The Danger of Tranquilized & Docile Youth

What Is Wrong with This Picture?

In February we provided you with coverage of the brutalization and arrest of Veteran Ray McGovern during Hillary Clinton’s speech at George Washington University. McGovern had dared to stand up during the speech, peacefully and silently, in a Gandhi-endorsed way, expressing his stand. That was his crime deemed by our government deserving of being beaten up, brutalized, and arrested. As part of our coverage we also provided you with brief video footage of Mr. McGovern’s assault. Now, I want to ask you to watch this video clip one more time to observe a far more troubling trend captured by that same brief footage. A trend that did not receive any coverage; at least not that I know of. A trend that should alarm anyone with the tiniest shred of common sense,” an alarm that hopefully will translate into seeking an explanation and possible remedies. Here is the video again:

I hope you observed more than Hillary Clinton, McGovern’s peaceful protest, and his beating and dragging. If you didn’t, please click the ‘play’ button and watch it again. Do you see what I see? A room filled with supposedly bright and educated university students, and supposedly intellectual elite. A room full of our young on its way to becoming the educated new workforce - filling up positions; from government bureaucrats’ and diplomats’ desks to the pacers of our congressional halls; from the corporate ladder climbers to the NGO drivers…That’s right. The Jack Morton Auditorium at George Washington University was filled with over 200 such people.

What was the reaction of these more than 200 people, mostly senior students and professors, to the dragging, beating, and brutalization of a veteran who dared to silently stand up? Please tell me, what did they do? Maybe you have to watch it for the third time with this question, this context in mind. Please do it; it’s only 1 minute long. Do you see what I see?

sheepThat’s right. This audience simply glanced over their shoulders, registered the brutalization of a peaceful senior veteran with pure disassociation, no rage and zero sympathy, and then quickly turned their faces towards a woman engaged in hypocritical talk; as if ‘nothing’ had happened. Not a single student objected vocally to this police state practice before their very own eyes. Not a single academic stood up and left in protest. Not a single reporter commented or whispered a word. Not a single person reacted; period.

Who are these people? What type of youth are we seeing here? What kind of education system and university are we talking about? Forget political apathy. We are talking about alarming social apathy. And how did they get here? Institutionalized docility? Indoctrination towards a numb and dumb generation to be ruled and policed easily? A tranquilized youth and a robotic citizenry?

# # # #

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. A people who cheer on the banksters drug funded CIA/DoD/NED/USAID worldwide ethnic cleansing and genocide, what kind of moral fiber can you expect?

    Only complete economic collapse (which hopefully is not far off) will get these parasites off of humanity’s neck.

  2. This scenario seems to me like a hypnotherapy session. I bet that there was something more then just what we see. On the left side there is a woman who was smiling like Hilary. She is well trained but she was also scared for a few second.

  3. Columbine.

  4. Bill Bergman says:

    Well, it could be consistent with what I saw at the introduction of Obama’s speech today, and I’m not a Republican or even rational at this hour, but at midday today my colleagues showed me the budget speech and at the outset the GWU audience (?) was uniformly clapping. With flags waving behind Him.

  5. Well, you’re absolutely right on the large majority of professors and students being docile and/or apathetic. At least part of the explanation for lack of reaction here, though, has to do with the self-selected audience. I mean this is the school where Jeanne Kirkpatrick taught. And on top of that if you’re really opposed to Clinton’s policies are you going to bother to go hear her speak? But then again if you’re not then maybe that too speaks of apathy. There are a lot of reasons for the apathy I could go into. One is the total lack of ability to connect and empathize with all the people dying half way around the world. And there are a lot of reasons for that. But I’m more concerned with the ignorance. My experience of both professors and students at all my college institutions has been a profound ignorance and even more profound disinterest in most things political. Of course, I’m not in the political science department, but still . . . I’d reckon the majority of people know bits and pieces of what’s going on, but I’d think you’d be surprised at how little.

  6. @Metem: Thanks for sharing, and good to see you here. Well, I am a graduate of GW (ouch!), and not a disgruntled one (almot 4.0 avg), and I can tell you this much, unforunately: the episode & apathy pretty much applies to all; including the professors. They used to be one of the top pushers of Neocon policies/agenda. Let me give you in example: In 1998, I dared criticizing Francis Fukiyama (and his ‘End-ism’ garbage theory), and that was an absolute no-no. I got an ‘F’ for the paper, with zero note or explanation (That’s why, almost 4.0 avg!!). When I went to see the professor,he said: anyone who does not support F.F. school of thought and doesn’t see the value of PNAC is either an ignorant idiot or out of touch with reality…
    Anyway, this was one of many GW examples/experiences. I have to say, I had the most miserable BA journey there; an environment that stood totally against ‘critical thinking,’ advoated for Neocon policies/theories, too close to gov policy makers…

  7. Hello Sibel,

    I am glad you are back. Well, but you are back again with this story. Frankly, I don’t understand why you support this guy. During this event, he acted like a complete fool. What we need in America and in the world are people who act as adults, not jerks. We need people ready to do what is necessary to better our world and our condition. Personally, I don’t have time to stand back to some politicians I don’t like. I have other things to do. And to turn your back on somebody doesn’t not help the cause of democracy at all. It is just adding to the atmosphere of discouragement and distrust we all feel. So instead of doing this kind of behavior and whining about the Israel “lobby” and other similar stuff, maybe he should concentrate on doing something positive like writing books, doing speeches, having his own podcast, etc.

    Frankly, for an ex-CIA agent, I am not impressed. He knows very well that it is the military-industrial complex and their lobbyists that make these decisions to invade countries, etc. It doesn’t matter really who is in charge of the country, the politicians of the day just go along with them and find reasons to present to the public. And he knows as well that during a speech, especially given by somebody important having a high-level job, that is security that makes the decision how to handle protests and the like. Clinton just prepares for her speeches. She doesn’t have time to review the details of security procedures. She has enough work to do like that.

    Sibel, I would like to ask you this: do you have something personal against Hillary Clinton? It is been a few occasions that I have noticed that you don’t seem to appreciate what she is. I agree that she is probably not better that the Bushes, but I don’t think she is any worse. So what is this all about?

    Have a good day.

  8. biphenylene says:

    Most people were likely unaware that this was a form of non-violent protest. Without publicity beforehand, those attending would simply assume that this individual had done something wrong, perhaps completely unrelated to the speech. If people had known what was going on, I’m willing to bet that many would have stood in solidarity, at a minimum…

  9. Claude, he was simply silently STANDING. He wasn’t disruptive. He was peaceful. He was non-violent. Yet you’re criticizing him for that?? Ever heard of civil disobedience? Or just non-violent resistance? And how do you know what else he does in his life? (As a matter of fact, he has done and continues to do a lot more than just stand up quietly at somebody’s speech.)

    As for biphenylene, I’d like to believe that had people “known what was going on, they would have stood in solidarity,” but I don’t. Most people are cowards. They’re not interested in standing up for anything, just mouthing all the correct liberal pieties at cocktail parties. If it involves any inconvenience, let alone something more serious like being arrested, they can’t be bothered. That’s why our civil liberties are being eviscerated, and that’s why this country is going down the tubes. Ribbit.

  10. biphenylene says:

    All right, I’ll change from many to some. Nevertheless, would you have stood up if you looked over your shoulder and saw that someone was being roughly taken away without knowing the context or the details of the situation? Digest it in three seconds and make a decision…

Speak Your Mind