What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.
Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.
Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.
[D]spite the genuine oppression facing black people at the time (compared to today’s “oppression” like microaggressions and implicit bias), Hendrix didn’t have time to view the world through the bifocal lens of Us and Them. He cared about harmony and peace and universal love. These are “Kumbayatic” concepts today, no doubt, but aren’t they better weapons against the forces of bigotry than that of lecturing the largely non-bigoted majority on its perceived “power,” “privilege,” and “fragility?”
Hendrix is deservedly recognized for his godlike guitar prowess and his contributions to rock ’n’ roll, but his insights into race and the motivations behind radical political coalitions should be given extra attention. In 2013, The Guardian published some excerpts from diary entries and interviews, including his thoughts on race, as here:
Race isn’t a problem in my world. I don’t look at things in terms of races. I look at things in terms of people. I’m not thinking about black people or white people. I’m thinking about the obsolete and the new. There’s no color part now, no black and white.
This is a pretty daring statement for a prominent black man to make in the 1960s and is in stark contrast to the celebrities of today who use their alabaster soapboxes to scream and spit about the dangers of racism as if Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Hendrix extolled the virtues of colorblindness in a time when almost everyone was still hyper-focused on pigment, and yet the mostly-white class of public figures today have the nerve to bombard audiences with Church Lady diatribes against everything “problematic” while sitting comfortably in their gold-trimmed, diamond-encrusted Beverly Hills enclaves, doing everything they can to save the world by dividing it. Who’s the real hero in this story?
One more quote:
The following quotation is attributed to Hendrix:
When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.
The US government is giving millions to university labs and private firms to stop domestic US citizen opinions on social media.
The National Science Foundation is taking a program set up to solve "grand challenges" like quantum technology and using it for the science of censorship.
Government-funded projects are sorting massive databases of American political and social communities into categories like “misinformation tweeters" and "misinformation followers."
Russell Brand, as animated as ever, showcases the corrupt history of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz as he simultaneously advocates for free speech. Brand didn't appreciate that Wasserman-Schultz called Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger "so-called reporters." Got him a bit riled up. I had the same reaction when I watched the hearings live . . .
Zachary Elliott's Paradox Institute has created a series of straight-forward biology lessons to make sense of the reckless (and sometimes intentional) confusion promulgated by transgender ideology. Here is the mission statement of Paradox Institute:
In an age where the very existence of male and female are being denied, the Paradox Institute provides evidence, reason, and above all, clarity to both simple and complex topics in the biology of sex.
The content presented is directly informed by contemporary scientific literature from the fields of evolutionary and developmental biology, endocrinology, personality psychology, and neuroscience.
Each video contains a short description and citations to scientific resources.
For example, here is why "Chromosomes are not Sexes."
Description:
Some claim that rare chromosome combinations prove there are more than two sexes, yet these combinations still result in males and females, not new sexes.
Here's one more video of the many available:
"Origins of Two Sexes"
Description:
This video essay explores the origins of the two sexes: how they formed 1.2 billion years ago and why they are nearly universal across the plant and animal kingdoms. The information for the video comes from peer-reviewed sources in evolutionary biology on the evolution of sex, anisogamy, and the two sexes.
Hello, I invite you to subscribe to Dangerous Intersection by entering your email below. You will have the option to receive emails notifying you of new posts once per week or more often.
