Tag: affirmative action

All Men Are Created Unequal. Does That Make America Impossible?

photog Current Events , , , , , ,

In the comments section that followed Michael Anton’s recent post about natural rights (“Farewell to Z-Man!

Once More on the Question of Natural Right”), a commentor said,

“Z-man is anonymous because he writes about biological differences, which is a capital offense in our society. Anton is a colorblind civic nationalist, so he doesn’t have to fear having his life destroyed for his views.

I agree that Anton and Z-man would better spend their time fighting the Left, but the schism between those on the Right who believe that there are biological differences among the various peoples of the Earth and those who don’t believe that is fundamental.

That is at the core of the debate between Anton and Z-man. Anton says that natural rights are universal and ever-present. That implies are all peoples are the same at all times. Anton rejects biological differences. Z-man says that the rights put forth by the Founding Fathers were based on their nature. The rights grew out of the particular biology of that people, Anglo-Americans.

For Z-man, culture is downstream from biology. For Anton, biology doesn’t matter at all. That is a fundamental difference.

Anton is a colorblind civic nationalist. He doesn’t believe that culture stems from biology.

His issue with the refugees is that they come from a culture that despises American values. That makes complete sense. However, for Anton, it’s about the culture, not the people. It’s why people like Anton has such a hard time arguing with the Left about immigration.

The Left says we should have open borders or, at least, very large immigration, especially, refugees because we’re all the same so why keep people out. Anton tries to refute this by arguing that we can only let in so many so that they can absorb our culture and truly accept American values. The Left calls him cold-hearted.

Anton has no response other (than) technical arguments because he accepts the Left’s morality: that all people are (literally) created equal so the burden of proof is on him to show why some people shouldn’t be allowed in.

Z-man doesn’t accept the Left’s morality. His argument for why we should reject the Afghani refugees is that they are a different people who will never accept our culture because their biology is different.

And before you start acting like the Left and call Z-man (or me) a racist, just remember that Z-man’s beliefs are pretty much the same as most people around the world, including Israelis and Japanese.

If this was Israel or Japan, their version of Anton would simply say, “No. We will not let in these refugees because they aren’t Jewish or Japanese.”

Anton disagrees with the Israelis and Japanese. He and the Left believe in the Blank Slate, that we are all lumps of clay that can be molded into any form if you just get the culture right.

Ironically, Anton rejects nature’s role in culture.”

Much of what is said here is essentially an accurate description of the difference of positions between the Dissident Right (e.g., the Z-Man) and the Civic Nationalists (e.g., Michael Anton, me).  But there are some subtle differences that I think need to be addressed.  I won’t speak for all Civic Nationalists but I will say for myself that I categorically deny that all human beings are equal in their abilities and have the same temperaments.  In fact, I’ll go as far as saying that human beings are heterogeneous at almost every level.  Even within the same nuclear family there will be remarkable differences of intellect, physique, personality and appearance among siblings.  And between different ethnicities and races the differences will be even larger.  You don’t have to leave the same continent to find the pygmies and the Tutsi.  The first group are hunter gatherers who average less than 4’ 10” in height while the latter are pastoralists that average 6’ but are not uncommonly over 7’ in height.  As far as differences of intelligence and temperament between groups of people there are all kinds of scientific studies and popular descriptions to provide speculation for these differences.

But the basic question isn’t whether these differences exist.  The question is do these differences prevent us from living together in a meritocracy?  In other words, if I’m stupider than my neighbor Bob will that mean we can’t live in the same society without eventually being at each other’s throats?  My belief is we can live together.

The Dissident Right does not believe this.  And as proof they point to the present nightmare we’re living through with “Black Lives Matter,” George Floyd and the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion racket being run against white people.

Well, that’s a pretty powerful argument.  Add that to the fifty years of affirmative action and forced integration and you have a pretty bleak picture.

