Закат западной цивилизации

[tijd]

Базой консервативного движения, которое привело Рейгана к власти 40 лет назад, были умело активизированные южные христиане. Часть родившихся в это время организаций, вроде Council for National Policy, были пропитаны духом " Протоколов сионских мудрецов".

Но у христианских активистов обнаружились внезапные соратники - еврейские интеллектуалы из Нью-Йорка, которые сдвинулись слева направо и обернулись неоконсерваторами.



Одним из самых ярких представителей служил Норман Подгорец. Подгорец родился в Бруклине в семье бедных еврейских иммигрантов из Западной Украины - его отец говорил на идиш и работал молочником. Мальчик проявил большие способности в школе, благодаря чему был принят с престижной стипендией на литературный факультет Колумбийского университета, а после в Кембридж. Не закончив английской аспирантуры, он вернулся на родину и, отслужив в армии, влился в интеллектуальную богему Нью-Йорка, публикуя статьи в престижных журналах и в 30 лет в 1960 став главным редактором еврейского журнала Commentary.



Журнал под руководством Подгореца был устойчиво леволиберальным, но, так сказать, местечковый консерватизм главного редактора временами просвечивал. Это проявилось в его нападках на движение битников и знакомого ему по университету Аллена Гинсберга и в нашумевшей статье 1963 года "My Negro Problem - And Ours".

В пушкинском возрасте 37 лет Подгорец опубликовал исповедальные мемуары "Making it", в которых описывал историю своей неутомимой борьбы за место под солнцем и приписывал похожие мотивы другим людям его литературно-либеральной среды. Автопортрет закомплексованного автора мемуаров напоминал персонажей Достоевского.

"I am a man who at the precocious age of thirty-five experienced an astonishing revelation: It is better to be a success than a failure. Having been penetrated by this great truth concerning the nature of things, my mind was now open for the first time to a series of corollary perceptions, each one as dizzying in its impact as the Original Revelation itself. Money, I now saw (no one, of course, had ever seen it before), was important: it was better to be rich than to be poor. Power, I now saw (moving on to higher subtleties), was desirable: it was better to give orders than to take them. Fame, I now saw (how courageous of me not to flinch), was unqualifiedly delicious: it was better to be recognized than to be anonymous. <...>
Every morning a stock-market report on reputations comes out in New York. It is invisible, but those who have eyes to see can read it. Did so-and-so have dinner at Jacqueline Kennedy's apartment last night? Up five points. Was so-and-so not invited by the Lowells to meet the latest visiting Russian poet? Down one-eighth. Did so-and-so's book get nominated of the National Book Award? Up two and five-eighths. Did Partisan Review neglect to ask so-and-so to participate in a symposium? Down two."
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/99/02/21/specials/podhoretz-making.html



Приход Рейгана в 1980 позволил Подгорецу и его единомышленникам избавиться от либеральной шелухи и прежних друзей и обрести свой подлинный голос.

Сыграли роль несколько факторов. Нью-Йорк 1970ых и 1980ых был неспокойным местом, с расцветом уличной преступности. Пугала также контркультура, с ее сексуальной революцией, наркотиками и т.д. У людей консервативного склада возникало ощущения краха привычного мира.

Отпугивало также отсутствие у леволибералов должного патриотизма, на волне разочарования в правительстве после Вьетнамского войны и Уторгейта. Несгибаемый оптимизм Рейгана возвращал веру в Америку, которая подарила детям иммигрантов возможность обрести высокий статус в обществе и заработать очков в "stock-market report on reputations".

Если для Рейгана противостояние СССР, как "империи зла", было в первую очередь противостоянием религии и атеизма, то для еврейских неоконов из Нью-Йорка противостояние демократии и диктатуры в первую очередь ассоциировалось с поддержкой Израиля, как оплота "свободного мира" на Ближнем Востоке.

