"STUDENT" PROTESTS OR LEFTIST FRONT?

 

 

 

Dorothy A. Seese
March 29, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

Most headlines about demonstrations, riots and other antisocial behavior involve "students." Or so the media reports. It would appear that genuine students would have a bit much on their hands with their studies and career objectives to go prowling about various cities swinging clubs and throwing rocks. But, one has only to look back to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 to find some gullible students with an airheaded view of the future, no practical experience, and well-trained revolutionary mentors guiding their enthusiastic lust for a good old brawl and the creation of some better world for all. In each case, students left alone without any organizers would produce few, if any, revolutionary marches, protests or demonstrations.

The student shield is useful to the real perpetrators. First, "student" gives the general impression that the mob is comprised of youths who are genuinely seeking a better life. Second, students can get out of class (if they have more than one or two classes) much more easily than workers can take time off the job. Third, students are more easily forgiven later in life for their youthful errors in judgment than are workers, who are expected to exhibit some self-restraint and sense of responsibility. Fourth, genuine students have absolutely no experience out in the real world where life decisions are made, so their minds are malleable to any sort of cause and excited by the ideals of the mentors of revolution.

Mentors join various colleges and universities, often with only one or two "cinch" classes on their schedule, to become identified as students. They set about organizing from this campus base, seeking out the children of the discontented, the underprivileged, or the individually ambitious and rambunctious. They bring the like-minded together to form a student group, and this becomes the core of the unrest and the focal point of any student protest, large or small, limited to campus or spread from campus to campus in wide-range protests.

Anyone who can look back on their college days recalls a time when they felt that they could change the world, and such an outlook has probably not changed since my days as a political science major. We had no real job experience, had never had responsibility for a household, and saw ourselves as the new wave of intellectuals who would change the world. We simply could not see ourselves as stupid, airheaded tools of the leftists who wanted to change our nation not to our desires, but to theirs. Fortunately, I never had any interest in revolution that was not conducted by the people at the ballot box during those college years, nor would I have been influenced by mentors because I am just too stubborn. Besides which, if they weren't planning on making it my kind of world then it had no value. Hubris? Yes, to the extreme.

It took less than two years in the real world of work, and particularly after I inherited my dad's job of being the family provider, to teach me something real. I had no great intellect, no impact on world affairs, no idea who was really behind the lofty ideals discussed over coffee at the college co-op, and no particular marketability from my years studying "intellectual" subjects that gave no job skills. That could be called a crash course in ego deflation. Somehow, it should be provided as a course in itself, since ego-deflation is necessary before one can really learn something useful.

Nothing has changed much as to the structure of "student protests" since the 1950's, other than their continued usefulness as a leftist tool to lead airheads into the streets to get trampled or beaten. The leaders have their agenda and the clueless students are deceived into thinking they are participating in some great era of change. Bullarkey. The mentors know that the students generally have no life experience, and coupled with the lofty ideas of youth, make a continual reserve of new "useful idiots" for the leftist agenda and its well-timed and highly orchestrated protests. One could write a book on student protests and lump the collection of stories together under the title "the fools and tools of Marxism" or "college-supplied armies of useful idiots for any leftist riot."

While it won't be possible to change the exuberance of youth, or direct it wisely if the home hasn't done this in advance, then students will continue to provide the cannon fodder for leftist marches and movements. The title "student" should be looked at as what it is: someone who is in the process of learning, not a body of youths of superior wisdom and maturity of perspective. One who is studying hasn't fully learned. We are, in fact, students all our lives or we become vegetables. But "student" in the articles about demonstrations refers to those actually enrolled in some institution of learning, higher or lower, and feeds the individuals who participate with the feeling that they are being recognized, that they are moving society forward. Twits. It is the elders from the leftist organization who do the planning, and by cleverly planting operatives among the students, feed egos and pat heads while leading unsuspecting learners to believe they have the power to be "makers and shakers" in a very large world.

Why does this respect, this vestigial reverence for learners, persist to this day? Because the media makes it so, for their own agendas. If someone has to be the instrument for change, the elders and mentors cannot be exposed for what they are or it will blow their agenda. So they shield themselves behind myriads of students who will walk freeways and stop traffic, take blows and then fade back onto campus slightly wounded, perhaps a bit disillusioned, but having tried. New student-tools always come to fill the ranks of those who graduate, drop out or fade away.

Those students who come to an institution of higher learning focused on their degree and their future avoid the conflicts associated with student demonstrations, either for fear of life and limb, or out of disinterest in the tactics of student movements directed by leftists. The majority of true students have a personal goal and an agenda that doesn't permit involvement in mass lunacy. Not many pre-med or engineering students are to be found among the protesters, it's generally liberal arts majors, engrossed in history, philosophy or political science who become involved. They are useful because they are numerous, not because they are brilliant. The sheer numbers can be staggering, and as such, present a huge shield that hides the shadows of the mentors and their funding facilities.

The media will accommodate the leftist cause at every opportunity, thrusting the word "student" at the forefront of articles about demonstrations to make them look legitimate.

An equal number of Christian students marching for the right to preach the gospel would be squelched by every means possible, and media would slant their yellow journalism to paint such as airheaded fundies from bad homes and crazy parents. So it isn't even all students who are acceptable protesters, only those who follow the leftist agenda. The media sees to that.

If students wanted to protest for a better society, the first place they would attack is the media, to ensure that the truth is published. Somehow, that never occurs. That, in itself, makes all student movements suspect. The professors of subversion on our nation's campuses ensure that the conservative, disciplined students never make the grades that their subversive allies collect. In university, it pays for conservatives to either keep quiet or find a way to organize effectively before some "spontaneous" movement erupts. No student movements have ever been spontaneous, they only become spontaneous when they overstep the boundaries allowed by the police. The agenda is well planned, sometimes the enthusiasm goes overboard and becomes a mob scene that has to be brought under control.

The next headline about a "student" demonstration should bring to mind that there is a rigid agenda behind the scores of lofty, empty heads rallying around a cause that's been made to sound noble by their mentors. And the public? It should beware of the title "student" because, in all cases, it's a front for non-students to gain control over areas the public would not otherwise permit.

All the above should be so obvious that this need not have been written, but apparently it isn't.

© 2006 Dorothy A. Seese - All Rights Reserved