“Yes, diversity in all things. Except, of course, in thought. Presumably, Professor Stanton is also “stunned”, “appalled” and “deeply offended” by the over-representation of, say, gay people in the spheres of arts and drama, or of women in the caring professions, or of Indian employees in Indian restaurants. Perhaps some recalibration of those industries is also in order, to ensure suitable diversity.
.
Ahhhh yes…the Neo-Com screed: Diversity in all things except opinion.
Sorry…forgot to include the link with my comment.
Lib-left Neo-com intolerance and bigotry?…you betcha:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008763
Additional Irony =
Mau Stanton “Lauded” for encouraging critical thinking!
I suspect it’s a matter of ‘WHAT’ is being thought of critically rather than ‘HOW ‘ the thinking is being done.
Holding critical POV rather that having the ability to actually think?
I personally am appalled by the total lack of diesel dykes on the front line of NFL and CFL football teams.
Students are instructed: ‘Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic background, etc.
The Ohio State speech code is probably unconstitutional. U.S. courts have ruled that students in state universities have the full benefit of freedom of speech as private citizens.
Private universities are a different matter.
We need more male teachers in primary school to deal with the fatherless barbarians. Fewer than 10% of new Ontario teachers from kindergarten to grade 6 are male. If ever there was a case for gender quotas it is in our classrooms, but women seem to turn a blind eye toward equality when it doesn’t benefit them. Now, I wonder when affirmative action hire ET and her various sockpuppets will appear to inform us that there is no such thing as gender quotas and we are just imagining things.
It’s coming down to these over-civilized, ultra intolerant liberal idiots on one side and the hip hop gangster culture on the other.
Just call me Mr. In Between and I don’t tolerate either side of our present day so called culture.
I will continue tell ethnic, gender based, or religious jokes if they are funny … just like I always have. None of those groups or any others have suffered because a little humour was tossed their way. In fact it is that very humor that often endears people to each other.
When I am forbidden to speak of, comment on, or joke about any group, I begin to resent and eventually hate that group … because that is human nature. I cannot defy human nature, because I am only human and nature if much bigger.
A Jewish blogger, Catholic blogger and Ohio State blogger go into this bar…
Students are instructed: ‘Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic background, etc. When in doubt about the impact of your words and actions, simply ask.’”
Of course, the central theme is offended. Feminist hag Stanton is offended and every lefty syncophant can invoke that too to squelch free speech.
What’s typical and amusing, “simply ask”, is the innocent kids directed to the obvious PC Commissar.
The Group of 88 faculty members at Duke University had no trouble condemning publically the Lacrosse players invoking all sorts of vile slurs against them involving race, gender, and socioeconomic status. They had no problem denying them the due process of innocent until proven guilty. And, those were the adults that had a moral and contractual responsiblity for the welfare of their students. It’s a good guess that the same craven faculty attitude lies under the surface on many campuses within the victim studies and liberal arts departments.
I think some of the most dangerous and vilest people in the world short of terrorists and violent criminals are elements of academia. How’s that for offending.
This is the kind of pervasive lefty re-education camp garbage that FIRE goes after. Too bad they are not funded better.
Just went to a bra shop to buy my wife a birthday present.
It struck me as patently unfair that all the employees were female.
If we get any more of the politically correct drivel trotted out, from some of the self-annointed Philistines who ostensibly guide us, it will likely be the death of us.
I might as well be living on Hans Island, at least one only needs to put up with occasional Dane, displaying Viking tendencies.
The Lord’s prayer in Old England used to end with the addition of the following:
“And God save us from the fury of the Norsemen.”
This should now be amended to:
“And God save us from the Administrative Bureaucrats.”
Cheers
Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht BGS, PDP, CFP
Commander in Chief
Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden (Rheinisches) Nr.7
(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
‘University’ of thought – how true, faculty are a narrow minded bunch.
