With the mayhem that unfolded in the Capitol building still fresh on everyone’s minds, David Bauder of the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-capitol-siege-riots-media-8000ce7db2b176c1be386d945be5fd6a">Associated Press</a> attempted to explore the terminology used to describe the events that took place on January 6th. Unfortunately, his efforts were really just a kind of duplicity masquerading as some candid, nuanced discussion. Yes, “words matter,” but not when employed with such a high degree of subterfuge. 
Initially, Bauder openly pondered what exact terms befit the violence on Capitol Hill. It seems rioting, chaos, and mayhem were too lackluster and inopportune. Perhaps, it was an “insurrection, domestic terrorism, or even a coup attempt,” Bauder opined. He finally settled on labeling it a “siege,” as though yielding to such a brazen and belligerent term that brought to mind moats and catapults made his bias any less evident. 
Most concerning, however, was his attempt to make the Capitol Hill riots somehow distinct from the months of looting and destruction during the BLM protests over the summer that laid waste to cities all across our nation. 
Bauder argued that the very use of the term “riot” in relation to the BLM protests was now “fraught with racial connotations” because “it…too quickly applied to situations involving Black Americans.” 
In fact, the <a href="https://twitter.com/APStylebook/status/1311357910715371520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1311357910715371520%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fap-stylebook-discourages-riot-expands-201233563.html">AP Stylebook</a> has completely redefined such terms along obtuse and distinctly racial lines. For much of the media, referring to the BLM protests as a “riot” or in any potentially negative capacity is now deemed, essentially, racist: 
<blockquote>“Focusing on rioting and property destruction rather than underlying grievance has been used in the past to stigmatize broad swaths of people protesting against lynching, police brutality or for racial justice, going back to the urban uprisings of the 1960s.
Unrest is a vaguer, milder and less emotional term for a condition of angry discontent and protest verging on revolt.
Protest and demonstration refer to specific actions such as marches, sit-ins, rallies or other actions meant to register dissent. They can be legal or illegal, organized or spontaneous, peaceful or violent, and involve any number of people.”</blockquote>
And now we approach the crux of the matter: David Bauder and the AP are not attempting to discuss the complexities of language and meaning under volatile circumstances. They are simply trying to monopolize and manipulate definitions to further a dishonest progressive agenda. 
Apparently, a whole collection of terms can be used to describe the violence and chaos that occurred on Capitol Hill, but not even the term “riot” is allowed to describe the burning buildings, the destruction of small businesses, or the rampant looting that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-mocked-for-fiery-but-mostly-peaceful-protests-tv-chyron-shown-in-front-of-kenosha-fire">took place before our very eyes</a> during the BLM “protests.”
In her piece for <a href="https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2021/01/15/associated-press-explains-difference-riot-riot/">Hot Air</a>, Jazz Shaw drives the point home: 
<blockquote>“What should the press call it when a mob in Portland or Seattle or New York or Philadelphia suddenly breaks off from a demonstration and begins throwing Molotov cocktails at police cruisers, burning down precinct stations and federal courthouses, physically assaulting law enforcement officers, breaking windows, and looting businesses? It certainly sounds like a ‘violent public disorder’ by ‘three or more people,’ doesn’t it? So it’s a riot.”</blockquote>
Something even more pernicious is at play, though, as our very language is being racialized and contorted by the AP and other major legacy media outlets to conform to decidedly progressive beliefs like “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/antiracism-is-a-booming-business">antiracism</a>” or “systemic racism.” 
By adding endless qualifiers to definitions specifically for black Americans in the name of “social justice,” they are yielding to a virulent kind of racism. In effect, they assume an inferior standing for black Americans within the broader culture and treat them as automatons bound by history and race rather than as individuals with equal amounts of agency. 
Lauded black scholar, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/">John McWhorter</a>, refers to this patronizing disregard for agency on the part of antiracism crusaders as “an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people.”
Glenn Loury, a renowned black professor and economist, also elaborates on this inherently racist notion for <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/glenn-loury-on-systemic-racism-trump-blm">City Journal</a>:  
<blockquote>“The removal of agency is a deep concern of mine. The tone of the conversation here in the U.S. in the last ten years has shifted to notions of systemic racism, white supremacy, and so on, as if those facts alone determine the outcomes in the schools and neighborhoods and prisons of America…I think that is a bogus argument, an argument of surrender, and it leaves one, oddly, petitioning the putative oppressor to save you from the consequences of his oppression.”</blockquote>
Loury adds that “[s]tructural racism is a bluff” and “a bullying tactic” meant to shut people up. If David Bauder’s piece alongside the AP’s new guidelines for terms like “riot” is any indication, Loury’s assertion is proving correct. 
The ongoing manipulation and monopolizing of language by the likes of the Associated Press should be a genuine cause for concern as divisions deepen all around us. It’s not meant to add nuance or complexity to our understanding. It’s meant to constrain us even further. While the Orwellian undertones seem self-evident, the prejudice that informs such tactics is not. Now more than ever, it’s imperative that we strive toward honest assessments of events in our nation, regardless of optics or outcomes. 
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Atlanta BLM

Associated Press Admits They Use Race To Choose Between ‘Protest’ And ‘Riot’

Associated Press

Black Lives Matter

protests

Readers Pass

Riots

With the mayhem that unfolded in the Capitol building still fresh on everyone’s minds, David Bauder of the Associated Press attempted to explore the

description

noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1

robots

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/associated-press-admits-they-use-race-to-choose-between-protest-and-riot/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2021/01/GettyImages-1216237394-1200x800.jpg

twitter:card

In many respects, the legacy media remains a greater driving force behind the COVID-19 pandemic than the actual virus itself. Their incessant fear-mongering at the outset of the pandemic has morphed into endless goal shifting as the crisis drags on in search of the current narrative. 
Worse, constant gaslighting has left countless Americans confused and exhausted. Now we are being <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/coronavirus-variant-dominant-us/2021/01/15/4420d814-5738-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html?fbclid=IwAR253EeW6cO8kHB-vylSvRaEjqdhyjgSSu926sDN_zEenvXMWVVXYuXa3qs">overwhelmed with headlines</a> about an even more contagious strain of COVID-19 looming on the horizon, just as vaccines have become available.
That the pandemic served as political fodder for the Left only exacerbates the level of deception. It’s increasingly difficult to gauge what exactly is going on or has transpired given the inordinate amount of half-truths and outright misinformation being doled out by the media. 
Here are five times the media changed the pandemic narrative to suit various agendas outside of the truth.
“Flatten The Curve”
It seems like a lifetime ago that so many experts insisted that life could return to some semblance of normality once we “flattened the curve” by imposing temporary lockdowns in March of 2020. 
At the time, the argument was that restrictive measures would slow the spread of the virus and limit the chances that hospitals and health workers throughout the nation would be overwhelmed with sick patients. 
We came together as a nation, and it worked. We flattened the curve, according to <a href="https://healthblog.uofmhealth.org/wellness-prevention/covid-19-curve-has-unflattened-fast-now-what">University of Michigan Health</a>: 
“Cities and states hit hard by the new coronavirus ‘flattened the curve’ of a rising tide of cases by cutting back on the kinds of interactions that can spread the virus from person to person. More than 100 years after the 1918-1919 flu pandemic, the same steps that worked against that deadly virus also slowed the new one.”
The narrative began to shift, in large part, because many on the Left sought to gain political capital from the ongoing pandemic. Media pundits on the Left began to argue that conservatives continued to somehow bear the sole burden of the spread of the virus. And, of course, no policy decision made by the Trump administration could be cast in a positive light. 
That Ezra Klein of <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/7/1/21308809/covid-19-coronavirus-2020-trump-election-polls-polarization">Vox</a> could argue that Trump chose “to politicize basic public health measures” without a hint of irony would almost be comical if it was not such a brazen and outlandish hoodwink.
In July of 2020, David Harsanyi of the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-lefts-coronavirus-narrative-is-a-myth/">National Review</a> wrote that “liberals are busy concocting a narrative that holds that the failures of the American response to coronavirus have been the fault of Trumpian nihilists in the Red States” even though “New York’s death rate has been ten times larger than Florida’s” at the time. 
“Let’s remember that initial national lockdown efforts were intended to flatten the curve so that hospitals wouldn’t be overwhelmed with COVID cases,” Harsanyi continued, “not to shutter the economy in perpetuity (or until a Democrat wins the White House) to ensure that no one gets sick anymore. Other than the New York area, which is led by a governor who made perhaps the single most deadly <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/fire-through-dry-grass-andrew-cuomo-saw-covid-19-threat-to-nursing-homes-then-he-risked-adding-to-it">policy mistake</a> in the entire crisis, this goal has largely been achieved.”
“Follow the science”
One of the most dogmatic refrains from the media and the Left during the pandemic has been “follow the science.” The phrase has been conveniently employed to allow the pandemic narrative to shift as needed.
It’s also acted as both an attempt to censor, silence, and rebut innumerable reasoned arguments advocating for <a href="https://gbdeclaration.org/">better, more nuanced policies</a> rather than wholesale restrictions. 
Dr. Vinay Prasad, an oncologist and health policy researcher, argues in his piece for <a href="https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/vinay-prasad/89856">Medpage Today</a> that drawing policies from science — even good science — is a limited endeavor because “[s]cience cannot make value judgments.”
“Science does not determine policy,” Prasad continues. “Policy is a human endeavor that combines science with values and priorities. In other words, science can help quantify the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/health/coronavirus-schools-children.html">increased risk</a> (or lack thereof) of school reopening on SARS-Cov-2 spread, and help quantify the educational losses from <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/02/opinion/remote-learning-coronavirus.html">continued closure</a>, but science cannot tell you whether to open or close schools. Making the decision requires values, principles, a vision of the type of society we want to be. How much do we care about the kids that rely on public school? Is it enough to offset a theoretical (but unsubstantiated) risk of viral spread? On this topic, I agree with others that we have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/18/opinion/coronavirus-school-closures.html">chosen poorly</a>.”
Prasad also breaks down the exceedingly partisan role science has come to play in the pandemic. His list includes confirmation biases in the form of “credentialism,” yielding to science in a rote, dogmatic manner devoid of critical evaluation, and, most importantly, the censoring of sound arguments just because they may go against the prevailing narrative. 
Prasad contends that “[s]cience is the idea that we must confront, discuss, debate, and refute ideas. Using brute force, the power of the platform, to proclaim the truth is antithetical to our creed.”
The effectiveness of masks
Early on in the pandemic, the media inundated us with reports that masks were considered ineffectual and even a potential detriment to limiting the spread of COVID-19 by health officials.
In March of 2020, <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-cdc-says-americans-dont-have-to-wear-facemasks-because-of-coronavirus-2020-01-30">Market Watch</a> reported that “people shouldn’t wear face masks to prevent the spread of the infectious illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. surgeon general.”
In an April 2020 interview with Dr. William Schaffner, a professor of preventative medicine and health policy at Vanderbilt University, <a href="https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/">Time</a> reported that masks would “not likely to be effective against respiratory illnesses like the flu and COVID-19.” Schaffner added, “[T]he CDC would have recommended it years ago…It doesn’t, because it makes science-based recommendations,” emphasizing that no study or data to date indicated masks would prevent the spread of the novel virus.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — who remains at the helm of tackling the pandemic — insisted early on that masks “do not provide the level of protection people think they do. Wearing a mask may also have unintended consequences: People who wear masks tend to touch their face more often to adjust them, which can spread germs from their hands,” according to <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/preventing-coronavirus-facemask-60-minutes-2020-03-08/">CBS News</a>. 
<a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Health/cdc-offer-conflicting-advice-masks-expert-tells-us/story?id=70958380">ABC News</a> reported that the World Health Organization (WHO) also offered some judicious advice at the time, adding, “If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19.” 
While countless redactions now exist by the WHO, the CDC, and health officials concerning masks, the arguments made against wearing them were not without merit at the time. Improper use, poor hygiene, and the overall ineffectiveness of cloth masks, in particular, were the reasons being presented by health officials.  
While “masks are still likely to prevent infected people from transmitting the virus,” according to a recent piece in <a href="https://reason.com/2020/11/18/masks-not-very-effective-at-protecting-wearers-says-new-danish-study/">Reason</a>, currently, there still exists no hard data or substantive study to provide definitive proof that masks prevent the spread of COVID-19. At best, strong correlative information has emerged that indicates properly worn masks might be an effective prophylactic in preventing transmission. 
That’s not an argument against the idea of masks either. Rather, it demonstrates that the volatile and polarizing subject of masks does not exist on some binary of “hard facts versus empty hubris,” though the legacy media would have us think otherwise. 
BLM rioters and protesters were given a free pass to gather by the thousands
Many on the Left and in the media who railed against anti-lockdown protests grew hopelessly silent as thousands of protestors and rioters assailed cities across our nation during the various BLM protests. 
Worse, many politicians may have conspired to disallow contact tracing at such super spreader events. In June of 2020, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio explicitly told health officials that no one who tested positive for COVID-19 be asked if they attended a BLM protest, according to <a href="https://www.thecity.nyc/coronavirus/2020/6/14/21290963/nyc-covid-19-trackers-skipping-floyd-protest-questions-even-amid-fears-of-new-wave">The City</a>.
“The hundreds of contact tracing workers hired by the city under de Blasio’s new ‘test and trace’ campaign have been instructed not to ask anyone who’s tested positive for COVID-19 whether they recently attended a demonstration, City Hall confirmed to THE CITY.”
Worse, even epidemiologists tracking the virus could not square their own political biases with their responsibilities. 
When asked about the BLM protests and riots, Catherine Troisi, “an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the University of Texas Health Science Center,” told <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/06/us/Epidemiologists-coronavirus-protests-quarantine.html">The New York Times</a> that she “certainly condemned the anti-lockdown protests at the time” but was “not condemning the [BLM] protests now.” Troisi reflected on her own cognitive dissonance, stating, “I struggle with that…I have a hard time articulating why that is OK.”
Unlike Troisi, over a thousand other health officials openly declared their biases and consequent hypocrisy in an open letter. Published by <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/05/health/health-care-open-letter-protests-coronavirus-trnd/index.html">CNN</a>, these officials were “advocating for an anti-racist public health response to demonstrations against systemic injustice occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
In other words, these health officials were only willing to support mass gatherings that aligned with their own political views. They even dared to suggest that the thousands who attended BLM protests and riots were not at risk of spreading the highly contagious virus but anti-lockdown protestors somehow were because they were “rooted in white nationalism.”
“However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States…This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives.”
The generous portrayal of Dr. Anthony Fauci in the media
If his glamorous cover story for <a href="https://www.instyle.com/news/dr-fauci-says-with-all-due-modesty-i-think-im-pretty-effective">InStyle</a> magazine in the middle of the pandemic is any indication, Dr. Anthony Fauci remains a darling of the legacy media. He is now poised to continue his role as chief medical advisor for the incoming Biden administration.
Though he boldly declared in his InStyle interview that he believes “everybody thinks I’m doing more than an outstanding job,” Fauci has backtracked on so many of his pronouncements during the pandemic that it’s hard to keep track.
Emma Colton of the <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/here-are-faucis-biggest-flip-flops-and-backtracks-amid-the-coronavirus-pandemic">Washington Examiner</a> provides a telling assessment of Fauci and argues that he “has flip-flopped or been proven wrong on a host of different coronavirus measures and recommendations since the virus first hit the United States last winter.”
Colton’s cogent summary exposes many of Fauci’s reversals and contradictions, including his initially referring to lockdowns in March of 2020 as “draconian,” insisting that masks were unnecessary, and minimizing the role of asymptomatic transmissions at the beginning of the pandemic.    
“Fauci, the leading White House coronavirus task force member,” Colton continues, “has changed positions or faced scientific data proving his stances are flawed on <a href="https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/1319003063672332288?s=21">issues ranging from mask wearing to the severity of the virus</a> and from asymptomatic spread to effective treatments for patients, among other issues, since January.”
***
Much of the narrative surrounding the pandemic has shifted from a public health crisis to a craven opportunity for the media and the Left to exploit to their advantage given their tremendous influence. This has lead to angst, confusion, and further divisions in our already deeply polarized nation as well as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/we-are-now-witnessing-the-deadly-impact-of-covid-19-lockdowns">untold suffering and hardship</a>. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