But the Left has been using this equality of outcome scam for decades as a proof that white people are discriminating against blacks.  And for whatever reason we’ve been letting them get away with it.  I no longer think it’s a convincing argument.  America is a multi-ethnic, multi-racial society and there is every combination of races and capacities on display.  And what is clearest is that trying to hire people according to their skin color is a recipe for disaster.  Everyone has probably seen or heard of people who were hired under affirmative action quotas and were completely unqualified for the job.  And what is also extremely clear is that African Americans are not the object of systemic racism.  Currently heterosexual white men are the ones being discriminated against and openly.  It seems clear that demanding the end of affirmative action and other anti-white policies and a return to a meritocratic system is the correct way to put all this racialist nonsense behind us.

To do this it will require places like Florida that have a Republican government to refuse to allow anti-white, affirmative action programs to continue.  And the very color-blind approach that the above commentor seems to disparage is the correct approach.  The United States need to get out of the race business.  In fact, I don’t think we should even list it on birth certificates or other government documents at all.  You might as well list my blood type and what kind of belly button I have too.  Instead, we should be concentrating more on things like SAT scores and which computer languages have been mastered.

Now of course maybe the Z-Man is right and the Republicans are hopelessly unable to fend off accusations of racism and they will always be the losers when the Left plays this racket.  If this is so we’ll see this play out.  But I’d like to believe someone like Ron DeSantis is the future.  He recently rejected the High School Advanced Placement curriculum for African American Studies because it was filled with lies.  This is the way to change things.  Just say no and then make it stick.  It’s not easy.  It’s a slog and a fight.  But if we choose fighters to represent us, we will get results.  If we choose squishes like Jeb! Bush, we get what we have now.

So sure, things are bad but I’m not ready to start the race war.  I think we can have a first world country without a civil war.  But it remains to be seen whether the people who claim to be our leaders are willing to fight to save it.  If they’re not then the Dissident Right will be correct.

Hollywood Blacklists White Men

photog Current Events , ,

Hollywood has codified affirmative action employment rules and is enforcing them.  So if the calculus of their rules requires that the director has to be a black transgender paraplegic then the results of the production should be fascinating.  And the results are already appearing.  Emboldened by the whip hand they’ve been given BIPOC cast and crew members now routinely lodge complaints against white male showrunners and directors knowing that the studio will put pressure on the man to kowtow to the empowered minorities or be fired.

The result of all this is obvious.  It will be all girl Ghostbusters all the time.  Expect humorless screeds from now on.  Every production from romantic comedy to action adventure will be so drowned in racial resentment and feminist screeching that the idea of being entertained will completely disappear from the experience.

I think it’s great,  I can think of no quicker way of impoverishing the industry than to let them put into practice their stupid beliefs about running society.  It’s all too reminiscent of Soviet cinema with its social justice messaging and secret police surveillance.  My only wish is that they dispense with white men all together.  Everyone from the owner of the studios to the assistant wig master should be some combination of non-white, non-male and non-normal.  I think of the great job they’ve done at reducing revenues and driving away their customers.  Eventually the Chinese will start producing movies for the American audiences and I’m sure they’ll be much, much better than the dreck Hollywood has put out in the last decade or so.

Tweaking the Narrative – How Asians Have Become White Supremacists

photog Current Events, Fake Science ,

The University of Maryland has figured a way to deal with the refusal of Asian American kids to suffer from systemic racism.  They’ve thrown Asians out of the People of Color (POC) club.  It’s been a real embarrassment to race hustlers that Chinese and Indian kids haven’t been held down by the supposed shackles of a white racist education system here and instead have excelled.  So their success has interfered with the affirmative action blueprint that the Left used to divvy up spots in top colleges.  So the University of Maryland has fixed the problem by kicking the Asian kids out of POC and forcing them into the White category where they can be discriminated against and demonized for all it’s worth.

Now that’s progress!  So if you take all the kids whose ancestors were from Europe (the white kids) and lump them together with the Asian kids does that make them the Eurasians?  And then does that mean Eurasian Supremacy is the new devil we all have to fight against?  And what about Madagascar?  It’s close to Africa but it’s in the Indian Ocean does that make them suspect of being hidden Eurasians.  It’s confusing.

Separation is Now Complete

photog Current Events , ,

Even a year ago there were plenty of people who honestly hoped that the Left and Right could paper over their differences and find a path forward that both sides could live with.  Sort of a Missouri Compromise for the 21st century.