"While the general impression that all neo-conservatives are Jewish is false, it is certainly true that all neo-conservatives are strong supporters of Israel. This has as much - and in many cases more - to do with the fact that Israel is a democratic state as that it is a Jewish one. For whereas neo-conservatives may differ among themselves over the extent and nature of American commitments abroad, they would all agree that at a minimum the United States has a vital interest in the survival of the relatively few democratic states already in existence. Israel, in particular, is seen by neo-conservatives as the most exposed of the democracies - the loneliest outpost of what they insist on calling (in deliberate defiance of the ridicule that has been heaped on the term in recent years) the free world."
https://www.nytimes.com/1982/05/02/magazine/the-neo-conservative-anguish-over-reagan-s-foreign-policy.html

Подгорец в кольце либерального разврата и Израиль в кольце арабских врагов служили метафорой для США в кольце коммунистической заразы, распространяющейся по всему свету, и способствовали метельному менталитету.



Для интеллектуальнго журнала Commentary имел неплохой тираж в десятки тысяч подписчиков, но его прямое влияние на избирателей было малозаметным. Несмотря на все усилия американские евреи в целом упорно продолжали придерживаться либеральных взглядов и поддерживать демократических политиков.

В книге "Why Are Jews Liberals?" (2009) Подгорец разочарованно писал:

Mr. Obama beat Mr. McCain among Jewish voters by a staggering 57 points. Except for African Americans, who gave him 95% of their vote, Mr. Obama did far better with Jews than with any other ethnic or religious group. Thus the Jewish vote for him was 25 points higher than the 53% he scored with the electorate as a whole; 35 points higher than the 43% he scored with whites; 11 points higher than the 67% he scored with Hispanics; 33 points higher than the 45% he scored with Protestants; and 24 points higher than the 54% he scored with Catholics.
These numbers remind us of the extent to which the continued Jewish commitment to the Democratic Party has become an anomaly. All the other ethno-religious groups that, like the Jews, formed part of the coalition forged by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1930s have followed the rule that increasing prosperity generally leads to an increasing identification with the Republican Party. But not the Jews. As the late Jewish scholar Milton Himmelfarb said in the 1950s: "Jews earn like Episcopalians"-then the most prosperous minority group in America-"and vote like Puerto Ricans," who were then the poorest.
Jews also remain far more heavily committed to the liberal agenda than any of their old ethno-religious New Deal partners. As the eminent sociologist Nathan Glazer has put it, "whatever the promptings of their economic interests," Jews have consistently supported "increased government spending, expanded benefits to the poor and lower classes, greater regulations on business, and the power of organized labor."
As with these old political and economic questions, so with the newer issues being fought out in the culture wars today. On abortion, gay rights, school prayer, gun control and assisted suicide, the survey data show that Jews are by far the most liberal of any group in America.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203440104574402591116901498

Симбиоз между еврейскими неоконами и южными евангелистами внутри рейгановской коалиции заключался в другом. Помимо неравнодушного отношения к Израилю, как к месту обещанного Армагеддона, евангелистов преследовал недостаток по-настоящему образованных людей с литературными способностями. Идеалом евангелического образования служило домашнее воспитание вместо школы и христианский колледж вместо нормального университета. Неоконы (вместе с выпускниками частных католических школ) замещали вакуум и стабильно поставляли в республиканские администрации работящие и образованные кадры, вроде семейства Лединых, а их близкое знакомство с либеральными кругами придавало им ореол прометейства.