White House Coronavirus Task Force Holds Daily Briefing

Five Times The Legacy Media Flip-Flopped On The Pandemic

Anthony Fauci

COVID-19

Legacy Media

Lockdowns

In many respects, the legacy media remains a greater driving force behind the COVID-19 pandemic than the actual virus itself. Their incessant

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/five-times-the-legacy-media-flip-flopped-on-the-pandemic-narrative/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2021/01/GettyImages-1215224972.jpg

twitter:image

The slow erosion of masculine ideals has been occurring for the better part of four decades, spanning film, television, and fiction. Currently, men are often only presented as bumbling oafs or as malevolent figures upholding the supposed “patriarchy.” When they are rarely presented in a positive light, it’s only often done in a limited or disqualifying manner. Rather than presenting masculinity as a complex set of principles ranging from fortitude and grit to compassion and humility, it’s reduced to brute and simple overtures. 
With suicide and addiction rates skyrocketing among men, it’s more important than ever before that true masculinity is celebrated in our storytelling. Here are nine examples in film and fiction that emphasize manliness and masculine ideals. 
Frodo Baggins in “The Lord of The Rings” Trilogy
J.R.R. Tolkien’s timeless tale of courage and perseverance was written under the specter of both World War I and World War II. What makes Frodo Baggins so compelling as the hero of the tale is his decidedly “unheroic” physical stature. He’s a diminutive hobbit with no obvious physical gifts that one often associates with heroes. What he has though — far beyond anyone else in the story — is a moral compass, unrelenting courage, and a willingness to sacrifice himself for the sake of others.
While Tolkien was a devout Catholic and lifelong friend of C.S. Lewis, the inherently religious nature of his work is too often cast aside. Tolkien <a href="https://denvercatholic.org/the-catholic-origins-of-the-lord-of-the-rings-and-other-truths-about-j-r-r-tolkien/">himself described</a> “The Lord of The Rings” as a “fundamentally religious and Catholic work.”
In “<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/21921247-moments-of-grace-and-spiritual-warfare-in-the-lord-of-the-rings">Moments of Grace and Spiritual Warfare in The Lord of The Rings</a>,” Anne Marie Gazzalo explores the decidedly religious and Christian dimension of Frodo’s heroism in Tolkien’s work:
“His body seems too small for all that he endures but not so his heart. Fear, fatigue, cold, hunger, and thirst torment him, but he continues out of love. Frodo’s struggle shows that there are, in fact, two quests going on: his to destroy the Ring and the Ring’s to dominate and destroy him. Despite the despair that it causes, which both fills and empties him, the Ring-bearer remains as intent upon saving everyone as Denethor is not. Frodo’s torn heart still beats, and it pushes past terror and hopelessness because of Sam’s blessed aid and his own battered and bleeding will to do so. Both hobbits teach us the great value of redemptive suffering.”
Dutch in “Predator” 
While easily one of the greatest action films ever made, what makes “Predator” — and so many other films in that genre from the 1980s — so compelling is that the heroes live by clear moral codes. There’s no nervous handwringing. Instead, decisive thinking and strength of will are valued and rewarded.
The hero of the film, Major Alan “Dutch” Schafer, embodies classic masculine archetypes including courage, fortitude, and an intrepid spirit often at a premium these days in much of film and fiction. 
It’s easy to dismiss such classic action films as simple when, in fact, they embody timeless moral themes like many of the very best tales and fables throughout history. And all the campy dialogue is just icing on the cake to boot. 
Andy Dufresne in “The Shawshank Redemption”
Frank Darabont’s screenplay adaption of Stephen King’s story is a rare instance where a great story is made even better on the screen. Falsely accused of murdering his adulterous wife, Andy Dufresne is sentenced to life imprisonment. Like McMurphy in “Cuckoo’s Nest,” he’s given a choice <a href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/shawshank_redemption/quotes/">echoed</a> by Dufresne’s close friend in prison, Ellis Boy “Redd” Redding: “Get busy living or get busy dying.” 
What Dufresne represents to so many is a sense of resilience and hope against the worst of odds. This is not the Polly Anna optimism of, say, some silly New Age trope. It’s the hope one finds in Viktor Frankl’s “Man’s Search For Meaning.” The hope that Dufresne holds onto is precarious and demands much of his own volition. Only when we finally witness all that he has endured and suffered do his words ring with truth and not pretense: “Hope is a good thing, may be the best of the things. And a good thing never dies.”
Randle McMurphy in “One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest”
Randle McMurphy is not a man of high virtue in either Ken Kesey’s novel or Miloš Forman’s fantastic film adaptation. He’s actually a bit of a rascal and a con man trying to save his own skin at the outset of the story. However, he emerges as a defiant, laughing soul and a hero of sorts in the story and film by standing up against the unending cruelties that infest the asylum. 
It’s McMurphy’s unwillingness to accept the procedural oppression at the hands of Nurse Ratched that finally sets him apart as <a href="https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/cuckoo/quotes/character/randle-mcmurphy/">the protagonist</a>, though she seeks to quell it: 
“She saw that McMurphy was growing bigger than ever while he was upstairs where the guys couldn’t see the dent she was making on him, growing almost into a legend. A man out of sight can’t be made to look weak, she decided, and started making plans to bring him back down to our ward.”
McMurphy — and the story in a broader sense — represents the overarching need and desire in men, especially, to challenge all that seeks to crush us into diminutive and effete beings, not only with indignation but — more importantly — with levity and grace:
“He knows that you have to laugh at the things that hurt you just to keep yourself in balance, just to keep the world from running you plumb crazy.” 
Doc Holliday in “Tombstone” 
Val Kilmer’s portrayal of the fabled gunslinger is certainly one for the ages. Even with Death constantly tapping on his shoulder in the form of tuberculosis, Doc Holliday refuses to concede to grief or mortality. His wisecracks betray his wan complexion throughout the Western. He remains as cool as ever and is easily the most compelling character in the film. 
“But honestly, a lot of us are really watching because of Val Kilmer’s performance as Doc Holliday,” <a href="https://decider.com/2019/05/21/every-doc-holliday-quip-in-tombstone-ranked/">Decider</a> argues, “Wyatt’s hard-drinking, hard-gambling gunfighter best friend. Doc is a fascinating character, part comic relief and part Greek chorus for the film, who’s as ready with a quick pistol shot as he is with a quick verbal harpoon.”
Boss Spearman in “Open Range”
Played masterfully by Robert Duvall, Boss Spearman exemplifies a grizzled sense of wisdom and character found in men of certain age and experience. Though the film is very much a classic Western, it often delves deeper than most. Spearman is tasked with finding the delicate moral balance between violence and fighting while upholding a sense of righteousness and virtue. 
Based on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauran_Paine">Lauran Pain’s</a> 1990 novel, “The Open Range Men,” screenwriter Craig Storper stated, “These characters don&#8217;t seek violence…But the notion that it’s sometimes necessary&#8230; is the Western’s most fundamental ideal,&#8221; according to <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20121224151547/http://blogs.amctv.com/movie-blog/2012/06/story-notes-trivia-open-range.php">the AMC Blog</a>. 
Spearman recognizes this grim necessity in protecting those in need when <a href="https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/open_range/quotes/">he tells the corrupt Marshall</a>, “Man’s got a right to protect his property and his life, and we ain’t lettin’ no rancher or his lawman take either.”
Alyosha in “Brothers Karamazov” 
Though the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor">cynical Ivan Karamazov</a> often receives the most attention and praise for his dark insights in literary circles, Alyosha serves as the moral and religious compass in Dostoevsky’s masterpiece. His strength resides in his compassion, humility, and understanding even as his siblings fall apart. In many respects, Alyosha and his mentor in the novel, Father Zosima, represent Christianity as Dostoevsky had finally come to know it.
Alyosha’s <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/alyosha-karamazov">hope</a> resides in “the secret of renewal for all, the power that will finally establish the truth on earth, and all will be holy and will love one another, and there will be neither rich nor poor, neither exalted nor humiliated, but all will be the like the children of God, and the true kingdom of Christ will come.”
Unlike so many of Dostoevsky’s religious characters that are hamstrung by their sense of piety and virtue (such as in “The Idiot”), Alyosha’s Christianity in “Brothers Karamazov” becomes a source of liberation, freeing him from the earthly travails of of existence. 
Ethan Hawley in Steinbeck’s “The Winter of Our Discontent”
While Steinbeck doesn’t have the lyrical deftness of Fitzgerald or the intellectual acuity of Faulkner, he was an expert at expressing sentiment without cliché and at exploring the many complexities that hound men.  Ethan Hawley in “The Winter of Our Discontent” is no exception and may be his most relevant character today.
In many respects, Ethan Hawley faces the same struggles so many men face. A former soldier who is now a grocery store clerk, financial ruin lurks around the corner and his home life is in disarray. Hawley does his best to maintain a brave disposition even as wounds open up inside of him. Inevitably, like countless men today, suicide becomes the sad, seductive choice as his failures inside and outside of himself mount. 
The loss Hawley feels is all the more pronounced because of the mercurial nature of hope. Near the end, Hawley bleakly states, “It’s so much darker when a light goes out than it would have been if it had never shone.” 
[Spoiler Alert]
It’s when Hawley steps into the turbulent waters of the Atlantic Ocean to end his life that he’s reminded again of his sense of purpose as a man and as a father. Defiance and courage swell inside of him higher than the tides he seeks to embrace as he struggles back to shore:
“A surge of wave pushed me against the very back of the Place. And the tempo of the sea speeded up. I had to fight the water to get out. I rolled and scrambled and splashed chest deep in the surf and the brisking waves pushed me against the old sea wall…I had to get back…Else another light might go out.” 
Philip Marlowe in any Raymond Chandler Novel
His crass charm and quick wit have made Philip Marlowe the blueprint of the hard-boiled detective for more than a century. The appeal of Chandler’s iconic character continues to reside in both an ability to quarter no bull while also drawing from a depth of genuine character hidden beneath his rough exterior. 
Marlowe’s endless sarcastic quips almost act as a smokescreen to his high character. “The Big Sleep” provides just one of <a href="https://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/news/a6742/raymond-chandler-quotes/">many examples</a>: “I don’t mind if you don’t like my manners. They’re pretty bad. I grieve over them during the long winter evenings.” 
Mike Schuster of <a href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90180169">NPR</a> describes Marlowe as “cool, smart, world weary, even droll. He dressed in dark gray suits, lived in lonely rooms, worked in empty offices.” The settings of Chandler’s character were “filled with dangerous men and fickle women.”  However, “Marlowe was tough, sure, but not cold.” 
Marlowe is very much a “modern-day knight” who “despite his misanthropic streak, [is] just an honest detective trying his best to survive in a dishonest society,” according to <a href="https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/literature/big-sleep/philip-marlowe">Shmoop</a>.  
“So in ‘knightly’ terms, we could say that Marlowe is on a quest for justice, dedicated to serving his lord with honor and loyalty, despite any sexual or financial temptations and threats of physical harm that come his way. Plus, since he’s got a strong sense of morals, we might also say that Marlowe is deeply invested in a personal code of chivalry.”
Evan Hamilton in Raymond Carver’s “Bicycles, Muscles, Cigarets”
While “Cathedral” is Carver’s best known short story and is fantastic in its own right, “Bicycles, Muscles, Cigarets” perfectly captures the love of a father for his son and the importance of standing up for one’s own friends and family.
Evan Hamilton’s son, Roger, is accused of stealing a friend’s bike with two other boys, Gilbert and Kip. Fair-minded as ever, Evan insists that his son own up to his part and pay back a third of the cost for the missing bike. Mr. Berman, Gilbert’s father, shows up, refuses to shake Evan’s hand, and blames the whole fiasco on Roger.  
An old-fashioned fistfight ensues between the two grown men after Mr. Berman digs his shoulder into Evan on his way out. Roger quickly gets the best of the other father:
“They rolled on the lawn, Hamilton wrestling Berman onto his back and coming down hard with his knees on the man’s biceps. He had Berman by the collar now and began to pound his head against the lawn.” 
Later, Evan reflects on witnessing his own father in a scrap: “But now he recalled his father’s own fistfight as if it were all there was to the man.” 
However, it’s not the fleeting pride of winning a fight that makes the story and Evan Hamilton so compelling. It’s the love and devotion for his son and unwillingness to cede to any bullying even if fighting may not have been the best choice in the matter. That love is reflected in Roger’s words as his father tucks him in for the night: 
“Dad? You’ll think I’m pretty crazy, but I wish I’d known you when you were little. I mean, about as old as I am right now. I don’t know how to say it, but I’m lonesome about it. It’s like — it’s like I miss you already if I think about it now.” 
Guido Orefice in “Life is Beautiful” 
“Life is Beautiful” is a film of staggering proportions filled with a rare combination of levity, charm, and depth rarely done well in film. Roberto Benigni’s portrayal of Guido Orefice drives the film. It was “the role he was born to play,” according to the late <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/life-is-beautiful-1998">Roger Ebert</a>. 
Forced to endure the horrors of a concentration camp, Orefice refuses to allow his 5-year-old son to bear witness to the atrocities. Instead, “Guido constructs an elaborate fiction to comfort and protect his son.”
Orefice embodies love and sacrifice and it reaches transcendent levels in the 1997 film. 
“But ‘Life Is Beautiful’ is not about Nazis and Fascists,” Ebert continues, “but about the human spirit. It is about rescuing whatever is good and hopeful from the wreckage of dreams. About hope for the future. About the necessary human conviction, or delusion, that things will be better for our children than they are right now.”
***
Men — young men, in particular — no longer have examples in storytelling to serve as guideposts in character and wellbeing except in rare instances. Instead, most current examples in film and fiction tend to vilify men or reduce masculinity to an effete husk. Still, others reinforce a virulent form of cynicism in the form of “incels” or “red pill” aficionados. Increasingly, one must reach into the past for compelling, overtly masculine characters in film and fiction. Perhaps, that is where change for many can and will be found. Who are your favorite examples?
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Predator Movie