I don’t believe that is any longer the case.  Sure, there are some people who make believe that everything will work out in the end and really this is all for the best.  But all of those people are on the Left.  Although some of them think of themselves as being in the middle.  But if you see what they are willing to tolerate then not calling them the Left is inaccurate.  Anyway, the Left figures that if they just keep doing what they’re doing now, we’ll either see the light of their day or just give up and go along with the inevitability of the right side of history.

But other than people who are completely unaware of what is happening on the ground everyone on the Right knows that we cannot live with the Left any longer.  The hatred they have for us is visceral and the tactics they are willing to use to get their way are not tolerable.

So, here we are.  We know what we need, separation.  What we don’t know is how or when.  It seems fairly apparent that it won’t be an easy process.  I’ll even say it won’t be bloodless, although, I don’t think we’re talking about a shooting war with tanks and drones and ground divisions.  I think it will be something like the Fall of the Soviet Union.  Things at the edges will start to unravel and the powers that be will lose control of the narrative and then start to lose control of events.  To a small extent it’s already happening.  The Red State governors stopped even paying lip service to President “Mask Up!” and just declared the COVID fiasco over.  And they made it stick.  And even the Blue State governors understood that they couldn’t keep the charade going any longer.  What will be the next domino to fall?  Will it be illegal aliens?  Will Texas start rounding them up on its own or denying them work and forcing them to leave?  Maybe.  Will the Supreme Court tell Alabama they can’t stop abortions after the heartbeat of the baby and will Alabama ignore them?  Maybe.

So, nobody knows how all this will go but we do know what we don’t want.  We don’t want BLM destroying our lives.  In fact, we don’t want affirmative action anymore.  If the Supreme Court thinks affirmative action is constitutional then the Supreme Court has to go.  We don’t want to defund the police.  Say what you will about the police.  Some of them are thugs too.  But my odds of avoiding crime are a hell of a lot better if the boys in blue are keeping the Bloods and the Crips on a very short leash.  We want color blind justice so that a melting pot like the United States was can come close to treating everyone sort of fairly.  We don’t want to be told what we can and cannot say or believe and we don’t want anyone telling us who we have to like or dislike.  And we damn sure know we need to be able to protect ourselves with our own weapons.  We may even need to protect ourselves from the Federal government.  The FBI has become the KGB, an enemy of the free people and we have more to fear from them than from any Russian threat.

We know we’re two different nations.  All we need now is a way to make it official.

So that’s what I think.  Does anyone disagree and think we’ll be able to meet the Left in the middle?  Let me know.  I’m always interested in other opinions.

Paul Gosar (Republican, AZ) Drafts Legislature to Ban Affirmative Action

photog Current Events , ,

Sure it’s not even a possibility but it’s exactly what I’ve been saying for years.  If the Supreme Court had any guts they would have declared Affirmative Action unconstitutional decades ago and ended it.  Kudos to the congressman for at least showing his convictions.  Others hould follow him.

 

Exclusive: Tomorrow Paul Gosar Will Deliver Body Blow to Liberal/Globalist Ruling Class When He Introduces the “MERIT Act”

 

Has the Madness Finally Outweighed Everything Else?

photog Current Events , , , , , , ,

Do you remember when we were told that the only reason why homosexuals wanted civil unions was because otherwise, they would be denied visitation rights in the hospital?  Compare that to the current LGBTQ agenda:

  • Homosexual men must have the right to adopt male children.
  • Homosexuals must be allowed in the military.
  • Men who decide that they are actually women must be permitted to compete against women in women’s sports.
  • Men who decide that they are actually women must be allowed in the girls’ bathroom.
  • Men who decide that they are actually women must be called by whatever “pronouns” they designate for themselves under penalty of criminal law.
  • Normal men must date men who decide that they are actually women and normal women must date women who decide they are actually men.
  • There are more than two sexes.
  • Biological sex is just a social construct.
  • Wedding bakers and photographers and other merchants must provide their services to homosexuals regardless of whether they have religious objections to these relationships.
  • The schools in this country must indoctrinate our children with the idea that these things are normal, sensible and good.
  • Children who have been confused into thinking they are “transgender” must be allowed to decide for themselves that they will be treated with hormone therapy and amputations of their reproductive organs to somehow accommodate these delusions about their sexual identities.