"Poddy is a silly billy" писал Гор Видал про Подгореца. Как либерал-изоляционист и представитель старой американской политической аристократии, Видал находился на противоположном полюсе спектра. Его едкие нападки на Подгореца и его жену, Мидж Дектер, были не лишены налета антисемитизма, хотя и обладали несомненным литературным совершенством:

Significantly, the one Yiddish word that has gained universal acceptance in this country is chutzpah. Example: In i960, Mr. and Mrs. Podhoretz were in upstate New York where I used to live. I was trying out a play at the Hyde Park Playhouse; the play was set during the Civil War. “Why,” asked Poddy, “are you writing a play about, of all things, the Civil War?” I explained to him that my mothers family had fought for the Confederacy and my father’s for the Union, and that the Civil War was-and is-to the United States what the Trojan War was to the Greeks; the great single tragic event that continues to give resonance to our Republic.
“Well, to me,” said Poddy, “the Civil War is as remote and as irrelevant as the War of the Roses.” I realized then that he was not planning to become an “assimilated American,” to use the old-fashioned terminology; but, rather, his first loyalty would always be to Israel. Yet he and Midge stay on among us, in order to make propaganda and raise money for Israel-a country they don’t seem eager to live in. Jewish joke, circa 1900: A Zionist is someone who waijts to ship other people off to Palestine.
<...> like most of our Israeli fifth columnists, Midge isn t much interested in what the goyim were up to before Ellis Island <...> General Grant was ashamed of what we did to Mexico, and so am I. Mark Twain was ashamed of what we did in the Philippines, and so am I. Midge is not because in the Middle East another predatory people is busy stealing other people’s land in the name of an alien theocracy. She is a propagandist for these predators (paid for?), and that is what all this nonsense is about.
Since spades may not be called spades in freedom’s land, let me spell it all out. In order to get military and economic support for Israel, a small number of American Jews," who should know better, have made common cause with every sort of reactionary and anti-Semitic group in the United States, from the corridors of the Pentagon to the TV studios of the evangelical Jesus Christers. To show that their hearts are in the far-right place, they call themselves “neo-conservatives” and attack the likes of Mailer and me, all in the interest of supporting the likes of Sharon and Greater Israel as opposed to the Peace Now Israelis, whom they disdain. There is real madness here; mischief, too.
“Well, one thing is clear in all this muddle,” writes Midge, adrift in her tautological sea, “Mr. Vidal does not like his country.” Poor Midge. Of course I like my country. After all, I’m its current biographer.
Although there is nothing wrong with being a lobbyist for a foreign power, one is supposed to register with the Justice Department. Also, I should think that tact would require a certain forbearance when it comes to the politics of the host country. But tact is unknown to the Podhoretzes. Joyously, they revel in the politics of hate, with harsh attacks on blacks and/or fags and/or liberals, trying, always, to outdo those Christian moral majoritarians who will, as Armageddon draws near, either convert the Jews, just as the Good Book says, or kill them.
All in all, the latest Podhoretz diatribes have finally convinced me that the time has come for the United States to stop all aid not only to Israel, but to Jordan, Egypt, and the rest of the Arab world. The Middle Easterners would then be obliged to make peace, or blow one another up, or whatever. In any case, we would be well out of it. After all, the theological and territorial quarrels of Israel and Islam are as remote to 225 million Americans as-what else?-the War of the Roses.
http://www.thecactusland.com/2010/06/empire-lovers-strike-back.html



Следует отметить, что знамя неоконсерватизма привлекало не одних только евреев. В том же журнале Commentary демократка Джин Киркпатрик опубликовала статью "Dictatorships and Double Standards" с призывом к более жесткому противостоянию коммунистическим щупальцам в международной политике. Статья произвела впечатление на Рейгана и его советников и привела к назначению Киркпатрик послом США в ООН.