11 Characters In Film and Fiction That Epitomize Masculine Ideals

Masculinity

The slow erosion of masculine ideals has been occurring for the better part of four decades, spanning film, television, and fiction. Currently, men are

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/11-characters-in-film-and-fiction-that-epitomize-masculine-ideals/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2021/01/GettyImages-607396066-e1610405801461.jpg

Though increasingly popular, antiracism remains a corrosive prescript that is only drawing us further apart. Worse, the extremist ideology has itself become a booming industry. Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi — the main founders of the so-called antiracism movement — are profiteering off this bogus notion. Their books continue to sell out. Expensive workshops and speaking engagements dominate calendars. Corporations are donating millions to the cause. And now many, many more are trying to capitalize on the spurious trend.
Robin DiAngelo has built an empire on anti-racism 
Beginning with her bestselling book, “White Fragility,” Robin DiAngelo continues to rake in millions of dollars as one of the most prominent advocates for antiracism. 
As a part of the services she offers, <a href="https://www.robindiangelo.com/services/">DiAngleo insists</a> that “racism is the foundation of Western society” and that “all white people benefit from the racial hierarchy, regardless of intentions.” 
Kyle Smith of the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/the-capitalist-genius-of-the-anti-racism-industry/">National Review</a> likens her to the “P.T. Barnum of our time,” a “televangelist” of sorts, and “a great American capitalist marketing genius, up there with the inventor of the pet rock or the people who figured out how to get rich by creating prestige brands of water.”
While Smith’s assessment of DiAngelo may verge on hyperbolic, the numbers certainly bear out. DiAngelo “was making up to $150,000 a month, on eight to ten gigs, even before the George Floyd killing…not counting book sales, which are prodigious.”
DiAngelo continues to make a killing in the emerging antiracism industry because her “business model is predicated on racism as unfixable,” according to Maureen Callahan of the <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/08/06/peddling-the-idea-that-all-white-people-are-racist-for-profit/">New York Post</a>. DiAngelo’s book, “White Fragility” has already “made her a reported $2 million so far,” and she apparently charges “$30,000-$40,000 for a few hours” of diversity training, depending on the client.
<a href="https://reason.com/2020/08/14/uconn-will-pay-white-fragility-author-robin-diangelo-20000-to-train-school-administrators/">Reason</a> reported that the University of Connecticut paid DiAngelo $20,000 in June 2020 for a three-day seminar on antiracism and “that DiAngelo and other diversity lecturers often charge in the $10,000 to $15,000 dollar range for a few hours of work.” 
Even worse, the university did not hire DiAngelo for a public speaking engagement. She was hired to “train” school administrators in private “with the explicit expectation that they will put her recommendations into practice,” with little to no critical evaluation. 
As so many on the Left and in academia dogmatically yield to DiAngelo’s spurious notions on race and racism, it’s imperative that we remind ourselves that her absurd assessments are, in fact, racist. 
In a recent piece for <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/white-fragility">City Journal</a>, Coleman Hughes argues that DiAngelo’s work is “zealotry disguised as scholarship,” and treats people of color as “a homogenous mass of settled opinion with little, if any, diversity of thought — a kind of CRT-aligned hive mind.” 
Not only are whites monolithic in all manner of thought and experience, so too are blacks and other minorities, according to DiAngelo. Needless to say, such vapid generalizations are the hallmarks of bias and prejudice. 
Hughes continues: “The second unstated assumption in White Fragility — and this is where the book borders on actual racism — is that black people are emotionally immature and essentially child-like. Blacks, as portrayed in DiAngelo’s writing, can neither be expected to show maturity during disagreement nor to exercise emotional self-control of any kind. The hidden premise of the book is that blacks, not whites, are too fragile.”
John McWhorter, an esteemed black scholar and professor of linguistics at Columbia University, takes it up a notch and outright condemns DiAngelo’s work for “dehumanizing” and “infantilizing” black people in his piece for <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/">The Atlantic</a>. He labels “White Fragility” a “racist tract” that “diminishes Black people in the name of dignifying us.”
“In 2020 — as opposed to 1920 — I neither need nor want anyone to muse on how whiteness privileges them over me.” McWhorter writes. “Nor do I need wider society to undergo teachings in how to be exquisitely sensitive about my feelings. I see no connection between DiAngelo’s brand of reeducation and vigorous, constructive activism in the real world on issues of import to the Black community. And I cannot imagine that any Black readers could willingly submit themselves to DiAngelo’s ideas while considering themselves adults of ordinary self-regard and strength. Few books about race have more openly infantilized Black people than this supposedly authoritative tome.”
In fact, many are now finding DiAngelo’s work comparable to the likes of white supremacist, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke">David Duke</a>. While, ideologically, they may seem at odds with one another, Jonathan Chait of the <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/07/antiracism-training-white-fragility-robin-diangelo-ibram-kendi.html">New York Intelligencer</a> insists that their “extremes begin to functionally resemble each other despite their mutual antipathy” because DiAngelo and the antiracism industry “literally replicate anti-Black racism.”
Ibram X. Kendi and the Center for Antiracism Research
Unlike DiAngelo, Ibram X. Kendi can hide behind the curtains of academia to avoid growing criticism, aided further by virtue of being a person of color. As a result, his <a href="https://www.bu.edu/antiracism-center/the-center/founder-statement/">Center for Antiracism Research</a> at Boston University continues to receive millions of dollars to promote its specious claims. 
In August 2020, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey <a href="https://www.bu.edu/articles/2020/jack-dorsey-bu-center-for-antiracist-research-gift/">donated $10 million</a> to the Center for Antiracism Research. <a href="http://www.bu.edu/articles/2020/center-for-antiracist-research-rockefeller-foundation-grant/">The Rockefeller Foundation</a> awarded the center $1.5 million in October of 2020. <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/25/metro/bu-anti-racist-center-gets-15-million-gift-vertex-launch/">Vertex</a>, a biotech firm, matched the Rockefeller Foundation with a $1.5 million donation of its own. 
These are only a few of the notable donations, grants, and endowments the Center for Antiracism Research receives to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-the-truth-about-the-anti-racist-movement-and-its-founder-ibram-x-kendi">promote its unintellectual and divisive agenda</a> — ironic given just how storied a school Boston University is.
To be sure, Kendi’s work is — at best — anecdotal and filled with high emotion. Most often, it’s bereft of substance or sound argument. His claims certainly do not warrant an entire center for “antiracism research” at a prestigious university. 
In fact, <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/how-to-be-an-antiracist">in his review of Kendi’s bestselling book</a>, “How to be an Antiracist,” Coleman Hughes titles his piece, “How to be an Anti-Intellectual,” reinforcing the argument that antiracism has little to no intellectual or academic merit whatsoever. 
Hughes contends that it’s nearly impossible to “interpret Kendi’s arguments as factual claims subject to empirical scrutiny or as diary entries to be accepted as personal truths,” and that “the book reads like a seeker’s memoir or a conversion story in the mold of Augustine’s Confessions” rather than a work supported by evidence and scholarship. Such a fundamental lack of academic rigor explains why “Kendi also cherry-picks his data” to exhaustion and is unable or unwilling to even cite his sources, according to Hughes. 
“Worse than the skewed approach to data in Kendi’s book are the factual errors. Citing an entire <a href="https://amzn.to/2pW5qTb">book</a> by Manning Marable (but no specific page), Kendi claims that in 1982, ‘[President Reagan] cut the safety net of federal welfare programs and Medicaid, sending more low-income Blacks into poverty.’ I could not find any data in Marable’s book showing that the black poverty rate rose during Reagan’s tenure. In fact, the opposite appears to be true, according to the Census Bureau’s historical poverty <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-people.html">tables</a>: the black poverty rate decreased for every age group between 1982 and the end of Reagan’s tenure in 1989.”
That such egregious errors litter Kendi’s work should be genuine cause for alarm given his meteoric rise in popularity and the millions of dollars his Center for Antiracism Research continues to receive. 
 The emerging, lucrative role of antiracism influencers
Now that the likes of DiAngelo and Kendi have shown that antiracism can be a lucrative venture, many more are seeking to capitalize on it. Various influencers on social media and elsewhere have positioned themselves as so-called “allies” in the antiracism cause in the hopes of profiting from the destructive trend in the form of online courses, workshops, and seminars. 
Chrissy Rutherford and Danielle Prescod have used their tremendous influence in the fashion world to further champion the works of Kendi and DiAngelo, and now seek to monetize it. 
The two women claim to have “extensive, first-hand experience encountering racism in the industry,” according to the <a href="https://cfda.com/news/chrissy-rutherford-and-danielle-prescod-launch-consulting-agency-2bg">Council of Fashion Designers of America</a>. 
Both women “experienced viral moments” on Instagram speaking out in support of the antiracism ethos, garnering upwards of 5 million views “thanks to the support of celebs like Ariana Grande.” 
Rutherford echoed Kendi almost word for word in her <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tv/CAyf_7mHGPP/">Instagram post</a>: “It’s not enough anymore to just be like, ‘I have good intentions. I’m not racist.’ You need to actually take the time to educate yourselves to be antiracist. And that’s where white people are falling short right now,” she told her followers. “Antiracism is the name of the game right now. And that’s it.”  
Taking advantage of the moment, Rutherford and Prescod “had a mutual epiphany” regarding their burgeoning roles as “allies” in the antiracism movement: “We need to teach them — and charge them,” according to <a href="https://www.elle.com/culture/a34763375/anti-racism-industry-profile/">Elle</a>.
The profile piece on the two fashion influencers in Elle goes on to boldly state that though “America’s economy is crumbling…the business of allyship is booming.”
Rutherford and Prescod have now formed 2BG (2 Black Girls), a “consulting agency…which aims to guide brands towards becoming more equitable and inclusive,” according to <a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/designers/a33502374/chrissy-rutherford-danielle-prescod-2-black-girls/">Harper’s Bazaar</a>. 
Certainly, Rutherford and Prescod are not alone in their antiracism endeavors, particularly as a business venture.
Claiming to be a “highly sought-after anti-racism educator,” <a href="https://www.moniquemelton.com/shop-shine-classes">Monique Melton</a> offers a series of courses — ranging from $97 to $497 — on antiracism. She also offers a <a href="https://www.moniquemelton.com/21-challenge">Black Liberation 21 Day Challenge</a> “designed to build a daily practice of anti-racism,” as well as a “12-week interactive online course” for $3500. 
The tech-savvy are jumping on board as well. <a href="https://www.nudgetext.com/ally">The Nudge</a>, a messaging app that provides a series of encouraging reminders to its users, now offers one geared specifically toward antiracism.
“For $5,” <a href="https://www.elle.com/culture/a34763375/anti-racism-industry-profile/">Elle</a> details, “participants could sign up for something called The Ally Nudge, a monthlong antiracism education program developed in collaboration with longtime diversity and inclusion consultant Akilah Cadet. During its first month, over 10,000 people signed up for The Ally Nudge in 1,700 cities.”
One can also subscribe to <a href="https://courses.checkyourprivilege.co/">Check Your Privilege</a>, “a shame-free space for white folx to show up learn and be held accountable on their anti-racism journey.” The site offers courses ranging from $20 to $1800. 
Lost in all the “allyship” and advocacy is just how deleterious the very notion of antiracism is fast becoming to our society. The likes of Kendi and DiAngelo have built influential empires that are infinitely more analogous to the pernicious effects of televangelism than the heroes of the Civil Rights era. Many now seek to follow in their dangerous wake and profit off of the cause to our collective detriment.  
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Ibram X Kendi

‘Antiracism’ Is A Booming Business

anti-racism

Ibram X. Kendi

Racism

Robin DiAngelo

White Fragility

Though increasingly popular, antiracism remains a corrosive prescript that is only drawing us further apart. Worse, the extremist ideology has itself

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/antiracism-is-a-booming-business/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2021/01/GettyImages-1206471025-1-e1609787873969.jpg