The only Liberal commercial I’ve seen during this election season in Ontario has Premier McGuinty praising Ontario public schools for being places where children of all races and religions can learn – together.
This is my first election since moving back from the United States. As I watch these commercials, I’m amazed that keeping Ontario public schools public seems to be the cornerstone of the Liberal election campaign. I guess they solved all of the other important issues facing Ontario. These are truly happy days in Ontario.
Can you imagine how boring our society would be if the progressives got all of their wishes granted. A colourless, humourless, genderless society. Only politically correct and approved diversity allowed. No dissent, just passive acceptance to “correct” thought. No struggle to overcome or achieve because everything is equalized down to the last job and dollar. What a boring place it would be. No true diversity with all of its problems just many differering shades of grey.
Forget teaching, how about nursing? My wife does not have one male co-worker, and as far as she knows, maybe 10 out of 1200 at the hospital where she works.
I am sure that there are thousands of dis-advantaged males who would love the chance at a career in nursing. Should there not be legislation to correct this equity oversight? With the physical demands put on today’s nurses(with obese, fat-ass patients that your typical nurse can barely budge)does it not make sense to bring some muscle onto the wards?
Andrew – good point on the imbalance or feminization of teaching, although imposing quotas aren’t the answer. Fatherless males need all of the positive role models they can get. Beyond salary as an issue, the culture of education has become feminized. It’s not as comfortable a place for male teachers.
I’m suspicious that the rise of Ritalin has its roots with this feminization. Boys are more gross motor than girls in grade school. I think it is being ignored by the same mentality that refuses to accept gender differences like the feminist hags at Harvard. With few male teachers, boys have less advocates.
Is Russia justified in flying its nuclear bombers near the borders of Western states, because some (mostly former citizens) suggest that regime should be changed?
Should a person, suggesting that Russia is indeed justified, be offended when called a communist troll?
Why oh why won’t people tolerate my intolerance?!?
There are two wierd types of deep and malicious ignorance – that of the ardent feminists, and that of the ungendered sophist leftist.
I think it is a biological fact that there are cognitive differences between men and women; our cognitive behaviour, by the way, is not simply a factor run by reason but also by emotion.
In addition, our species also sets up the situation where our cognitive processes are habitualized by our physical experiences. If we are a tiny fragile female, we’ll experience the world quite differently from a 6 and1/2 foot soccer hunk.
Feminists – and I’m opposed to them – both reject and insist on differences. They insist that there’s no difference between men and women, yet insist that women be hired ‘because they are women’. Doesn’t make sense. If there’s no difference, then, merit ought to be the only qualifier.
Our universities are, sadly, the domain of the sophist leftist and feminist. It is very difficult, I assure you, to be a realist and pragmatist – in academia.
andrew – I see that you are back to sophistry and insults. How about some critical thought rather than stooping to that level?
The old ‘left – right’ divide;
Factory workers, Union members vs Professionals, business types.
The “modern” Canadian ‘L-R’ divide;
The Latte crowd, Intellectuals(misnommer) vs Everybody Else.
So why does such a small group have such a high degree of influence over all of our lives ?? Simple. The Media, with a few exceptions, and their ‘agenda-driven’ ways.
. There’s only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people’s cultures and the Dutch.–Nigel Powers.
Certain species of ethnic, religious, etc., humour are still tolerated and perhaps even commercially successful. For example, How to Raise a Jewish Dog:
http://jpundit.typepad.com/jci/2007/09/in-the-mail-ell.html
ron in kelowna – I wonder if the factory worker is really a unionist and a leftist. In Quebec, for example, you have no choice; you have to be a member of a union – or – no job. You can’t interact directly with mgt; you have to go through the union.
In my view, unions are parasites; they are corporations all by themselves, feeding off the wages of the workers.
And I wonder if the professional is really a ‘rightist’. A lot of them that I know, in the medical field, for example, are ‘left’. I think that’s due to our health system being public.
