In 2010 I wrote of Michael Berube’s What’s Liberal About the Liberal Arts?, “the philosophy of non-coercion and intellectual pluralism that Berube describes and defends so well isn’t just an intellectual curiosity, but an actual ethos that he and other professors live by, and which defends conservative students.” I grew up believing that most professors lived by that ethos. I don’t, anymore. It really has changed. For years we fought tooth and nail to oppose the David Horowitz’s of the world, insisting that their narratives of anti-conservative bias on campus were without proof. Now, when I try to sound the alarm bells to others within the academy that mainstream conservatism is being pushed out of our institutions, I get astonished reactions – you actually think conservatives should feel welcomed on campus? From arguments of denial to arguments of justification, overnight, with no one seeming to grapple with just how profound the consequences must be. We are handing ammunition to some very dangerous people.
Emphasis mine. The reader says that Freddie’s account is an example of my Law of Merited Impossibility, which states: “It will never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it.”
About a decade ago, I came up with the Law of Merited Impossibility as an aid to understanding why it is that conservatives who took liberals at their word — specifically on the gay marriage issue — were being played for patsies. The liberals would assure us that this radical thing they were calling for would never be used to persecute or marginalize conservatives … and when gullible conservatives and moderates assented to it, the victorious liberals would soon turn on them, saying it’s a matter of justice that bigots be suppressed.
The Law of Merited Impossibility is a useful interpretive tool, you’ll find, and a spur towards developing a strong Hermeneutics Of Suspicion towards the words of left-liberal activists.