And how about the feminist agenda?  Remember when it was all about not discriminating against young women who just wanted to make their way in a “man’s world?”  What does it look like now?

  • The physical training requirements of the United States military forces have been severely downgraded to allow women to serve in combat roles. And even by these watered-down standards most of the female recruits are unqualified.
  • Quotas are now mandatory in almost all sectors and organizations both private and government to require women well in excess of the number of qualified women for these jobs.
  • The number of women in STEM fields has to be increased regardless of competency or even interest in the subject. If necessary “management” roles must be provided to allow women to share in the prestige of a skill set they do not possess.

And finally let’s look at that most endless source of grief.  When the civil rights war “struggle” began Martin Luther King said he had a dream that one day his children would be judged on the content of their character and not the color of their skin.  Well, where are we now?

  • All things are judged by the color of skin. If your skin color is black then all things are done in your favor.  If your skin color is white then you’re just plumb out of luck.
  • If a black man commits a crime and the police catch him, they cannot use force to arrest him. He can punch, kick, stab or shoot them.  If they even subdue him by grappling him to the ground then they will be blamed if he dies of a heart condition that he exacerbated by fighting with the police.  In fact, they will be charged with his murder.
  • If the government decides that black rioting and looting are needed to win an election or punish the white inhabitants of an area then no crimes that black people commit during this sanctioned rioting time will be pursued.
  • If black people begin to victimize other ethnicities such as Asians, then these attacks will be declared the result of white supremacy and will necessitate further rioting and looting.
  • People whose ancestors were slaves 150 years ago will be paid trillions of dollars by people whose ancestors weren’t even living in this country at the time.
  • Having black people vote requires that not only in their communities but also all across the country voting cannot require any kind of standard identification documentation like a driver’s license or even a welfare benefits card. And in their communities no standards of accuracy can be maintained.  If the vote count shows that 200% or even 500% of the number of registered voters voted then that is what happened.

 

So, these are the things that we are being told must be.  What does all this mean for us?  Well, think about what your response is when someone tells you that 1 + 1 = 3.  First off, you know that you are dealing with either a liar or a madman.  More likely you are dealing with a partnership of liars and madmen.  But let’s go on.

In each of these cases government is interfering with the freedoms of Americans.  In most cases it is the rights of free association.  You are being told who you can and cannot hire or live with or associate with.  In some cases, it is even worse.  Selective enforcement of criminal law is being used as a form of domestic terrorism.  And in the worst of the abuses a mental illness in children is being used as an excuse to allow them to mutilate themselves to satisfy other mentally ill individuals who need validation for their madness.

When I look at the LGBTQ and feminist dictates, I think of what steps I’d take to deal with these things.  The first thing I’d do is protect my children from indoctrination in these lies and madness.  Home schooling and religious schools would be the solution.  As far as the discrimination against men, it would make you think about living in a country where these laws aren’t acceptable.  Granted that is an extreme option but I think it should be considered.  Another option is self-employment.  So far, they haven’t mandated small businesses having to hire women.  But give them time.

And finally think about the problems this makes between black people and everyone else.  If blacks are now such a privileged class that they are allowed to commit property and violent crimes with impunity what would make you want to live anywhere near them at all?  Even defending yourself from being assaulted or robbed by black criminals could mean prison for you.  It’s obvious that any rational person, white, brown, yellow or red would make it his first concern to keep himself and his family as far away as possible from a black neighborhood, especially a poor black neighborhood.

And so, when you look at the entirety of current US policy as it concerns the liberal agenda on race and sex, I think you have to say that it creates a dysfunctional society that damages the lives of normal people and especially families to a very great extent.  Even if you take into account the economic advantages of living in the richest country on the planet it seems to me that the social and even psychological damage all this does outweighs the advantages.  If no hope exists to undo these crazy policies, then it seems to me that the best thing for normal people to do is get out.