В 2021 интересно перечитывать описание Киркпатрик необходимых условий для существования демократического общества:

"Fulfilling the duties and discharging the functions of representative government make heavy demands on leaders and citizens, demands for participation and restraint, for consensus and compromise. It is not necessary for all citizens to be avidly interested in politics or well-informed about public affairs-although far more widespread interest and mobilization are needed than in autocracies. What is necessary is that a substantial number of citizens think of themselves as participants in society’s decision-making and not simply as subjects bound by its laws. Moreover, leaders of all major sectors of the society must agree to pursue power only by legal means, must eschew (at least in principle) violence, theft, and fraud, and must accept defeat when necessary. They must also be skilled at finding and creating common ground among diverse points of view and interests, and correlatively willing to compromise on all but the most basic values.
In addition to an appropriate political culture, democratic government requires institutions strong enough to channel and contain conflict. Voluntary, non-official institutions are needed to articulate and aggregate diverse interests and opinions present in the society. Otherwise, the formal governmental institutions will not be able to translate popular demands into public policy."
https://www.aei.org/articles/dictatorships-and-double-standards-2/

Главной идеа статьи заключалось в  том, что, поскольку левые движения в разных странах неизбежно скатываются в коммунистические диктатуры, для противостояния им допустимо поддерживать правых диктаторов в "традиционных обществах" (вроде шаха в Иране и Сомосы в Никарагуа), даже если подобные диктатуры вызывают у среднего американца инстинктивное отторжение.

"Traditional autocracies are, in general and in their very nature, deeply offensive to modern American sensibilities. The notion that public affairs should be ordered on the basis of kinship, friendship, and other personal relations rather than on the basis of objective “rational” standards violates our conception of justice and efficiency. The preference for stability rather than change is also disturbing to Americans whose whole national experience rests on the principles of change, growth, and progress. The extremes of wealth and poverty characteristic of traditional societies also offend us, the more so since the poor are usually very poor and bound to their squalor by a hereditary allocation of role. Moreover, the relative lack of concern of rich, comfortable rulers for the poverty, ignorance, and disease of “their” people is likely to be interpreted by Americans as moral dereliction pure and simple. The truth is that Americans can hardly bear such societies and such rulers."



Распад СССР стал для неоконов приятной неожиданностью, но вместе с тем оставил их не у дел.

В 1996 Подгорец выступил с шуточным "панегириком" неоконсерватизму. Он откровенно признавал, что движущей силой для неоконов вроде него было не столько противостояние мировому коммунизму, сколько борьба с засильем контркультуры внутри Америки, и приписывал неоконам заслуги не только в победе в холодной войне, но и в победе в культурной войне за консервативные ценности.

"If anti-Communism was the ruling passion of the neoconservatives in foreign affairs, opposition to the counterculture was their ruling passion at home. Indeed, I suspect that revulsion against the counterculture accounted for more converts to neoconservatism than any other single factor. Here, too, the neoconservatives enjoyed a great advantage over other conservatives in being intimately familiar with modernist literature, avant-garde art, and bohemian libertinism, on which many of them had themselves cut their cultural teeth. <...>
We can also say that the neoconservative defense of traditional values against the assaults of the counterculture ended with a victory that, in its own way, resembled the victory of the West over Communism in the cold war. Who today shies away from the word capitalism, celebrates free and easy sex, or promotes drugs as the gateway to a higher consciousness?"
https://www.aei.org/articles/neoconservatism-a-eulogy/

С празднованием второй победы он несколько поспешил. В наше время "the word capitalism" перестает вызывать однозначно положительные ассоциации, а идеи свободы сексуальных отношений и "drugs as the gateway to a higher consciousness" успешно возвращаются в общественное сознание.



Через пять лет, с приходом Буша и 9/11, неоконы внезапно оказались на коне и смогли достичь вершины своего политического влияния. Хотя они занимали второстепенные позиции в администрации Буша, и было бы неверно считать их тайными кукловодами Буша и Чейни, вклад неоконов в подготовку и обоснование войны в Ираке тем не менее трудно переоценить.

The “neocons” - second-tier officials such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith and vice-presidential chief of staff Scooter Libby - were not the decision-makers. The decision to invade was made by President George W. Bush in consultation with Vice President Richard B. Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell. None of them would ever label themselves a “neocon.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-time-to-retire-the-neocon-label/2019/03/13/11cc2714-45a2-11e9-aaf8-4512a6fe3439_story.html

Трудно также переоценить масштаб катастрофы, в которую в итоге вылилась иракская авантюра.



