Post-Modernism and the Senate Judiciary Committee

“Postmodernism is difficult to define, because to define it would violate the postmodernist’s premise that no definite terms, boundaries, or absolute truths exist.”

Post-Modernism is a movement that began in academic circles as a means to explain away the consistent failures of communism/socialism since their founding. It is populated by former communists and socialists who have reigned in academia without accountability. It has been adopted by so-called activists who are still trying to understand why others succeed where they have failed – this is their excuse.

It is a form of nihilism which rejects everything that brought Western civilization out of the Dark Ages – advancements in art, science, industry, government, engineering, technology, medicine, etc. It has made its way out of academia and into the streets where mob violence (e.g. Antifa, Occupy Wall Street, Earth Liberation Front, the Eugene anarchists) has become its raison d’être and jabberwocky its explanation. And from there it has been adopted by the new Far Left liberal/progressive wing of the Democrat Party and was in full display during the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominee and now Justice Brett Cavanaugh.

One of its adherents is Barack-Obama-want-to-be, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ). Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Booker is long on rhetoric and short on accomplishments. During the Cavanaugh hearings, Mr. Booker addressing Mr. Cavanaugh’s accuser stated: “I believe your truth” and repeatedly thanked her for “her truth.” And therein lies the problem. “Truth” is not subjective; it is objective. It is not individually stylized; it is universally applicable. However, in the view of post-Modernists, like Mr. Booker, truth is malleable – it is personal.

Now you may think that Mr. Booker simply misspoke and meant to say, “I believe your testimony” but he did not. He repeated it multiple times, but always in the same context – truth was personal and subjective, not universal and objective. Mr. Booker is, like Mr. Obama, a well-educated man. He is a Rhodes Scholar with multiple degrees, including a law degree. Yet despite his academic record, he has thrown caution to the wind and embraced the most dangerous political philosophy since man crawled out of the caves and joined in societal mores. And here is why.

In the post-Modernist there is no absolute truth. That means that anything is true if you believe it to be true. Or nothing is true because you have not embraced it as “your truth.” In either instance, the conclusions are rather benign until you step into a society where others take the same point of view – all they believe is true, and all that they don’t believe is not true. So how do you resolve the disputes between your truth and their truth? That’s right – “might makes right,” mob violence where the strongest imposes his or her truth on others who disagree. And that lasts until a stronger mob overwhelms and subjugates the previous victor.

Each time the victor dominates and immediately demands the following:

  •  Ban speech that disagrees with its “truth.”
  •  Punish and ban those who do not accept its “truth.”
  •  Destroys the evidence that supports deviation from its “truth.”
  •  Force non-believers to finance its “truth.”

Does any of this sound familiar? Have you not witnessed the speech banning, book burning and personal confrontations of those who have not accepted the mob’s “truth” on college campuses? It’s not just university campuses, or protests at the G-20 summits, or even the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate. It is Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, al-Qaeda, ISIS, the Soviet Union, the Peoples Republic of China, and on and on. It always ends with a dictator, detention camps, secret police and common graves for those who do not accept its “truths.”

[For those of you who would like a greater understanding of the post-Modernism movement, its adherents and its dangers, please visit YouTube on line and search for Jordan Peterson – a Canadian psychologist and lecturer on societal impacts of post-Modernism.]

In a November 11, 1947, Winston Churchill is said to have noted:

“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”

The authors of the United State Constitution recognized the likelihood of an overbearing government and the resulting tyranny of the majority. It is the reason that the authors adopted as the Constitution’s First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

That is the individual’s safeguard against tyranny, including the tyranny of the post-Modernism advocates and the mobs they inspire. Before you embrace this antithesis to individual rights, you may want to think about the fact that the only reason you can espouse such nonsense is because those who came before understood what could happen under mob rule and wanted to safeguard exactly what you seek to crush – freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and freedom to disagree – even with a mob of losers, even if those losers have reached the status of United States senators.

As for Mr. Booker, he is either incredibly naïve (like his idol Mr. Obama) or one of the most dangerous men in politics today. If it is the former, Mr. Booker stands a good chance of being devoured by the beast of post-Modernism and the mob mentality that it creates. If it is the latter he will reap what he sows.