The Age of Entitlement – A Book Review

photog Book Reviews, Current Events, Reviews, Trump , , , , , , , ,

Christopher Caldwell’s book, “The Age of Entitlement – America Since the Sixties” is a hard book to read.  As I described in several places it took me much too long to finish because many times I had to stop after about fifteen minutes of reading and put it down.  It was too painful to hear the seemingly endless litany of defeats, betrayals and acts of cowardice by our elected officials and their bureaucratic, academic, legal and corporate co-conspirators.  And yet I think this book should be read by anyone who doesn’t know the full history of how we have been stripped of our constitutional rights based solely on our European ancestry and normal male identity.  It is so infuriating to read, that it serves as the perfect eye-opener for anyone who still thinks that affirmative action and political correctness are harmless and just.

Caldwell walks us through the years, starting with the Civil Rights struggle against segregation in the South and shows the gradual but continual evolution of that movement from a crusade to end discrimination against blacks to a concerted program to discriminate against whites.  He shows how the logic went from successfully ending the unconstitutional denial of equal rights for blacks into implementing the unconstitutional practices of affirmative action, with its abrogation of free speech, freedom of association and property rights based on not equality of opportunity, but rather equality of outcome.  And since these decisions were made by unelected judges who were basically answerable to no one, no recourse was possible.  For every white man the burden of guilt never had to be proved.  It was always assumed.

After this Caldwell walks us through the expansion of the civil rights movement to embrace other “victims.” Next was women with the adoption by the left of abortion on demand and equal rights for women in the work place and the delegitimization of traditional marriage.  After this we get homosexual rights, immigrant rights and on to the explosion of immigration.  Finally, we come to the present day where demonization of European identity and culture is all pervasive.  We reach a point where open contempt for the native-born Americans is open and threatening.  We see these people marginalized and starved out of their homes by industry and government leaders who openly connive to replace them with immigrants legal and illegal.  They end up on welfare and waiting for death under the soporific influence of  cheap and plentiful opioids that have purposefully been allowed to flooded our streets and countryside.

Throughout Caldwell points out how the leaders of the conservative cause are always woefully unprepared or even unwilling to challenge incredibly unpopular programs and laws.  Time after time a leader will run for office on a platform to defend or revive some part of life that the progressives are undermining and again and again, we witness either a defeated attempt or no attempt at all to prevent the destruction of our way of life.

And at the heart of most of these campaigns are the progressive lawyers and judges working hand in glove with the progressives in the bureaucracies and in the non-profit foundations.  These foundations were set up by the elites that use them to push for the programs that they support but do not affect them personally.  Their schools and homes and families are above the level of being disadvantaged or impinged upon by these forces, unlike the common people that they demonize whose lives are thrown into chaos by these anti-social measures.

Equally distressing is seeing how the leaders of industry sided with the progressives in order to gain access to cheap labor by both exporting jobs to the third world and importing these third world workers right here in the United States as either legal or illegal immigrants.  And once the Tech Revolution was in full swing, we are walked through how the American men who dominated this industry adopted the progressive cause and used their new found tools to obliterate the brick and mortar retail landscape of the entire United States.  And with the diminution of newspapers, radio and television as advertising channels, communication companies like Google and Facebook now get to decide who is allowed to do business and who is not.  And they decide it based on whether they like your politics.

So, we reach the present day where any dissent from the official narrative that demonizes white men is not just shouted down but answered with de-platforming, unemployment, physical assault and sometimes criminal prosecution.  And as the book signifies on its last page.  That is what gave us the Trump presidency.

Personally, this book reinforced in my mind the necessity of challenging affirmative action in front of a conservative Supreme Court.  The fig leaf that affirmative action employs to shield its unconstitutional nature is the importance of “diversity.”  But since diversity doesn’t appear in the Constitution, a brave and honest court should strike down all the quota driven fairness devices and strip the Federal and State bureaucracies of their discriminatory mechanisms.  All that needs to be asserted is that equality under the law doesn’t need to provide equal outcomes for every individual.  Some people are smarter or stronger or more hard working or crueler or more beautiful or taller or shorter or luckier.  I can live with those things and believe me there are enough things that I wish I could do that I can’t.  But facing that is called sanity.  And it’s far from a bad thing.

