Great post!

Demoralization What Yuri Bezmenov Didn-t Tell You

Sources: [pastebin.pl]

....................................

University Of Texas Disbands Anti-Free Speech Group
By Jeff Charles | Dec 27, 2020

Let’s score another victory for free speech. As you already know, radical leftists on college campuses nationwide have engaged in full on efforts to restrict political views that contradict their own. It’s been a problem for years, but the situation worsened after President Donald Trump took office and political tensions increased.

But it appears that those who value the spirit of the First Amendment are successfully pushing back against leftists who would suppress their voices. The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that the University of Texas has dissolved its Campus Climate Response team. This group was tasked with monitor students and members of the faculty to identify individuals who broke the rules of progressivism.

Members of the team could subject professors and students to disciplinary action if they said something they deemed to be offensive.

From the Journal:

“Students could anonymously report their professors and peers for ‘bias incidents’ to the Campus Climate Response Team, which would investigate and threaten disciplinary referrals and ‘restorative justice’ meetings with administrators. The university gave several examples of what constitutes an act of bias, including ‘faculty commentary in the classroom perceived as derogatory and insensitive,’ and other behavior open to highly subjective judgments about what is offensive.”

The Journal credited Speech First, a nonprofit group that sued the university on behalf of students in 2018, alleging that officials “created an elaborate investigatory and disciplinary apparatus to suppress, punish, and deter speech that other students deem ‘offensive,’ ‘biased,’ ‘uncivil,’ or ‘rude.’”

A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in 2019. University spokesman J.B. Bird referenced the court’s decision on Wednesday, stating that there was “no evidence students were disciplined, sanctioned or investigated for their speech” and that, “to the contrary,” there was “strong evidence of the university protecting the speech rights of conservative students and guests on campus.”

However, Speech First appealed the decision and the “Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the ruling and remanded the case back to the district court,” according to the Journal.

Circuit Court Judge Edith Jones slammed the bias-response team, arguing that it was “clenched fist in the velvet glove of student speech regulation.”

Now, the university’s administrators have agreed to dissolve the team as part of the settlement and will also alter polices designed to squelch speech. They are lifting the ban on “uncivil behaviors and language that interfere.” They are also removing a definition of “verbal harassment” that barred “ridicule” or “personal attacks.”

Under the settlement, UT reserves the right “to devise an alternative” to its bias-response team, but “Speech First is free to challenge that alternative.” Speech First has also succeeded in changing policies at Iowa State and the University of Michigan. Keeping track of campus censors these days is a full-time job, alas.

The university can still alter, or create new rules regarding speech on campus. It can also create a new team. But it is apparent that the lawsuit has made it so that they cannot brazenly step on free speech on campus for political purposes. The progressives in charge will surely attempt to find other ways to suppress opposing views, but it won’t be nearly as effective as it was previously.

This case demonstrates to students and faculty at other universities that the radical leftists’ authoritarian approach to speech isn’t impossible to overcome. Perhaps if more groups like Speech First would be willing to step up and fight these battles in the court conservatives and others can more effectively fight those intent on silencing them on college campuses.

[redstate.com]

The crazy issues are not real issues. They are made up to cause a society's ruin to soften it up for a Leftist takeover. Leftist activism thrives in societies obsessed with libertarian excesses over traditional values.

Identity politics is indeed full of hypocrisy, contradiction and incongruity. The individual is assigned an identity and must be placed in the appropriate box from what one can visually perceive, white/black, male/feminist , straight/alternative, rich/poor, old/young, etc. It's profiling gone wild. The victim group will excommunicate any who refuse to wear the label.

But Identity politics is a part of the Marxist tool box. Victim groups must be identified and labeled then they are useful in dismantling the social fabric and structure of a society or nation. The first dichotomy was what Marx identified as the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The proletariat were then motivated to destroy the class structure to bring about equality. This came out of Hegel's dialectic and the term dialectical materialism was coined to describe it around the time of Marx's death in the 1880's. Identity politics was expanded upon in the first half of the 20th century and its power was demonstrated by the rise of feminism in the 1960's. If equality were the objective of identity politics there wouldn't be a problem with it but its prime objective is to weaken the structure of the society in order to implement a communist form of government. Identity groups, once established, attack the institutions and history of a nation. The problem with socialism is that it is created out of abundance and can only survive in a productive society that creates abundance. When it seizes control of the means of production it always limits it and creates scarcity and from there dies out.

This guy Azerrad nailed it. Kudos!..