"OVERT" SPEECH.

I recently read an article by an aspiring young social critic who overtly claimed that the U.S.A. of 2018 was plagued by overt racism, sexism and homophobia. Now, as someone of 68 years who has lived through decades when this was quite true, I have to say "Baloney!" to that premise of this Leftist author. 

The problem today in the U.S.A. and other developed countries is the oppression of overt expression of controversial ideas, ideas which are not racist, sexist or homophobic. For example, "Islamophobia", a made-up concept by media-savvy Saudi Arabians, cannot be exposed as a fraud without accusations of religious intolerance. Subscribing to Islam, or any religious dogma, is not a genetic trait, outside of personal choice, yet many of the Left treat it as such.

The problem with this attempt to crush overt expressions of controversial ideas is obvious in history. Overt expressions suppressed often lead to covert expression through behavior (acting out). This is called passive aggression in traditional Psychology. In the less stable personality, the acting out of suppressed ideas or fears can take a lethal turn. In societies, suppression of debate and opposition with violence  inevitably leads to mass suffering and eventual war. 

Overt social and political oppression of disagreement with a globalist narrative is omnipresent in developed nations. As never before in recent history, speech-control laws are popping up in democracies. Speech control and mind control are intertwined in The Digital Information Age. The irony of today's oppression of speech is its acceptance and promotion by those who see themselves as historically oppressed or as morally identifying with these so-called oppressed groups. 

It has long been known that the abused will often become abusers. But this is a case of generally comfortable people in The West who have not actually been abused pulling on historic resentments, goaded on by a politicized globalist (pro-UN, pro-EU, pro-Saudi) media. The only logical explanation for this is a globalist tactic of divide-and-conquer to further a globalist-elitist agenda for the human population. 

The economic leveling (general diminishing) of human population's vast majority cannot be achieved by unifying humanity, obviously, since 1% of humans control the majority of resources and wealth. A unified humanity, looking past historic tribal transgressions, would see the injustice of this ploy. The tide of social and political change would do more to level that 1% for the transitory material betterment of the 99%. This will, of course, most likely happen in time whether or not the current globalist manipulations succeed.  

Universities are the wellsprings of the hypnosis of materially comfortable youth to see themselves as engaged in an abusive paradigm outside their control or responsibility. In previous times, universities were laying out truly diverse (liberal arts and sciences) education which inspired informed individuals to draw their own conclusions about the workings of the world, both good and bad. World leadership was peopled by the products of that kind of broad education for good or ill. But what kind of leadership or democratic participation can be expected by those who view the world as a tribal mess of endless grudge-based resentments? 

If my speculation about all this is true, then overt, informed speech is perhaps the one non-violent antidote to this manipulation to divide national populations into tribal conflict. There are other violent antidotes, which will inevitably take their course if the globalist-elitist form of social engineering tightens its grip on humanity. Overt speech may be the only way to wake up the hypnotized of the coming generations. Otherwise, they, like generations before them, may well become actual victims of massive violent conflict.