Basic biology and psychology — whose accuracy is supported by a litany of scientific facts — are currently lost on the transgender movement, with the Left now deeming such analytical realities as prejudiced and antiquated, especially when it comes to the most vulnerable in our society — children. We must vehemently fight against the radical advocates of transgenderism who have begun preying upon children under a false guise of compassion.
Irreversible surgeries, puberty blockers, hormone dependency, and other untold consequences await children allowed to transition before adulthood. Defending such procedures and decisions is equivalent to treating children like guinea pigs. By all scientific metrics, their bodies and, most importantly, their minds are not, at all, sufficiently developed to handle or make such monumental decisions. Yet, here we are, forced to witness children undergo dire procedures while not even being able to vote, drink, or serve their country. 
The developing brain in childhood and adolescence is incapable of such life-changing decisions
It’s imperative to recognize that a child’s brain is in a constant state of development and incapable of fully grasping the mental and physical significance of changing one’s gender. Though transgender activists and parents report all sorts of anecdotal evidence — even regarding toddlers supposedly exhibiting gender dysphoria — there is no scientific basis outside of sentimental hubris to support these claims. 
Increasingly, the legacy media completely foregoes the crucial aspect of the developing brain in childhood and adolescence in favor of a dogmatic yielding to transgender activism. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jun/15/trans-transgender-children-gender-family-project">The Guardian</a> audaciously framed the debate as “people who think…gender dysphoria will fade by adulthood” versus “the vast majority of mental health professionals who study gender dysphoria insisting that affirming a child in whatever way they express their gender is beneficial to their mental health.” 
In 2017, Kimberly Shappley told <a href="https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a43702/transgender-child-kimberly-shappley/">Good Housekeeping</a> that she struggled with her “beliefs and convictions” because her 18-month-old son “began exhibiting very strong female characteristics.” 
In a bizarre and unethical twist, a child psychologist encouraged Shappley to question her 4-year-old son’s gender identity. 
“While family was questioning whether Kai was gay,” Shappley continued, “a Christian friend of mine, who is also a child psychologist, asked me: ‘Have you noticed Kai’s feminine behavior?’ It was such a gentle question, as opposed to the harsh accusations of others. I said, ‘I’ve noticed, but I figure she’ll just grow out of it.’ I can laugh at that now. It’s so clear, in retrospect, that this was not a passing phase. But when my friend asked me that, I still wasn&#8217;t ready to accept it. As I continued to watch my child developing, my friend started pointing out red flags that there was something very real going on. She told me that Kai being transgender may be something I needed to consider.”
The reality is that a child’s brain is in a constant state of development and incapable of making such a drastic decision, especially at such a tender age. <a href="https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&amp;ContentID=3051">The University of Rochester Medical Center</a> reports that even teenagers are not fully capable of making rational decisions, much less a 4-year-old. The human brain is only fully developed at around the age of 25. This helps explain why rash decision-making and high emotions beleaguer adolescents. 
“In fact, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently,” The University of Rochester reports. “Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain’s rational part. This is the part of the brain that responds to situations with good judgment and an awareness of long-term consequences. Teens process information with the amygdala. This is the emotional part…In teen’s brains, the connections between the emotional part of the brain and the decision-making center are still developing — and not always at the same rate. That’s why when teens have overwhelming emotional input, they can’t explain later what they were thinking. They weren’t thinking as much as they were feeling.”
Neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt echoes this fundamental fact on the developing brain. She told <a href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708">NPR in 2011</a> that “brain scans show clearly that the brain is not fully finished developing until about age 25.” She added “that the part of the brain that helps you to inhibit impulses” is not fully developed as a teenager, let alone as a toddler or a 4 year-old. 
How, then, can parents like Kimberly Shappley even consider burdening their children with the consequences of such an enormous decision? It’s not only unethical beyond measure, it’s unjust and unfair regardless of the desires or behaviors a child or teenager may or may not be exhibiting. 
What seems most at play in parents who compel their children to transition is a desire to appear “noble and brave” in their respective progressive communities, often to the detriment of their children’s wellbeing. Shappley goes on to explain that her family is now surrounded by “transgender men and women who are leaders in the community” who “encourage Kai to be proud of who she is and where she comes from” while “building a stronger community together.”
The untold consequences of puberty blockers on children
Increasingly, the medical community now recommends puberty blockers and a lifetime of hormone therapy when allowing children to transition.  In fact, many medical professionals are demanding that the age for transitioning procedures be lowered from the current age of 16. 
In 2017, <a href="https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/transgender-kids-eligible-for-earlier-medical-intervention-under-new-guidelines/19909/">NBC Bay Area</a> reported that “[a] team of international doctors is working to rewrite the clinical guidelines for how and when to medically treat transgender children,” and “are now considering allowing children to undergo hormone therapy at earlier ages in order to change their bodies.”
What many of these doctors fail to report are the multiple long-term and drastic side effects these so-called therapies have on children. In fact, due to the overwhelmingly politicized nature of gender dysphoria in children, the dire consequences of such therapies are, essentially, hidden or ignored. 
<a href="https://www.stlouischildrens.org/conditions-treatments/transgender-center/puberty-blockers">St. Louis Children’s Hospital</a> reports that puberty blockers can “lower bone density,” have an adverse effect on growth, and stunt the development of genitalia. Worse, the novel use of puberty blockers in children at such an increasingly higher rate makes “other possible long-term side effects” a complete mystery. 
Dr. Eric Vilain — a UCLA pediatrician and geneticist of some controversy — <a href="https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/ucla-faculty-voice-what-should-you-do-if-your-son-says-hes-a-girl">spells out</a> the immense challenges a gender dysphoric boy faces over a lifetime if allowed to transition: “In late childhood she will need hormones to block puberty; she will then take estrogen for the rest of her life. Eventually, she may want genital surgery. Although this surgery is usually satisfactory, side effects requiring additional surgery are not uncommon.”
Gender dysphoria in children is more of a phase than a permanent state
It’s increasingly difficult to comprehend whether a child may legitimately be suffering from gender dysphoria or if the child’s parents are actively encouraging confusion, motivated by misguided moral grounds rooted in progressivism and — in some instances — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/10-year-old-boy-dressed-drag-pictured-naked-amanda-prestigiacomo">the errant pageantry</a> associated with such choices. 
Regardless, quite a few studies suggest that gender dysphoria in children is unlikely to persist in children. Only “10%-25%” of children “will continue to have gender dysphoria after the onset of puberty,” according to <a href="https://www.mdedge.com/pediatrics/article/109858/mental-health/how-young-too-young-optimal-age-transitioning-transgender?sso=true">MDedge Pediatrics</a>.
Dr. Eric Vilain also <a href="https://newsroom.ucla.edu/stories/ucla-faculty-voice-what-should-you-do-if-your-son-says-hes-a-girl">argues against the overarching narrative</a> “that gender dysphoric children have the minds and brains of the other sex, adult transgenderism is inevitable, and early transition to the other sex is the only humane option.”
“Gender dysphoric children have not usually become transgender adults,” Vilain continues. “For example, the large majority of gender dysphoric boys studied so far have become young men content to remain male. More than 80 percent adjusted by adolescence.”
Vilain adds one crucial caveat to his findings, stating that “the available research was conducted at a time when parents almost always encouraged their gender dysphoric children to accept their birth sex.” However, when coupled with what we know regarding the developing brain in children and adolescence, the active encouragement of gender dysphoria on the part of parents — particularly with the aid of medical treatments like puberty blockers — becomes more a form of abuse rooted in neglect and manipulation than some adamant stance advocating for the wellbeing of one’s child. 
The steadfast work of Abigail Shrier to save our children from the “social contagion” of transgenderism
Though the Left and the legacy media have excoriated her book, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Irreversible-Damage-Transgender-Seducing-Daughters/dp/1684510317">Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters</a>,” investigate journalist Abigail Shrier continues to ring the alarm bells on the “sudden, severe spike in transgender identification among adolescent girls” in her recent piece for <a href="https://quillette.com/2020/11/07/gender-activists-are-trying-to-cancel-my-book-why-is-silicon-valley-helping-them/">Quillette</a>. 
“Between 2016 and 2017,” Shrier writes, “the number of females seeking gender surgery <a href="https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2017/body-contouring-gender-confirmation-2017.pdf">quadrupled</a> in the United States. Thousands of teen girls across the Western world are not only self-diagnosing with a real dysphoric condition they likely do not have; in many cases, they are obtaining hormones and surgeries following the most cursory diagnostic processes. Schoolteachers, therapists, doctors, surgeons, and medical-accreditation organizations are all rubber-stamping these transitions, often out of fear that doing otherwise will be reported as a sign of ‘transphobia’ — despite growing evidence that most young people who present as trans will eventually desist, and so these interventions will do more harm than good.”
Shrier also emphasizes the fact that “most teenagers are not in a good position to approve irreversible alterations to their bodies” due to their developing minds and bodies. She also adds that “suffering from trauma, OCD, depression, or any of the other mental-health problems…are comorbid with expressions of dysphoria.”  
To be sure, gender dysphoria was “vanishingly rare” in girls up until recently. Shrier refers to the current trend as a “social contagion” that targets “high-anxiety, depressive (mostly white) girls who, in previous decades, fell prey to anorexia and bulimia or multiple personality disorder.”
Ironically enough, given how the Left castigates her, Shrier “fully support[s] medical transition for mature adults.”
Given the exponential rise in gender dysphoria in children, it’s imperative that we examine the root causes of such a phenomenon. Mounting evidence suggests that it’s more of a trend, a “social contagion” in children often unwittingly encouraged by peers and their very own parents. 
Regardless, we must stand opposed to any medical procedures that risk irreversible damage to their developing minds and bodies on the basis of science and morality. It seems increasingly evident that to do otherwise is tantamount to abuse.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Trans Flag

How The Transgender Movement Is Treating Children Like Guinea Pigs 

Gender

Transgender

Basic biology and psychology — whose accuracy is supported by a litany of scientific facts — are currently lost on the transgender movement, with the Left

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/how-the-transgender-movement-is-treating-children-like-guinea-pigs/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/12/GettyImages-1152686518-1-e1609071266857.jpg

Chicago’s drag kings are out to destroy ‘toxic masculinity,’ one sequin and pelvic thrust at a time

The Prohibition of Masculinity Is Ruining Men

Culture

Feminism

The onslaught of progressive gender norms alongside feminism in mainstream culture has reduced masculinity to an effete and empty husk. Men are being told

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/the-prohibition-of-masculinity-is-ruining-men/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/12/GettyImages-944717532.jpg