Who are the genuine right in Canada? The self-employed, the entrepreneurs, finance, etc. It’s difficult to develop a wide ranging right in Canada because the Liberal dynasty deliberately set up Canada in the safest mode for it to retain political power – as a population dependent on the gov’t purse.
So – the Liberals set up Canada as economically dependent on franchises from the US, dependent on research (drugs) dev’t by the US which we could copy without the costs of developing those drugs.
Set up Canada as economically unable to have an investor class (our high taxes) so that the population would be depdnent on the public purse for public industries rather than their own setting up industries.
Set up Canada as econmically dependent on the US consumer so that we wouldn’t compete on the world market. Set up a propaganda system of the MSM to ‘educate’ Canadians into a self-definition as passive, tolerant, peaceful…wimps – who wouldn’t fight back against the Top Down Authority of the Ottawa Govt.
Then, having set up an economy operating primarily by public institutions (health, education, transportation, communications, CBC etc) – and unable to develop an investor class to set up private institutions…this political mode set up the dependent population into isolate groups defined by hereditary variables: religion, ethnicity, language.
All together – this is a dependent population, which means a socialist population, because they are prevented from being independent and free.
Wow, the day came when I totally agree with ET.
Recently scambling for something to read I pulled this down from my bookshelf. For sda reader edification I’ve found it on line. It DOES relate to the thread.
F.A. Hayek: The Intellectuals and Socialism
w3.mises.org/etexts/hayekintellectuals.pdf
Jaw-droppingly profound. All is explained. Written in 1949. Only 14 pages.
READ IT. You will thank me. You’re welcome.
“Just went to a bra shop to buy my wife a birthday present”
Posted by: set you free
Talk about your oxymorons…
@Andrew, re: your 10:44 AM
Go to the woodpile, now! Find a stick, and thrash yourself.
“I wonder when affirmative action hire ET and her various sockpuppets…”
FYI, she is retired. It was difficult for women of her generation to get faculty positions, so I rather suspect her qualifications are well above the present average.
Twit.
Despite the fact that I have serious issues with many of the things she says, at least she is reasonably consistent and thoughtful.
“well above the present average.”
High praise indeed! I didn’t know our academic friend was retired and given that gender quotas have only recently gone bonkers I cheerfully withdraw the affirmative action hire accusation.
However offended you may have been by my comment, however, multiply it by like 2.83 E^37 and that’s how grossed out I am at ET’s recent assertion that there is no such thing as gender quotas, and your gee-I-never-saw-this-before choice to attack someone who opposes quotas rather than actual quotas.
“Go to the woodpile, now! Find a stick, and thrash yourself.”
Andrew becomes a flagellant.
Unfortunately, it is too late, the voters in the 3 by-elections have removed any need for self-inflicted LIEberal political mortification.
Their campaigning is reflective of the way they ran the country whilst in office, INTO THE GROUND!
On the other hand maybe the sado-masochistic community are Liberal supporters reflecting ‘diversity’.
You know the people who like to be ‘controlled’.
Cheers
No, andrew – I was hired on merit. Not affirmative action.
And I never said that ‘gender quotas’ didn’t exist – in hiring or elsewhere. Where did you dream up that accusation against me? My latest criticism of you was your claim that there was such a thing as a ‘warrior gene’. Heh.
By the way, with regard to affirmative action etc, as I said – feminists and socialists can be quite malicious and vicious in their rejection of fairness, equity and merit. In all my years as an academic, I can’t count how often merit was ignored with regard to the person hired; instead – the least threatening person, or the friend; etc. Same thing with other issues – decisions are made for psychological rather than rational reasons.
Now, me-no-dhimmi, thanks for the Hayek link. Strange – that paper isn’t on the web site of the Hayek Centre – but, it’s a good paper.
