Choosing Not to Choose

Matthew Stewart has a post over at City Journal titled Multiculturalism, or Cultural Appropriation? in which he make a case that Progressives need to decide between one or the other. It looks at history and the facts and concludes

Another puzzling aspect of the cultural-appropriation focus is that it seems clearly to clash with another progressive imperative: the need to nurture multicultural appreciation. Multiculturalism has been a prominent cause among progressives for more than a generation, but today, admiration for other cultures apparently comes with a warning sign: look, but don’t adopt, lest you face accusations of “theft” or insensitivity.

Most reasonable people have no trouble understanding that to adopt an artifact or practice doesn’t diminish the culture from which it originates. “You can’t steal a culture,” as Columbia University linguist John McWhorter has observed. Cultural exchange is enriching, not impoverishing, and imitation remains, as in the old formulation, the sincerest form of flattery. It’s time for progressives to decide between embracing multiculturalism or policing “cultural appropriation.” They can’t have it both ways.

The Progressive position flies in the face of the logical principle that A is not not-A which our culture inherited from the ancient Greeks. But Progressives never let logic or the facts get in the way of their desire to be in control. O’Brien explained it this way—

‘You are a slow learner, Winston,’ said O’Brien gently.

‘How can I help it?’ he blubbered. ‘How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.’

‘Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.’

And have you noticed that Progressives keep trying to change the meanings of words?

Quote of the Day

This is the eternal origin of art that a human being confronts a form that wants to become a work through him. Not a figment of his soul but something that appears to the soul and demands the soul’s creative power. What is required is a deed that a man does with his whole being.

—Martin Buber

What’s Confusing Them Is The Nature Of His Game

Sarah Hoyt has a post titled Those Who Walked Away From Sanity over at PJ Media about deals with the Devil (whether you believe in him or not) and the Establishment Left. She notes that such deals always seem to have a bad ending. I would add that they end as in the earliest versions of the Faust legend. Faust only got a few years of service from Mephistopheles and no lucky breaks.

And now the worm is turning. The ground is shifting under their feet. People are going around them, not making obeisance. The industries are shrinking. There is less power, less money, less adulation in the path they chose than they thought there would be.

But that’s where they are.

A lot of the unhinged rage from the left is the rage of the dupe who finds out exactly how the devil swindled them.

Sure, they’ll never admit it. A lot of them will cling to the crazy left harder than ever, rather than admit what they did.

But something deep within them has broken and is crying quietly for what they used to be; for what they might have been.

It can’t be consoled.

All they can do, instead, is shout louder, backstab faster, threaten more, and spin more deranged versions of reality.

Read the whole thing.

And don’t be evil or make deals with The Evil One.

UPDATE—I was scrolling through the blog and found that this post had disappeared. I went to my wp-admin page and found that it had been moved to the trash while I was offline.