What
do we get? Approximately the same thing we see going on in Venezuela:
the smothering love of the state suddenly becoming just smothering – and
the money running out.
Yet amazingly, the left wants you to get out of your car and take one of these collective riding horrors.
Worse
still, it means to run other parts of New York precisely on this
model. Thomas Lifson today wrote about how Bill de Blasio has confessed
to having a socialist yen to run every aspect of New York’s housing
market, telling everyone who gets housing and who doesn’t and how and
which and at what price. His will to absolute power is incredible.
There are two basic definitions of racism in the United States, one
roughly associated with progressives and one roughly associated with
conservatives. The former describes racism as the failure to acknowledge
and seek to redress systemic discrimination against select
disadvantaged minority groups. It is very broad and captures everything
from unconscious bias to white supremacy. The latter views racism as
making assumptions about, or taking action towards, an individual or
group on the sole basis of their race. It is narrow and generally
requires belief, intent, and animosity.
These definitions don’t simply differ; to a great extent they
actually contradict each other. Much of the contradiction stems from the
fact that the progressive definition of racism requires that an
advantaged individual or group must be attacking the less privileged.
The more conservative and narrow definition of racism requires no appeal
to power structures, only to bias, and can be committed by anyone
towards anyone.
Friedrich Nietzsche cautioned those who fight monsters to take care lest
they become monsters themselves. He should have also warned those
pretending to fight monsters, whose imagined enemies are really
projections of their own evils.
The problem with the word toxic, as it is used today, is that it not
only reflects the fear people apparently feel, but it also spreads
panic. Labelling something ‘toxic’ is to flag it up with a red danger
sign – it warns others that they may become contaminated, too. My hope
for 2019 is that the word toxic becomes confined to describing hazardous
chemicals once more.
only if there where not ideas that acutely are toxic
Democrats thinking about running for president in 2020 are dramatically changing the way the party talks about race in Donald Trump’s America: Get ready to hear a lot more about intersectionality, allyship, inclusivity and POC.
White and nonwhite Democratic hopefuls are talking more explicitly about race than the party’s White House aspirants ever have — and shrugging off warnings that embracing so-called identity politics could distract from the party’s economic message and push white voters further into Donald Trump’s arms.
Democrats running on a platform of “we really don’t like white people” is basically the only way Trump can win again in 2020, and here they are going full steam in that direction.
You do not advance on the path toward excellence by embracing the proposition that nothing is better than anything else. It is impossible in principle. This is not a claim of cultural supremacy, it is a statement of the supremacy of the individual.
They knew the rules when they ran. If Jewish people have complied then there is no need to change and they can make an exception while in Congress session.
Those who seek to
draw the parameters of acceptable topics for comedy frequently invoke
this golden rule of ‘punching up or down’. But sometimes comedy works
best when it is testing the limits of our tolerance and skipping lightly
into moral minefields. To rid comedy of ambiguity is to undermine its
potential impact. Offence is the least interesting response to comedy,
because it cannot be anything other than subjective. There will always
be those who will take satire at face value and therefore fail to
understand its purpose.
As bored as most of us are with the incessant news stories about
comedians ‘crossing a line’, this is a development that reveals
something ugly at the heart of our culture. It is obviously anyone’s
right to criticise the quality or taste of a comedian’s work, but the
tendency to demand apologies and retractions reveals a widespread
censoriousness and entitlement. Worse still, those who claim to be
offended are now taken so seriously that they have the collective power
to force people out of their livelihoods because they don’t share the
same sense of humour.
CultML 