Friends, today I bring you a cornucopia of wisdom and insight...
First, check out this article about a college student who wrote an op-ed about the ignorance and outspokenness of "white boys". Now, I support free speech -- don't get me wrong -- but the author of this article is venting prejudice and stereotypes about a group defined by their skin color and gender. Would Dickinson allow the article to be published, if it was similarly biased against blacks or women? Duh. The double standard on "racism" and "sexism" lives on.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/not-racist-college-student-wrote-op-ed-titled-white-boys-allowed-talk-speaks-221855881.html
This is a great blog post by someone very knowledgeable about the climate change debate. He argues convincingly that the idea that the world is on its last legs is mere hype:
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-2-7-the-climate-scare-ever-more-shrill-ever-less-serious
And here's another great article about the ongoing migration of Americans from high-tax states to low-tax states. Hardly surprising. You'll note that many red states are due to gain in Congressional representation after the 2020 census. Unfortunately those changes won't benefit President Trump in 2020, however. The changes don't take effect until 2022.
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/429623-americans-continue-their-march-to-low-tax-states
I'm no great admirer of Nate Silver and his ilk. These election prognosticators basically read the polls, opine that the polls are probably right, and collect the accolades. Big deal. However, Nate makes an important point towards the end of the article. A very large Democratic field of presidential candidates in 2020, combined with new rules that require the proportional allocation of delegates, makes it possible, maybe even probable, that the Democratic nominee won't be chosen by the time of the Democratic National Convention. It could be a floor fight, in other words, and horse-trading, which determine who the Democratic candidate will be. In short, it could get ugly! Hooray!
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/everyones-running-and-that-could-be-dangerous-for-the-democrats/
Finally, this is a must-read. It looks as though the Trump administration will drive a stake through the heart of "disparate impact," a truly odious legal doctrine that basically says that, if the arbitrary racial quotas concocted in the minds of liberals aren't fulfilled by any institution or business, racism can be ASSUMED, regardless of whether it's actually present or provable. I sincerely hope the Trump administration, and the Supreme Court, will end this very common form of reverse discrimination once and for all:
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/02/14/trump_looks_to_end_numbers-only_bias_theory_governing_american_life.html
Dr. Waddy: If it were possible to take to corporal task the historical perpetrators or apologists, by their actions, of undoubted wrongs like slavery, there would be some justice in it,though assignment of all culpability may not be possible. Then excoriate their memory, yes? But that can do wrong to those who objectively perceive some considerable merit in people like Jefferson or Lee and those people may not countenance it and they may persist; that's just the way it is. If it is to be argued that certain contemporary groups benefit unfairly today from the actions of past white males , to the continued disadvantage of the perceived still oppressed, then the considerable remedial efforts (often voluntary and costly - eg. death fighting for the Union)of white males, to the end of justice for the oppressed, must be given due credit. Arguments to the contrary must satisfy standards of intellectual honesty or be regarded as efforts to force compliance. There is of course much evidence of that these days. White males are simply not going to accept being relegated to continuous apology for the actions of persons, historic or not, with whom the majority of them disagree - namely those who wished or wish women and minorities ill, especially by those who demand deference, even unto abject admission of subconscious "MICROagression", for themselves and movements intending to force that upon white males. They will meet unrelenting resistance and that adds up to permanent conflict. For any who may level the dismissive and assumed self evident charge of "racism" on such opinion I say "reexamine the word honestly"; it has been, in my opinion, as discredited by presumptuous and cynical misuse over the last fifty years as to be essentially meaningless, though it does retain an intimidating power often unjustly wielded.
ReplyDeleteThe Dickinson student's essay speaks for itself and has met with some creditable criticism. Note the statement therein to the effect " no institution dedicated to the disenfranchisement of white males has ever been established". I have much personal experience of "affirmative action" in NY state government employment and know it to have been exceedingly "affirmative" in that very injustice. I saw numerous examples of accomplished white males denied promotion in favor of grossly incompetent members of historically oppressed groups. My own seniority, earned by years of service inside the prison walls, was declared irrelevant by "affirmative action" in case of layoffs. Was I personally responsible for the travails of those who have been treated unfairly? Was it right that I should bear that burden? If NY leftist bureaucrats (themselves shielded from such consequences, of course), wished to shield "protected groups", could they not simply have preserved their positions in government employment, without denying ,to those proven faithful, regardless of their birth, job protection which was an ongoing incentive for them? If not, why not? Naturally, I look to any effort by the Trump administration to disempower those who would remedy "disparate impact" with summary and presumptuous denial of earned benefits to the "politically incorrect", with favor. If those who advocate such retribution advance the "continuing effect of historical oppression" as a standard for discreditation of sincere and far reaching efforts to do right in this time, I bid them beware - well applied historiography may well offer examples of their own culpability for such abuse of other peoples! Their fevered logic may well, in consequence, enable their own guilt.
Dr.Waddy: How dare you question, in any manner, that catastrophic global warming is imminent and that the evidence for it is as undeniable that the actions of venal capitalists and others who are convinced of the benefits to human well being "confirmed" by modern technology, especially those "proven" by the insolent use of natural gas, are the obvious cause? How dare you! Your moral vacuousness denies your argument further serious perusal and will be recorded against that assured day when we may exact your answer to your assured perfidy.
ReplyDeleteJack, you are wise to ask what definition of "racism" those on the Left make use of, although you can be sure that just asking the question will be perceived as a MACRO-aggression in itself... The Dickinson student's response to charges of racial bias was revealing. She said, in effect, I'm not white, so I can't be racist. By and large, though, we must thank her for joining the debate. Her very obtuseness is an asset to those who seek to establish race relations on a sounder basis. And your point that there are now, and have been in the last few decades, MANY institutions dedicated to reverse discrimination is absolutely correct. An objective study of whether, on balance, people of color are more likely to encounter AFFIRMATIVE discrimination than negative discrimination is long overdue. Such studies tend to be useless, though. They generally confirm the preconceptions of whomever is doing the study.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I'm sure you're right that my heretical statements have long since guaranteed my persecution by future leftist overlords. Perhaps they will imprison me? My only solace lies in the very high regard the Left has for inmates... Who knows. My circumstances might improve!
Dr. Waddy: I'd ask the Dickinson student: Are you assuming that because I'm a white male that my opinions have been uneffected by those verities, especially undeniable historical ones, which form your overall views on race and sex relations ? Why make the effort then of taking me to task? Surely your remonstrances are of no better persuasiveness than those to which we have already been exposed.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy:Your confidence that once esconsed in the Cuomo exalted ranks of the incarcerated you are by definition excused all moral culpability, is demonstrably well taken. Why Andrew mourns the officially straitened lives of police killers and cannot "for days" understand why that would disturb those in state law enforcement under his onerous command.
I feel an overwhelming attack of common sense, a perception I know to be considered antithetical to correct "thinking" in the political culture now dominant in NYS, when I consider why real Americans bail out of the "Empire State" (the "Imperial State"?). I shall be as insolent as to provide a primer to those who embrace that newly confirmed totalitarian system:
You see, Prince Cuomo has made it clear that we are not welcome in HIS state and it follows from that that he has no compunctions about driving us out. OK, we've gotten the message and since there is an overwhelmingly REAL America nearby, we have chosen to repair to it in ever increasing numbers.
The consummately hostile attitude in NYS toward people with positive lifestyles (since they are considered simply to be privileged)does suggest to those among the most positive in our economy, those with the guts to embark on enterprises free and profit seeking, that in NY they run an ever present risk of having all their efforts negated (punished even)by 23 year old Marxists in the state bureaucracy, at will. Not surprisingly, they flock to those states in which such people are, ehh, discouraged and bade go elsewhere.
The Federal crackdown on Federal tax breaks for those who contribute, often unwillingly, to the "take from the productive , give to the unproductive" principle so very obvious in those who now command NYS and CA, focuses attention unwelcome by the elite which considers itself far better able to direct public and private wealth to worthy causes than the primitive populace. Their confiscatory presumption is revealed in sharp and telling relief. The inevitable consequence? Well, an emigration of the unenlightened which is of present satisfaction but which leads to increasing powerlessness on the national scene (eg. loss of House seats and electoral votes ). "Empire State" no more; "Enervating Principality", that's more like it. CA - might as well be a foreign and not too friendly country .
Hi Jack. Yes, the stampede out of NYS continues apace. I believe we're due to lose two Congressional seats after 2020 -- California may even lose one. At a certain point the "business model" of big government states may become unsustainable, but luckily for the anti-capitalists there are a lot of wealthy people who, despite their own persecution, seem to enjoy living on the coasts. Masochism perhaps? Of course, if Amazon is any indication (and its a pretty good barometer in this day and age), AOC and her ilk might be a bridge too far, even for the left-leaning elite. I wonder if at some point billionaires like Bloomberg could even pull the plug on the Democrats?
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: If Bloomberg had summarily imposed on him completely confiscatory taxes like those which obtained in the UK before PM Thatcher; if he were to be saved from some subhuman savage by an unforgiveably armed Good Samaritan; if he were to be declared a subject rather than a citizen simply because of his physical attributes; he would become exemplary of former Philly Mayor Frank Rizzo's truism - " A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged" - and pretty damned quick too. The Dems rush to Marxist madness may well be politically suicidal, as long as our country wakes up in time - that is - before the totalitarians among us deny us all choice.
ReplyDeleteWell said. Bloomberg may not be salvageable, but I suspect a lot of wealthy Americans are quaking in their boots right now. Maybe the "Silent Majority" of millionaires and billionaires will vote with their pocketbooks (and their votes) in 2020? We need them to step up, because Bloomberg and his ilk are preparing to spend gargantuan sums.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: They may well be unable to believe in the possibility of a deluge, as improbable as it appears, but worse, they do not recognize the immense destructive potential embodied in the undoubted intention of the majority of declared Dem candidates to attempt to effect catastrophic change, nonetheless unneeded and unwanted, on a recalcitrant America. The Dems actually think that a winning strategy; God forbid that they are right. That the tumbrels might be refurbished and the headsman's blades rehoned, FOR THE SILLY SYBARITES, is beyond their ken. Oh, they probably wouldn't be crudely dispatched by this "enlightened" horde but for those brought up in wealth, consignment to the middle class would be living death. They'd better realize they have this in common with the real America they so despise.
ReplyDelete