Tuesday Morning Ethics Warm-Up. 7/19/2022: Harvard, Redheads, Uvalde, Bad House Guests And More

A lot of people find images like this, and the motto, offensive, presumably because of the association with Ronald Reagan, who brilliantly appropriated optimistic patriotism as a conservative value in response to Jimmy Carter’s “malaise” vision of the nation. Being negatively triggered by one’s own flag and expressions of pride and enthusiasm regarding the nation it represents is not a healthy state of mind, and therefore it is unethical conduct to actively promote such an attitude…which we now see being done every day.

1. It may be unethical, but Harvard at least has gall…In April, Harvard University set out to exceed its previous record for virtue signaling, committing $100 million to “redress its ties to slavery” after a report concluded that slavery played an “integral” role in shaping the University. This is the Cambridge version of reparations, and the flagrant act of misusing donated non-profit funds wasn’t even controversial. The whole board signed on without dissent, which shows how Borg-like the Harvard leadership is. “Diversity” of thought when wokeness is at issue is not welcome. In this month’s alumni magazine, amusingly, Harvard begs for contributions to keep the magazine operating at a high level (it is an excellent alumni magazine), as if  tossing away 100 million dollars on non-educational matters didn’t make the appeal ridiculous. As one contrarian alum noted in a letter to the editor, if Harvard can give away all that money to assuage its conscience about supporting and benefiting long ago from a legal and predominant practice that had gone on for centuries, “it doesn’t need mine.”

In other damning news from Old Ivy, the Harvard  web site calls Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard,  currently pending before the Supreme Court, as a “politically motivated lawsuit.”  That’s the case in which Asian-American students allege that Harvard discriminates against them (like it discriminates against whites) in its admissions policies.  The web site states, “Harvard College does not discriminate against applicants from any group in its admission processes.” This is pure “it isn’t what it is” gaslighting. One can argue that affirmative action, which is the real issue  in the case, should continue and that it passes ethical standards via utilitarian balancing, but it cannot be denied that  the practice isn’t discrimination. The statement is a lie.2. Speaking of discrimination and virtue-signaling, Showcase Cinemas, a British movie chain, announced that it will provide free movie tickets for redheads during the current heat wave, which has been declared a national emergency. The theory is that redheads are more bothered by heat than others, which is a dubious proposition at best. The stunt is pure discrimination, and unethical. I’m pretty sure obese people also suffer more in the heat: why not free tickets for them too?

3. The problem in Uvalde wasn’t guns…the problem was that all the systems that were supposed to protect the public failed due to incompetence, stupidity, apathy and cowardice.  This is the unavoidable conclusion from the facts laid out in the preliminary report on the May 24 mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde. The 82-page report was released by a special investigative committee of the Texas state legislature. My favorite detail: the mad killer had acquired the nickname “School Shooter” among fellow gamers and among people he knew in a local chat group because of his open obsession with school shootings and his constant enthusiasm about violence. Naturally, this wasn’t reported to law enforcement, but considering the performance of law enforcement during the shooting itself, it wouldn’t have done any good anyway.

Of all the mass shootings, Uvalde is the weakest justification for limiting gun rights. If the police are going to cower in terror (and lie about it afterwards) when a maniac is shooting children , that is a strong argument for allowing law-abiding citizens to have access to firearms to do the job the police will not.

4. Today’s featured unethical candidate for high office: Republican Ryan Dark White, 54, running for the U.S. Senate in Maryland as “Dr. Jon McGreevey.” The fact that he’s using an alias in the race is sufficient evidence for me to distrust him; his ridiculous website is another good reason.  But he was also arrested last week and charged with falsely claiming to have information about child sex trafficking, according to a release from the Harford County Sheriff’s Office. White, or Dr. Jon, told police that a man at an adult bookstore where he works was forcing a young girl to perform sex acts on male customers. [Pointer: valkygrrl]

5. I can’t let this pass...”Social Q’s” has been soft-peddling the leftist propaganda lately, so I’m going to give Philip Gallanes’s daily life etiquette advice column another chance. In the current edition of the Times feature, an inquirer writes that she let friends who are “like family” stay at her lake house for a long weekend while she was away, and they trashed the place, leaving “six loads of dirty laundry, furniture moved all over the place and a pile of water toys in her shed” while neglecting to leave a thank-you note for the accommodations. When she complained, “not only did they fail to apologize,” they criticized her reaction and quibbled about the amount of laundry they had left. She asked Gallanes whether she should forgive them. Gallanes answered that she should give them time to come around and apologize before she writes them off for good.

