Thomas Sowell: The Left’s Invention of ‘Micro-Aggression’ is the Road to ‘Micro-Tyranny’

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Since the 1960’s when former Democrat President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next two hundred years,” the left has used racial division and racism to further their power.[/vc_column_text][banner300 banner=”5517620b381df”][vc_column_text]However, as racism in America has drastically declined over time, the left has worked harder than ever to keep racism alive, claiming that only by electing more leftist, communist members of the Democrat Party, ironically the party of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and segregation, can the victims be saved.

And those evil racists in the Republican Party, the party that fought to end slavery, end Jim Crow laws, segregation and passed the Civil Right Act of 1964, are somehow out to get them.

Despite the progressive left’s “victories” in raising the perception of racism in Democrat controlled cities like Baltimore and Ferguson so that blacks would destroy their own neighborhoods, racism in America has declined so much in the country that leftists have had to invent racism that, well, isn’t really racism at all. In fact, apparently according to the left, it can’t even be seen anymore, but yet it’s still there somehow in something called a mysterious “micro-aggression” against whatever group the Dems are trying to be the savior towards.

The great economist Thomas Sowell, author of the classic “Basic Economics” and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, wrote a great piece on Monday in his Investor’s Business Daily column regarding the progressive communist left’s latest buzzword: “micro-aggression.”

Professors at the University of California at Berkeley have been officially warned against saying such things as “America is the land of opportunity.” Why? Because this is considered to be an act of “micro-aggression” against minorities and women.
Supposedly it shows you don’t take their grievances seriously and are therefore guilty of being aggressive toward them, even if only on a micro scale.

Sowell points out some of the more ludicrous example of “micro-aggression” that the left has had the gall to spew, like saying that “America is the land of opportunity” and these two addition gems:

If you just sit in a room where all the people are white, you are considered to be guilty of “micro-aggression” against people who are not white, who will supposedly feel uncomfortable when they enter such a room.


At UCLA, a professor who changed the capitalization of the word “indigenous” to lower case in a student’s dissertation was accused of “micro-aggression,” apparently because he preferred to follow the University of Chicago Manual of Style, rather than the student’s attempt to enhance the importance of being indigenous.

Sowell eloquently make the case that “micro-aggressions” are just another way for the political left to expand their strategy of creating victimhood everywhere, and to silence opposition by limiting alternative opinions as “hate speech” instead of winning debate in the marketplace of ideas:

The concept of “micro-aggression” is just one of many tactics used to stifle differences of opinion by declaring some opinions to be “hate speech,” instead of debating those differences in a marketplace of ideas. To accuse people of aggression for not marching in lockstep with political correctness is to set the stage for justifying real aggression against them.

Sowell informs us that the left changing the meaning of words to promote their political causes, even when it ultimately leads to violence as it did in Baltimore and Ferguson, is nothing new. France’s Jean-Paul Sartre called social conditions he didn’t like “violence” as a precursor to real violence.

“Satre’s American imitators have used the same verbal tactic to justify ghetto riots,” Sowell wrote.[/vc_column_text][banner300 banner=”553157113d3ff”][vc_column_text]Sowell argues that whether they are meaning to or not, they taking the country towards totalitarianism progressively.

The left is not necessarily aiming at totalitarianism. But their know-it-all mindset leads repeatedly and pervasively in that direction, even if by small steps, each of which might be called “micro-totalitarianism.”


About the Author

Matthew K. Burke
Matthew K. Burke
A former Washington State U.S. Congressional candidate in 2010, Matthew attended the nation’s first modern day Tea Party in 2009 in Seattle, Washington. He also began writing and blogging that year. Matthew became a Certified Financial Planner in 1995 and was a Financial Advisor for 24 years in his previous life. Matthew was one of the three main writers leading a conservative news site to be one of the top 15 conservative news sites in the U.S. in a matter of months. He brings to PolitiStick a vast amount of knowledge about economics as well as a passion and commitment to the vision that our Founding Fathers had for our Republic.

Send this to a friend