В речи на второй инаугурации в 2005 Буш провозглашал доктрину распространения демократии в мире:

"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.
This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary. Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.
The great objective of ending tyranny is the concentrated work of generations. The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it. America's influence is not unlimited, but fortunately for the oppressed, America's influence is considerable, and we will use it confidently in freedom's cause."
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4460172

15 лет спустя уровень демократии в мире скатился на 30 лет назад - на уровень 1990 года и продолжает катиться дальше вниз. А американский моральный авторитет в мире, который при поддержке неоконов добивался Буш, обвалился вслед за Бушем и Трампом.

Democracy is under pressure across the world. According to the latest annual report by Freedom House, a United States-based non-partisan think-tank, the balance is shifting further “in favour of tyranny”. In the report’s assessment, 2020 was the 15th consecutive year of declining global freedom.
This dire picture is confirmed by other studies. In the 2020 edition of its Democracy Index, The Economist Intelligence Unit recorded the worst state of global democracy since the index was first published in 2006.
V-Dem, another leading research project, reported today that in 2020, autocratisation accelerated and “turned viral” across the world. V-Dem’s study points out that “the level of democracy enjoyed by the average global citizen” is down “to the levels around 1990”. Last year, its researchers concluded that for the first time since 2001, a majority of states are no longer under democratic rule.
https://www.democracywithoutborders.org/16143/time-for-global-democracy-promotion-to-be-ramped-up/



В 1981 Мидж Дектер, жена и соратница Подгореца, возглавила "Committee for the Free World". Как говорил еврейский интеллектуал Альфред Казин, "уже смешно".

I confess that whenever I see a piece of print reading “The Committee for the Free World, Midge Decter Executive Secretary,” I laugh. I’m reminded of a young reporter, who was granted an interview in the Oval Office with President Lyndon Johnson, and so exasperated Johnson by his bumbling questions that the great man, rising to his full 6 feet 3 1/2 inches, sputtered in indignation: “How can you ask a chicken-shit question like that of the Head of the Free World?”
For all the contemptuousness and rigidity of the views I first observed years ago at a Dalton School PTA meeting, Midge Decter’s easy laughter still persuades me that in this “neoconservative” there is a cynic waiting to be let out. Although she surprised me by going public to excoriate homosexuality, liberated women, and protestant clergymen foolish enough to worry over Lebanese children without a roof over their heads, I confess to affection for Midge. I cannot resist her smile of worldly experience. When I called her to accept the invitation, admitting that I was surprised to be asked, she cheerfully said: “It’s not too late to save your soul.”
The Committee for the Free World is not exactly a committee, though I am sure it is run like one by the local presidium, drawn largely from Commentary’s staff and writers, whose struggle against international communism earned the Committee a grant (in 1981) of $100,000 in Mellon money from the Carthage Foundation in Pittsburgh. The Committee is the latest and most aggressive of those bodies of former leftist intellectuals, in the tradition of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which, concentrating on the danger of communism abroad and at home, still consider themselves an avant-garde of sorts. Unlike the American Committee for Cultural Freedom, however, which fell apart in dissension over McCarthyism because many members still considered themselves liberals, radicals, democratic socialists, and would not wish to become fellow travelers of Senator Taft, James Burnham, William F. Buckley, Jr., and tutti quanti, the Committee for the Free World is a straightforward rightist organization-for former liberals and former leftists.
This avant-garde has personal and political ties with the Reagan administration, can always be depended upon to support Begin and to ignore much of what goes on in South Africa. It is part of that astonishingly wide “conservative” network in America represented by Social Democrats USA, Freedom House, the current United States delegation to the United Nations, the magazines Commentary, The National Review, The American Spectator, The New Criterion, Mainstream, The American Scholar, and The Public Interest, the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, Georgetown University’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, the evangelists behind the Moral Majority, the defense contractors behind the American Security Council, libertarians opposed to gun control, the groups in favor of capital punishment and opposed to abortion, the “Right to Work” lobby-and, of course, Senator Jesse Helms’s Congressional Club.
https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1983/03/31/saving-my-soul-at-the-plaza/



