At the same time, YWC promotes a celebration of western European culture. On the YWC Web site and Facebook group, there are numerous historical references to European culture. I was wondering how that plays into your role at UNC.
"The problem with university students and faculty is that there is basically, in our opinion, a deep mistrust and hatred of Western heritage. We're constantly focusing on the sins of our past. It's not to say they weren't sins. It's just to say that we need to revitalize our culture and not constantly talk about mistakes we might have made. We've long since made up for the sins we might have committed."
Do you mean slavery and the Inquisition?
"I can definitely say that slavery's one of the sins. When it comes to things like the Inquisition, I'd rather not comment—I don't want to condemn it. That's a personal opinion, and not really a club opinion."
You have got to be kidding me. You don't want to condemn the torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of people because of thought crimes? WTF are these people smoking? The Inquisition tortured people to extract confessions. They wanted to know if anyone else might be heretics or were skiving off of their Catholic duties. They used waterboarding, the rack, and in certain times and places, things worse than that. The Spanish Inquisition, which is probably the most well known thanks to Monty Python's Flying Circus, was apparently renowned for their creative torturing of prisoners. But they weren't the only Inquisition. There were plenty of others that operated all over Europe from the mid-13th century when it was founded to combat Catharism in the Languedoc to the 19th century. In fact, the Holy Office of the Inquisition still exists to this day in Catholicism, albeit under a different name, The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
When someone wouldn't give in under torture and condemn other people, and renounce any thoughts that they had that were contrary to the "good" teachings of the Catholic church, they were turned over to the secular arm of the government and burned at the stake, or in certain other times and places drawn and quartered, dragged by horses and/or hanged. Sometimes if the "crime" was a small one, they were given penance, and if they relapsed into their heresy, they didn't get a third chance. The second trial was a certain death sentence. And this stupid bastard doesn't want to condemn any of that, indeed, it seems that he wasn't keen on telling the interviewer what he really thought about it since he didn't want to comment on it. I wonder why? Could it be because he fancies doing that sort of thing to people?