I very much liked his outline of ‘intellectuals’ – I call them Cloud-Dwellers, but it’s the same. They are people who are totally detached from the practical effects of their ideas and are almost always socialists, ie, utopians.
His description of them as having only superificial knowledge – a result of the absence of direct responsibility; their utopianism which is aligned with mechanism. That is, they consider that just as they can control nature, they can control human conditions.
The majority of them are located in the urban area – removed from direct contact with reality and relying on a hidden infrastructure of which they have little knowledge (farming, engineering, science etc etc)..And, as our industrial world has urbanized, we find them more and more.
Dion is a perfect example of the Cloud Dweller or Intellectual.
The problem with Cloud Dweller/Intellectuals is that alienation from reality – how long can a species function in a robust manner when it is alienated from the practical effects of its decisions? That’s why I think that, psychologically, we will always have socialists – and alienated utopian intellectuals because these ideas of utopia are emotionally satisfying. But practically, no people can function that way for long.
Hayek doesn’t get into the scenario where, when socialism comes to power, it inevitably confronts this basic alienation from reality. It then moves into totalitarianism, to MAKE people fit into these idealistic notions. And then – collapses.
ET: I also recently read Hayek’s , “Why I am not a conservative” which I’d heard about but never got around to. I believe it’s from his Constituion of Liberty. Anyway, get this: it was sent me by an old friend who I’ve partially converted to the libertarian cause. The former “liberal” (new meaning) now proudly describes himself as a “classical liberal”. Hayek despaired of calling himself a “liberal” because it took too much time and effort to explain it to his interlocutors. In the end he chose Whig. Anyway, if you haven’t already, you will appreciate it I’m sure.
The key lesson I got from it is that conservatives too are collectivists only toward different objectives. He gives as an example, the old conservative resistance to government intervention but acceptance of it in agriculture.
His teacher von Mises said that fascism arises when well-meaning socialists are unable to adopt the methods required to realize on their programme.
Finally, the startling thing I find when I read Hayek and von Mises is their outright geniality towards the socialists — their acceptance of their good intentions. It’s sad that today we just don’t have that kind of geniality in the public square. Without it, I’m afraid, we are unable to get people to realize their well-intentioned error.
There’s too much shouting and not enough honest exchange.
LynnH wrote, “Can you imagine how boring our society would be if the progressives got all of their wishes granted. A colourless, humourless, genderless society. Only politically correct and approved diversity allowed … No true diversity with all of its problems just many differering shades of grey.”
Lynn, it’s already much worse than that. We’re there now, and it’s a GULAG: ask any teacher—all are altogether vulnerable—who’s been targeted and “charged”. (Mere assertions, by even the most craven parent or administrator, are taken as proof of malfeasance. IMO, utter crap!) The unions are both left wing (socialist) and part of the power structure, so they’re altogether complicit in the homogenization.
At present, I even know of a teacher, with impeccable left-wing credentials, who’s become a victim of the PC jackals. The unions’s absolutely no help: why would it be? Most of the lackeys who inhabit Union Never Neverland aspire to high paying JOBS—most have nothing to do with VOCATION—in administration. This has everything to do with why the unions routinely let teachers hang out to dry: who, in the union, would go for the jugular of a crooked board administrator—they’re legion—who might well be the deciding factor in either one’s advancement or one’s being blacklisted? Connect the dots . . .
LynnH is on to something. But, the games’s about 100 steps further than one might imagine.
Welcome to the gulag.
Addendum: The gulag dispensation’s not just shades of gray.
Yes, it is that. But it’s also crucifixion for those colourful realists who disagree.
Kyrie eleison. (As I listen to a glorious Palestrina, a capella Mass. There are some things worth dying for.)
Educated beyond her intelligence, obviously.
ET writes, “His [Hayek’s] description of them [intellectuals] as having only superficial knowledge – a result of the absence of direct responsibility; their utopianism which is aligned with mechanism.”