This week, in the hopes of renewing old bonds, the Chinese government offered congratulations to Joe Biden. After four years of tough treatment from the Trump administration, the move signals a hope and desire on the part of the brutal Marxist regime to reestablish a better standing with the U.S. and the rest of the world. Biden’s close relationship with China in the past as well as the fact that his son, Hunter Biden, is already financially entrenched in China bodes well for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 
Meanwhile, the unfettered genocide of the Uyghur Muslims in China continues with no end in sight, with allegations of similar atrocities in Tibet as well. Outside of lip service, most of the Left alongside Biden have turned a blind eye to these horrific crimes against humanity. With few exceptions, conservatives have been alone in taking a legitimate stand against the genocide, though their voices may soon be quelled by the incoming Biden administration if history provides any indication. 
The grim details of the ongoing atrocities include forced abortions and sterilizations
So much evidence exists of a genocidal campaign against the Uyghurs in China that it beggars belief. Sadly, as with recent genocides of the past – including Rwanda and Bosnia – it seems that the horrors will only be condemned in some posthumous and impotent lament.
According to Olivia Enos of <a href="https://www.heritage.org/asia/report/why-the-us-should-issue-atrocity-determination-uighurs">The Heritage Foundation</a>, the CCP is forcing “sterilizations and implantation of intra-uterine devices (IUDs) in Uyghur women and forced abortions of Uyghur babies.” She also makes clear in her report that it’s “increasingly difficult to deny the CCP’s genocidal intent against Uyghurs.”
<blockquote>There is strong evidence indicating the CCP’s intent to eliminate, in whole or in part, future generations of Uyghurs. Succinctly, Zenz’s report finds several concerning trends that suggest an intent to prevent births, first through forced sterilizations and the forced implantation of IUDs, and second through forced abortions of Uyghur pre-born children. Other studies even document the use of infanticide against Uyghur post-born children.</blockquote>
Currently, <a href="https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/120418_Busby_Testimony.pdf">1 to 3 million Uyghurs</a> are reportedly being held in Marxist “re-education centers” by the CCP to undergo “psychological indoctrination programs, such as studying communist propaganda and giving thanks to Chinese President Xi Jinping,” according to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/7/28/21333345/uighurs-china-internment-camps-forced-labor-xinjiang">Vox</a>. 
Able to crush any opposition within its borders with virtual abandon, the CCP is now allegedly building similar “re-education centers” in Tibet. <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54260732">The BBC</a> reported in September 2020 that some 500,000 Tibetans are being forced into labor camps for the purposes of learning the “Chinese language and work ethics.” 
China’s hope to renew old ties with Biden is well-founded
Though Biden’s stance toward China on the campaign trail was a defiant one, much of it seems like empty bluster if his past relationship with the CCP is any indication. The president-elect was instrumental in fostering closer ties with China both as a Senator and as Vice President with the Obama administration.
In a piece for the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/03/joe-biden-is-chinas-choice-for-president/">National Review</a> in March 2020, Sen. Tom Cotton (R – Arkansas) detailed just how integral Biden was in fostering such a cozy relationship between the U.S. and China, often to the dismay of his fellow Democrats. 
<blockquote>In the critical fight over whether to grant most-favored-nation trade status and World Trade Organization membership to China in the 1990s — a fight in which, again, many of his party’s leaders in Congress were on the right side — Biden carefully shepherded China through the process from his powerful perch as the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Wherever a brake might have been applied — by placing human-rights or labor conditions on most-favored-nation status, for example — Biden voted the measures down and lobbied other senators for Beijing. Unfortunately, China and Biden got their way, and American workers are still suffering from it.</blockquote>
Obama himself considered the relationship between the U.S. and China to be “the most important bilateral relationship in the 21st century,” while Biden served as his Vice President. Such bold pronouncements led to “unprecedentedly close ties” between the “two greatest economic powers,” according to <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/assessing-u-s-china-relations-under-the-obama-administration/">Brookings</a>. 
It should come as no surprise, then, that China would actively <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/china-congratulates-joe-biden-on-winning-the-presidential-election/">congratulate President-elect Biden</a>. The CCP is well aware that they have an amenable ally in Biden — one who is likely to offer no more than empty words of condemnation against their ongoing genocide, while simultaneously working to foster a deeper relationship together. 
Cotton also rightly points out that for all the clamoring from the Left accusing President Trump of being a “Russian agent,” far more evidence exists to suggests President-elect Biden is deep inside China’s pocket. 
The Hunter Biden fiasco raises many red flags
Though the story continues to be suppressed by the legacy media, perhaps the most damning aspect of the recent allegations found in the recent <a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Report_FINAL.pdf">Senate report</a> against Hunter Biden is not his underhanded dealings with Ukraine, but his ongoing relationship with China and the CCP. These allegations implicate his father as well. 
Michael Goodwin of <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/10/22/hunter-biz-partner-confirms-e-mail-details-joe-bidens-push-to-make-millions-from-china/">The New York Post</a> asserts that Joe Biden has “secretly been playing footsie with China” for some time with his son often acting as a proxy of sorts, and that the president-elect “was a willing and eager participant in a family scheme to make millions of dollars by partnering with a shady Chinese Communist firm.”
Goodwin also alleges that Joe and Hunter Biden “traveled together to China on Air Force Two, where Hunter landed a $1.5 billion commitment from a government-controlled Chinese bank.”
In “American Princelings,” Helen Raleigh of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/hunter-biden-china-engagement">City Journal</a> provides extensive details on how the CCP used the Bank of China — the regime’s largest nationalized bank — to buy “influence in the United States through the children of two of the most prominent officials in the Obama administration” in 2013. She names Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz — John Kerry’s stepson — as integral to the purchase of, potentially, such broad and deep-seated influence and corruption.  
<blockquote>Consider…the Bohai Harvest RST (BHR) investment fund, partly owned and directed by Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz, the stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry, through their private equity fund, Rosemont Seneca Partners. Chinese companies, including some large state-owned enterprises such as the Bank of China (BOC), controlled and funded 80 percent of BHR, and Chinese government authorities approved the deal to establish the fund after Hunter Biden traveled to China with then-Vice President Joe Biden in 2013.</blockquote>
John Kerry is, of course, poised to play a prominent <a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-climate-climate-change-john-kerry-national-security-ee05316df77b8d532921a2e299388a62">foreign policy role</a> in the Biden administration only adding to the speculation that the president-elect may willingly turn a blind eye to China’s brutality and oppression due to such unscrupulous dealings with the Marxist regime. 
The Trump administration and conservatives have been most vocal in calling out the genocide
While the legacy media has attempted to portray the Trump administration and conservatives as decidedly “anti-Muslim,” the reality is that conservatives have often been the sole voice of condemnation against the Uyghur genocide.
In June 2020, White House national security advisor Robert O’Brien <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/chinese-communist-partys-ideology-global-ambitions/">described the brutal indoctrination</a> being inflicted upon Muslims in China by the CCP: 
<blockquote>The Chinese Communist Party reinterprets religious texts, including the Bible, to support communist party ideology. It locks up millions of Muslim Uyghurs and other minorities in reeducation camps where they are subjected to political indoctrination and forced labor, while their children are raised in Party-run orphanages. This process annihilates family, religion, culture, language, and heritage of the people who are caught up in these camps. Under the Chinese Communist Party, information is tightly controlled and expression is constantly surveilled, so that it can be quashed or shaped by the state.</blockquote>
O’Brien has repeatedly referred to the facilities housing untold millions of Uyghurs as “concentration camps,” as the Trump administration deliberates on a formal declaration of genocide, according to the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-admin-may-label-chinas-treatment-of-uighurs-a-genocide-report/">National Review</a>. 
Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo) was the original cosponsor of the “Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act.” In no uncertain terms, senator Hawley also <a href="https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-colleagues-confront-chinas-human-rights-abuses">spelled out the atrocities</a> being committed by the CCP: 
<blockquote>For too long, the Chinese Communist Party has gotten away with imprisoning over a million Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in its concentration camps. Passing this bill shines the light on the Party’s human rights abuses and makes sure those responsible for the Uyghurs’ persecution do not go unpunished.</blockquote>
Meanwhile, the Left has remained largely silent on the genocide. In fact, “woke” companies like Nike and Apple, that actively market themselves as “progressive,” continue to demonstrate unabashed support for China and the CCP by incentivizing forced labor. Worse, they are now actively opposing legislation meant to curb such draconian practices in China. 
Nike, Apple, and Coca-Cola all rallied against the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and sought to curb the bill that would “ban imported goods made with forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region” and “prohibit broad categories of certain goods made by persecuted Muslim minorities in an effort to crack down on human rights abuses,” according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/29/business/economy/nike-coca-cola-xinjiang-forced-labor-bill.html">The New York Times</a>. 
These are some of the same companies whose reputations are built on supposed human rights advocacy. Nike has made millions marketing Colin Kaepernick as a “social-justice folk hero” and has <a href="https://news.nike.com/news/nike-commitment-to-black-community">committed $40 million</a> to address “systemic racism” in the U.S. 
Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, had the audacity to write an open letter denouncing “injustices” here in America during the Black Lives Matter protests and riots, knowing full well his company’s brutal and inhumane practices abroad. Cook wrote:  “We can have no society worth celebrating unless we can guarantee freedom from fear for every person who gives this country their love, labor, and life.” 
This is the same company that encouraged such brutal and outlandish working conditions in its Chinese factories that <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-CJB-9896">nets were installed to prevent further suicides</a> in 2010.
“Worker after worker threw themselves off the towering dorm buildings, sometimes in broad daylight, in tragic displays of desperation – and in protest at the work conditions inside. There were 18 reported suicide attempts that year alone and 14 confirmed deaths,” <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/18/foxconn-life-death-forbidden-city-longhua-suicide-apple-iphone-brian-merchant-one-device-extract">The Guardian</a> reported.
The hypocrisy is, of course, astounding given that “Uyghurs are working in factories that are in the supply chains of at least 82 well-known global brands in the technology, clothing and automotive sectors, including Apple, BMW, Gap, Huawei, Nike, Samsung, Sony and Volkswagen,” according to the <a href="https://www.aspi.org.au/report/uyghurs-sale">ASPI</a>. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Riots Occur In China’s Urumqi Ethnic Region

As China Congratulates Biden, Their Genocide Continues

Biden

China

trump

This week, in the hopes of renewing old bonds, the Chinese government offered congratulations to Joe Biden. After four years of tough treatment from the

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/as-china-congratulates-biden-their-genocide-continues/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/12/GettyImages-88874417.jpg

As renewed lockdowns go into effect to combat the winter surge in COVID-19 cases, the dire impact of such restrictions is now becoming tragically evident. Increasingly, it seems the lockdowns and other restrictions are creating — at best — a Pyrrhic victory of sorts: a victory which inflicts such a devastating toll on the “winner” that it is effectively a defeat. Countless Americans face economic ruin, many businesses have been forced to close, deaths and diseases of despair have skyrocketed, and all other serious health concerns have been overshadowed by the seemingly misguided efforts to quell the pandemic. It’s no longer conjecture to argue that shutting down entire countries will cause untold collateral damage. The only question that remains is if the consequences of such restrictions will, ultimately, surpass the loss caused by the pandemic itself. 
More Japanese people died from suicide in just one month than from the entire COVID-19 pandemic.
It’s a harrowing fact that borders on the surreal. In just the month of October alone, more Japanese men and women have taken their own lives than have died from COVID-19 during the entire duration of the pandemic to date, according to <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/japan-suicide-coronavirus-more-japanese-suicides-in-october-than-total-covid-deaths/">CBS News</a>. 
<blockquote>“Far more Japanese people are dying of suicide, likely exacerbated by the economic and social repercussions of the pandemic, than of the COVID-19 disease itself. While Japan has managed its coronavirus epidemic far better than many nations, keeping deaths below 2,000 nationwide, provisional statistics from the National Police Agency show suicides surged to 2,153 in October alone, marking the fourth straight month of increase.”</blockquote>
In even grimmer news, Ayai Tomisawa of <a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/10/09/national/social-issues/suicide-mental-health-coronavirus/">The Japan Times</a> reported that the number of suicides grew due to an unprecedented number of women and children taking their own lives. Women committing suicide “jumped by around 40 percent,” while “suicides by students in elementary to high school more than doubled to 59 [percent] from the same period last year.”
While suicides were finally decreasing in Japan since health officials began keeping such records in 1978, the pandemic has reversed such an optimistic trajectory due, in large part, to the catastrophic rise in women committing suicide, according to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/28/asia/japan-suicide-women-covid-dst-intl-hnk/index.html">CNN</a>. 
<blockquote>“But for the 10 years leading up to 2019, the number of suicides had been <a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/01/17/national/suicides-japan-record-low-20000/">decreasing in Japan</a>…The pandemic appears to have reversed that trend, and the rise in suicides has disproportionately affected women. Although they represent a smaller proportion of total suicides than men, the number of women taking their own lives is increasing. In October, suicides among women in Japan increased almost 83% compared to the same month the previous year. For comparison, male suicides rose almost 22% over the same time period.”</blockquote>
It’s increasingly evident that such calamities are directly related to the pandemic and the consequent restrictions put in place. Worse, Japan is one of the very few nations that reports official data on suicides. Here in the U.S., such data is often only available years later, allowing for only speculation and guesswork on the current impact of the pandemic restrictions on American lives. 
“The mental health toll looks set to be one of the pandemic’s most insidious legacies given the difficulty of grasping or measuring the magnitude of self-inflicted harm until it is too late,” Ayai Tomisawa of The Japan Times continues. “Major economies like the U.S. and China don’t report official data on suicides until years later, though experts have predicted a wave of such deaths this year while anecdotal evidence abounds on social media platforms.”
Some studies suggest that the suicide rate could increase by as much as 145% given the toll the pandemic is having on younger people, according to <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4352">The BMJ</a>. 
<blockquote>“Widely reported studies modeling the effect of the covid-19 pandemic on suicide rates predicted increases ranging from 1% to 145%, largely reflecting variation in underlying assumptions. Particular emphasis has been given to the effect of the pandemic on children and young people. Numerous surveys have highlighted that their mental health has been disproportionately affected, relative to older adults, and some suggest an increase in suicidal thoughts and self-harm.”</blockquote>
If what’s occurring in Japan is any indication, such a bleak outlook may very well prove true here in the U.S. given the restrictions being implemented once again. As it stands, Japan’s death toll for suicides for 2020 alone is at 17,000 and counting. 
Deaths from heart disease and other ailments are skyrocketing during the pandemic.
As predicted by many experts, countless individuals with serious health conditions have put off visits to doctors and hospitals due to both enduring fears of COVID-19 and the fatiguing limitations put in place by the various pandemic restrictions. A staggering 50% of elderly Americans canceled appointments in April of 2020, according to <a href="https://khn.org/morning-breakout/putting-off-health-care-31-of-all-americans-delay-trips-to-doctors-more-than-50-of-seniors-cancel-appointments/">KHN</a>.
In England, this has resulted in an alarming number of excess deaths from heart disease. According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/14/heart-disease-deaths-soar-in-england-covid">The Guardian</a>, “The British Heart Foundation (BHF) said there had been 4,622 ‘excess deaths’ from heart and circulatory diseases between the start of the pandemic and mid-October.” 
Many of these deaths were preventable according to the BHF. However, because of the pandemic, “relatively younger adults had been dying of heart problems in higher numbers than expected” due to a variety of reasons including putting off “seeking care.” The BHF also listed “fear of contracting Covid-19 in health settings” and “delays to surgeries and routine heart care” as contributing factors. 
Dr. Chris Colwell, Chief of Emergency Medicine at San Francisco General Hospital, told <a href="http://v">NBC News</a> that many are “suffering severe consequences from having delayed care for fear of coming to the hospital.” 
It’s worth noting that an <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771761">October 2020 study</a> in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) also reported a sharp increase in deaths from non-COVID-19 causes. The authors of the study stated that an “analysis found that COVID-19 was cited in only 65% of excess deaths in the first weeks of the pandemic” and that “deaths from non–COVID-19 causes (eg, Alzheimer disease, diabetes, heart disease) increased sharply in 5 states with the most COVID-19 deaths.” The authors concluded that though “US deaths increased by 20% during March-July 2020,” COVID-19 contributed to “only 67% of these excess deaths.” 
Leading epidemiologists warned of severe consequences to such restrictive measures at the outset of the pandemic. 
Since the very beginning of the pandemic, many lauded epidemiologists raised the alarm on the grim realities extended lockdown restrictions would likely cause. Most were either forced into silence or vilified for their positions. The media, alongside his own peers in the scientific community, disparaged lauded Stanford epidemiologist, <a href="https://profiles.stanford.edu/john-ioannidis">John Ioannidis</a>, for his early position on limiting lockdowns — ironic considering how much praise he received for his <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124">2005 study</a> that demanded far more rigor and critical evaluation in scientific research.
In April of 2020, Ioannidis specifically brought up the specter of increased suicides as a potential consequence of locking down in an interview for the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bearer-of-good-coronavirus-news-11587746176">Wall Street Journal</a>. 
<blockquote>“‘But there’s far, far, far more . . . young people who commit suicide.’ If the panic and attendant disruption continue, he says, ‘we will see many young people committing suicide . . . just because we are spreading horror stories with Covid-19. There’s far, far more young people who get cancer and will not be treated, because again, they will not go to the hospital to get treated because of Covid-19. There’s far, far more people whose mental health will collapse.’”</blockquote>
Ioannidis proved sadly prescient as we now bear somber witness to the exponential rise in suicides in Japan, as well as the disturbing fact that 25% of young Americans from ages 18 to 24 have <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/14/health/young-people-suicidal-ideation-wellness/index.html">contemplated suicide</a>. 
Ioannidis also spelled out other consequences likely to occur if such restrictions continued for an extended period of time — most of which also proved true. In his now viral piece for <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/">STAT</a> in March of 2020 that was roundly condemned at the time by the legacy media, he argued that “draconian countermeasures” might prove catastrophic well beyond the scope of the pandemic itself.
<blockquote>“One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric. At a minimum, we need unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making.”</blockquote>
Three other leading epidemiologists from Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford have all but exhausted their voices in providing ample evidence that the various pandemic restrictions are causing far more harm than good. <a href="https://unherd.com/author/sunetra-gupta/">Sunetra Gupta</a>, <a href="https://unherd.com/author/jay-bhattacharya/">Jay Bhattacharya</a>, and <a href="https://unherd.com/author/martin-kulldorff/">Martin Kulldorff</a> composed The <a href="https://gbdeclaration.org/">Great Barrington Declaration</a> detailing their “grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies.” It seems to no avail, though 9,000 doctors and scientists and counting have signed the declaration. Still, it has barely registered a blip on the legacy media’s radar — even with such a nuanced and reasoned position — mainly because it goes against the prevailing narrative.
“Coming from both the left and right, and around the world,” the epidemiologists write, “we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health — leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.” 
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

COVID-19 Protest

We Are Now Witnessing The Deadly Impact Of COVID-19 Lockdowns

As renewed lockdowns go into effect to combat the winter surge in COVID-19 cases, the dire impact of such restrictions is now becoming tragically evident.

