Liberal prof calls out illiberal liberals

Jonathan Zimmerman is going to get his ass fired.

Not at Penn where he teaches education and history (and has tenure), but from the Philadelphia Inquirer, where he has been a veteran, left-leaning contributor.

Jonathan Zimmerman, advocate for free speech (Photo: University of Pennsylvania)

His offense? Deviation from progressive orthodoxy.

Look — it’s bad enough the broadsheet felt obliged to use two mainline conservative writers, Jennifer Stefano and Kyle Sammin (after ditching much more conservative Dom Giordano and Christine Flowers) — but Zimmerman was supposed to be one of their own. 

In recent months he has become a maverick, and the Inky does not like mavericks. (Believe me, I know.)

Zimmerman has become so much of a maverick — centering on freedom of speech — that I have republished several of his Inquirer columns, criticizing left-wing academics, and Woke culture.

He’s at it again, railing against liberals who claim to be opposed to censorship, yet use it themselves to try to stop dissenting voices. I agree with his theme, but I disagree with the culprit. 

He opens his column by reporting that he was outraged that “Gender Queer,” a coming-of-age book by a nonbinary author, was banned by many libraries. 

But he was also outraged by many libraries and book stores banning “Irreversible Damage,” a book that attributes the rise of gender surgeries more to “social contagion,” meaning cultural pressure, more than anything else.

“That’s how I differ from some of my fellow liberals, who scream bloody murder about restrictions on books they love but seem perfectly happy to remove ones that they loathe,” he writes. ‘I understand — and, in many ways, share — their distaste for ‘Irreversible Damage.’ But you can’t fight censorship with one hand if you’re furthering it with the other.”

A little later he adds, “When it comes to free expression, even liberals have become illiberal.”

I disagree.

Not with the sentiment, but with the target.

It is not the liberals, such as Zimmerman. It is some of the progressives.

To me, a liberal is defined as someone who may hate what you say, but will defend to their death your right to say it. 

Progressives are governed by their feelings about what you say and how it may affect the feelings of others. Like those magical, newly-invented micro-aggressions that are used to silence opposing views. Not all progressives, but the further left you go, the more detached from reality they are.

By exaggerating and elevating actual social ills, progressives create parody. They take a perfectly reasonable starting point of Woke — being aware of and confronting social injustice — and exploding it into the idea of viewing everything through a lens of race (or class), and assigning racism to any idea that opposes their own.

It is the kind of thinking that creates participation trophies, and demeans the idea of merit and hard work. It worships at the new Woke, and bows before Critical Race Theory.

So the “resolutely leftist school district” in Burbank, Cal., reports Zimmerman, barred the teaching of “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” on “the grounds that these books (which both use the N-word) cause ‘harm and trauma’ to Black students,” despite Black authors having praised both books.

Zimmerman is particularly harsh on the American Booksellers Association, which sponsors a Banned Books Week, and yet abjectly apologized after it sent “Irreversible Damage” to bookstores.

It described the book as “anti trans” that caused “pain” and “harm” to the trans community. “This is a serious violent incident that goes against ABA’s policies, values, and everything we believe and support.”

Violent? That word usually indicates physical force. This is an example of the exaggeration I talked about.

Zimmerman’s response: “An organization ostensibly devoted to the ‘freedom to read’ closed the book on it. According to illiberal liberals, you should be free to read what they like. Everything else is off the table.”

The tendency to squelch opinions that you don’t like does not exist only on the Left. The Right does it, too. 

Free speech can sometimes be ugly speech, but as my generation used to be told, “Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never harm you.”

Today’s generation seems to be told that names will harm you.

That is a dangerous, anti-democratic idea.

16 thoughts on “Liberal prof calls out illiberal liberals”

  1. The Inky has not allowed thoughtful conservative voices since Jonathan Last, Rick Santorum and Kevin Ferris, and Stu may be the last of the thoughtful centrist voices.

    The Inky now is no different from FOXNEWS or MSMBC, basically catering to an audience by providing them what they already agree with; not informing them of anything substantive to consider.

    However, I still love its comics page and puzzles.

  2. On an unrelated topic, I am relieved to see that Septa has spent millions to prevent fare evasion, while there are stabbing, shootings and all other types of assaults every day. WTF?!?!

  3. I agree with what you point out in this column. You even make passing near the end a mention of crazies on the right and equate them to progressives on the left. We may disagree on degrees of extremism, but not the main point that all have the right to express an opinion, even if we disagree with it.

  4. This is what I love about this column: a place where any lunatic (including myself) can express an opinion — left, right, center, gay, straight, Christian, Jew, et cetera — and be accepted, rejected, praised, castigated, and so on. THAT, my friends, is freedom of speech as it is meant to be.

    1. And MY devotion to free speech means I have NEVER blocked anyone, no matter how some (looking at you, Daniel) provoke me with stupidity and blind allegiance to lies. What do I do in those cases? I just don’t read them.

      1. Stupid is blind allegiance to a man who is destroying the country right before your very eyes. You write about it all the time, You see it played out on TV everyday. What do you need to change your mind. A Terrorist attack on the country or maybe a family member killed by a illegal. There are a number of candidates to choose from yet you endorse Biden. Now that’s stupid.

      2. Stu, tell the truth: “Daniel” is just a chatbot you have post here to do over-the-top Trump rants, so you can brag that you allow all opinions.

        But really, the one-dimensional caricature is getting a bit tiresome. It’s also a bit unbelievable that the only “opinion” this “person” has is Trump, Trump, Trump.

        I know that you really don’t like Trump, but is it really fair to use this transparent stereotype to make fun of his supporters?

        There are sincere people out there who really do want to repeal the Affordable Care Act and pull out of NATO. There are sincere people out there that think Ukraine should be given to Russia and think it extremely important that the federal government be used as a tool to wreak revenge on Trump’s political enemies.

        There are plenty of people who LIKE government shutdowns and get proudly patriotic when they see screaming babies ripped from their mothers’ arms. Or who think that folks who assault cops are heroes and patriots. Not to mention all those who want a “compromise” on abortion that will make everybody happy!

        C’mon, Stu. At least expand the range of the chatbot so that it includes these other pro-Trump issues, instead of just running the same Johnny-One-Note over and over again.

        1. Zzzzzzzzzzzz reading your long boring posts puts everyone to sleep. Biden is a bad president . And If you ever stop running your mouth you would see it.

          1. Stu, can’t you get an upgrade on the bot? It’s incoherent and just repeating itself again.

        2. Tom, in the past I have identified him as a Russian bot. I read NOTHING that he posts. Arguing with him is pointless. Only my opposition to cancel culture stops me from deleting him.

  5. Zimmerman is spot on about the illiberalism of liberalism. I see it more as a problem of far left progressives.. They are as out of control as the far right MAGAts. Note I did not say conservatives, because the cult is anything but conservative.
    I just wonder how Zimmerman can stand it at Penn. When I professed there, the left loonies made me crazy.

    1. Exactly right, Wanda. I have always defined myself as a liberal, but I certainly take issue with some of the off-the-wall things certain “progressives” seem to be bringing into the mix. The secret sauce for success to be is this: be reasonable. I don’t think that’s too much to ask, is it?

  6. Question: “How many wokesters does it take to screw in a light bulb?
    Answer: “That’s racist!”

    Question: “How many MAGA Republicans does it take to screw in a light bulb?
    Answer: “You’ve got Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Comments are closed.