Murray and Milo: The Same?
I really appreciate this piece by Kevin Gannon. I’m with him on the events at Middlebury College and Charles Murray.
In a world of cases, where we try to judge individual events on their merits, this one is just so ridiculous that it deserves all manner of condemnation. Introduced by the college president? Check. A major campus event? Check. An environment of resistance? Check. A prominent, known racist with a decades-long track record taken seriously by a large swath conservative pseudo-intellectuals ? Check.
This was no snot-nosed flamboyant provocateur (i.e. Milo Yiannopoulos) invited by College Republicans to a small venue—the equivalent of a political sarcasm hour hosted by a non-intellectual.
While both speakers are reprehensible, I believe that Murray is the more serious threat.
Murray is taken more seriously by the right that matters—the right with deep pockets and that takes itself deadly seriously. Milo, however, was never invited by a president for an academic lecture. He’s never been employed by the Heritage Foundation to write policy that might starve the disadvantaged. Milo is an entertainer that spouts some occasionally articulate pseudo-intellectualism, whereas Murray’s pseudo-intellectual policy considerations are taken seriously by other so-called intellectuals and politicians.
If we’re going to protest campus speakers, I’ll man the barricades against Charles Murray. He’s a threat. For Milo, I don’t want him around either, but he’s just a jerk. He deserves our yawns and smug condescension. He wants your attention more than Murray, but the latter quietly undermines the common good. Murray is the greater threat to disadvantaged populations, especially people of color. – TL