Как грибы после дождя, после победы Рейгана росли и другие смежные организации. Стивену Балчу, еврею из Бруклина, довелось учится в Беркли во время напугавших его студенческих волнений 1960ых. При поддержке Дектер он организует NAS (National Association of Scholars) для борьбы со злостным подрывом "западной цивилизации" в американских университетах.

"Midge Decter helped by supplying a list of professors who supported the Committee for a Free World. It was a place to begin."
https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/22/2/a_tribute_to_steve_balch

В 2009 Балч ушел с поста директора организации, чтобы возглавить Институт Изучения Западной Цивилизации в техасской глубинке (Texas Tech University). Организация потеряла свое прежнее влияние, чтобы уступить его новому поколению шарлатанов. Старые мишени "affirmative action" и "political correctness" обрели новые названия.

The group, whose 25th-anniversary conference will be held in New York this weekend, has struggled to keep up with technology and has been hurt by economic downturns. Its membership has dwindled to about 3,000, down by one-third from its height in the late 1990s. It has given up on trying to maintain the health of its state affiliates, several of which have shut down or are dying on the vine. It has found philanthropic support harder to come by as tight times have prompted major donors to give less money, with more strings attached, and a federal program that provided much of its revenue in recent years has stopped awarding grants.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/national-scholars-group-turns-25-showing-its-age/



Новый директор NAS, антрополог Питер Вуд, принимал участие в конференции, созванной Трампом в Белом доме в сентябре 2020. Его выступление включало безумные теории заговора про то, как университетские преподаватели преподают "маоисткую тактику" и тайно организуют уличные протесты, вместе с паранойей про наступающий таким образом конец цивилизации.

"Who writes that script? The answer is fairly evident. It is the campus activists-some of whom are faculty members, some graduate students, some undergraduates, and many who might be best described as academic hangers-on, taking or teaching a course or two, and living on the periphery of the academic community. These people sometimes join named groups, but many of them float from one activist cause to another, and they are best described as a network with some organized nodes that have recognized leaders. Some think of themselves as revolutionaries, anarchists, or as front-line “workers” in the “struggle.” All of them accept without question the basic doctrines of contemporary progressive thought. These include the idea that America is systemically racist; that capitalism and free enterprise are inherently exploitative; and that climate change is an existential peril. They have spent years immersed in anti-liberal ideology, identitarian indignation, and the study of Maoist tactics. They’ve been taught that gaining power by any means necessary is the legitimate path to what they think of as “social justice.” And they are eager to put what they have learned into practice. <...>
Because if there is one thing that history teaches, it is that civilization does not endure on its own. Neglected-or attacked outright-our civilization could quickly disappear. Frankly, it is disappearing and will disappear if we do nothing to stop it."
https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/nas-president-peter-wood-speaks-at-the-white-house-conference-on-american-history



Орегонское отделение NAS было создано в 2016 Брюсом Гилли, профессором канадского происхождения в Portland State University. На следующий год Гилли опубликовал провокационную статью в защиту колониализма и с призывом к вернуться к практике порабощения отсталых стран. Провокация удалась.