I highly recommend this book.  It’s about time that someone published something as honest and informative on the subject of America’s descent into the maelstrom of social justice insanity.  It’s time that we throw our support behind whichever men are brave enough to lead the fight back to sanity.  And I know it won’t be easy.  As Steve Bannon said “If you think they are going to give you your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken.”  He’s right.  They will fight at every step.  If the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, the big cities will riot and burn.  Well, that’s nothing new.  But it’s the only way back to a world where fairness and freedom even have their original meanings.

Good work Christopher Caldwell.  You wrote a horrible, urgently important, good book.  Bravo.

Claremont Review of Books – The Law That Ate the Constitution by Helen Andrews

photog Current Events, On-Line Article Reviews, Reviews , , ,

Here’s someone else who is mining the important but horrific story in Christopher Caldwell’s book, “The Age of Entitlement.”  I’m glad to see Caldwell getting coverage all over the Right.  His story is an eye opener and should wake up many normies who are confused by how we got where we are now.  In the parlance of the kids it will red-pill many and black-pill more than a few.  But it will also show how the judiciary was weaponized and that will indicate how a conservative court could reverse huge swaths of the unconstitutional overreach by admitting that anti-white discrimination is still discrimination and is a crime.

Diversity is Our Weakness – Bakke Revisited

photog Book Reviews, Current Events, Reviews , , , , , ,

For someone as old as I am, one of the more horrific side effects of reading Christopher Caldwell’s book “The Age of Entitlement” is reliving all of the political debacles that he chronicles.  Each one comes back and delivers the same pain you felt originally plus the additional grief you get from reflecting on how that defeat reverberated through the years.

To select a specific example, Caldwell details the 1978 court case in which a white male applicant to the UC Davis medical school, Allan Bakke, was rejected in favor of a minority student.  Allan Bakke had board scores in the 96th, 94th, 97th and 72nd percentile while the minority candidate had scores in the 34th, 30th, 37th and 18th percentile.  Back then the California court rightfully ruled that Bakke had been discriminated against and also ruled that the California program that made this preference was racially discriminatory and must be eliminated.  But the University of California appealed to the Supreme Court and by a five to four vote the Court decided that although discrimination was being practiced, diversity was so important that quotas were acceptable as long as they were masked by calling them diversity “plus factors.”  Previous to this, no one had ever heard of diversity as a constitutional requirement.  So what we had was the very same anti-discrimination laws that the civil rights movement championed ten years before would now be purposefully broken by their government allies to disadvantage a population of people on the basis of race and gender.  How ironic.

This was the decision that sealed the fate of white male students across the country.  Women and various minorities would be put at the front of the line and regardless of how low their scores were they would get the seats ensured by the hidden quotas that all the universities employed.  And eventually the same system would be used by all the major corporations that were monitored by the Federal government which is essentially every one that had more than a handful of employees.

And that is where we are today.  The only difference is that additional “protected groups” like homosexuals and illegal aliens have been added over time to the rolls of the favored.  And now we have reached a place where every organization, whether a college, corporation or non-profit social group justifies this by employing a mantra that they drum into their employees, namely, “diversity is our strength.”

Diversity is our strength.  What does that even mean?  In what sense is it a strength?  I have personally witnessed diversity hires who have proven so incompetent that they effectively destroyed the functionality of a whole department.

I can remember a technical director standing up at a company meeting and during the “diversity and inclusion” sermon stating that he knew diversity was our strength because a company culture survey had confirmed that it was.  I tried not to smile, but failed because I remembered the last time a supposedly “anonymous” culture survey had provided results that contradicted the official narrative.  But anonymity was only maintained at the individual level.  All survey respondents were identified to the level of the supervisor above.  The low-level supervisors of the anonymous dissenters were told that their poor managerial skills were responsible for the “uninformed” nature of the contradictory responses of their direct reports and if the trend continued it would be handled by demoting the supervisors.  Naturally, the supervisors then begged their reports to toe the line if they didn’t want to see them fired.  So essentially the proof of diversity being a strength is that the company told the employees that it is.

Let’s look at it rationally.  If you wanted to hire mechanics what would you be looking for?  Several things; mechanical aptitude, strength, conscientiousness, experience and resourcefulness.  Now several of these general qualities we could hope to find in applicants of any race or either gender.  But if you are looking for strength and mechanical aptitude you would not be surprised to find that the great majority of the best applicants were men.  So, hiring an equal number of men and women as mechanics, while obviously producing more diversity than with an all-male staff is going to provide you with a weaker crew both in terms of strength and skill.

