Dear Friends,
It seems to me, using oppression to stop oppression, is like setting an arsonist’s house on fire, it does nothing to stop the arson, it only makes it worse. There is a powerful philosophical theory, making it’s way through the heads of young people and university professors today, that the best way to stop oppression, is to oppress those, the would be oppressor sees, are oppressors. They see oppression of those who have never damaged them personally, but are members of groups known to oppress, as righteous behavior. In other words, progressives see oppression as a virtuous act, when they do it. Not at all self serving or arrogant, progressives see themselves as being in the best position to decide which groups are oppressors and should then be oppressed.
Setting yourself up as judge, prosecutor, jury and executioner, is very empowering. Then going to the extreme of silencing the defense is a means certain to get a conviction, and then oppress the evil oppressor. Being the only opinion that counts, allows those in that illustrious position to sit above the common lot of mankind, lost in our personal bigotries, grudges, incompetencies and ignorance, those ubermen capable of being judge, prosecutor, jury and executioner, don’t have. They are, well, just better people. At least in their own minds. Another point of view might say that someone who puts herself into that position, rather than being sublimely wise and erudite, is in fact arrogant, hubristic, egoistic and unwise to the Nth degree. That is of course only an opinion.
Which does point out another problem with using oppression to fight the oppressor, that is how do you know who the oppressor really is? Progressives have that handled easily, they break humanity into groups, if you are a member of a group that has traditionally been oppressed, by the standards of the progressive faction of course, then you are the oppressed, no matter how much you might oppress others. If, on the other hand, you are a member of a group that is considered an oppressor group, then no matter your personal virtue, you are an oppressor and therefore should be oppressed, in the name of justice. By that standard, Eric Bonhoffer deserved to be oppressed, because of the group he belonged to, despite his personal virtue in giving his own life fighting oppression. Problem solved.
One might claim that using oppression to fight oppression, is an excuse someone who wants to oppress might use to justify his oppression, that notion is debunked. No need to look into it. Clearly, a progressive who is oppressing someone of an oppressor group, is only beating that 80 year old woman… to protect some young unemployed, unemployable, substance addicted gang members, from her oppression. She may look at them disapprovingly and thus oppress them. Plus being a member of a traditional oppressor class she has it coming, if for no other reason, than to balance out the books on oppression. When a speaker is shouted down and exposed to airhorns at close range, that is merely keeping the oppressor from oppressing the oppressed, by oppressing them first.
Personally, I feel oppressing others is a bad thing, but then again I am a libertarian, not a progressive. As such, I don’t have the personal absolute certainty that I am in all things correct, so correct that I am duty bound to oppress oppressors. It is handy that the rules are so clear cut, all members of oppressor groups are to be oppressed… couldn’t be easier to pick out who should be oppressed, in the name of justice. You see… in my libertarian/conservative world view, I would judge an Eric Bonhoffer, Schindler, Theresa of Calcutta or Pope John Paul II, by their acts and character, rather than the color of their skin. Then again, I don’t have the sublime wisdom or the hard heartedness of a progressive, to oppress the oppressor… even if I could tell who they really are. Instead… I’ll leave all that up to God.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
