Please excuse the historical reference, but when the radicals of the French Revolution were most afraid of losing power, they embarked on a campaign of mass murder:
The September Massacres were a wave of killings in Paris (September 2–3, 1792) and other cities in late summer 1792, during the French Revolution. There was an overwhelming fear that foreign armies would attack Paris and the prisoners would revolt and massacre the people. Radicals called for preemptive action, especially journalist Jean Paul Marat who called on draftees to kill the prisoners before they marched off. The action was undertaken by mobs of national Guardsmen and some fédéré; it was tolerated by the city government (the Paris Commune, which called on other cities to follow suit). By September 6, half the prison population of Paris had been executed: some 1200 to 1400 prisoners. Of these 233 were nonjuring Catholic priests who refused to support the government. However, the great majority of those killed were common criminals. The massacres were repeated in many other French cities. No one was prosecuted for the killings, but the political repercussions first injured the Girondists (who seemed too moderate) and later the Jacobins (who seemed too bloodthirsty).//
It does seem that Leftist attacks on their enemies have become more unhinged, frequent and dangerous.
Here is one reason why this is happening:
It's obvious that the far left has decided there are no longer constraints on what it can do to anyone who disagrees with it. How did this happen? Who let the dogs out?
The answer is not university presidents. The answer is that the Obama administration let the dogs out.
The trigger event was an agreement signed last May between the federal government and the University of Montana to resolve a Title IX dispute over a sexual-assault case.
Every college administrator in the U.S. knows about this agreement. Indeed, there are three separate, detailed "Montana" documents that were signed jointly—and this is unusual—by the civil-rights divisions of the Justice and Education Departments. Remarked DoJ's Joceyln Samuels, "The government is stronger when we speak with one voice."
That's real muscle. But read the agreement. It is Orwellian.
The agreement orders the school to retain an "Equity Consultant" (yes, there is such a thing) to advise it indefinitely on compliance. The school must, with the equity consultant, conduct "annual climate surveys." It will submit the results "to the United States."
The agreement describes compliance in mind-numbing detail, but in fact the actual definitional world it creates is vague. It says: "The term 'sexual harassment' means unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature." But there are also definitions for sexual assault and gender-based harassment. All of this detailed writ is called "guidance." As in missile.
No constitutional lawyer could read this agreement and not see in it the mind of the Queen of Hearts: "Sentence first, verdict afterwards!" Indeed, the U.S. Education Department felt obliged to assert that the agreement is "entirely consistent with the First Amendment."
First Amendment? It's more like a fatwa. The Obama administration has issued a federal hunting license to deputize fanatics at any university in America. They will define who gets accused, and on what basis.
The White House enabled these forces again last week, releasing an Education Department list of 55 colleges that are "under investigation" for possible Title IX violations. Not formally cited but "under investigation." The list includes such notorious Animal Houses as Catholic University, Swarthmore, Knox College, Carnegie Mellon and Harvard Law School. In truth, every school in America is effectively on the list.