Jonah Goldberg’s recent piece, titled “Who Cares About National Unity?” (April 26, 2019, National Review) is the required reading of the week. In fact, dare I suggest, it should be a required reading of the year. Or at least required of every registered voter in the United States before he is allowed to cast his ballot in the next election. This truly is the kind of stuff that every adult who fancies himself a remotely informed voter must read, consider, digest and take to heart if we have any hope of continuing to be a free nation and a free people.
“Here’s my succinct request [of all politicians, Democrat and Republican],” says Mr. Goldberg. “Stop trying to unify the country.”
“I’ll wait a minute for those of you who need to clutch your pearls or breathe into a paper bag to compose yourselves,” he continues. “Okay. Now, if you felt a certain amount of horror, revulsion, or rage at that statement, ask yourself why you want the country unified [W]hat is it exactly about unity that you think is so important? If your answer is simply that “disunity” is bad, that’s understandable. But is that true ? I mean, can’t 300+ million Americans disagree on some stuff without everyone getting weepy ?” If diversity — real diversity — is good, then it is irrefutably the case that some disunity is good too ”
“Our system isn’t designed to be unified” continues Mr. Goldberg. “Our constitutional norms enforce an adversarial system of separated powers where we hash out our disagreements and protect our interests in political combat. Democracy itself is not about agreement but disagreement.”
“Unity is a tool, a means to an end, not a good in itself. [As], fire is a tool that can be used for good or evil [so too] unity is only as good or bad as the goal you want to attain with it Really unified rape gangs are still evil What is true of rape gangs is also true of evil regimes. Was Nazi Germany less evil because it could plausibly boast of the sense of unity and common purpose felt by so many Germans?
“Mobs tend to be evil, or at least dangerous, even when they are unified around an ostensibly noble purpose Unity can be an intoxicant, causing us to surrender our individuality to the group.”
“What is fascinating to me,” concludes Mr. Goldberg, “is that in the centuries since the Enlightenment, unbridled unity, enforced and encouraged from above, has been the single greatest source of evil, misery, and oppression on a mass scale, and yet we still treat unity like some unalloyed good ”
“There’s something downright Orwellian about the prospect of shouting at people “We must unite around our celebration of our differences!” shouts Mr. Goldberg.
Yes, there is something that smacks of being downright Orwellian in listening to the current field of Democratic candidates. How can anyone miss it? How can anyone with “ears to hear and eyes to see” not see and hear the doublespeak, the self-refuting duplicity, the hypocrisy?
“We can’t tolerate your intolerance.”
“We are sure nothing is sure.”
“We know nothing can be known.”
“We are absolutely confident there are no absolutes.”
“We believe in free speech unless we decide your speech should not be free.”
“We are champions of inclusion unless we decide you should be excluded.”
“We demand everyone march in lockstep ‘unity’ in our parade of diversity.
“We are the guardians of truth, because there is no truth, other than our truth.”
“We are proud to wave our banner of love because we hate everything about you we find hateful.”
“We are pro-science and so what if we deny the science of biology, physiology and genetics?”
“All morality is relative but we will Make American Moral Again.”
Professor Frank Ellis at the University of Sheffield recently wrote that “the term ‘politically correct’ was coined in the late 1920s by the Soviets It was first used when Vladimir Lenin began his rise to power.”
As you read the words of Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Ellis, ask yourself which political party has clearly sold its soul to being “correct?” Ask yourself which party stumbles over itself to squash dissent and disagreement? Ask yourself which political party is obviously hellbent on killing intellectual diversity on its altar of ideological unity? Ask yourself which party is more passionate about the collective good than it is for the good of the individual? Ask yourself which party just might be guilty of ideological collusion with well, the Russians?
And if you find yourself not caring about the answers and not worrying much about such insignificant things as inconsistency and deception, congratulations. You have officially become part of the Big Brotherhood.
Oh, and that annoying little boy who keeps shouting stuff about your emperor having no clothes — just ignore him. Relax, take your soma, watch your feelies, be unified.
All hail Big Bro! Vote for Uncle Joe!
Liberty, equality, fraternity. Or death.
• Everett Piper, a former university president, is a columnist for The Washington Times and author of “Not A Day Care: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth” (Regnery 2017).
© Copyright (c) 2019 News World Communications, Inc.
This content is published through a licensing agreement with Acquire Media using its NewsEdge technology.