Didn’t the late, great, pro-life Canadian philosopher, George Grant (amazingly, the uncle of Michael Ignatieff) write about the destruction that mechanism wreaks on any society that embraces it?
(Me No Dhimmi, ‘Really lovely to see/hear from you again!
But, I’m sorry I have difficulty with your “I’m afraid, we are unable to get people to realize their [socialist] well-intentioned [sic] error. There’s too much shouting and not enough honest exchange.”
With due respect, MND, how on earth does one have an “honest exchange” with those who use tyranny—Right here. In Canada. I’m not making this up.—in order to enforce their diktats? E.g., I’m on the blacklist of virtually all my old [exclusive] college “friends” who are both well-to-do and often-in-the-forefront-of-society socialists.
On the few occasions when we meet, I’m well intentioned and polite to them—who, in the public square, have won all the battles—while they, “tolerant’ and “in favour of diversity” as they are [sic], generally treat me as if I were a leper. “Honest exchange”? I’D like that! With privileged, entitled people like these, who have no concept of humility, tell me how . . .
Cheers.)
I think that people are looking in all the wrong places for the counter revolutionaries (anti-PC folks). You will not find them in the universities, the media, politics. They are in the trades, industry, applied science, agriculture …. hands on work. I know, I worked with them. In a forced union environment, no less. You can recognize them instantly. They are the characters with both rough humour and coarse opinions. They swear and sweat. They tell you when you are being and idiot. If only they would wake up and start taking a more active roll in politics then maybe policies would shift back to reality.
Thank-you for that Me No Dhimmi – that was a long, interesting read that you linked on your post. I do know the name Hayak but I have not read his work extensively. In the article that you linked, he traces the historic development of intellectuals and he highlights the difference between a socialist mindset and intelligence. The writer seems to feel sorry for intellectuals because they are well meaning but not too bright. Intellectuals are useful tools in the hands of intelligent people. Intelligent people are not always (or even often) lovers of mankind in general. I remember hearing the old saying “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”. Maybe an intelligent person wrote this as a warning to people about intellectuals!
I only read a brief passage about the right to own property in this article but it was quite telling – when property owners stopped being the primary shapers of public policy things began to go downhill…I can never remember hoping to be a worker ant in the giant ant hill called earth. I wanted to own my own mini hill and answer to no Queen/King in any shape or form on my own ‘hill’.
I think that my own desire to own their own ‘mini hill’ is almost universal among humans but acquiring a ‘hill’ is a uphill battle – as is keeping other ‘ants’ away from a hill once it is acquired. It is always a temptation for the less successful to try and extract the holdings of others through creative law making – that would be Mr. Trudeau, in Canada. The man who did nothing somehow got himself elected to run the country. Run it he did – right into the arms of “Comrade Stalin”.
Canadians have almost forgotten how to dream – they do not imagine themselves as owners of their own property and their own destiny; they think of their pensions as their passports to freedom. How sad that is….the best years of your life spent paper pushing for a nebulous someone else with the only compensation to be a pension.
Canada has lots of empty space – owned by the ‘crown’ and government appointed ‘Indian Chiefs’ and ‘elders’ (like Hutterites) or the UN (the UN owns Jasper and Lake Louise according to the plaque at the information lookouts).
Living in the country, on land that is owned by yourself or your Dad and Mom makes a person feel free and powerful. Is this the reason that the intellectuals paint farmers and ranchers as hicks and hayseeds (or rednecks)? They believe that denigrating those they envy will make the landowners less powerful and, in Canada, they have been successful because they have wrestled the RIGHT to own property out of our list of Rights and Freedoms. The list (Charter!) is an oxymoron!
I am not a property owner but I grew up on 4 sections of land that my Dad owned so I know the feeling of independence and security that living on your own place brings to people. I would wish with all my heart that the young people I know could aspire to own their own lives by living on their own land. Property owners have little respect for intellectuals when they are busy making their dreams come true before they reach 65….they might want to raise a family if they can provide a place for their children to live without state intervention – or daycare – those kids might grow up to be strong and independent because they are capable of looking after themselves.
