‘Right and just’: Violence morally justified by the New Yorker, cult of progressive science

by WorldTribune Staff, September 27, 2021

A progressive religious devotion to what it calls “settled science” has let loose a malevolent spirit in America today.

Ecoterrorists were suspected in the burning of Seattle homes that were built near wetlands. / AP / File

The coronavirus vaccine mandate fanaticism is a wholehearted representation of it. But it is not the only one.

And marked by the invincible sense of self-righteousness that comes when you know you are right and your enemies are wrong, this dangerous and unstable modernist madness is rushing headlong down the road to bloodshed.

The New Yorker, a big-brand hipster urbanite publication that claims to have 1.2 million subscribers, has just openly platformed and amplified the notion that climate change now poses such a threat to the world that ecoterrorism must be considered as a legitimate way to combat it.

The magazine tweeted on Sept. 26:

Here is the astonishing introduction New Yorker podcast host David Remnick gave to the violent radical who wants to bomb and destroy to save the planet:

“But the summer we’ve just had, with its appalling wildfires and its record floods, provides ample evidence that the effects of climate change are already here. And they’re catastrophic.

“And frankly nothing that governments are likely to do this year will be enough to reverse those trends. Andreas Malm is a professor at Lund University in Sweden. He studies the relationship between climate change and capitalism. And he advocates for far more drastic action than we’ve seen so far. His recent book, ‘How to Blow Up a Pipeline,’ is a bit more nuanced than the title suggests. But at its core he really does want environmental activists to rethink their commitment to nonviolence and embrace tactics of sabotage.”

This is what passes for sophisticated discourse among the cosmopolitan Left in 2021.

Malm did not back away from his call for violence during the discussion that followed:

“I am recommending that the movement continues with mass action, civil disobedience, but also opens up for property destruction….. I do think we need to step up, because so little has changed, and so many investments are still being poured into new fossil fuel projects.

“So I am in favor of destroying machines, property, not harming people. That’s a very important distinction there. I think property can be destroyed in all manner of ways or it can be neutralized in a very gentle fashion, as when we deflated the SUVs’ [tires], or in more spectacular fashion as in potentially blowing up a pipeline that’s under construction. That’s something that people have done.”

“So you ARE recommending blowing up a pipeline,” Remnick wryly responded, with all the amazement of a man ordering lunch. He then steers Malm into ruminating on the means and mannerisms of “intelligent sabotage.”

Any truly intelligent person, of course, could see that once the violence starts, it’s not going to stop with letting the air out of the tires of SUVs.

The Left’s embrace of physical destruction in pursuit of its righteous causes was also on display last year during the summer of George Floyd. Social justice is as sacred a part of the progressive canon as climate change, of course.

Another prominent artsy progressive rag, New York magazine, (not to be confused with The New Yorker) sickeningly defended two leftist lawyers who firebombed an NYPD car, using the same “property destruction violence is acceptable” argument. From that Aug. 2020 article:

“Instead, [these friends of the two arrested lawyers] emphasize that violence against government property, especially in the midst of political upheaval, is not the same as violence against a person; that the prosecution of their friends for an act of what amounted to political vandalism is far more extreme than the crime itself; that it amounts to a criminalization of dissent and reflects a broader right-wing crusade against people of color and the progressive left — and, as such, demonstrates precisely the horror of the system they were out in the streets that night to protest.”

See how quickly we can get from flat tires to Molotov cocktails?

What should be most alarming to regular citizens is that the same language of total righteousness in the name of power is being used by progressive advocates of forced coronavirus vaccine jabs. Earlier this month, WorldTribune spotlighted former Obama administration Homeland Security assistant secretary Juliette Kayyem’s zeal for restricting the rights of unvaccinated Americans.

“We are right and just” is a direct quote made by Kayyem in support of ruthless action against those who don’t agree with her on the “settled science” of Big Pharma’s experimental jabs.

The scope of the tyranny behind those words is literally limitless. Yet this what progressives believe: We know with scientific certainty that you are wrong, therefore anything we do to you is justified. Because you do not have the right to be wrong. Not when it is a matter of life and death.

It certainly may be megalomaniacal, or insane, or anything else you want to call it. But it is not illogical.

For if you really believe you are 100 percent right and the “other side” represents an existential threat to all human existence, then how is stripping away rights and performing acts of violence against such people and their associated entities NOT justifiable?

Congratulations, America. You are now reaching the last stop on the sacred “tolerance” train.

Those on the right abandoned absolute belief (traditional values) in the public sphere in the name of that holy “T” word decades ago. Now, another absolute belief system, one as all-embracing yet sinister and hateful, has arisen and is being installed in all of our societal institutions to fill the void.

INFORMATION WORLD WAR: How We Win . . . . Executive Intelligence Brief