What happened in the United States that got us to this point in history? There are lots of theories and avenues to the insanity. But if there is one institution that’s done it, it’s our educational system. Most schools in the United States – from kindergarten through the graduate level, including law schools – have jettisoned any remnant of a biblical moral order. In fact, to be considered a “modern,” this must be done:

“In polite society, the mere mention of the Bible often introduces a certain measure of anxiety. A serious discussion on the Bible can bring outright contempt. . . . The Book That Made Your World, by Vishal Mangalwadi, brings to mind Alexis de Tocqueville’s early-nineteenth-century classic, Democracy in America. . . . A culture can barely begin, let alone sustain, any serious intergenerational attempt to comprehend, interpret, and respond to the riddles of life and the universe unless it has some reasonably comprehensive worldview.”

Given evolutionary and materialistic assumptions, there is no underlying moral base upon which to build a lasting society. Integration into the void of chaos, primitivism, and nihilism, something we’re seeing escalate all around us, is the only possible end.

The thing of it is, a high percentage of parents purposely and voluntarily send their children to these high priced re-education centers that are hell-bent on overturning a moral worldview that made our nation the envy of the world.

The leftists have not hidden their views under a bushel. They’ve been very direct and open about what they have been doing.

In his obituary for influential academic philosopher Richard Rorty (1931-2007),  Jürgen Habermas wrote, “Nothing is sacred to Rorty the ironist. Asked at the end of his life about the ‘holy,’ the strict atheist answered with words reminiscent of the young Hegel: ‘My sense of the holy is bound up with the hope that some day my remote descendants will live in a global civilization in which love is pretty much the only law.’” Love based on what is the conundrum for any “strict atheist.” There is no love for the materialists. Atoms do not love other atoms.

In order to accomplish his stated goals, Rorty, like so many before him, had to rid the world of Christianity, and the university was the place to bring about its destruction.

_________________________

“It seems to me that the regulative idea that we heirs of the Enlightenment, we Socratists, most frequently use to criticize the conduct of various conversational partners is that of ‘needing education in order to outgrow their primitive fear, hatreds, and superstitions.’ This is the concept the victorious Allied armies used when they set about to re-educating the citizens of occupied Germany and Japan. “It is also the one which was used by American schoolteachers who had read Dewey and were concerned to get students to think ‘scientifically’ and ‘rationally’ about such matters as the origin of species and sexual behavior (that is, to get them to read Darwin and Freud without disgust and incredulity).

It is a concept which I, like most Americans who teach humanities or social science in colleges and universities, invoke when we try to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic, religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own …

“The fundamentalist parents of our fundamentalist students think that the entire ‘American liberal establishment’ is engaged in a conspiracy. The parents have a point. Their point is that we liberal teachers no more feel in a symmetrical communication situation when we talk with bigots than do kindergarten teachers talking with their students …

“When we American college teachers encounter religious fundamentalists, we do not consider the possibility of reformulating our own practices of justification so as to give more weight to the authority of the Christian scriptures. Instead, we do our best to convince these students of the benefits of secularization.

“We assign first-person accounts of growing up homosexual to our homophobic students for the same reasons that German schoolteachers in the postwar period assigned The Diary of Anne Frank… You have to be educated in order to be … a participant in our conversation … So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable.

“We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours … I don’t see anything herrschaftsfrei [domination free] about my handling of my fundamentalist students. Rather, I think those students are lucky to find themselves under the benevolent Herrschaft [domination] of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents … I am just as provincial and contextualist as the Nazi teachers who made their students read Der Stürmer;1 the only difference is that I serve a better cause.”2

________________________

Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, and radical Islamists say the same thing. They all claimed to serve a “better cause.” If you wonder why America is like it is, you only have to ask most college professors in the social “sciences” and humanities departments.

1. “Der Stürmer . . . lit. ‘the Attacker’) was a weekly tabloid-format Nazi newspaper published by Julius Streicher (a prominent official in the Nazi Party) from 1923 to the end of World War II, with brief suspensions in publication due to legal difficulties. It was a significant part of Nazi propaganda and was vehemently antisemitic.” [↩]
2. ‘Universality and Truth,’ in Robert B. Brandom (ed.), Rorty and his Critics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 21-22. [↩]