We must demand that the Right to own Property be put back in our Constitution – and we must stop the spread of ‘crown’ ownership – in any form. The land belongs to Canadian people – it should be many privately owned hills not one pile of dirt, untended and unvalued.
With the ownship of property comes a respect for soldiers and love for ones nation. Why? Vested interest ring any bells?
Hayek exposes the so-called “Intellectuals”.
[Until one begins to list all the professions and activities which belong to the
class, it is difficult to realize how numerous it is, how the scope for activities constantly
increases in modern society, and how dependent on it we all have become. The class
does not consist of only journalists, teachers, ministers, lecturers, publicists, radio
commentators, writers of fiction, cartoonists, and artists all of whom may be masters of
the technique of conveying ideas but are usually amateurs so far as the substance of
what they convey is concerned. The class also includes many professional men and
technicians, such as scientists and doctors, who through their habitual intercourse with
the printed word become carriers of new ideas outside their own fields and who,
because of their expert knowledge of their own subjects, are listened with respect on
most others.]
“.. but are usually amateurs ..”
Yup.
[Almost all the “experts” in the mere technique of getting
knowledge over are, with respect to the subject matter which they handle, intellectuals
and not experts.]
My Dad had a saying; “An expert is just some fool away from home.”
[Professor Schumpeter, who has devoted an
illuminating chapter of his Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy to some aspects of
our problem, has not unfairly stressed that it is the absence of direct responsibility for
practical affairs and the consequent absence of first hand knowledge of them which
distinguishes the typical intellectual from other people who also wield the power of the
spoken and written word.]
“… absence of direct responsibility…”
Think ‘Tenure”
[The specialists who will thus
achieve public fame and wide influence will thus not be those who have gained
recognition by their peers but will often be men whom the other experts regard as
cranks, amateurs, or even frauds, but who in the eyes of the general public nevertheless
become the best known exponents of their subject.]
Think Gore and Suzuki.
[The main reason for this state of affairs is probably
that, for the exceptionally able man who accepts the present order of society, a
multitude of other avenues to influence and power are open, while to the disaffected and
dissatisfied an intellectual career is the most promising path to both influence and the
power to contribute to the achievement of his ideals.]
The real smart ones do not want to waste time being an “Intellectual”.
[The main lesson which the true liberal must learn from the success of the
socialists is that it was their courage to be Utopian which gained them the support of the
intellectuals and therefore an influence on public opinion which is daily making
possible what only recently seemed utterly remote.]
“… courage to be Utopian.”
What is depressing is that this was written so long ago and still, still ….
What is encouraging is that now we have the Internet. I would likely have never have seen this article otherwise.
I can never remember hoping to be a worker ant in the giant ant hill called earth. I wanted to own my own mini hill and answer to no Queen/King in any shape or form on my own ‘hill’.
Here’s an interesting bit of scripture. And so it has been…
1 Samuel 8:5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
1 Samuel 8:10 And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.
1 Samuel 8:11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
1 Samuel 8:12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
1 Samuel 8:13 And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
1 Samuel 8:14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
1 Samuel 8:15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
1 Samuel 8:16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
1 Samuel 8:17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
1 Samuel 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
1 Samuel 8:19 Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;
1 Samuel 8:20 That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.
“Yes, diversity in all things. Except, of course, in thought.”
It’s laughable to read about right wingers accusing the left of stifling opinion. In Canada, right wing “opinions” parrot the National Citizens Coalition agenda. Anyone who deviates from this is immediately accused of being a socialist.
“Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Friend, let me take out the speck in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.”
Luke 6:41-42
Speak for yourself, lberia. Unlike the Right in this country, the Left has hijacked virtually every public institution–and even non public ones, like the Anglican Church of Canada–and regularly squanders our hard earned tax money to foist its agenda on the rest of us.