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/we-are-now-witnessing-the-deadly-impact-of-covid-19-lockdowns/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/12/GettyImages-1222295589-e1607259809901.jpg

Far from being the bastion of tolerance and inclusivity, for decades the progressive Left has weaponized such virtues for their own narrow ends. They have employed identity politics and cancel culture to silence, chastise, and even ruin any who dare trespass upon or challenge their narratives and schemes. It’s no wonder that, increasingly, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-trump-massively-exceeded-expectations-with-minority-voters-heres-how-he-did-it">minorities are moving toward conservatism.</a> As shown by the results of this past presidential election, it’s becoming clear that many are simply fed up with the bigotry and prejudice promoted by the legacy media and popular culture which drives various agendas of the Left. Here are six such examples. 
Robin DiAngelo’s “White Fragility” is an exercise in dehumanization
The underlying premise of Robin DiAngelo’s work, “White Fragility,” is fundamentally grounded in a form of prejudice the Left refuses to acknowledge. It’s a monolithic indictment of an entire group of people premised exclusively in the superficialities of color and the inherently cultural and <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/race-genetics-science-africa/">non-scientific notion</a> of “race.” As such, DiAngelo considers “all whites…complicit in racism by virtue of their skin color,” according to Chloé Valdary of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/diversity-training">City Journal</a>. 
If DiAngelo’s vapid assessment and generalizations were ascribed to any other group of people, her work would be considered patently racist and any further discussions on the matter would be enthusiastically rejected. 
Unfortunately, DiAngelo has crafted her prejudice in such a deceptive manner that it disallows any legitimate critique of it, creating a “racial double bind” of sorts. “To argue” against DiAngelo “is racist” and only “proves that the label fits.”
Fortunately, John McWhorter’s critique of “White Fragility” in <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/">The Atlantic</a> is the perfect antidote to DiAngelo’s intellectualized gibberish. As a lauded black scholar, McWhorter is automatically exempt from DiAngelo’s “racial double bind” by her very own logic, unless she wishes to exert her own “white privilege” upon McWhorter. 
McWhorter takes a less obvious but far more damning approach to “White Fragility.” He insists that DiAngelo’s work is “dehumanizing” and full of “condescension” toward people of color. He refers to it as a “racist tract” that “diminishes Black people in the name of dignifying us.” 
“In 2020—as opposed to 1920—I neither need nor want anyone to muse on how whiteness privileges them over me,” McWhorter continues. “Nor do I need wider society to undergo teachings in how to be exquisitely sensitive about my feelings. I see no connection between DiAngelo’s brand of reeducation and vigorous, constructive activism in the real world on issues of import to the Black community. And I cannot imagine that any Black readers could willingly submit themselves to DiAngelo’s ideas while considering themselves adults of ordinary self-regard and strength. Few books about race have more openly infantilized Black people than this supposedly authoritative tome… Or simply dehumanized us.”
The unabashed racism of Karl Marx
Though the openly Marxist leaders of Black Lives Matter are quick to assail the Founding Fathers as “racists,” they choose to be willfully ignorant of the virulent racism that informed Marx. 
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors <a href="https://time.com/5171270/black-lives-matter-patrisse-cullors/">told Time</a> that her “intellectual influences” draw from “Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin and Mao Zedong.” Cullers also claimed “in a…video from 2015 that she and her fellow organizers are ‘trained Marxists’ – making clear their movement’s ideological foundation,” according to <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/">The New York Post</a>.
In fact, the very paradigm that underpins much of the progressive Left in the form of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-left-is-rewriting-american-history-to-push-their-radical-agenda">Critical Theory is intrinsically Marxist</a>. Yet, his abject racism is presented as a mere afterthought, if ever mentioned at all.
“Marx is a hero to many labor union leaders and civil rights organizations,” noted scholar, <a href="https://www.newsherald.com/story/opinion/2020/08/16/many-marxists-dont-realize-their-hero-racist-and-anti-semite/3369024001/">Walter E. Williams</a>, recently wrote, “including leftist groups like Black Lives Matter, antifa and some Democratic Party leaders. It is easy to be a Marxist if you know little of his life…What most people do not know is that Marx was a racist and an anti-Semite.”
For further proof, one need only read the very words of Marx himself. Here’s an excerpt from <a href="http://hiaw.org/defcon6/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.html">a letter to Friedrich Engels</a> rife with exhausting prejudice: 
“The Jewish n***** Lassalle who, I’m glad to say, is leaving at the end of this week, has happily lost another 5,000 talers in an ill-judged speculation. The chap would sooner throw money down the drain than lend it to a ‘friend,’ even though his interest and capital were guaranteed.”
Chelsea Handler “reminds” rapper 50 Cent that he’s black
Prior to the presidential election, Curtis Jackson — better known as 50 Cent — seemed to <a href="https://twitter.com/50cent/status/1318558550210301958?s=20">show support</a> for President Trump and his fiscal policies.
In response, comedian Chelsea Handler openly chastised the famous rapper’s decision, asking him “if he knew what race he was,” according to <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/10/27/chelsea-handler-bullied-50-cent-into-recanting-his-trump-support/">The New York Post</a>.
She then went on The Jimmy Fallon Show and stated that she “had to remind him that he was a black person, so he can’t vote for Donald Trump.” 
This is the same Chelsea Handler who states in her 2019 Netflix documentary entitled, “Hello Privilege. It’s Me, Chelsea,” that she is “the beneficiary of white privilege” and hopes to find what her “responsibility is moving forward in the world that we live in today where race is concerned,” according to <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/bjw78m/chelsea-handlers-new-netflix-special-proves-she-still-doesnt-understand-white-privilege">Vice</a>. 
Yet, here she is, disqualifying a black voice because of his very racial identity and the possibility that he dared to show support for President Trump. Handler’s accusation is very much the hallmark of the kind of arrogant racism that informs the Left.
The bias against Asian-American students at Ivy League schools
Ivy League schools such as Yale and Harvard — now seen as the epicenters of progressive thought — have allegedly been discriminating against Asian-American students for decades. In 2018, the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/harvard-discrimination-against-asian-american-students-obvious/">National Review</a> reported that “while the Asian-American undergraduate population at elite universities that do not take race into account in admissions has soared since the 1990s, it has hovered around 20 percent at Ivy League schools.” 
Such disparities in admissions led to a lawsuit from a “group called Students for Fair Admissions…alleging that [Harvard] engages in unconstitutional racial discrimination against Asians in its admissions process.”
Recently, a federal appeals court ruled against Students for Fair Admissions, though the case is likely to be heard by the Supreme Court, according to a recent piece by Zachary Evans of the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/appeals-court-rejects-lawsuit-alleging-anti-asian-discrimination-at-harvard/">National Review</a>.
“The case has been followed closely by supporters and opponents of race-based affirmative action policies,” Evans reports. “In the event that plaintiffs attempt to bring their suit before the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Court agrees to hear arguments, plaintiffs will argue their case before a 6-3 conservative majority of justices on the bench.”
The Justice Department is also investigating “alleged discrimination against Asian-American and white applicants to Yale University” though much may change in the coming months with the transition to the Biden administration and its decidedly progressive bent. 
“Internalized racism” is “Uncle Tom 2.0”
“Internalized racism” is a somewhat novel term often bandied about by the Left toward minorities who refuse to tow the progressive line. Essentially, it’s an elaborate attempt to intellectualize the term, “Uncle Tom,” to appear more palatable to the general public. 
Instead of referring to the likes of Candace Owens or Larry Elders in such derisive and obviously racist terms, many on the Left argue that such conservative thinkers “suffer” from “internalized racism,” usually beyond their control. Such fatiguing condescension is pervasive among the Left, used as another method to silence the opposing views of many conservative minority voices. 
Worse, it removes all sense of agency from those accused of “internalized racism,” reducing them to subjugated automatons who — once again — must be “liberated” by the progressive Left. 
Donna K. Bivens of <a href="https://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/What_is_Internalized_Racism.pdf">Racial Equity Tools</a> seeks to define “internalized racism” in the following manner: 
“As people of color are victimized by racism, we internalize it. That is, we develop ideas, beliefs, actions and behaviors that support or collude with racism. This internalized racism has its own systemic reality and its own negative consequences in the lives and communities of people of color. More than just a consequence of racism, then, internalized racism is a systemic oppression in reaction to racism that has a life of its own. In other words, just as there is a system in place that reinforces the power and expands the privilege of white people, there is a system in place that actively discourages and undermines the power of people and communities of color and mires us in our own oppression.” 
Bivens adds that “individuals, institutions and communities of color are often unconsciously and habitually rewarded for supporting white privilege” and that “internalized racism is a systemic oppression.”
This very definition of “internalized racism” is working with two specious assumptions presented as objective facts: Namely, that “white privilege” and “systemic racism” are realities, rather than nebulous constructs rooted in Critical Theory and other far Left paradigms. 
In effect, when the likes of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-the-truth-about-the-anti-racist-movement-and-its-founder-ibram-x-kendi">Ibram X. Kendi</a> and Robin DiAngelo employ the term “internalized racism,” it’s meant to silence any opposition or meaningful critique of their extremist views. 
“You ain’t Black” if you voted for Trump, according to Joe Biden
During his election campaign, Joe Biden insinuated that minorities who support Trump are betraying themselves and their very identity. In a May 2020 interview for <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOIFs_SryHI&amp;feature=emb_title">The Breakfast Club</a>, Biden stated in no uncertain terms that “if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.” 
Regardless of the intent behind Biden’s comment, it remains patently racist. That such a reckless statement didn’t cause a greater uproar, particularly among minorities, only reinforces the idea that the legacy media is shaping and controlling the political narrative. Had President Trump made such a remark, for example, he would have been widely condemned as an open racist.
Despite the Left’s constant attempt to malign him as a racist, Trump actually improved his standing among minorities in the recent presidential election. This bodes well for the future of conservatism.
“If the poll is an accurate reflection of final results,” the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-won-one-quarter-of-non-white-voters-improving-on-2016-numbers-exit-poll/">National Review</a> reported, “Trump will have improved his support with black and Latino voters relative to 2016, when non-white voters comprised 21 percent of his vote share.”
Clearly, far more is at play as more and more minorities move toward conservatism, even in the wake of such meaningless accusations from the likes of Biden. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Chelsea Handler

The Prejudice And Racism Of ‘Progressives’: 6 Examples

Joe Biden

Far from being the bastion of tolerance and inclusivity, for decades the progressive Left has weaponized such virtues for their own narrow ends. They have

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/the-prejudice-and-racism-of-progressives-6-examples/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-821989806-e1606762187994.jpg