My advice would be different. This is a betrayal of trust and signature significance: only assholes behave like that to friends and people who have done them a favor. The decision to be made is whether the mistreated woman wants to continue a friendship with users and creeps. If she does, the Julie Principle is in effect.

17 thoughts on “Tuesday Morning Ethics Warm-Up. 7/19/2022: Harvard, Redheads, Uvalde, Bad House Guests And More

  1. #5 is pretty simple as far as I’m concerned, never allow these people to use the house again, but don’t say why, always say it’s otherwise occupied or that the husband doesn’t want it used while you’re not there or something like that. Let them figure out what they did that has lost them the privilege. If they ask, tell them “if you don’t know, I’m not the one to tell you.” If it costs you the friendship, then so be it, these don’t sound like people you want to be friends with. Be thankful these aren’t family, otherwise you might have to bite your tongue in the name of having a peaceful holiday season.

    • Why be coy? I’d tell them flat-out why they couldn’t use the house (if they had the balls to ask again) . I would emphasize that leaving the mess was a big part of it, but the bigger reason would be that they didn’t even have enough respect for me to at least apologize. I don’t see what you would gain by playing head games with them.

        • If you don’t want people to treat you like shit, the solution is to not accept being treated like shit, and explain clearly why you won’t accept it. Pussyfooting around will just get you more shitty treatment; anyone as inconsiderate as the person portrayed in the story isn’t the kind of person to whom you can teach lessons with passive aggression.

      • It doesn’t sound like that would have gotten you anywhere here. The owner confronted them and told them once, and they shined her on.

  2. 1. From wiki:

    “The Harvard University endowment (valued at $53.2 billion as of June 2021) is the largest academic endowment in the world. Its value increased by over 10 billion dollars in fiscal year 2021, ending in the largest sum in its history. Along with Harvard’s pension assets, working capital, and non-cash gifts, it is managed by Harvard Management Company, Inc., a Harvard-owned investment management company.”

    Harvard will never, ever, run out of money. Why do they continue to solicit donations from anyone? I wonder how much money the guys at “Harvard Management Company, Inc.” take home in bonuses each year? Or is it just staffed by Goldman Sachs guys working in their spare time? A hundred million is chump change to these guys. Being on the Harvard board must be like being in Congress where you can just print money. They have a literally bottomless pit of the stuff. Obscene.

    • This guy took out a shooter by himself within two minutes of the shooter opening fire, spraying shots into a food court.

      • Nearly 400 police officers in Uvalde took more than an hour to do the same thing this random 22-year-old citizen stepped up and did in two minutes.

        I’m not a “defund the police” guy, but it’s getting harder not to wonder what we’re getting for all the resources we expend on policing in America when literally hundreds of cops just stand around casually while kids are being massacred a few yards away.

    • It happened 30 minutes from where I live. We are still a little shocked…some of that “Did that really happen here?” But he’s rightly called a hero and a Good Samaritan.

      • Why is the coverage of this incident so muted? Strange. It had the potential to be as deadly and Uvalde or any other mass shooting. But, relative crickets.

        • OB, if you are sincere in your ignorance, I would imagine it’s got something to do with the optics. A private citizen, using a firearm, limited the extent of the tragedy. This is not in alignment with Democrats’ narrative that guns can’t be used by private citizens in order to protect human life; guns commit crime, and anyone with a gun is dangerous to society and should be feared more than death itself. Anyone claiming different should be ostracized from society.
          Just an educated an cynical guess.

  3. Jack, I wanted you about that website, I did.

    I said “just don’t” and you didn’t listen. You have no one but yourself to blame.

      • Let me get this straight: “Dr. Jon McGreevey” works at an adult bookstore?

        Well, at least he’s predictable: the path from doctor to smut peddler to Senate candidate is a continuous and consistent decline in respectability.

        And, boy, that website is a real doozy…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.