Leftist Class War On Truth

Dr Ablow is right. The transgender issue is a legal, moral and intellectual war for the definition of truth.

The real reason why the North Carolina 'bathroom bill' debate is center stage

The use of bathrooms by transgender individuals has come center stage in the U.S. presidential campaign for a reason: The bathroom debate is really a debate about the fundamental way we Americans will define any truth—whether as something deeply felt by an individual, or something scientifically demonstrable and verifiable.

Whether or not one believes gender reassignment therapy or surgery is wise, the cultural acceptance of biological/genetic females as male and vice-versa is tied to whether our species is willing to abandon genetics and biology as fact, in favor of considering a person’s desired self-image to be fact. But, even more, I believe that that fundamental question is tied, in the minds of millions of people, to whether any evidence or data should ever be considered more sacred than closely-held opinion.

If I maintain that my self-concept is that of a black person (and Rachel Donezal does so assert, for herself) and I tattoo myself black, head-to-foot, should our culture accept me as a black man? If I apply to law school as African-American, should I be given any preference that is allowed a minority applicant?

If I maintain that my entire being tells me I am not 54-years-old, but 75-years-old (in my tastes and friendships and energy level), should I be entitled to receive Medicare? Because attorneys I have asked have told me that case law related to transgender issues would make the argument that I ought to be eligible for Medicare carry weight.

If a 25-year-old man maintains that his maturity level and sense of self make him a 13-year-old, should he be allowed to be involved sexually with “other 13-year-olds?”

See, if we believe that transgender individuals must use the restrooms they choose, one could argue that many of our cultural institutions must flex away from fact. And one could argue that cultural chaos will result.

These questions, after all, extend to other realms than race and age. If I were a male member of ISIS, and jailed for terrorist acts, but then insisted while incarcerated that I were a 15-year-old, female American citizen who not only has changed my opinions, but am no longer in any way the person who was convicted of terrorist acts, should I then be released?

If the German people were to vote overwhelmingly, even unanimously, to assert that the Holocaust never happened, and then were to remove any reference to it or evidence of it from their culture, should we be required to not offend them by asserting that the Holocaust did, indeed, happen?

Some readers may think that my questions are preposterous, but they make this point: Many people unconsciously recoil at the potential slippery slope that transgenderism and the bathroom bill represent.

We aren’t simply debating who will use which bathrooms.

Because taken to its extreme, the slippery slope I have described really could have us embracing what is asserted, rather than what is evidenced scientifically, or is historically known to be fact.

Because the Left operates under the Hegelian thesis/antithesis/sythesis strategy as renewed in the Frankfort School and the "march through the institutions", the slippery slope is built into the concept of "Progress"; it is the very definition of Progress. And because the Left operates under the Alinsky tactical methodologies, they will always claim that there is no slippery slope, despite their blatant history of just that.

The Left will always need more and more Victimhood Class members to replace those which have been normalized and put in charge; for example homosexuals now can destroy anyone who looks crossways at them, and they frothingly do so. So the Left's Victimhood Classes will necessarily become ever more aberrant, until either the Left has full and total control, or runs out of aberrants to classify as Victims in need of messiahs to save them.

Truth was long ago jettisoned by the Left, who now create their own truth as the march through the institutions. And their truths frequently conflict with each other, as with feminism vs. transgender women for example. However the idea that truth, when it is true, does not have internal inconsistency is a lost concept, because it is not useful to the Left, and in fact is an encumbrance. Which is why it was jettisoned long ago under postmodernism.

I have noticed that virtually all of the boycotters of North Carolina cheerfully do business with the most abominable and discriminatory regimes in the world, including the Saudis, China, and anyone with money. Their boycott of North Carolina demonstrates the vast hypocrisy which infests the Left. But that is the net result of abandoning truth in favor of phony issues "cloaked in morals", as Alinsky famously directed. The Leftist narrative of "Progress" as they define taking control is more important to them than any truth which they do not define themselves for the world and its concept of reality.