A deliberate attempt by the Left to completely rewrite American history, motivated by bitter activism and postmodern ideals, continues to take place at an alarming rate. Though once isolated to the ivory towers of higher academia under the guise of Critical Theory, such revisionism has now made its way into our mainstream culture. Our educational system, alongside the legacy media, now present much of American history – with all its triumphs and tribulations – as more of an abomination than as a momentous struggle that allowed our nation to become one of the most just and egalitarian in all of human history. In doing so, they seek to supplant traditional American culture and values with what can only be defined as “woke” totalitarianism informed by Marxist thought. 
Critical Theory and its offshoots are rooted in Marxism
While Critical Theory carries an exhausting, broad, and ever-evolving definition, at its root, it’s an ideology and outlook developed in the early part of the twentieth century by the <a href="https://iep.utm.edu/frankfur/">Marxist Frankfurt School</a>.
“The Critical Theory of the…Frankfurt School,’” <a href="https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-theory/">New Discourses</a> details, “focused on power analyses that began from a Marxist…perspective with an aim to understand why Marxism wasn’t proving successful in Western contexts. It rapidly developed a ‘post-Marxist’ position that criticized Marx’s primary focus on economics and expanded his views on <a href="https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-power-systemic/">power</a>, alienation, and exploitation into all aspects of post-Enlightenment Western culture.”
This focus on “power, alienation, and exploitation” led to the “study of various types of power relations within myriad aspects of culture.” This resulted in Critical Theory branching out to form a seemingly endless array of lesser so-called theories including “queer Theory, critical race Theory, intersectional feminism, disability studies, and fat studies.”
These are no longer simply fringe ideas relegated to academia and obscure corners of the internet. Corporations and branches of government on state and federal levels are actively integrating such “theories” into their various training protocols. <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/critical-race-theory-in-american-classrooms">City Journal</a> reports that “NASA spent half a million dollars” for workshops on male privilege and that the FBI holds “weekly ‘intersectionality’ workshops.” 
Most importantly, these offshoots of Critical Theory have moved away from the traditional Marxist critique of capitalism in favor of an overarching indictment of “liberal Western culture.” As such, they serve as the galvanizing force behind such extremist movements as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-5-radical-goals-of-the-black-lives-matter-organization-the-media-ignores">Black Lives Matter</a> and Antifa which seek to eradicate traditional American history and culture as we know it.
Critical Theory has invaded our schools
The most pernicious influence of Critical Theory is occurring in our public schools. Teachers have now been trained for years in various colleges and universities to indoctrinate their students with these neo-Marxist ideas — and often unwittingly so.
<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/higher-education-critical-theory-attacks-americas-norms-traditions/">The National Review</a> reports that “colleges of education are the training grounds for <a href="https://www.jamesgmartin.center/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-Politicization-of-University-Schools-of-Education.pdf">translating this leftist academic theory</a> into K–12 pedagogy and practice.” This is having a harmful effect on young minds all across our nation as “prospective elementary and secondary teachers are steeped in the philosophy of Critical Theory.”
“Some school districts have become proud indoctrination factories” for critical race theory, according to Max Eden of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/critical-race-theory-in-american-classrooms">City Journal</a>. Some of the lessons being taught to elementary kids include “What is the Black Lives Matter Movement and what is our role in it?” and “Think About It George Washington: The Beginnings of 273 Years of Hypocrisy in America.” 
“Parents may wonder how our public schools became propaganda mills,” Eden continues. “The answer…is two ways: gradually, then suddenly. Critical race theory was largely pioneered in U.S. schools of education; a generation of teachers has been trained in its toxic assumptions. Then, after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May, a host of major education trade associations <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/rise-of-woke-schools">publicly vowed</a> to imprint this ideology onto the next generation.”
Generations of young Americans are now being educated through the filter of Critical Theory to actively despise our nation, its history, and even themselves if they cannot effectively categorize themselves as marginalized “victims” under some definition of Critical Theory and its various offshoots. 
The American Association of School Administrators (AASA) recently released a statement rife with the “woke” totalitarianism of Critical Theory by echoing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-the-truth-about-the-anti-racist-movement-and-its-founder-ibram-x-kendi">the zealotry of Ibram X. Kendi</a> in order to “dismantle systemic racism” in our schools: 
“We are living at a time of obscene inequities and merely trying to compensate is not enough. Equity is more than making things more accessible and AASA’s work on equity must go further and become actively anti-racist. The perpetual traumas of inequality and discrimination manifest as more than the acts themselves, taking a significant toll on the mental health and well-being of all those impacted. Now is the time for all educational leaders to intensify our commitment to address inequities and work to dismantle systemic racism.”  
The legacy media and the inherent failings of The 1619 Project
Nikole Hannah-Jones, an investigative journalist and creator of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html?mtrref=www.poynter.org&amp;assetType=PAYWALL">The 1619 Project</a> for The New York Times, doesn’t just seek to revise American history for the storied newspaper. She wants to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html">rewrite</a> it from the ground up along distinctly racial lines. 
“The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.”
Hannah-Jones argues that “The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie.” She insists that the founding proclamation of our nation that “all men are created equal” was a falsehood “the white men who drafted those words did not believe…to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.”
In a concerted effort to counter the many glaring inconsistencies and half-truths in Hannah-Jones’ ambitious project of outright revisionism, a coalition of black scholars has formed <a href="https://1776unites.com/about/scholars/">1776 Unites</a> that includes such notable names as Glenn Loury and Coleman Hughes.
Writing for <a href="https://1776unites.com/essays/we-cannot-allow-1619-to-dumb-down-america-in-the-name-of-a-crusade/">1776 Unites</a>, scholar John H. McWhorter excoriates The 1619 Project as an “outright misrepresentation” of history, as well as being “simplistic” and “anti-intellectual.” Most importantly, McWhorter reminds the likes of Hannah-Jones that the very ideals our nation was founded upon are what led to the abolishment of slavery. 
“America has always been an experiment, ever imperfect, always in rehearsal,” McWhorter writes. “That its beginnings 400 years ago were founded in casual bondage of other humans is appalling from our viewpoint, but should surprise no one given what was ordinary in all human societies worldwide at the time. That in this nation, slavery gradually was abolished, via a movement in which white people vigorously and crucially participated, was a kind of miracle in itself. It demonstrated that the rehearsal was a progressive one, moving ever towards justice even if never achieving its quintessence.”
Coleman Hughes also offers <a href="https://1776unites.com/essays/lets-arm-black-children-with-lessons-that-can-improve-their-lives/">tremendous insight</a> into the failings of The 1619 Project. While quick to “support teaching Americans of all ages about the horrors of slavery,” Hughes argues that Hannah-Jones’ ungainly attempt at blatant revisionism “is an attempt to weaponize that history to fight ideological wars in the present.”
“Instead of teaching black children lessons they can use to improve their lives — such as the importance of education and geographic mobility — the 1619 Project seems hellbent on teaching them to see slavery everywhere: in traffic jams, in sugary foods and, most surprisingly, in Excel spreadsheets…Without doubt, America would be a very different place — in ways both large and small — if not for slavery. Yet the arguments marshalled in support of this fact too often rely on an intellectual sleight of hand that would be plain to see if applied to any other historical event.”
Such “weaponizing” of historical facts remains at the root of what many in the legacy media engage in as evidenced by The 1619 Project. Journalistic integrity and academic rigor are now being replaced by fervent, dogmatic activism, devoid of fact and substance. 
Howard Zinn’s Marxist retelling of American history
First published in 1980, the late Howard Zinn’s wildly popular work, “A People’s History of The United States” ushered in a deluge of Marxist tropes into mainstream American culture. Daniel J. Flynn of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/html/fbi-history-howard-zinn-10752.html">City Journal</a> refers to Zinn’s work as an “unremittingly Marxist retelling of the nation’s past” that was “[f]ueled by enthusiastic professors who made the book required reading and by pop-culture name-dropping by the likes of The Simpsons, Good Will Hunting, and The Sopranos.” 
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/lies-the-debunkers-told-me-how-bad-history-books-win-us-over/260251/">The Atlantic</a> defines Zinn’s work as a relentless critique of “capitalism and American nationalism” that “has been taught in countless middle school and high school classes.”
In a 1998 interview for the Communist newspaper, <a href="https://revcom.us/a/v20/980-89/987/zinn.htm">The Revolutionary Worker</a>, Zinn himself echoes many of the underlying objectives of Critical Theory embodied in his work stating, “I wanted my writing of history and my teaching of history to be a part of social struggle.” Zinn viewed the teaching and writing of history as a fundamentally “political act.” 
The website, <a href="https://www.marxist.com/memory-of-howard-zinn-life-and-ideas.htm">In Defense of Marxism</a>, compares Zinn’s approach to writing history to the abject radicalism of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky">Leon Trotsky</a>. Both abandoned any attempt of a “traditional, mainstream telling of history.” In fact, the title of Zinn’s autobiography, “You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train,” very much echoes Trotsky’s disdain for what he viewed as “treacherous impartiality” toward historical facts. 
In his review of Mary Grabar’s book, “Debunking Howard Zinn,” <a href="https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2020/04/a-radical-pseudo-historian-meets-his-match/">Professor Wilfred McClary</a> offers the most searing and eloquent critique of Zinn and his work emphasizing that “Zinn was not an original scholar and, in fact, not even a historian by training.”
While arguing against the “patently untruthful 1619 Project,” McClary also insists that Nikole Hannah-Jones is following directly in the footsteps of Zinn in her zealous, dogmatic pursuit of rewriting American history to accord with the radical Left. 
Though McClary laments that if “young Americans are being taught their history at all, Zinn is likely to be what they are being taught,” he finds some solace in Grabar’s critique of Zinn that depicts the radical author as an “utter charlatan and naked partisan, an admirer of Stalin and Mao, a relentless self-promoter and self-mythologizer, and a media-savvy celebrity of the Left.” 
“Through it all Grabar is unsparing in her treatment of Zinn’s historical distortions,” McClary continues. “From his unfair depiction of Columbus as a genocidal maniac, to his comic-book romanticizing of American Indians as residents of nonviolent hippie communes, to the depiction of the Founding as the creation of a preserve for wealthy white males, to his depiction of the “good war” of World War II as a war between morally equivalent sides, he had to play fast and loose with the facts to support his fantastical assertions — and Grabar calls him on every one of them. She is devastatingly effective.”
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Nikole Hannah-Jones

How The Left Is Rewriting American History To Push Their Radical Agenda

1619 Project

critical race theory

A deliberate attempt by the Left to completely rewrite American history, motivated by bitter activism and postmodern ideals, continues to take place at an

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/how-the-left-is-rewriting-american-history-to-push-their-radical-agenda/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/Nicole-Hannah-Jones-1200x800.png

As the legacy media and others on the Left herald Joe Biden as the man who will bring about some new progressive era, they have conveniently forgotten the racist policies and actions that pockmark his political career. While the Left has spent the last four years hounding President Trump as a racist&#8211; with scant evidence &#8212; Joe Biden advocated for and wrote actual policies that may have negatively impacted minorities for decades. From his adamant stance against racial integration, his infamous crime bill, and, most recently, his insistence that “you ain’t Black” if you don’t vote for him, Biden’s racist legacy as a career politician stands in stark contrast to the reputation he enjoys on the supposedly &#8216;anti-racist&#8217; Left.
His opposition to busing over fears of a “racial jungle” 
Early in his career as a U.S. Senator from Delaware, Biden became one of the most vocal advocates for maintaining racial segregation in all of America. He was the “leading anti-busing crusader” for the Democrats and found himself very much “in league” with staunch segregationists. According to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/15/us/politics/biden-busing.html">The New York Times:</a>
<blockquote>He emerged as the Democratic Party’s leading anti-busing crusader — a position that put him in league with Southern segregationists, at odds with liberal Republicans and helped change the dynamic of the Senate, turning even some leaders in his own party against busing as a desegregation tool.</blockquote>
In an interview with <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/joe-biden-busing-letters-2020/index.html">CNN</a>, Jason Sokol, a professor at the University of New Hampshire, emphasized that Biden was &#8220;strongly opposed to busing and was very interested in the passage of the anti-busing legislation” and that his approach “wasn&#8217;t a half-hearted thing.&#8221;
In his opposition to integration through busing, Biden famously warned that such a policy could create a &#8220;racial jungle&#8221; or sorts, as detailed by David Harsanyi of the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/biden-says-we-should-look-at-his-record-on-race-it-doesnt-help-his-case/">National Review</a>:
<blockquote>Biden might have later claimed to have ‘marched in the civil-rights movement’ (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/03/us/politics/biden-1988-presidential-campaign.html">he didn’t</a>) and to have represented Black Panthers (he almost surely didn’t), but in reality he was one of the leading voices in the Democratic Party <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/15/us/politics/biden-busing.html">opposing</a> busing reforms. Now, we can debate the usefulness of busing, but there is no debate over whether Biden said that without ‘orderly integration’ his children would be growing up ‘<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-said-desegregation-would-create-a-racial-jungle-2019-7">in a racial jungle</a>.’</blockquote>
In a bit of irony that now borders on the absurd, vice-president-elect Kamala Harris chastised Biden’s opposition toward busing during a heated debate in 2019 stating, “There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools, and she was bused to school every day, and that little girl was me,” according to <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/27/harris-attacks-bidens-record-on-busing-and-working-with-segregationists.html">CNBC</a>. 
In a television interview Biden gave in 1975 on the volatile subject, he argued that “such steps” as mandatory busing would be a source of greater animosity between Americans, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/15/us/politics/biden-busing.html">The New York Times</a> reported. 
“This is the real problem with busing…You take people who aren’t racist, people who are good citizens, who believe in equal education and opportunity, and you stunt their children’s intellectual growth by busing them to an inferior school, and you’re going to fill them with hatred.&#8221;
“And what about the black student from Wilmington’s east side? You send him to A.I. Dupont, bus him through Centerville every day, then send him back to the ghetto. How can he be encouraged to love his white brothers?”
 His rubbing elbows with segregationists 
Joe Biden&#8217;s opposition to busing was surely supported at the time by segregationists around the country- some of whom Biden considered allies.
He regarded George Wallace in a positive light and “bragged about receiving an award from… the former Alabama governor and one of America’s most notorious segregationists,” according to <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/joe-biden-delaware-civil-war-860886/">Rolling Stone</a>. 
In the same piece, Rolling Stone reported that Biden also once proclaimed during a campaign speech that “we (Delawareans) were on the South’s side in the Civil War.” 
As The Washington Examiner<a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/biden-praised-segregationist-strom-thurmond-as-closest-friend-who-believed-in-heterogenous-diverse-society"> detailed,</a> former segregationist Strom Thurmond was one of Biden’s “closest friends” by his very own admission. 
“Thurmond…ran for president in 1948 on a segregationist platform and led a record-setting filibuster to block the Civil Rights Act in 1957. He later softened his stance on civil rights issues in the 1980s but never fully renounced his position on segregation or the racially inflammatory comments he made during his presidential campaign.”
Biden even <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0ZdFjZxQXA">spoke</a> at Thurmond&#8217;s funeral, lauding him as great leader and man of conviction.
Not surprisingly, both Biden and Thurmond were very much opposed to “mandatory busing to desegregate schools in the 1970s and 1980s.”
In 1975 Biden “stunned his colleagues” by teaming up with Jesse Helms, “the segregationist senator from North Carolina,” to author an “anti-busing amendment to that year’s education spending bill,” according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/15/us/politics/biden-busing.html">The New York Times</a>.  
His 1994 Crime Bill
The inherently specious notion of “systemic racism” has been at the forefront of the Left&#8217;s narrative these last six months and counting. Spurred on by the extremism of organizations such as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-5-radical-goals-of-the-black-lives-matter-organization-the-media-ignores">Black Lives Matters</a> and the growing prevalence of ideas such as &#8216;Critical Race Theory,&#8217; the term is fast becoming an unfortunate and divisive cultural mainstay in our nation. 
If, for the sake of argument, we concede to the idea of “systemic racism,” then Joe Biden was very much an architect of it for close to three decades as the author of The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Critics of his bill argue that it disproportionately targeted Black Americans and lead to their mass incarceration, according to the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/biden-says-we-should-look-at-his-record-on-race-it-doesnt-help-his-case/">National Review</a>. 
<blockquote>Critics, mostly contemporary Democrats, argue that the law helped create a mass-incarceration regime that disproportionately affects African Americans. We can debate the effectiveness of the policy, but Biden can’t claim he didn’t <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-touted-crime-bill-1992-death-penalty-jaywalking-senate-2019-6">brag</a> that the bill does ‘everything but hang people for jaywalking.’</blockquote>
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/09/joe-biden-crime-bill-and-americans-short-memory/597547/">The Atlantic</a> argued that Biden’s crime bill “helped lead to the wave of mass incarceration that’s resulted in the United States accounting for 25 percent of the world’s prison population.”
Lenny McAllister, a Black conservative, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/10/13/923170325/examining-joe-bidens-record-on-race-1994-crime-bill-sponsorship">told NPR</a> that Biden’s “1994 crime bill disproportionately impacted [primarily Black] communities such as Homewood-Brushton where literally generations of fathers and mothers spent a disproportionate amount of time in jail.”
Biden, for his part, had little patience or sympathy for the perpetrators of crime regardless of race back in 1993 – a position diametrically opposed to the Left’s current stance – stating, “It doesn’t matter whether or not they’re the victims of society…I don’t want to ask, ‘What made them do this?’ They must be taken off the street.” Biden also gave dire warnings of “predators in the streets” insisting that we simply “[l]ock the S.O.B.’s up,” according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/joe-biden-crime-laws.html">The New York Times</a>.
Hillary Clinton echoed Biden’s hardened stance in 1996 with her now-infamous and racist labeling of inner-city kids as diabolical <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?69606-1/hillary-clinton-campaign-speech">“super-predators”</a>: 
“They are often the kinds of kids that are called super predators. No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.”
Now, of course, Biden has tried to walk back his tough stance on crime. While vying for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2019, he “unveiled a plan” aimed at “lowering incarceration rates, ending the federal death penalty and eliminating racial disparities in how people are sentenced,” in large part, because of the backlash against his 1994 crime bill “that some say contributed to mass incarceration, especially of black men,” <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-biden/biden-unveils-plan-to-end-racial-discrimination-in-u-s-criminal-justice-system-idUSKCN1UI137">Reuters</a> reported. 
“Under Biden’s new plan, he would aim to reduce the U.S. prison population, in part by ending the jailing of people solely for drug use offenses. He would also create a $20 billion grant program to incentivize states to shift their focus from jailing people to preventing crime.”
Though a decades-long proponent of the death penalty, Biden would also “scrap the death penalty at the federal level” and call on states to follow suit “by sentencing people to life without parole, rather than executing them.”
“You ain’t Black”
Biden’s most recent racist gaffe occurred recently on the campaign trail. In an interview with <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOIFs_SryHI&amp;feature=emb_title">The Breakfast Club</a>, Biden exclaimed that anyone who voted for Trump “ain’t Black” in his closing comments to the host: “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t Black.”
The insinuation, of course, is that any minority that votes for Trump is some form of an Uncle Tom – one of the most derisive and racist accusations leveled at minorities, often by the Left.
Larry Elder, a conservative and producer of the documentary, <a href="https://www.uncletom.com/">Uncle Tom</a>, points out in a piece for the <a href="https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/elder-joe-you-aint-black-biden-please-see-uncle-tom">Toronto Sun</a> that “Democrat Identity Politics 101 dictate that Republican blacks lose their blackness, Republican women lose their gender and Republican Latinos cease being Latinos.” 
On a deeper, perhaps more insidious level, such aspersions cast by the likes of Biden point to how the Left forces minorities to either tow the progressive line or be ostracized and forced to relinquish their own identity. One is simply not allowed to have a dissenting voice as a minority on the Left without fear of reprisal.
This is often how minorities are, essentially, used by the Left to do their bidding ad nauseam as well. In an essay for <a href="https://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2019/01/02/the-worst-enemy-of-black-people-n2538218">Townhall</a>, professor and scholar Walter E. Williams touches upon an oft-ignored aspect of the overarching chicanery employed by the Left toward minorities by citing a telling quote from the late controversial civil rights leader, Malcolm X:
<blockquote>The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have. If the Negro wasn&#8217;t taken, tricked or deceived by the white liberal, then Negros would get together and solve our own problems. I only cite these things to show you that in America, the history of the white liberal has been nothing but a series of trickery designed to make Negros think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems…</blockquote>
Such a quote, even with the vitriol behind it, highlights the inherent racism behind Biden’s assertion and highlights why <a href="https://twitter.com/MAGAHULK2020/status/1273413083742867456">a growing number of minorities</a> are simply no longer willing to be duped by the Left. 
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Joe Biden In A CBS ‘Bicentennial Minute’

