So, those on the Left frequently scold the rest of us for being 'intolerant' in thought and deed. Of course, their idea of tolerance is actually conforming to their mores and values. Opposite view points are not welcomed, not tolerated, only scorned and are censured when possible.
Case in point: Recently the CEO of Mozilla was forced out when it was revealed that he had the gall to contribute to a political cause that the Left finds to be repugnant to their worldview. Mr. Eich emphasized that his private political views did not enter into the operation of the company that we worked for but in this Topsy-turvey world of intolerance that masquerades as tolerance, the Left gathered their forces and sent him packing.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/03/technology/mozilla-ceo/index.html
I was listening to NPR yesterday where this issue was being discussed. The majority of the callers stated that he got exactly what he deserved because his views were 'not in mainstream'; were 'out of step with society'; showed that he is 'intolerant' and much more. The discussion host challenged the callers by serving up a scenario where a CEO holds personal views that mirror those of the callers but due to the conservative nature of the state that the example company is located in, the CEO is forced to resign. Would that be fair, wondered the radio host? All but one of the leftist callers said, without any sense of awareness of their double standard, that it would be completely unfair and 'intolerant' to dismiss a company CEO whose views matched theirs. Only one young woman admitted to the host that she was being hypocritical in her stance but then emphasized that her stance was the only allowable one.
To a person they demanded censorship and retaliation against anyone in a position of authority who held views contrary to theirs.
It is a few short steps from this stance to thought control for the masses.
1984 anyone?
Case in point: Recently the CEO of Mozilla was forced out when it was revealed that he had the gall to contribute to a political cause that the Left finds to be repugnant to their worldview. Mr. Eich emphasized that his private political views did not enter into the operation of the company that we worked for but in this Topsy-turvey world of intolerance that masquerades as tolerance, the Left gathered their forces and sent him packing.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/03/technology/mozilla-ceo/index.html
I was listening to NPR yesterday where this issue was being discussed. The majority of the callers stated that he got exactly what he deserved because his views were 'not in mainstream'; were 'out of step with society'; showed that he is 'intolerant' and much more. The discussion host challenged the callers by serving up a scenario where a CEO holds personal views that mirror those of the callers but due to the conservative nature of the state that the example company is located in, the CEO is forced to resign. Would that be fair, wondered the radio host? All but one of the leftist callers said, without any sense of awareness of their double standard, that it would be completely unfair and 'intolerant' to dismiss a company CEO whose views matched theirs. Only one young woman admitted to the host that she was being hypocritical in her stance but then emphasized that her stance was the only allowable one.
To a person they demanded censorship and retaliation against anyone in a position of authority who held views contrary to theirs.
It is a few short steps from this stance to thought control for the masses.
1984 anyone?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment