Well, that’s disappointing. I was just beginning to hope for deliverance via a benevolent, advanced alien race or the Rapture — whichever came first.
Sadly, though, as reported in the Daily Wire, a new scientific paper, published by a researcher with a Ph.D. in computational neuroscience, a nanotechnology researcher, and a moral philosopher, says the probability is “substantial” that there is no intelligent life in the observable universe other than on Earth.
But I’m not feeling so unique at the moment. Currently, the stability of the American political climate hinges on the calming voices of the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and David Axelrod.
Which is to say we may be beyond hope, and perhaps an injection of common sense from a groovy alien race would be just what the doctor ordered. I mean, there’s “trust but verify,” and then there’s “so you’re saying there’s a chance.”
And as if there’s any doubt by now, we lean toward the one who is dumb and dumber last at the Steve Deace Show.
Whatever confidence I can possibly reserve for the possibility of three Democrats finally realizing that things have gone too far with the crazed Left, I am quickly reminded that the monster of their creation goes on, unimpressed and unthwarted by such rhetoric. For on the very day that such words of caution were sent into the political jetstream by the aforementioned Democrat leaders, it came to pass that journalism reliably stepped forward to put a bullet in them, courtesy of a New York Times op-ed.
The headline: “The Ignorant Do Not Have a Right to an Audience.”
From the get-go, we are clearly informed by philosophy professor Bryan Van Norden that “ignorant” should be read as “conservative” or “right-wing.” And if such a label is placed upon you, the good professor insists that you shouldn’t be given a platform to espouse your dreck in any capacity other than as basically a street preacher. Go ahead and yell your folly out on the corner to whatever rabble will entertain you, Van Norden says. But no more should you be granted a mass media platform.
This is the primary reason, among others, that the New York Times' philosopher du jour can’t be taken remotely seriously. The media, Hollywood, academia, the federal bureaucracy, etc. have already been overrun by the very thought police that Van Norden dreams about. If he doesn’t understand that, he is either stupid or virulently manipulative.
Beyond that, the primary reason Van Norden gives as the need for such militancy in policing the public consumption of bad ideas is elitist to its core: The public is dumb and can’t be relied upon for anything resembling common sense to adequately weigh and measure different notions of the truth.
So get out of the way and agree to be led, because we must avoid the “tyranny of the majority.”