What hypocrites people like you are! You talk freedom of choice, yet support the kangaroo courts of the Human Rights (sic) Commissions, which suppress any speech that deviates from the PC norm. E.g., Public school boards suppress freedom of speech all the time: those who don’t toe the left-wing, multicultural, anti-tradition, pro-gay, feminist party line either keep their mouths shut or risk draconian reprisals or dismissal. (Thank God for groups like the NCC who have the guts to openly say the emperor has no clothes. You, of course, believe the emperor’s beautifully clothed. Open your eyes!)
Please name for us a public body that uses taxpayers’ money and sanctions with teeth to keep in line the Left in this country. I believe you’ll find that the shoe’s firmly on the other foot. It’s the Right in this country that’s had its rights severely curtailed by the PC dispensation that uses the power of the state to jackboot dissenters.
The arrogance and intolerance of the Left for any dissent, while pretending to be “tolerant” and in favour of “diversity” (only their own brand) is distasteful in the extreme. The Left’s willingness–even eagerness–to use the power of the state and taxpayer money to both intimidate and punish its fellow citizens and political enemies is a disgrace.
lookout:
I didn’t write that the left was not intolerant…they most certainly are. The right is just as intolerant, but they use faux grass root groups like the NCC, or faux unbiased thinktanks like the Fraser Institute to manipulate public opinion through a corporate media which is mostly Liberal biased, but not left wing. (In my opinion, Liberals are just as right wing as the Conservatives, with the possible exception of some minor social issues which the Conservatives have adopted as there own since taking power.)
As excessive as you imagine this vast left wing conspiracy is, you are dreaming if you think life would be better for the majority of people if organizations like the NCC and the Fraser Institute had everything there own way. They would like us to go back to the 1890’s, when only the rich lived well.
lberia, I appreciate your moderate tone but not your poor logic. What the hell are you talking about?
The intelligent, empirically based research of the Fraser Institute and NCC is PRIVATELY funded: these GENUINE grass roots–that means not funded by Big Broth–er, I mean, Sister) institutions have no publicly funded jackboots with which to throttle their lefty political enemies. And please provide us with evidence that the Fraser Institute and the NCC sway public opinion via the media: are you off your meds?
IMO, these institutions make a lot of sense, and you’ve provided not a jot of evidence, re your libellous statements about their power to suppress dissent: concrete examples, if you please.
Re my “Please name for us a public body that uses taxpayers’ money and sanctions with teeth to keep in line the Left in this country. I believe you’ll find that the shoe’s firmly on the other foot. It’s the Right in this country that’s had its rights severely curtailed by the PC dispensation that uses the power of the state to jackboot dissenters.”
I’m waiting . . .
Name public bodies? How about the police? Planting disruptive agent provocateurs in order to turn peaceful protests in to riots. How about the courts? Quick to raise injunctions if governments or corporations demand it. How about governments themselves? Tearing up negotiated, legal contracts when it suits them. (This happened in BC several years ago.)
I doubt that any evidence ar any I argument I provide will sway you with regard to the influence of the NCC et al, so I would suggest you do your own research and try to look at things objectively.
Yes, lberia, name public bodies: like the HRCs–which quite exclusively target the Right, especially orthodox Christians–the courts, which have used the Charter to do much the same (read Rory Leishman’s Against Judicial Activism), and such institutions as the public school boards, which rigorously enforce political correctness–speak out and you go to re-education or worse. These are powerful, publicly funded institutions, with the clout to mold–how about enforce–public opinion–seriously disrupt a person’s life, and deny freedoms.
Talk about being objective, your examples are vague and do not indict the NCC, which is your thesis with which I disagree. Let’s have some concrete examples, which prove that grassroots bodies like the NCC are as serious a threat to the freedoms of the citizens of Canada as the public institutions I’ve indicted.