Two or three decades in the future, should our public schools once again be teaching history, and if common sense might have regained wide acceptance among the populace, I’m thinking our present is setting up some crushingly difficult true-false quizzes.
Those future students are going to look back at this world picture, especially as 2019 melts into 2020, and think too many were partaking too liberally of the newly legalized recreational smoking of loco weed.
Our current times likely will be viewed with the mixture of anachronistic wonder and outright disgust, neatly encapsulated in the question the enlightened young often have reserved for past behavior of their elders: What were you people thinking?
Let us visit a 2050 classroom of Donald J. Trump High School (the location matters not, because before ending his second term, President Trump signed an executive order renaming all public high schools after him) and check out a history test regarding our era.
Remember, each statement must be rated as true or false.
In November 2019, a Polish chef helped stop a deadly terrorist attack on London Bridge by wielding a five-foot narwhal tusk.
A: True. Surprisingly, PETA types didn’t run immediately to eagerly awaiting media microphones to protest such insensitive and vulgar use of a souvenir from an endangered species.
The perpetrator of that same London Bridge attack had been released early from prison, where he’d served fewer than seven years of a 16-year sentence for plotting to bomb the London Stock Exchange.
A: True. Fortunately, the man won’t get another early prison release and the opportunity to go for a terrorist hat trick, having been shot dead on the scene of the bridge incident.
In late 2019, millions of Democrats whose previous brush with being bi-lingual had been reciting the advertising slogan “Yo quiero Taco Bell,” were running around the country invoking “Quid pro quo” as the reason Trump should be impeached.
A: True. Also true is that they’d have been better served chanting – and understanding – Latin legal terms such as corpus delicti or contra legem. Feel free to look up those, you language-curious sorts.
Editors of a Northwestern University student newspaper apologized for being “invasive” and because they had “hurt students” with coverage of those protesting a speaking appearance by former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
A: True. This grovelling display from what formerly had been considered among the very best of journalism schools, speaks to the peaking of political correctness, which you know, as a student in 2050, since has been left on the ash heap of history.
Even as candidates seeking the 2020 presidential nomination of the increasingly misnamed Democratic Party were trying to out-socialist each other, voters in Hong Kong, with firsthand knowledge of living under the socialist yoke of China, voted almost 90% of open district council seats to pro-democracy candidates.
A: True. That’s the problem with socialism. It sounds good – who doesn’t like free stuff and living off the toil of others? – but human nature always intrudes and socialism never works in the real world.
One particularly hypocritical writer for the formerly great New York Times savaged a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, Tulsi Gabbard, for wearing a white pants suit, after formerly having fawned over Hillary Clinton, a previous Democratic presidential candidate, for wearing a white pants suit.
A: True. This is but one reason why long before 2050 The New York Times had been relegated to a role of digital bird-cage liner.
When Michael Bloomberg entered the Democratic presidential field, his eponymous Bloomberg News had an internal memo that was leaked saying that his “news” organization would not investigate the boss, or other Democratic candidates, but Trump still was fair game.
A: True. Another day, another example of, if not fake, at least biased news coverage.
In the first two decades of this century, a curious mix of snowflakes who needed therapy animals and coloring books to help them cope with any of life’s harsh realities, and social justice warriors who were good mostly at harassing people they didn’t agree with politically in restaurants and at their homes, were embracing eagerly the prospect of a civil war that they and their left-wing buddies would win easily.
A: True. This may seem the most incredible answer of all based on your view from 2050, knowing that the conservatives won the civil war without firing a single shot of the traditional variety. Instead, they merely hurled cuts of raw meat across the battle lines and used loudspeakers to rain upon their adversaries both gender-specific pronouns and reminders that Trump had beaten Hillary, leaving members of the opposition curled up in fetal positions and incapable of leaving their parents’ basements.