TGA Welcomes TGR

The Georgetown Review, a new conservative publication, launched last week. 

Go visit.

What’s funny (or not) is with their very first post they were accused of sexism by a liberal commentator on Facebook for using the “blushing coyly as a schoolgirl” line The Hoya used when it was founded.


The commenter then gleefully squeals about TGR getting called racist, homophobic, etc., in the future, and receives the most likes than any other comment to date, mostly from people we personally know are extremely liberal. 

This happens because as we’ve said previously, the words racism, homophobia, sexism, and so on don’t mean anything substantive anymore and are simply trotted out whenever someone disagrees with a liberal and the liberal wants to disqualify and delegitimize the speaker without having to actually engage with the substance of the argument.  In other words, their preferred tactic is to take out the messenger, rather than address the message.  This is either because they are incapable of using facts and logic to combat the message, or they’re afraid people will agree with the substance of the message, so the strategy is to make it personal and do anything they can to avoid talking about the issues.  

At TGA we’ve received numerous such attacks, so we’re not surprised The Review received similar treatment its very first day.

Anyways, we’re happy to see TGR and offer our best wishes and support.  We also have a few words of advice.

But before we begin, a message to all our left-wing liberal Social Justice Warrior haters, (you know who you are), in reference to The Georgetown Review: we are not them and they are not us.    

That said, because The Georgetown Review is new and has the potential to do great things, we’re going to let Kevin and the gang take the lead for a while.  We would like to see what they can do.  So we’ll be taking a pause unless a) TGR stops publishing like Utraque Unum did, or b) something happens that TGR does not cover or which they do cover in a ham-fisted way.

So you liberals should avoid making false accusations of sexism or racism and all the other -ists and -ics and -obics.  Don’t even think of fomenting a shaming campaign against them like with what happened with Dylan Cutler or Christian Hoff Sommers last year, or ginning up some internet hate mob just because they wrote something you disagree with and happen to think differently.  Never forget, we are watching.  Never, ever, EVER, forget that.  And be grateful The Georgetown Review exists because they’re a lot more likely to pull-punches, “be nice,” and deliver the sort of “sober and dispassionate” writing both you and the Pat Mustgiveins and Ken Nunnencucks of the world desire. 

So you better be praying they succeed. 

Otherwise you’ll be dealing with us again.  We’ll punch back.  And we don’t bring guns to knife fights.  Instead we drop tactical nukes.  

Now we would be lying if we didn’t say we’re a little proud The Georgetown Review has sprouted up, similar to the way we felt when Utraque Unum revived last semester after a two-year dormancy.  We won’t say we’re responsible for either one, but considering how there was no strong right-of-center voice until TGA began and made a lot waves challenging left-wing ideas, not to mention exposing and pushing back against thuggish liberals and progressives who wish to suppress speech on the Hilltop, we like to think we’re somehow responsible, if only in terms of inspiration.  Btw, after the next GUSA election in February we’ll make a special return visit and tell the real story of the Chicken Madness campaign, the one the current CM team doesn’t want you to know.     

When TGA started last year one of our goals, aside from exposing liberal discrimination and bias in campus media, the faculty, and administration, was to inform, influence, and motivate any Hoya who leans to the right (in addition to those who lean left but have open minds and believe in things like fairness, truth, and intellectual diversity).  We wanted to stretch the Overton Window, meaning expand the parameters of debate which had been diminishing and will shrink again unless people remain vigilant and actually defend free speech, something we know GUSA and The Hoya will rarely do when the speech expressed goes against their philosophical and political beliefs. 

We’ve been shouldering the burden of providing a counterpoint with the goal of getting others to do it, so we’re happy to pass the torch on to TGR and the two other right-leaning pubs that have begun since February when we stopped publishing regularly (go here for the latest issue of the recently revived Utraque Unum, and here for the new Order and Liberty blog, which though not Georgetown-focused, was co-founded earlier this year by two Hoyas we know and like TGR publishes from a right-of-center perspective).  

So here’s the advice . . .

Stick to mainly campus issues. 

While everyone in the SFS and all the Government majors think they’re read up on the latest international firestorm or political hot topic, the fact is there are so many more people in D.C. and elsewhere who can provide smarter and more interesting takes.  So stay where you have the expertise, which is Georgetown.  Be more than just a souped-up version of The Right Way.  No one cares what a freshman thinks about China policy.  Nobody wants to read an essay you wrote about Obamacare for your politics class and see it get repurposed into a blog post.  As they say in the MSB, your value-added comes in when you comment on things you actually know about, which means the Hilltop, and not public policy or foreign affairs.

Don’t eat your own. 