The Racist Legacy That Should Haunt Joe Biden

2020 Election

As the legacy media and others on the Left herald Joe Biden as the man who will bring about some new progressive era, they have conveniently forgotten the

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/the-racist-legacy-that-should-haunt-joe-biden/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/Biden-70s.jpg

As cancel culture continues to rage across America, the scope of what&#8217;s considered offensive continues to broaden exponentially. As a result, the enriching history of poetry and literature &#8211; with all its complexities and contradictions &#8211; is being discarded and deconstructed into oblivion in academia and beyond. Books and authors once considered integral to a holistic education are now being removed or censored if they contain rhetoric that could offend. Here are nine examples of books and authors who could be the next victims of cancel culture:
1984
Often touted as a prescient take on a dystopian future replete with authoritarian rule and censorship, it’s almost a kind of comic irony that George Orwell’s 1984 is now repeatedly brought up in a censorious manner as endorsing misogyny in current literary circles. 
In ‘<a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Orwell_Mystique.html?id=g-gyr7ddFYUC">The Orwell Mystique: A Study In Male Ideology’</a>, author Daphne Patai insists ‘‘Orwell assails Big Brother’s domination but never notices that he is the perfect embodiment of hypertrophied masculinity…[who] focuses on male power over females.&#8221;
Elsewhere, in <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/01/the-product-of-its-time-defense-no-excuse-for-sexism-and-racism/283352/">The Atlantic</a>, Noah Berlatsky argues, “George Orwell&#8217;s handling of his main female character in 1984 is clichéd, clumsy, and not a little sexist.”
The main thrust, scope, and vital relevance of 1984 is cast aside to pounce upon the misogyny and sexism the novel supposedly espouses. 
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Mark Twain’s complex and classic novel that reads, at once, as a simple adventure story and also as a treatise on the American dream depending on the age of the reader, is no longer a masterpiece of American literature in the eyes of many. It’s now increasingly regarded as racist. 
Twain’s novel has been among <a href="http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/100-most-frequently-challenged-books-1990%E2%80%931999">the most commonly banned books for decades now</a>. In today’s cancel culture climate, however, it may finally be on its last legs for its language and characterization of black Americans. 
That Twain’s novel was groundbreaking for its time for his views on race in America must now be discounted. We must also somehow look past the fact that <a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-e&amp;q=toni+morrison">Toni Morrison</a>, a Nobel Prize-winning black American novelist, <a href="https://www.stjoe.k12.in.us/ourpages/auto/2013/12/10/59680878/Morrison%20Intro%20to%20Huck%20Finn.pdf">considered it a masterpiece</a> as well:
“I was powerfully attracted to the combination of delight and fearful agitation lying entwined like crossed fingers in the pages. … It is classic literature, which is to say it heaves, manifests and lasts.”
Flannery O’Connor
Often heralded as the queen of Southern Gothic literature, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flannery_O%27Connor">Flannery O’Connor’s</a> stories are often bleak and violent but also tinged with a strong moral tone owing to her Catholic upbringing. Her work received the National Book Award posthumously in 1972. 
Recently, however, her letters and postcards have been made available to the public. Like most everyone else in the world, her views and opinions are rife with musings and contradictions. Regardless, she is now being chastised as a racist. The New Yorker recently ran a piece entitled <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/06/22/how-racist-was-flannery-oconnor">‘How Racist Was Flannery O’Connor?’</a>  that stated the following: 
<blockquote>[L]etters and postcards she sent home from the North in 1943 were made available to scholars only in 2014, and they show O’Connor as a bigoted young woman. In Massachusetts, she was disturbed by the presence of an African-American student in her cousin’s class; in Manhattan, she sat between her two cousins on the subway lest she have to sit next to people of color. The sight of white students and black students at Columbia sitting side by side and using the same rest rooms repulsed her.</blockquote>
O’Connor was still a teenager when she wrote those letters, but that is apparently no excuse and is somehow deserving of a lengthy piece in The New Yorker. She must now be posthumously vilified and held to an impossible standard even though the rest of her life as an adult and as a writer demonstrates none of the ignorance she may have held as an adolescent. 
Raymond Chandler
Known as the grandfather of the detective novel and a fiercely independent writer, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Chandler">Raymond Chandler’s</a> style of writing has been endlessly mimicked and parodied in works of literary fiction, film, and television. His main character and protagonist, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Chandler">Philip Marlowe</a>, remains the blueprint for the classic hardboiled detective.  
Now though, his novels are under renewed scrutiny. As <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/15/raymond-chandlers-detective-novels-endure-flaws/">The Federalist</a> details, &#8220;the more politically correct academics see no value in Chandler and dismiss him and his protagonist Philip Marlowe as homophobic and misogynist.”
Considering that notions of traditional masculinity are increasingly at a premium, it’s no surprise that Chandler and his character, Philip Marlowe, are viewed as unacceptable these days. 
JK Rowling
Once lauded for her rags to riches story as a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-people-defined-me-as-a-single-mother-on-benefits-and-assumed-i-wasnt-fit-to-raise-my-8824498.html">working-class single mother</a>, the Harry Potter author remains under a constant barrage of attacks for her <a href="https://apnews.com/article/7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2">views</a> on transgenderism.
Rather than examining the actual criteria of Rowling’s views, <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/06/jk-rowling-transphobia-feminism">Vanity Fair</a> posited that the author was simply ceding to white privilege and uncritical dogma: 
<blockquote>So Rowling, a British feminist, is soaking up these anti-trans views—she’s transphobic because everyone she reads and listens to is. Why? That’s the real mystery. <a href="https://theoutline.com/post/6536/british-feminists-media-transphobic?zd=2&amp;zi=ummcf52w">Some</a> pin the blame on many British journalists’ close ties to 2000s “skeptic” movement, largely built around dismissing pseudosciences such as homeopathy and “anti-science” views. My view is that it’s about just how white and privileged journalism is in the U.K.</blockquote>
Rowling responded to the criticism and sought to clarify her position in a much-maligned <a href="https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/">blog post</a>: 
<blockquote>“I’m concerned about the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition and also about the increasing numbers who seem to be detransitioning (returning to their original sex), because they regret taking steps that have, in some cases, altered their bodies irrevocably, and taken away their fertility.”</blockquote>
Lonesome Dove
Larry McMurtry’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonesome_Dove">Pulitzer Prize-winning novel</a> that epitomizes classic western folklore is now increasingly considered antiquated and destructive. In a recent list of books one should now actively avoid <a href="https://www.gq.com/story/21-books-you-dont-have-to-read">according to GQ</a>, author <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Groff">Lauren Groff</a> singled out ‘Lonesome Dove’ as contributing to the ‘degradation of America’: 
<blockquote>I&#8217;m convinced that the cowboy mythos, with its rigid masculine emotional landscape, glorification of guns and destruction, and misogynistic gender roles, is a major factor in the degradation of America.</blockquote>
Groff also stated that McMurtry’s novel was full of “old toxic stereotypes we all need to explode.”
Charles Bukowski
Unruly, funny, salacious, and even gross, Charles Bukowski’s stories and poems often championed destitute blue-collar men, loners, and outcasts. As with all good literature and poetry, his work offered an insight into a perspective often hidden away or obfuscated by the stuffy pretense of academia. 
Feminists insist that Bukowski’s work is misogynistic and filled with sexist tropes, as though his stories were written as an actual personal affront to them in some hopelessly solipsistic manner. 
In a review, <a href="https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/12/in-no-regrets-women-writers-talk-about-what-it-was-like-to-read-literature-s-midcentury-misogynists.html">Slate</a> quoted feminist Dayna Tortorici’s odd read of Bukowski that somehow managed to confirm her own body dysmorphia:
<blockquote>I will never forget reading Bukowski’s <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0061177571/?tag=slatmaga-20">Post Office</a> and feeling so horrible, the way that the narrator describes the thickness of ugly women’s legs. I think it was the first time I felt like a book that I was trying to identify with rejected me. Though I did absorb it, and of course it made me hate my body or whatever.</blockquote>
H.P. Lovecraft
From Stephen King to Guillermo del Toro, Lovecraft’s influence on the horror genre is undeniable. However, many of his personal views were indeed abhorrent, especially with regards to his racism and anti-semitism. 
According to <a href="https://lithub.com/we-cant-ignore-h-p-lovecrafts-white-supremacy/">Literary Hub</a>, Lovecraft exclaimed “the Negro is fundamentally the biological inferior of all White and even Mongolian races.” And that’s really just the tip of the iceberg. 
Though the lunacy of Lovecraft’s personal views has little bearing on his works of fiction, only time will tell if his entire canon will be discarded by society. 
To Kill A Mockingbird
Harper Lee’s classic novel was often considered a profound and compassionate take on inequality and race in America and was assigned to prompt conversations on tolerance and dispel notions of prejudice. 
Now it seems even ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’ is too offensive for many. According to <a href="https://www.slj.com/?detailStory=mockingbird-is-just-part-of-the-story">School Library Journal</a>: “Many believe Harper Lee’s classic novel to be problematic, if not outright racist.”
Writing for the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/18/books/review/tom-santopietro-why-to-kill-a-mockingbird-matters.html">New York Times</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roxane_Gay">Roxane Gay</a>, the author of ‘Bad Feminist’, dismisses the novel entirely because it’s not relatable to her own experiences, stating, &#8220;I don’t need to read about a young white girl understanding the perniciousness of racism to actually understand the perniciousness of racism. I have ample firsthand experience.&#8221;
It’s as though the entire point of great literature is lost on the likes of Gay and her cancel culture contemporaries. Compelling stories and poems offer an insight into another’s perspective often wholly different from one’s own. One doesn’t need to be a Greek warrior to appreciate <a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-e&amp;q=homer">Homer</a> or dying of tuberculosis to understand <a href="https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44479/ode-to-a-nightingale">Ode to a Nightingale</a>. If anything, Gay’s criticism highlights the self-absorption and odd entitlement that rampages through cancel culture and society-at-large today. 
Worse, if classic literature is read at all these days, it’s often simply to find parts to disavow. <a href="https://www.elle.com/culture/books/a32033/10-mysoginistic-novels-every-woman-should-read/">Writing for Elle</a>, Elissa Straus proclaims: 
<blockquote>We need to read books by and about macho, sexist proto-frat boys because they are our past. Misogyny was not a minor player in the cultural history of the world. Women need to know it and feel it in order to understand its internal logic. Only then can we set to dismantling it…In other words, know thine enemy.</blockquote>
As literature and history continue to erode under the auspices of &#8220;social justice,&#8221; outrage, and cancel culture, we risk a return to a state of ignorance and obedience fundamentally counter to the American way of life. 
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

“Harry Potter And The Cursed Child” Opening Day

9 Books And Authors At Risk Of Being Canceled

Cancel culture

Censorship

JK Rowling

As cancel culture continues to rage across America, the scope of what&#039;s considered offensive continues to broaden exponentially. As a result, the

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/9-books-and-authors-at-risk-of-being-canceled/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/JK-Rowling.jpg

Menu

Sharif Khan