Milton Friedman on Capitalism v. Discrimination - Milton Friedman explains how affirmative action can’t eradicate prejudice and argues that society can make better progress by understanding human nature.

......................

Look at all those terrible actors to got hired as affirmative action at the expense of all the good actors that didn't. See that is the sneaky thing "progressives" have done. They sneaked in a new constitutional "right" that overrides the older constitution, because.... "progress" off course.

That is why you should all ditch rights and go back to what really matters. Morality. Liberalism is immoral by design.

Roger Scruton: How Socialism got Repackaged into Human Rights

Human Rights: Nonsense on Stilts? - Sir Roger Scruton

[forbes.com]

......................

“The ideological fantasies of this movement [New Left of the 1960s] … were no more than a nonsensical expression of the whims of spoilt middle-class children, and while the extremists among them were virtually indistinguishable from Fascist thugs, the movement did without doubt express a profound crisis of faith in the values that had inspired democratic societies for many decades.… The New Left explosion of academic youth was an aggressive movement born of frustration, which easily created a vocabulary for itself out of Marxist slogans … : liberation, revolution, alienation, etc. Apart from this, its ideology really has little in common with Marxism. It consists of “revolution” without the working class; hatred of modern technology as such; …the cult of primitive societies … as the source of progress; hatred of education and specialized knowledge.” ― Leszek Kołakowski, Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders, the Golden Age, the Breakdown

......................

“Originated by the green leading-edge in academia, this aperspectival madness of “no truth” leapt out of the universities, and morphed into an enormous variety of different forms—from direct “no-truth” claims, to rabid egalitarianism, to excessive censoring of free speech and unhampered knowledge acquisition, to extreme political correctness (that forced the best comedians to refuse to perform at colleges any more, since the audiences “lacked all sense of humor”: you’re allowed to laugh at nothing in a “no value is better” world—even though that value itself is held to be better), to far-left political agendas that in effect “equalized poverty,” to egalitarian “no judgment” attitudes that refused to see any “higher” or “better” views at all (even though its own view was judged “higher” and “better” than any other), to modes of entertainment that everywhere eulogized egalitarian atland, to a denial of all growth hierarchies by confusing them with dominator hierarchies (which effectively crushed all routes to actual growth in any systems anywhere), to the media’s sense of egalitarian “fairness” that ended up trying to give equal time to every possible, no matter how factually idiotic, alternative viewpoint (such as Holocaust deniers), to echo chambered social media where “pleasant lies” and “reassuring falsehoods” were the standard currency.” ― Ken Wilber

......................

“It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. People with a sense of fulfillment think it is a good world and would like to conserve it as it is, while the frustrated favor radical change. Faith in a holy cause is to a considerable extent a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves. The permanent misfits can find salvation only in a complete separation from the self; and they usually find it by losing themselves in the compact collectivity of a mass movement. The quality of ideas seems to play a minor role in mass movement leadership. What counts is the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of the opinion of others, the single handed defiance of the world. Hatred is the most accessible and comprehensive of all the unifying agents. Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil.” ― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

The moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt, in a speech at the American conservative think tank Manhattan Institute, criticized the theory by saying:

[In intersectionality] the binary dimensions of oppression are said to be interlocking and overlapping. America is said to be one giant matrix of oppression, and its victims cannot fight their battles separately. They must all come together to fight their common enemy, the group that sits at the top of the pyramid of oppression: the straight, white, cis-gendered, able-bodied Christian or Jewish or possibly atheist male. This is why a perceived slight against one victim group calls forth protest from all victim groups. Intersectionality is like NATO for social-justice activists.

......................

During the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963, in his famous speech I have a Dream, American civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr., said: “I have a dream that one day little black boys and girls will be holding hands with little white boys and girls.” I agree with that statement fully. And yet looking at what I see today, I can't stop thinking that poor Martin is spinning in his grave.

“...obscurantist feature in social scientists trying to combine pluralism with environmentalism. They are so preoccupied with the role of prejudice in creating hostile environments that they perpetually deny the obvious, that stereotypes are rough generalizations about groups derived from long-term observation. Such generalizations are usually correct in describing group tendencies and in predicting certain collective actions, even if they do not adequately account for differences among individuals. Nonetheless, as Goldberg explains, the self-described pluralist and prominent psychologist Gordon Allport went out of his way in The Nature of Prejudice (1954) to reject stereotypes as factually inaccurate as well as socially harmful. For Allport and a great many other social Scientists, nothing is intuitively correct unless it is politically so.” ― Paul Edward Gottfried, After Liberalism: Mass Democracy in the Managerial State

“Racial stereotyping. For Martin Luther King, Jr., and other civil rights leaders, the sin of white racism was stereotyping all black people as inferior. It was a prejudice to be sure, but it was predicated on the assumption that all blacks were the same. King objected to stereotyping because he wanted blacks to be treated as individuals and not reduced exclusively to their racial identity (hence the meaning of his famous statement about the content of one's character taking precedence over the color of one's skin).

The postmodern left turns the civil rights model on its head. It embraces racial stereotyping - racial identity by any other name - and reverses it, transforming it into something positive, provided the pecking order of power is kept in place. In the new moral scheme of racial identities, black inferiority is replaced by white culpability, rendering the entire white race, with few exceptions, collectively guilty of racial oppression. The switch is justified through the logic of racial justice, but that does not change the fact that people are being defined by their racial characteristic. Racism is viewed as structural, so it is permissible to use overtly positive discrimination (i.e., affirmative action) to reorder society." ― Kim R. Holmes, The Closing of the Liberal Mind: The New Illiberalism's Assault on Freedom

......................

"Anti Racism" Event BANS White people From Asking Questions, It's Like Bizarro World

The University of Edinburgh has been criticised for hosting an “anti-racism” event in which white people were due to be banned from asking questions.

The conference has been organised by the Resisting Whiteness group which opposes racism and describes itself as a QTPOC (queer and trans people of colour) organisation.

There will be two “safe spaces” at the event one of which white people will be barred from entering. The safe places are meant for those who feel “overwhelmed/overstimulated or uncomfortable”.

A blurb for the “conference, talks and workshops” at the city’s Pleasance Theatre, which aim to “amplify the voices of people of colour, says: "We will therefore not be giving the microphone to white people during the Q&As, not because we don't think white people have anything to offer to the discussion, but because we want to amplify the voices of people of colour.

"If you are a white person with a question, please share it with a member of the committee or our speakers after the panel discussion."
Questions explored during the conference will include “what does it mean to be a queer and/or trans person of colour in a society that frequently does not want to see us?”.

However, Jane McColl, an anti-racism campaigner, said the event itself was “blatantly racist”, adding: “It sets back the battle to achieve equality and fairness by decades, all because of the actions of a tiny group of extremists, whose perverse sense of logic has led them to belittle white people, not by who they are as individuals, by merely because of their skin colour.

"Imagine if this event was called 'Resisting Blackness' and non-white people were told they could not ask questions, nor access a room because they were the 'wrong' colour."

A spokesman for the university said tackling racism was an important topic for debate but added that it placed “great value on issues around equality and voice”.

He said: "Consequently the university has met with the event organisers to ensure the event is compliant with our values.

"We have expressed our concerns to them about certain aspects of the format of the event and they are revising their 'safe space' policy for the conference as a result."

Source Article: [telegraph.co.uk]