There are a lot of people who will want you to sell out others on the right.  These will mostly be liberals, but will also include people who consider themselves conservatives yet for some reason care more about being liked by liberals than defending or promoting libertarian or conservative principles.  If your pattern recognition capabilities are strong you’ll see the conservatives who seem to pay more attention to punching right and ingratiating themselves with the left usually come from privilege backgrounds and never actually do anything to combat the left.  And if you pay closer attention, you’ll see liberals never call out their own no matter how bad they act, even though they constantly demand those on the right disavow one another for the exact same behavior.  The reason is because liberals are lying when they say they’re concerned with tone or are shocked and offended about something that’s been said or done. The fact is getting People of the Right to turn on each other is good strategy and a useful tool to attack and divide conservatives.  Liberals are better off when we are engaged in in-fighting and tearing down each other than going after the left, and they love it when media attention is focused on internecine struggles than debating actual issues. 

A great example is with the current election.  Plenty of College Dems and cuckservative types have been calling for the CRs to disavow Trump.  Yet even though Hillary Clinton has a long documented history of enabling the sexually predatory behavior of her husband (to include rape), intimidating and bullying victims of sexual assault, engaging in corruption while in government, and many examples of bad judgement, all of which are far worse than anything Trump has done or said, not a single person on the left will call upon anyone else on the left to disavow or critique her.   

Now it’s understandable to want to hold yourself and your team to a higher standard, but don’t fall into the trap of doing the left’s work for them or allowing your own team’s imperfections to cause you to constantly give up and lose the fight.  Think of it in terms of a family.  A parent may certainly hold themselves to a higher standard and be harder on his or her own children’s behavior than some neighbor’s kid down the street.  But the parent shouldn’t publicly complain about his own child’s behavior to non-family members while at the same time suggesting the other kid down the street whose behavior is objectively worse is somehow a better kid. That’s just dumb parenting. 

Know Georgetown history. 

One of the sadder things about the whole 272 campaign is they’ve gotten everyone to actually think Georgetown owned the slaves.  Not only did Georgetown NOT own the slaves, the descendants of whom are now getting reparations (and also demanding a billion-dollar payout), but Georgetown employees didn’t even sell the slaves.  It was all done by Jesuits up in Maryland, a couple of whom previously worked at Georgetown because they were directed to do so by their organizational (Jesuit) superiors.  But because Georgetown received a small part of the proceeds 175 years ago, we’re all of a sudden responsible now and must pay reparations. 

Another bit of info: the whole thing was started solely to undermine Catholicism.  It wasn’t even begun by the race hustlers you would expect, though these people did latch on to the issue once they saw its potential to make them a buck and gain some power and attention.  It was none other than Angry Gay Man and “Hoya Historian” columnist Matthew Quallen who started the whole thing, as revealed in an exclusive TGA interview.  Per Matt, his sole purpose writing multiple columns about Jesuit slaves was to demonize Catholics and delegitimize the Church’s moral teaching because he’s upset with the Catholic position on homosexuality.  He didn’t even do original research, the work had already been done, and his innovation was just repackaging the content to take advantage of today’s victim and grievance industry culture.   (Nota BeneThe Catholic Church had previously outlawed slavery among Catholics, but the Jesuits, as Jesuits often do, ignored Church rules at the time, kind of like they do now by ignoring Church teaching on abortion),

Or you might check out the history of Jesuit education and John Carroll’s purpose in starting Georgetown, which was for it to serve as the “main sheet anchor” of the Catholic Church in the new republic, as opposed to what it is today, which is a hostile actor when it comes to authentic Catholicism in America.  Bottom line is Georgetown’s founder clearly wanted the University to be a strong Catholic educational institution, not a home for Cafeteria Catholics who care more about being liked by secular elites and non-Catholics than defending or promoting the faith.

Here’s something else: did you know H*yas for Choice was once a recognized club which received University funding back when it was called “GU Choice.”  That was until the Vatican stepped in and told the then Jesuit president of Georgetown to strip it of University recognition and no longer provide funding because killing babies is against Catholic Church teaching.  Yet now, despite the University having been reprimanded for funding a pro-abortion club in the past, we again have the pro-abortion club H*yas for Choice receiving University funding via the mandatory student activities fee the University collects from all students and controls in a University bank account.  

Last point on this: in addition to knowing the past, catalog it.  Catalog it, catalog it, catalog it.  By writing articles and posting online examples of speech suppression, SJW hate campaigns, liberal bias, administrative hypocrisy, etc., a record is created for future Hoyas to see, in perpetuity.  Never let an instance go unreported or uncommented on.  Show how some instances are not isolated, but rather, indicative of a pattern of hostility, bias, and discrimination towards non-liberals at Georgetown.  Show all the evidence that exists about how the suppression of speech on the Hilltop always seems to be the result of liberals.  The fact is neither The Hoya nor The Voice will report on these issues, so someone needs to do it.  Doing so also keeps the pressure up.  Without something to counterbalance the rhetoric of the left, they will become more and more extreme and more and more dominant and more and more fascist.  

Recognize as People of the Right attempts will be made to punish you for your views and you will always be held to higher standard than People of the Left.

