It's deeper than you might think.
As pro-Hamas protests sweep U.S. campuses across our nation, a very curious phenomenon has surfaced: a large number of the protestors are not only wearing the keffiyeh, but also the Covid mask.
Why is this exactly?
The keffiyeh-wearing is not much of a mystery. The protestors are clearly making a statement of solidarity with Islamic jihad in general, and with Hamas terror in particular. But the Covid masks add an intriguing twist. Some of the mask-wearers themselves maintain that they are trying to “stay safe” — in what they believe is the ongoing Covid “pandemic.” Other observers have postulated, however, that this is an effort by the protestors to hide their identity.
There are, of course, possible elements of truth in both of these reasons, but beneath these layers, something much deeper is going on – and it involves a powerful impulse that serves as the foundation of leftist utopianism itself.
It would do well to reflect upon the manner in which the Maoist Cultural Revolution in China imposed unisex desexualized dress on its citizens. The tyranny perpetrated this as a ruthless war on gender differences and individuality in the name of “equity.” And this war involved a calculated assault on the possibilities of private attractions, affections, and desires.
The central reality to gauge here is that unisex/desexualized dress satisfies in leftists their morbid pining for enforced sameness. It is crucial, in their world, to erase physical as well as emotional differences and attractions between people. In the utopian endgame, humans must all be replicas of each other and be completely devoted to the cause, the revolutionary state, and to its all-knowing administering of “equality” and “social justice”.
It is no surprise, therefore, that western leftists were enthralled with the Maoist social engineering experiment. I have documented this in my book United in Hate — where I show how fellow travelers who journeyed to worship at the altar of the Maoist killing fields flew into ecstasy upon witnessing the unisex clothing.
Let’s recall a few examples:
American leftist academic Orville Schell adored China’s enforced mode of dress the moment he witnessed it. In his book, In the People’s Republic, he praised the “baggy uniformlike tunics” and wrote admiringly how “the question of the shape of a person’s body is a moot one in China.”
Schell was very excited that physical attributes were subordinated in intimate relationships. He wrote that the Chinese had:
“succeeded in fundamentally altering the notion of attractiveness by simply substituting some of these revolutionary attributes for the physical ones which play such an important role in Western courtship.”
Schell also noted approvingly that “the notion of ‘playing hard to get’ or exacerbating “jealousies in order to win someone’s love does not appear to assume such a prominent role.”
American actress Shirley MacLaine joined Schell in being deeply enamored with China’stotalitarian puritanism. Like all leftists, she would have surely viewed any restriction on women’s attire or sexual impulses in her own society as patriarchal and capitalist oppression, but for the Chinese people, the suffocation of unregulated love and sex was a magnificent thing in her eyes. In her book, You Can Get There, she wrote: --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.
No comments:
Post a Comment