1. I have some ethics observations on this thing that was sent out to white parents in the Highland Park area of Texas by a Black Lives Matter-affiliated group:
Here they are:
- As long as white individuals hesitate to push back on BLM’s outrageous assertions and demands, the group will continue to grow more audacious and arrogant
- The logic of this demand can only make sense to someone who has no concept of right, wrong, and fairness. “We want you to handicap your own children in order to clear the way for our children, who can’t compete and who shouldn’t have to work especially hard to overcome obstacles that you and your children are not responsible for placing in their path.”
- The screed is an excellent example of how the concept of equal opportunity has been warped into “equity,” meaning not just equality of results, which life never guarantees, but punitive measures to ensure advantages of favored groups over those that are disfavored, aka whites and males.
- The extension of the argument in the letter would require athletes fortunate to have advantages of strength, speed, and skill to pledge not to compete against those not so “privileged” as to be born with these advantages, and job applicants of superior talent, intelligence and character to refuse to place themselves in a position where they would be chosen for a job over less fortunate job-seekers.
2. I originally had the photo of a thoughtful chimp above. Then, after I decided on the first item, I thought: “Hmmm. Will someone accuse me of using that image to suggest that the BLM strategy outlined in the letter was the brainstorm of chimps?” In the interests of being more safe than sorry, I defaulted to “The Thinker.” But I resent having to live in a society where racism is presumed in order to constrain expression and humor, and where people are actively looking for excuses to be offended, and to apply the worst motives to all rather than the best. I resent it, and detest those who are making life this way.
3. Why is any company using Megan Rapinoe in its ads and promotion? She is a negative presence, always. She is austere and androgynous, almost never smiles, radiates anger and resentment, and carries a negative effect from the Cognitive Dissonance Scale around with her. The defiant, angry, anti-American pink-haired lesbian market can’t possibly be that large. I have now seen nearly ten TV adds featuring Rapinoe, and as a casting director, former marketing professional and critic I can say with complete confidence that she has the presence of a dishrag while emitting the positive vibe of the average scorpion. And she isn’t even trying to project anything but a perpetual snit. A corporation using her isn’t just virtue-signalling, it’s self-destructively virtue-signalling. Here’s a typically charming Megan moment:
4. I know I already touched on this, but how can anyone, even Nancy Pelosi, say such a thing with a straight face? How can any journalist not immediately vivisect and mock it? From Byron York of the Washington Examiner: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she barred Representatives Jim Jordan and Jim Banks from the Capitol riot investigating committee because the two Republicans “had made statements and taken actions that I think would impact the integrity of the committee.” Pelosi said Jordan and Banks also “made statements and took actions that just made it ridiculous to put them on such a committee seeking the truth.” Wow. Pelosi appointed GOP Rep. Liz Cheney specifically because she has already made it clear that she blames Donald Trump for the Capitol riot and regards it as an “insurrection.” Every one of the Democrats on the Committee voted to impeach Trump based on little evidence, contrary evidence, and in some cases false evidence. Rep. Adam Schiff is on the committee!
Meanwhile, if you would like to read as tortured a defense of Pelosi’s kangaroo committee as any mind deeply sunk into the mouth of madness could concoct, read this in the Columbia Journalism Review. The bias is aflame: who wouldn’t detect it immediately and recoil? Yet this passed the standards of a “distinguished” journalism magazine.
5. It’s already face to the wall…I guess now I have to paint over my diploma. Gee, maybe all whites should refuse to apply to Harvard.
The “No Label Academy” is a non-profit founded by Harvard alumni and created “from a place of wanting to bring Harvard together, like finding a medium by which to bring students together regardless of race, socioeconomic status, etc,” according to student founder Miles Weddle, whose statement proves that Harvard’s English program has hit th skids along with everything else. How strange, then, that the organization now has a no-whites-allowed program. Maryland rapper IDK will teach a tuition-free music business seminar at Harvard for BIPOC students under the auspices of No Label Academy this August The Harvard Crimson reported this month. Sponsors of the racially-segregated event include Nike and Converse.
That looked bad, and a University of Michigan-Flint professor named Mark Perry filed a federal civil rights complaint stating, “This program discriminates on the basis of skin color by operating exclusively for BIPOC individuals only and illegally excluding and discriminating against non-BIPOC individuals on the basis of skin color,.”
Now Harvard is playing games. After Perry filed his federal Title VI complaint, the group’s website was changed to read, “No Label is not affiliated with Harvard University, nor is No Label Academy a Harvard University program or activity.” It’s not affiliated with Harvard, but its seminar will be taking place on Harvard’s campus. Why is Harvard allowing a racially discriminating program to take place at the Business School? Surely it wouldn’t allow a whites-only seminar, even if it was devoted to the music of Lawrence Welk.
If no group of white students has the guts to go to the seminar and demand admission, Harvard is lost.
Hell, I would have done that.