Dalai Lama Is Offensive, Oppressive, Not Inclusive Enough


Mao touted ‘diversity and inclusion,’ too: ‘Let a hundred flowers bloom.’

Chinese students denounced the prospective speaker at UC San Diego and even went to the Chinese consulate to find out what they could do to stop the man coming who represented an affront to “diversity and inclusiveness”. A man who was so “offensive” and “oppressive” he had to be stopped — the Dalai Lama.

How fitting the children of Mao would stand in support of “diversity and inclusiveness” as did Mao.

Mao organized the peasants, channeled their protests into violent uprisings and wound up in the propaganda department of the Nationalist Party. He is the man who forced a cultural revolution in China throughout all the stages leading to socialism/communism.

Mao’s Great Proletarian Revolution and education program required beatings and executions but they had to “Fight selfishness, criticize revisionism,” or so the slogan of the times goes.

Ordering the total purge of every physical, emotional, or spiritual aspect of China was key in order to focus the revolution on him and his violent Leninism. He was said to be “illuminating the land with its brilliant rays” during a revolution that ended after fifty years and two million dead.

Mao Zedong was known as “The Great Helmsman” and was the creator of the cultural revolution. “Our objective is to struggle against and crush those persons in authority who are taking the capitalist road… so as to facilitate the consolidation and development of the socialist system,” one early directive stated.

The revolution began in the schools. Gangs of teenagers in red armbands and military fatigues roamed the streets of cities such as Beijing and Shanghai setting upon those with “bourgeois” clothes or reactionary haircuts. “Imperialist” street signs were torn down.

Then came the student-led “red terror”.

“We read a lot of horror stories about students beating their teachers to death in the stairwell,” says Andrew Walder, the author of China Under Mao.

They were our budding revolutionaries — the Antifa — and we now have the former attorney general Loretta Lynch calling for blood and death in the streets.

Mao’s Little Red Book saw the country fall into chaos and anarchy. He fought individualism, capitalism, fomented a violent class struggle, and dictated that no pursuit in life could be separated from politics, which Meryl Streep would agree with.

A big fan of multiculturalism for communism’s sake, he would be proud of the students attempting to shut down the speech of a religious man of peace.

Mao’s tool for revolution was political correctness and only the party language could be spoken. That is what is what we are beginning to see at the University of California awith their many riots over speaking engagements by people with whom they disagree.

“Oppression”, “cultural appropriation” are no better placed than in Tibet where Buddhist monasteries are routinely raided and demolished in a country where the people are forbidden from carrying photo of the Dalai Lama in public. The only hero worship allowed is of the Communist Party leaders.

The children of Tibet have a difficult time learning their language and the brutality is so random and so often that since 2009, more than 145 Tibetans have set themselves ablaze.

Communists don’t like “appropriation” but they love to profit from tourism which they do not share with the Tibetans themselves who see it as another attempt to dilute their heritage.

Several years ago, Beijing demanded Tibetans celebrate the Chinese New Year in pretense of contentment under China’s oppressive rule. Any who refused risked government-induced destitution or far worse.

China exacts the same social injustices as American students do on college campuses while calling themselves social justice warriors.

Buzzwords are substitutes for principles in the linguistic scam known as political correctness.

The more colleges fight to be unjust, the more they look like Chinese campuses of the 1960s. Shame, accuse, assault, ruin careers, draw blood of those with whom you disagree — students and professors alike.

When a Professor brought a speaker named Charles Murray to Middlebury College, the Mao-like students screamed when the professor tried to speak, physically hurt the professor who brought the speaker, and this continued until the event ended in complete anarchy.

Charles Murray is a scholar accused falsely of being a white supremacist.

History repeats, as Marx observed, “the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.” Mao urged China to “let a hundred flowers bloom,” then cracked down violently on dissenters. Social-justice warriors claim to stand for “diversity and inclusion,” but they’re eager to write off anyone who dares question, challenge or disagree, Jillian Melchior wrote in the WSJ.

My local high school sent out tips for picking the right college and at the top of the list was not cost or curricula, it was the inclusiveness and diversity of the campus.

Higher education’s mindless adherence to phrases like “multiculturalism” and “diversity and inclusion” has opened colleges to an authoritarian mindset that brutally marginalizes opposing opinions. The Dalai Lama is denounced, while privileged students get a self-righteous ego boost from defending regurgitated principles.

Heat St editor Jillian Melchior adds: deprived of competing ideas, students never learn to think critically, swallowing politically correct dogma whole. Ultimately, the joke is on them. After all, they’re paying for an education.”

‘Let a hundred flowers bloom,” but only the ones the left agrees with.

Political editor for Heat St Jillian Kay Melchior wrote about the event at UC San Diego for the WSJ .

h/t Brian Hayes

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
1 Comment
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments