This is what universities are churning out these days.
Oliver Friedfeld, a senior at Georgetown University, and his roommate were recently mugged.
Most people would come away from such an experience a little wiser. Perhaps next time, they’ll pay more attention to their surroundings, maybe they’ll take an interest in crime prevention in their communities, maybe they’ll even take the logical step and start carrying mace, a taser or a gun for protection.
Friedfeld, on the other hand, feels he deserved to be mugged because of his “privilege” compared with his attackers. And yes, Friedfeld is white. He doesn’t give a description of his attackers, other than to say that they were younger than him. If I were to hazard a guess, I’d say they were probably black or Latino — not because they were engaged in criminal activity, which cuts across all social strata, but because of Friedfeld’s patronizing attitude toward them.
In an article in The Hoya, titled “I Was Mugged and I Understand Why,” Friedfeld wrote:
“I come from a solidly middle-class family, and, with relatives in Mexico City, certainly don’t consider myself entirely shielded from poverty. And yet I’d venture to guess that our attackers have had to experience things I’ve never dreamed of. … Who am I to stand from my perch of privilege, surrounded by million-dollar homes and paying for a $60,000 education, to condemn these young men as ‘thugs?’ It’s precisely this kind of ‘otherization’ that fuels the problem. … Young people who willingly or unwillingly go down this road have been dealt a bad hand.”
The whole article is just dripping with white guilt and condescension.
Friedfeld’s point drifts through some dreamy vision of Marxism, because it’s the system that is at fault, you see. In his view, his mugging has nothing to do with personal morality, just economics — oh! and guns:
“Not once did I consider our attackers to be ‘bad people.’ I trust that they weren’t trying to hurt me. In fact, if they knew me, I bet they’d think I was okay. They wanted my stuff, not me. While I don’t know what exactly they needed the money for, I do know that I’ve never once had to think about going out on a Saturday night to mug people. I had never before seen a gun, let alone known where to get one.”
Actually, Oliver, if your attackers knew you, they’d probably think you’re a naive chump and just ask you to write them a check next time.
That one line, “I trust that they weren’t trying to hurt me,” should be taken as proof that Darwinism is untrue, because if it were, you’d probably be dead now.
If someone forces you to the ground at gunpoint and pats you down, there is no reason to think that gun isn’t going off, intentionally or by accident. Basic survival instinct should have told you that.
Friedfeld uses words like “otherization” to describe the identification of his attackers as thugs. But the most frightening aspect of his article is the subtext of “otherizing” himself.
This is the apparent goal of much of what passes for education today, to lay on the guilt and shame so thickly that the student comes to see himself as “the other,” to use Friedfeld’s sociological lingo. By undermining the student’s sense of self-worth, he becomes part of the collective, and the Marxist agenda of “income inequality,” aka “share the misery,” moves forward.
It’s dismaying to see the psychological damage done to young people by the modern education system, which by and large has been given over to the control of people who are either fervent advocates of, or too stupid to know why they should oppose, communism.
The lies of “income equality” and the worker’s paradise have seeped into our culture, when the reality of communism is that an elite ruling class always enjoys the good life while most people get to wallow in poverty, as demonstrated by this video about the children of China’s ruling families.
As for Friedfeld, you can hope he grows a spine somehow, but it seems unlikely. And because he’s enrolled in Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service, you can expect he’ll one day add to the long list of useless “leaders” in Washington, D.C., blathering about “income inequality.”