If you wanted to choose good medical school students what would you look for?  Until 1964 you would be looking for emotional composure, honesty but most importantly for very high analytical intelligence.  That is why science and math are the most important prerequisites for medical school.  But if after the civil rights era you would accept candidates solely based on their sex or race regardless of how low their testing scores for analytical intelligence were then you would get a weaker class of medical students.

This same exercise can be employed for any job that requires anything more than rudimentary skills.  In each case choosing candidates by a quota, regardless of fitness for the position does not give you a stronger employee, it gives a weaker one.  From this analysis I conclude that “diversity is our strength” is not just untrue but that the opposite statement is shown to be true.  If choosing applicants according to core job competency is subordinated to checking off gender and race boxes then you have purposefully picked less talented individuals as part of your selection process.  That is stupid.  And worse than stupid, it is dishonest.  And since the victims of this dishonesty, namely the co-workers, have to pretend they don’t see what’s happening it is also highly demoralizing for them.

There it is.  A dishonest process to defend an illogical goal.

There are many things that a conservative Supreme Court needs to do.  Reverse the homosexuality agenda, re-establish the right of free association and protect the First and Second Amendment Rights of all Americans.  But if I were to rank the priorities, I would say that ruling affirmative action unconstitutional is the first priority of a conservative agenda.  American society as a whole would benefit from the elimination of the dishonesty, incompetence and resentment that this insane practice foists on all of us.

Will the Supreme Court take up something like this?  Under John Roberts and with the current conservative/liberal 5/4 split it will not.  But with the 6/3 split that might soon exist it is possible.  And that is why I especially hope that President Trump ends up with a strong majority in the Senate after this year’s election.  I know he will be making an additional nomination within the next five years.  I want it to be a bold conservative judge who will make a bold step like eliminating affirmative action.

Bridging the Chasm Between the Dissident Right and the Civic Nationalists

photog Current Events, OCF, Trump , , , , ,

A week or so ago I critiqued an on-line article about finding common ground with leftists who were upset about being attacked by their even crazier neighbors in the “woke” community.  In my analysis I rejected the value of accepting them as allies and as an alternative proposed a dialog with the Dissident Right.  I said:

“So, in answer to the title of Mr. Klavan’s article, yes conservatism can be conserved but not by accepting non-conservative ideas and the people who live by them.  Let the progressives, the liberals, the moral relativists, the feminists and the alphabet people battle with their even crazier “woke” brethren (or whatever gender bent category they prefer) on their own.  We have nothing in common with them and nothing to gain by engaging with them.  I would much prefer to engage with the fringe groups to the right of us and see if we can find some common ground with them.  Their ideas are more extreme than ours but they at least do not reject the values that we embrace.  In many cases I think they have let pessimism radicalize their thinking and pushed them to conclude that only radical solutions to our problems exist.  I think the last few years have shown that progress can be made if the right people get involved.  If actual conservatives have a part in running the country better outcomes are possible.”

Recently I have read several articles by the Dissident Right that seem to echo the idea that there is room for constructive engagement between the so-called “Civic Nationalists” and the so-called “Dissident Right” (wow, that a lot scare quotes!).  Of course, from their point of view this merely means they are interested in proselytizing us over to their cause.  And, fair to say, I’m interested in changing their minds about some of the darkest pessimism they have concerning America’s future.

To be perfectly candid, the biggest difference between realistic civic nationalists and the dissidents is their conclusions about racial identity.  They are convinced that a minority majority America cannot maintain the essential characteristics that the country had when 85% of the population was of European descent.  Now this is a very sensitive subject and even acknowledging that it could be an issue has been enough to get all kinds of people banished to the gulag of the de-platformed.  Racial and ethnic topics are taboo for all but the anti-white cheerleaders of the left and their only object is to vilify everyone from Christopher Columbus to Kate Smith for not having read the playbook of the 21st Century Witch Hunters.  But considerations of race and identity are important and should be able to be discussed rationally and constructively.