In 2017, Professor Gilley submitted “The Case for Colonialism” to the journal Third World Quarterly. After a selective and cursory discussion of an enormously complex and bloody history, he used a cost-benefit analysis to conclude that the benefits of colonialism outweighed its drawbacks. “Maybe the Belgians should come back,” he wrote, referring to the period best-known for a brutality that led to ten million deaths. The article prompted the resignation of fifteen scholars on the editorial board in protest. It also prompted two petitions for retraction signed by around 18,000 scholars.
Since that time, Gilley has delivered a talk to Germany’s far-right political party exhorting the audience to take pride in its colonial past; brought his patently inappropriate and inhuman cost-benefit frame to the history of American slavery, claiming that it was “good fortune” for African people to be enslaved by the British Empire; and responded to the nation’s reckoning with racism after George Floyd’s murder by branding his social media with #BLMterrorists. In 2019, he launched a book series with Lexington Books entitled “Problems with Anti-colonialism.” He intended it as a counter “to anti-colonial attitudes [that] continue to constrain policy choices in the former colonial world” and as support for “former colonial powers (mainly Britain, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Portugal, Spain, and Italy) as well as Anglo-settlement colonies (the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)” that experience pressure to “debase their historical records.”
This fall, a petition on Change.org, “Against Bruce Gilley’s Colonial Apologetics,” that questioned the publisher’s judgement in approving the aforementioned series amassed over 900 signatures of scholars and educators across the country in a matter of days. It is important to note that these signatures were not generated by an outreach to a general public largely unfamiliar with the context but to scholars and educators well-informed about Gilley’s positions. Presumably in response to the petition, and accompanying letters demonstrating the faulty grounds for the series, the publisher reconsidered the academic merit of the project and cancelled the series. Whatever reason the publisher may officially give, PSU-AAUP views the cancellation as a vindication of the principle of academic freedom.
https://www.psuaaup.net/blog/entry/psu-aaup-condemns-professor-bruce-gilleys-procolonialism-platform

Комментарий в расистском часе Такера Карлсона:

"What we are watching is a full-scale assault from within on the West itself. Its history, its political and intellectual legacy. It's not a debate where one side tries to convince the other. It's a war, with one side trying to erase all remnants of its opponent. In this case, Western civilization. Consider what happened recently at a sleepy academic journal called third world quarterly..."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/10/10/tucker_carlson_progressive_war_on_christopher_columbus_really_about_western_civilization.html



В феврале 2021 Гилли раскрутил новую провокацию. Заметив, что в рамках "Black History Month" орегонское министерство образования поместило в своем бюллетене ссылку на разработанную калифорнийскими педагогами методичку "Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/ORED/bulletins/2bfbb9b, он стал писать, что в Орегоне ныне считают школьную программу математику расистской

На следующий день байка быстро разнеслась по  пропагандистским каналам и социальным сетям.

Fox News: Oregon promotes teacher program that seeks to undo 'racism in mathematics'
NY Post: Adding wokeness: Oregon promotes teacher program to subtract ‘racism in mathematics’
Washington Examiner: Oregon promoting teacher course on 'dismantling racism in mathematics'
Daily Caller: Program To Take Racism Out Of Math Being Promoted By Oregon DOE

Непонятно, кто координировал все эти публикации, потому что ни одна из них не ссылается на другие. К тому времени, как Такер Карлсон взялся обсуждать эту тему на своей передаче, из нее пропали все возможные нюансы.



Для обсуждения Карлсон пригласил блоггера Либби Эммонс, редактора помоечного сайта The Post Millennial и задал ей наводящий вопрос "How could math be racist, since it is purely objective?" Заметка на сайте postmillennial называлась "Oregon promotes divisive critical race theory in math curriculum".

Следующей на подхвате была армия борцов с "cancel culture", в которой не обходится без еврейского батальона. Для борьбы с соломенным человечком прохиндейка Бари Вайсс передавала слово рекрутированному раннее выдающемуся математику Серджиу Клайнерману (автору предвыборной статьи "Why I Will Vote for Trump"):

"When it comes to education, I believe the woke ideology is even more harmful than old-fashioned communism."
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/there-is-no-such-thing-as-white-math

Старые традиции не умирают.

How To Fight Antisemitism pic.twitter.com/zvPc66bWoM
- Eli Valley (@elivalley) February 12, 2021