DUKE NOT LEST YE BE DUKED

Just when you think it's all been discovered ... Cathy Young (of the estimable "Reason" magazine) had an Op-Ed in the "Boston Globe" over the weekend (April 16, page A11) in the matter of the Duke case.

She reinforces the impression - and I think it's hugely accurate, and ominous for Us all - that (a) from the very outset (b) a synergy of academics, the media, and feminst rape advocates (c) "were quick to tailor the still-unfolding case to a narrative of sexual abuse of a downtrodden black woman at the hands of privileged white males". Young then marvelously quotes one of these academics, a Duke literature professor (!), who characterized the accused players as "the politically dominant race and ethnicity [and] the dominant gender". Y'know, reading this type of stuff - just its style - is like plowing through tomes of Soviet 'thought'; but the similarities, alas for The Republic, do not end there.

As you can see from (a), (b), and (c) above, and as the feminists themselves have been trying to say for decades, a gang-bang is an ugly thing. And dangerous. And as I mentioned in the preceding Post about this case, it is the hugely insidious and destructive and dishonest paradox of this aspect of the feminist revolution that such gang-banging has to be instituted AND called a Good Thing in order to reach the desired broad, sunlit uplands of a crimeless, non-violent, tasteful, refined, but sexually vibrant and satisfying world.

The self-abasing and professionally 'trahisant' complicity of academics and the mainstream media in all of this stuff is now well-established. But Young also draws back the curtain on lawyers, and I think that this element of the revolting synergy is still not fully illuminated.

She quotes one Wendy Murphy, "a Boston-based, former sex-crimes prosecutor" AND "an adjunct professor at the New England School of Law". (They have special prosecutors for these shows now? I know they want to have 'special' courts for them - hardly out of keeping with a Western anti-tradition that includes Star Chamber and special Gestapo and SS courts.)

Sez Lawyer Murphy (on MSNBC): "I have never, ever met a false rape claim ... My own statistics speak to the truth." Wahllllll ... she says so much here. That she has never met a false claim - of anything - indicates either a very unwide experience or a very inadequate perception; that she reinforces her lack of knowledge with "never ever" indicates a penchant for confident exaggeration that does not speak well for a Member of the Bar or for a Professor - and in a law school to boot! And that she assumes that her own (grossly limited) experience or the perception thereof is - as the lawyers say - 'dispositive' and definitive and conclusive ... she's either not well or not competent or she is being very untruthful toward Us.

But of course, it would all be for the Cause, and in that Cause - or in any 'revolution' - the public are merely the bit-player extras, the anonymous heads of cattle in the herd that the vanguard trail-bosses of the Cause must whip along to the desired objective (so often in the 20th century, to an actual slaughter-house).

They are teaching this sort of stuff in law schools? It is considered worthwhile professional preparation for attorneys? And so there are now attorneys 'out there' who actually believe this stuff and that Murphy's way is the Way to proceed? The Way to practice law? And for how long has this been going on? May we now fear that there are judges out there who were professionally 'formed' by this sort of stuff and are now on the bench?

And - why not take all the bad news in one gulp? - have a number of these attorneys gone into the JAG corps? And if you haven't had any nightmares recently, imagine that they are now JAG prosecutors, where their deformed sex-0ffensive training is blended with the fundamental deformity of military 'justice' itself? And - if your pacemaker is up to it - imagine that one of these attorneys is assigned to defend a male service-member accused of a sex offense ... And we wonder where the treacherous and reprehensible Unitarium got the idea that the Law and Justice were up for grabs and could be twisted to any purpose that Power might choose?

Flaks like Murphy and her academic collaborators (and their name is Legion) and the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are presently trying to spin the Duke case as usefully as they can. Jackson prays that we can just all move on and give thanks that more damage wasn't done - as if butter wouldn't melt in his mouth. Others are going to try to focus on the Duke lads as the unlovely fratboy lumps that they surely do seem to be (but that's not a crime). Others are going to try to defend the whole sex-offense approach as 'revolutionary justice', wherein - if we recall our Soviet Thought and Praxis 101 course - the purpose of 'justice' is to embody and symbolize the outrage of the victimized masses against a particular class (any of whose members will do for the day's target, and the specifics of their guilt or innoncence be damned). So while the bhoys may indeed be "louts", the revolutionistas have made them kulaks as well. And that's - not to put too fine a point on it - not only 'unAmerican but anti-American and anti-Western.

Yes, yes - the aforementioned Rev Jackson said Western Civ had to go (the same Western Civ that grounded the gravitas portrayed in the film "Judgment at Nuremberg"). But by the Year of Grace 2007 We see that letting Western Civ go like an old and expensive employee has led to a moral chaos that has undermined not only Our domestic societal and cultural life and Our 'character' as a People but has also undermined Our Constitutional ethos and morally deranged Our government and - the bloody top-off on it all - the military that that government controls in Our name.

In emergency room parlance, a patient with this many interacting, synergistic problems is on the way to becoming a 'train wreck'.

As if to reinforce the alarm, Dr. Trudy Bond has an article on the Counterpunch site (www.Counterpunch.com/bond04142007.html) limning how senior Army psychologists and the governing level of the American Psychological Association are collaborating in the infliction of torture while simultaneously denying it and spinning it as professionally meritorious behavior.

Military chaplains flag-waving and exhorting like old-time Soviet 'political officers' while claiming to do it for Jeezuzz, military lawyers railroading doomed defendants while claiming it's all on the up-and-up, miiltary doctors under-diagnosing wounded vets in order to duck having to care for them while claiming to 'do no harm', military psychologists advising how best to torture while claiming that it's a good thing they've been hired to 'advise' ... and do We think that We are not accountable? What is happening to Us? How have We lost so much so quickly? Our decency, Our honor, Our integrity? Our ability to value the foregoing? Our ability to recognize - to admit - what We have lost? What We have allowed to be done?

However all that has happened, the brazen and disreputable imbecilities perpetrated by assorted synergistic revolutionaries in the sex-offense mania have certainly paved the road. Whether that road will lead Us all the way to hell is still within Our power to determine. But the road itself already reaches that far.

UPDATE

Stuff keeps coming out. Today up in Boston, Wendy Murphy the lawyer/law school prof/victimiste advocate goes on record in the "Boston Herald" as opposing a $700,000 incease in state funding for public defenders at the expense of the hugely tangled sex-offender registry board and district attorneys.

The money, she wails, "should hardly go to give even more money to the people causing some of the problems." Here, I say again, is an example of the Soviet-era roots of this particularly American lawlessness: An attorney and law professor shows no appreciation for, maybe no awareness of, the overriding Constitutional concern for ensuring the individual citizen some level of protection from the arbitrary imposition of the criminal law and the government power.

For Murphy and her ilk (and their name may be not simply Legion but Official Legion) the 'defendant' - being a 'man' and a 'sex-offender' - is a member of an objective-enemy class and is thus guilty as well as beyond redemption even before the trial that - with whatever integrity is left to trials in these matters - will declare his guilt or innocence. This is a soviet attitude; it is not an American attitude; it is an un-American attitude; it is an anti-American, anti-Constitutional attitude. And it is a firebell in the night warning us of just how profound and pervasive (from the Left as well as the Right) is the damage done to Our sense of the rule of law.

And again: who can be suprised that Cheney and Rove, ever alert to possibilities and far far more vigilant than the children of light, saw their way clear to embarking on the war in Iraq? The USSR went away in 1991. Eerily, its praxis and its philosophy had by then just reached the point of breaking into the bigtime in American legislation ... We are not haunted by the spirit of sovietism. We are infected by it.