You are here


Complexities of antiracism

For another example of how complicated diversity and antiracism make things, here’s something by an Asian woman born in Uganda and now living in London: Racism and the truth about the Ugandan Asians. Say what you like, she’s a woman of principle. The first principle is that everything is really something else. The second is that someone else is really to blame. The third is that the presence of “racism” trumps and transforms everything, including normal human reactions like resentment for gross injury and gratitude for generosity.

A typical passage:

Never forget that when we came here in 1972 Enoch Powell was at his most powerful [this was four years after the Tories bounced him from the shadow cabinet], although there were thousands of people who did welcome us and the mood was not as hysterically anti-immigration as it is today. Nor was Idi Amin as wholly demented as people believe.


Gleichschaltung in the British theater

Another effort in Britain to bring cultural institutions into line: Racism in British Theatres. I look forward to future reports on indecency, lack of patriotism, doubts about the work ethic and who knows what else in the British theater. The reports on racism in the theater follow reports on racism in British universities and many other public and cultural institutions.


Jail time for the “n” word

There’s something very odd about treating this as “course of conduct or repeatedly committed act which alarms or seriously annoys another person”: Man Sentenced To Jail For Racial Slur. It was a one-time event, and the black woman involved didn’t even hear the offending “n” word. Nor did anyone seem to think the event represented a serious social problem in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.


Rural diversity

There’s an air of unreality to the Voice of America assertion that slower processing of refugee claims is causing problems in North Dakota because the state is “struggling to maintain its population” and “refugees are a vital part of [its] economic development.” Even if it’s true that the arrival of mainly unskilled third-world immigrants improves things for those North Dakotans who haven’t moved elsewhere, it seems unlikely that a shortfall of 250 or so from one source among many—which seems to be the concern—would make much of a difference.

Accounts from England of racism in rural areas and demands for “practical strategies to develop an effective anti-racist agenda” may help fill out the picture of the effect of efforts to promote “diversity” in the hinterlands. First outsiders move or are moved into areas where the people have a settled way of life. Then when there’s friction the locals have to be reformed to extirpate any assumption they’ll be able to live in the way and among the people to whom they’re accustomed. All to the good, if the purpose of government is getting everyone to get with the program.


The Homintern strikes again!

Diversity and tolerance just keep rolling, at least in the sense that everything has to be the same everywhere: Peru Celebrates First Gay Pride Event and Malta’s Green Party Puts Gay Rights On The Agenda. There seems to be nothing local about current trends, which to my mind should put to rest (in the minds of those so troubled) the notion that it’s all a Jewish plot or that importing Peruvians and Maltese would strengthen family values in America.


Roommate discrimination

More tolerance! Eugene Volokh, libertarian-leaning immigrant Russian-Jewish law professor, has dug up a recent California Fair Employment & Housing Commission case in which the Commision fined a woman $500 for inflicting “emotional distress” on a would-be roommate by telling him that “I don’t really like black guys.


In the civil rights trenches

Could a free people conceivably accept the civil rights laws? Here’s a report from the front: “Specially Ill-Educated”, on the effects of the Federal command to “mainstream” students with behavioral disorders. If a kid kicks and bites but doesn’t injure people seriously it’s been decided in Washington that local educators can’t remove him from class because that would treat him unequally.

The situation is bizarre but not anomalous. To govern is to distinguish cases and act accordingly. The basic principle of antidiscrimination laws, therefore, is that people can’t be allowed to govern themselves. They’ll only hurt each other, so everyone must be placed permanently in custody. That principle is now thought to demand comprehensive worldwide bureaucratic control of all social relationships, even the most fundamental and intimate of ties. The relevance of common sense—a.k.a. deeply-rooted social stereotypes—is rejected on principle.

Tomorrow is July 4th, still sometimes called Independence Day. It’s the national day of a country whose highest achievement is now thought to be the civil rights laws. Hasn’t something gone wrong somewhere?


Islamophobia in Britain

Here’s a worthwhile account of the Islamophobia panic among British elites. The panic is quite comprehensible—in times of stress a society needs to reaffirm its core beliefs, and Western political life is now based on what the article calls “a profound distrust of the public - a fear that base sentiments lurk under the surface, only requiring a spark to be unleashed.”


The EEOC and the Supreme Court

Equal justice under law: EEOC directs agents to ignore Supreme Court ruling on back pay and other remedies available to illegal alien employees. In the meantime they’re looking into ways to comply verbally, for example by awarding “restitution for unpaid work” instead of “back pay.” Quite right, too. As we’ve noted before, rooting out discrimination is the supreme imperative that trumps all else.


Staples on Jefferson/Hemings

And here’s a characteristically thuggish piece by New York Times diversity hire Brent Staples on the Jefferson/Hemings issue we’ve discussed before. He manages to grind a surprising number of his many axes, which argues a certain skill, but he seems to have no notion that things are true if they’re true and false if they’re false.


Non angeli sed Angli …

An interesting article: Genes show Welsh are the true Britons. The historians have gone back and forth on this, but it now appears that the Angles and Saxons did ethnically cleanse the native Britons.


Times Square entertainment

It’s interesting those guys are still there: The Children of Israel. I don’t often go near Times Square these days, and it’s been couple of years since I’ve seen them, but they really are as bad as Mr. Goldblatt says.


Noonan on good and bad patriotism

In a very idle moment (I was looking at an interactive map showing blogs located near my subway stop) I ran into the following horrible quote from Peggy Noonan:


Diversity in New Hampshire

Is it ever anything but? Diversity top priority for new University of New Hampshire leader. The current numbers more or less reflect the racial composition of New Hampshire, but that’s just not good enough. After all, ”A world class education requires a diverse educational community” and thus social engineering and thought control. Meanwhile, Seattle struggles to maintain diversity in the face of a ruling prohibiting race-based assignments, and social scientists find that crude mixing isn’t enough—you have to engineer friendships as well.


Antiracist prosecutor in the UK

Sir David Calvert-Smith, UK director of public prosecutions, says most Britons are guilty of racism. He’s right, of course. Once you buy into antiracism and the rest of it the need to extirpate all traces of non-bureaucratic human relatedness becomes a sort of jihad—an infinite battle for the goal that exceeds all others.


Open borders rhetoric in Europe

I found this BBC article, EU immigration policies condemned, a useful compendium of open-borders rhetorical devices:

  • Attribute concern about immigration to the “far right.”
  • Call for “strong leadership” (i.e., ignoring popular concerns).
  • Request the strong leadership to “dispel popular misconceptions and fears” (i.e., engage in obfuscation and shut down discussion).
  • Call excluding illegals “sealing borders” or “Fortress Europe.” Say it’s xenophobic and can’t be done anyway, so what’s needed are legal channels of entry.
  • Say “anti-immigrant” and not “anti-immigration.”
  • Otherwise refer to everything that might be done as ineffective, counterproductive, or against human rights, and claim all immigration is either beneficial to the receiving country, required by human rights, or both.
  • Never vary from the key point: there are no legitimate arguments, and can be no legitimate arguments, against essentially open borders. The only problem worthy of public discussion is xenophobia and how to fight it. Thus EU proposals to do something about illegal immigration can only be understood as a way of dealing with the far right.

Similar rhetorical devices are of course used with regard to other elements of the left/liberal agenda.


Diversity as good business strategy

The indisputable orthodoxy today is that companies need to be able to integrate all sorts of people into their workforce, and that diversity is strength. Hence such things as the following: Diversity drive at BP targets gay staff , and Wales: Training Service Opened To Combat Homophobia In Workplace. If you think there’s a problem with homosexuality you’d better get with the program.


Indian underclass

An interesting addition to social taxonomy—Indians in Malaysia: A community in distress. I don’t know of another expat Indian underclass. Possible causes: they have to compete with the far more numerous Chinese, and don’t benefit from the strong affirmative action programs in favor of the Malay majority. Also, they were brought to Malaya as plantation workers, and so lived several generations as wards of the big rubber growers.


The majesty of justice

Liberals have traditionally been very much concerned with procedure, perhaps because they justify their rule by saying they impose nothing substantive but only a general requirement of fair play. On the other hand, it’s obvious that on some issues like affirmative action they know what the answer has to be and all others are not only wrong but inconceivable. What happens when the two tendencies conflict? Disorder in the Court suggests the answer: substance wins. That shouldn’t be a surprise.


Immigration and income polarities

Makes sense: if you import the world, then you import the inequalities of the world. The headline says “Census Finds Rising Tide, and Many Who Missed Boat”, but the data suggest it’s less those missing the boat than those getting off the boat who are behind declining incomes in places like LA.



Subscribe to RSS - Inclusiveness