Critical Analysis vs. the Party of Science
How scientific are those who constantly cite “science” as the basis for dictating our lives?
During a recent press conference, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki blamed the 80 million unvaccinated Americans for the current COVID-19 plight confronting America, even though, throughout the presidential campaign both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris professed a profound distrust of the vaccines. In an attempt to obscure this unfortunate reality, Yahoo! News parsed the vice president’s words by reporting that she only said, “she did not trust Trump and would wait for more credible sources of information.”
Are we now to believe that the efficacy of a medicine is determined by the outcome of an election? Can Americans mail in enough ballots and elect aspirin as the cure to cancer? Or was the vice president just playing games with a life-threatening ailment in an effort to acquire power?
While hiding in his basement, Joe Biden routinely castigated Trump’s COVID-19 response in his daily mutterings to the press, even though the speedy manufacture of the vaccines was a focal point of Trump’s response. Political science focuses on the theory and practice of government and politics at the local, state, national and international levels. So, was it virology, biology, or political science that enabled the Left to successfully weaponize COVID as a means to gain control of the White House? Is the party of science actually the party of political science?
When considering social media, we have been told that private companies and private citizens are free to impede a person’s commerce, career, and speech. It’s no harm, no foul, as long as you’re only getting hosed by private actors.
Attorney General Merrick Garland, however, is suing the state of Texas out of concern that private citizens will preclude a person’s right to abortion. Is the attorney general making a legal admission that a band of private citizens can actually trample the constitutional rights of other people? Furthermore, and putting aside any moral judgments, is there a scientific justification for why abortion rights have superseded the rights explicitly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution?
What is the science or axiom behind the Left’s accusations of cultural appropriation? Small businesses and local eateries have been dinged as cultural appropriators, while major corporations such as Taco Bell are granted a pass. Do menu items such as nacho fries or the Crunchwrap Supreme merit an authenticity exemption? Or could it be the science of economics, where major corporations fund all the proper causes? The cultural appropriation guidelines governing personal appearance are equally as murky. High profile leftists such as Jimmy Kimmel, Joy Behar, Justin Trudeau, and Virginia Governor Ralph Northam have all donned blackface, yet each has forged a successful career out of self-righteously calling other people racist. Equally confusing is how white people with hair braids are bad and subject to social media ridicule, while those rocking a tribal tattoo are especially trendy.
When I was a kid in grammar school, we were taught that a new ice age was coming and risked freezing to death. Is it possible that climate experts overcorrected the ice age trajectory and put us on course towards global warming? Researchers think that 6,000 years ago the Sahara Desert was covered in grass and received plenty of water. Could the climate experts enact the Green New Deal in the Sahara and restore this desert wasteland back to a tropical paradise? Such an endeavor could create countless green jobs, reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and shut up climate deniers by highlighting their climate control abilities.
Why does the homicide rate of African Americans receive such scant attention? For each statistic there is a real family grieving the loss of a loved one. Yet, those who pretend to care so much seem more interested in Robin DiAngelo’s lectures on white fragility. Interestingly, DiAngelo does not seem to study the human mind like other psychological schools of thought, in as much as she attempts to mold it to support preferred policy prescriptions.
In a similar vein, Charlamagne tha God, a very popular radio host, recently landed a television show on Comedy Central and his commercials include witty comments about white privilege. Congrats to Charlamagne on his new show. He and DiAngelo are free to sell their ideas, but it does seem contradictory that whites are simultaneously fragile and guilty of supremacy. The contradiction may be resolved by the simple fact that resentments are more marketable than gratitude, and victimhood more celebrated than resiliency.
As a Washington, D.C. resident I see bumper stickers “I believe in science” “science is real,” but no such references to self-awareness.
Post a Comment