The descendants of the English who founded this country have a right to be proud of what their forefathers created.  The United States is one of the most remarkable human inventions that can be pointed to.  Along with the British, Roman and Athenian systems it evolved from, it has blossomed into a model that has impacted to a greater or lesser extent, the whole of the human world.  Without a doubt, there was something about the people and the circumstances that surrounded the founding of this country that should be revered by its descendants and anyone who chooses to live in it.

The charges of guilt against America for conquering the country from the Native Americans and for slavery before the Civil War are absurdly hypocritical.  War and slavery have been a part of every human culture including the Native Americans and Sub-Saharan Africans from the very beginning and to the extent that the United States and Britain have worked to eliminate slavery and embrace the idea of all humans being a family, they should be recognized as having made a quantum leap beyond the long depressing history of nations and empires murdering and enslaving each other to stay alive.

And this hypocrisy about America’s supposed guilt is, I believe, a big part of why the Dissident Right believes that a non-European majority in the Unites States will destroy the things that have made it unique.  All of the hooting and hollering about Jefferson and Washington being slave owners and whatever the latest atrocities the Antifa idiots commit compounds the sense of unfairness that people feel when they are confronted with the ongoing discrimination that affirmative action represents.  Anyone who has seen what corporate management has become knows that choosing a woman or a minority or an LGBTQ candidate is the only way to avoid being subject to the dreaded “diversity and inclusion” police.  Your judgement will be questioned and your “unconscious bias” will be referenced by your upper management and the advocacy groups that have sprung up like poison mushrooms in every school, college, corporation and non-profit organization.

So, I’m cognizant of the outrages being perpetrated on the legacy population of the United States by, mostly, their fellow European Americans ostensibly for the benefit of these various minorities but I disagree with the dissidents on the conclusion that this has to inescapably change the country into something unrecognizable to those who loved it.  And as a rationale I am reminded of the southern European immigrants of the 1890s and early 20th century.  These people were equally considered unacceptably alien and a threat to the American nation.  And indeed, when they flooded the country in their millions, they did create chaos and an explosion of crime.  But by their desire to emulate the prosperity of their neighbors they instilled in their children the desire to be Americans in every sense and they did become Americans and they probably loved this country as much (if not more) than those Mayflower descendants who currently bad-mouth the United States for all the supposed sins that their woke brethren enumerate.  This former wave of immigrants leads me to believe that we can absorb some reasonable amount of immigration.  Obviously unlimited and illegal immigration is a danger to our system and needs to be stopped in order to allow the already large number of legal immigrants to assimilate.

But the current climate of “blame America” is the real danger I see.  Whatever numbers of immigrants are deemed harmless to the country, they still must be inculcated with a sense of gratitude for their membership in it and toward the people and culture that built it.  And to accomplish that our government must not be put in the hands of America-haters like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or any of the other Democrats who want to divide and conquer us.

As far as the dissidents’ opinions on HBD, I can’t confirm or deny whether there are such large differences between populations of humans as they claim.  But if they do exist, I still do not see the relevance.  There is plenty of variance in intelligence and other characteristics within populations and these ranges of variance act in hierarchical fashion to steer individuals to occupations and groupings that suit them more or less.  The important thing is that people feel that everyone is at least given the same chance to try to succeed.  A ditch digger who earns his money honestly doing the task he is qualified to perform is more honorable than the Ivy League legacy student who gets his spot in school and industry while more qualified candidates are rejected because their families didn’t vacation on Martha’s Vineyard.

My hope is that if honest reformers like Donald Trump can begin to roll back the harmful policies that the social justice programs of the 1960s and 1970s then maybe the dissidents will come around to our way of thinking and support reasonable reform of an admittedly dysfunctional system.  But for now, I think it’s reasonable to begin a dialog with the Dissident Right.  They were among the first who diagnosed the conscious malpractice of the Establishment Republicans and their clandestine collusion with the Left in marching this country over a cliff.  They are just as legitimate a part of the nation as some of the radical groups that the Left has welcomed into its camp.  Ostracizing them just to prove our purity is stupid and self-defeating.

So that’s what I think.  That was long because it is difficult to talk about these things without being very clear about what I mean.  But I thought it was worth saying.  Leave your opinions, if you’d like, in the comments.