We all know this, but it’s occasionally forgotten.  That doesn’t mean there are topics you should not cover.  Just remember that by doing so, regardless of what your tone is or what you actually say, you will be attacked in a variety of ways, as you’ve already seen by being called sexists your first day of existence.  In many cases your accusers won’t even bother addressing your argument, but will just try and delegitimize it by calling you whatever -ist or -ic or -obic they can come up with in order to frighten you and others from publishing in the future and/or to punish you for the crime of thinking differently.  They’ll demonize and ridicule you and try to isolate you from your friends by calling on them to condemn you.  They’ll get the administration to threaten you.  They'll go beyond simple discourse and will do their best to make your life difficult and unpleasant.  You just have to accept life's unfair and carry on the best you can.  

Meanwhile, if you’re a liberal and violate University policy by bullying colleagues and students or making rape jokes and telling religious people in a sexually abusive and demeaning way to perform sex acts on you because you don’t like the fact they believe in Catholic teaching, then the Administration will do absolutely nothing, and neither The Hoya nor The Voice will report the story.

Understand Rhetoric vs. Dialectic. 

You’ll want to use both.  Dialectic is the essence of dialogue and is what you want to use when trying to inform and influence people with open minds and who make decisions based on facts and logic.  It’s what one wishes was the dominant method of discourse in a University dedicated to the search for truth and the advancement of knowledge.  But let’s face it, many professors, administrators, and students don’t care about the truth or free and open dialogue in which all manner of ideas may be discussed.  They would rather suppress the speech and thoughts of those with whom they disagree in order to indoctrinate them with their own beliefs.  And they will use all manner of lies and emotional arguments to demonize those who think differently or who are unwilling to be politically correct. 

That’s when rhetoric is your friend. 

Rhetoric doesn’t limit itself to the techniques of the dialectic, but rather, also appeals to emotion by using satire, ridicule and other means to win the argument or delegitimize and demoralize an opponent.  An example would be the following quiz GU Right to Life recently used . . . “Who Said It: Margaret Sanger or Adolf Hitler?”  Margaret Sanger was a fan of eugenics and had ideas akin to actual Nazis.  She openly spoke about reducing America’s black population via birth control, sterilization, and abortion, because she believed blacks were genetically inferior to whites.  And yet, she’s a hero to the feminist grrrls at H*yas for Abortion, the Womyn's Center, and the Women's (Feminist) Studies program.  Sanger is also the founder of Planned Parenthood, America’s foremost abortion mill, an organization which works in concert with H*yas for Choice and situates most of its abortion clinics in predominately black neighborhoods.  Planned Parenthood each year gives an annual award named after Margaret Sanger.  Receiving it is considered to be the highest honor Planned Parenthood can bestow on a person and is meant to "recognize leadership and excellence" in promoting abortion.  Connecting Planned Parenthood, Nazis, and H*yas for Abortion using the statements of the first two's founders is effective rhetoric.

Now you’ll constantly be told to “take the high-road” and only engage in the dialectic with “the best of the opposition” and to ignore left-wing extremists and avoid satire.  The people telling you this will be those on the left who don’t want you using against them the exact same rhetorical techniques they will be using against you.  In other words, they're liars who prefer you to be stuck playing checkers while they’re all playing chess.  They’ll be going low while pretending and imploring you to go high.  Ignore them.

Hold controversial speaking events.  

Invite Trump and Ann Coulter.  Schedule Camille Paglia or Eve Tushnet for the next OUTober.  Have Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams speak during Black History month.  Use Georgetown money to do it.  The University is paying for all sorts of left-wing ideological and political activities using tuition dollars, from the various identity group mafia centers, (CMEA, Womyn’s Center, LGBTQ Resource Center, Casa Latina, the Black House, and many more), to the grievance industry courses which having nothing to do with the search for truth and advancement of knowledge, (i.e., the Philosophy Department, Justice and Peace Program, English Department, Women’s Studies, American Studies, Sociology, and African-American Studies).  o our side needs to grab as much of that cash as possible.  Have one big superstar lecture each semester.  

Finally, ask questions.   (See here, here, here, and here).

That’s it.  We wish TGR well.  And like we said, do more than just be an outlet for class essays.  Post original and exclusive content.  Do your best to spark actual debate and effect real change unlike some flaccid Benedict Option pseudo-intellectuals who care more about sitting in a circle talking to each other about the Great Books than doing anything tangible like fighting or speaking out against the illiberal left. 

Don’t worry about being liked by any other publication on campus, having liberal administrators pat you on the head like you’re Jack the Bulldog, and getting special invites to events in Riggs or some tent set-up outside Healy.  Leave that to the GUSAnos, the brown-nosers, and the identity group mafia zombies.  Tell the hard truths and not the pretty lies about reality the left wants you to parrot for them.  Present “outside the box” and diverse thinking everyone claims to want but which neither The Hoya nor The Voice seems willing to publish and which the administration and SJWs will stomp on if given the chance.  Don’t be corporate.  Don’t be cucks.  Avoid being the safe, neutered publication the left desperately wishes you to be, which is to say, an ineffective tool giving the appearance of diversity of thought but which is really nothing more than a front for only the sort of approved ideas and speech the left is willing to allow you to publish.   

That’s it.  Follow our advice and you'll not just succeed, but you'll have lots of fun too.

Hoya Saxa!