Almost exactly a year ago, Tucker Carlson delivered an opening monologue entitled “The Cultural Revolution has Come to America.” In case you’ve happily forgotten the events of last summer, be unhappily reminded: the media frenzy surrounding George Floyd’s death included a trend wherein children secretly recorded, then publicly aired, arguments with their Republican parents on TikTok. This was done presumably in order to shame parents, as Tucker put it, “for the crime of insufficient loyalty to Black Lives Matter.” Kids tried to have their own parents “cancelled,” fired, and publicly humiliated for their failure to accept and acclaim the doctrine of queer BIPOC supremacy as their spiritual anchor in life and through history, which also began in 2020.
Since last summer, the revolution has continued apace. Comparison to Mao Zedong’s China was fitting both then and now.
Mao spoke of a revolution that would “touch people to the very souls,” and, through this, insisted that all activity of human life be subordinated to the political. There was no art for the sake of art; only art for the sake of the revolution. There was no education for the sake of education; only education for the sake of the revolution. There was no human relationship, no ancestral bond or memory that should not be forgotten in service of the revolution. There was only the revolution, for the revolution’s sake. This form of totalitarianism gripped China in the summer of 1966, and set it on a path that would damage the social life of its people to this day.
From 1966-1969, through the ritualistic public humiliation of elders at the hands of children mobilized en masse through both universities and junior and senior high schools, Mao attempted to destroy in China what the American Left of today similarly hates: natural authority that emerges through some excellence, specifically education or procreation. These relationships are, in many ways and especially as understood through Confucian philosophy, the very foundation of society. Teachers and parents were Mao’s targets. But intergenerational intimacy—the conduit through which the most important aspects of life are preserved—was the true casualty of the Cultural Revolution.
The Red Guard’s activity in schools mirrors what many American institutions tolerate now. Rebecca Karl, professor of history at New York University writes in Mao Zedong and China in the Twentieth Century World: “Teachers, professors, and school administrators…were detained [by their students] and forced to write self-criticism addressing the crimes of which they were accused…They had to publicly admit their crimes. Even if they did all that was asked, they were usually not released. The point was to demonstrate the hollowness of all authority” (emphasis added).
The Guard also waged war on “the four olds” (old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits). This meant the destruction of monuments, of temples, and then, of course, the home. The revolutionary youth went into private domiciles to destroy any vestige of bourgeois sentiment they could find: flower gardens, pianos, pets, books, and old records were destroyed in total abandon. Karl notes that Red guard street patrols “routinely stopped those deemed too pretty, accusing them of harboring bourgeois ideas of beauty… Femininity was bourgeois, and all personal adornment became politically suspect.”
Because all instantiations of traditional order were plain enemies of the revolution, Mao targeted those whose unrefined tastes and untempered passions would be most susceptible to manipulation: children. Children, their sense of justice warped and inflamed by communist propaganda, reliably attacked their superiors, parents and teachers alike, who were cowed into silence. Children were the footsoldiers of the deadliest political revolution of all time.
Yet it is now commonplace for the average middle-class American couple to outsource the greatest responsibility they have in relation to their children to low-IQ party functionaries of the Department of “Education.” These apparatchiks can hardly be called teachers, in the same way that critical race theory can not be called an education. Their purpose is to break kids’ brains. It is to make them hate history. It is to preach the Malthusian gospel of white guilt and transgenderism while destroying the possibility that those children might ever perceive truth, beauty, and goodness where it remains in their lives. In other words, it is to breed activists for the endless revolution.
Can we really be called parents, or think of ourselves as satisfactory ones, if we subject our children to people like this? And if we do, whether out of fearful acceptance or passive compliance, why would we be surprised when our babies grow to hate us? Among the myriad reasons now to shield children from the abusive propagandizing of the American Left, consider one more: preventing ideologues from turning kids into little Maoist robots is not only a parent’s sacred obligation for the sake of the child, it is also a form of self-preservation. These politics are not a silly phase that little Jimmy will overcome once he starts paying taxes. Know instead that they signify a worldview that will lead to the annihilation of your family if left untreated.
Contrary to common practice now, some human activities and bonds are higher than politics; for them to be touched by politics is an implicit desecration. For your child’s sake, for your own, and for the sake of your country, let no one touch your child’s soul but He who created it. Otherwise, your kids will find themselves among a society of the dead, and you’ll have been long buried under a mountain of dirt and lies.