nature of their
modes of thinking, the bonds that used to connect the various components of the
culture began to dissolve. This opened the door for permissiveness to get in,
replace what was there, and steadily grow bigger inside the fissures of a
cracking old culture like fungus grows inside a dilapidated building.
Still, despite
exhibiting the attributes of a Jewish lawyer which he is, can we find anything
in Clifford May’s article that would indicate he has deep ideas he does not reveal
for whatever reason?
In fact,
there may be such indications. Here are a few possibilities:
“Extremist ideologies are
proliferating. These developments should worry us, no? QAnon is a
made-in-America. Its arcane ideology has spread to other countries. I’m not
suggesting that Mr. Trump agrees with such views. I am suggesting he
demonstrated abysmally poor judgment by breaking bread with these extremist
whackadoodles. Finally, let me point out that Mr. Biden is championing a
variety of extreme positions, including those of the ideology known as wokeism.
No mention was made of the beyond-the-fringe brand of gender-identity ideology
Mr. Brinton both represents and promotes. To even call attention to such
extremism is now taboo — though I guess it’s a taboo I’ve just broken”.
There
seems to be an attempt here by Clifford May to be more than the outsider who is
looking through the glass window as he tries to understand what’s behind the
display that was arranged by others. Thus, speaking in general terms, May
declared that extremism was proliferating. That mysterious QAnon was made in
America but easily spread to other countries. Donald Trump has poor judgment
but Joe Biden is championing wokeism and other extreme ideologies. And he,
Clifford May, broke a taboo by mentioning the foibles of a certain Mr. Briton.
Could it be that Clifford May is on his way to writing an article under a title that reads as follows: “Researching the subject seriously, it is clear that Jews bear responsibility for antisemitism”.