How can emphasising the differences help us forget the differences?
Apparently next week is Cultural Diversity Week, and it seems that my employer is wholeheartedly supporting this initiative. There will be videos and seminars, and no doubt every senior member of the management team will be issuing emails extolling the virtues of multiculturalism. I have no doubt it will also be one of the topics at the next training meeting
The company is not alone, all big businesses are trying to portray themselves as woke, to ensure there is no backslash from the illiberal left, to ensure they can continue to sell products to those who self define as Communist anti-captilists. The irony of the situation.
The vehemence directed at persons or organisations that do not accept the diversity and multicultural agenda is fierce and one can understand why most feel it is easier simply to accept the dogma rather than question it. But does diversity training really encourage inclusion?
How can emphasising the differences help us forget the differences? How can diversity training reduce the notion of us and them that underpins racist attitudes? Surely the way to bring people of all backgrounds together is to emphasise those aspects that unite us. So in the case of our employment, the fact we work for the same business, we work as a team, we all have broadly similar goals and aspirations, and we all want to succeed.
It seems a simple enough notion to me, but I suspect mine will be a lone voice at next week's meeting.
Why do liberal leftists continue to emphasise differences, when those differences simply serve to drive wedges between the different communities
Some time ago I came to the conclusion that multiculturalism is the worst, most damaging experiment ever inflicted on society. Rather than bringing people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds together, it has served only to divide, create ghettos. For example Blackburn, which is now two cities, one half of which is a typical post-industrial English town, the other half a suburb of Islamabad. Never the twain shall meet.
I have been reading a book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religionby Jonathan Haidt. Towards the end of his study he states;
Emphasizing differences makes many people more racist, not less.
When I read it, I was floored. Here for the first time, my thoughts on the subject encapsulated in one simple sentence, and written by a self confessed liberal!
Society functions because all members of it by and large agree to act in accordance with certain norms. In Britain, we queue, we drive on the left, we pay our taxes, we abide by laws and customs handed down from one generation to the next. It is by no means perfect, but it is the glue that holds society together.
So why do liberal leftists continue to emphasise differences, when those differences simply serve to drive wedges between the different communities, breeding resentment as a consequence. Wouldn't it be better to emphasise those aspects that unite us, that draw us together. By all means celebrate your own cultural background, but recognise that we are all citizens of one nation and to that extent we share a common heritage, a heritage that could be the rallying point that brings all parts of society together.
Has the quality of political discourse in this country ever been lower?
Slug, melt, centrist dad, and now gammon. Childish insults thrown at anyone who has the temerity to disagree with a Corbynite. Has the quality of political discourse in this country ever been lower?
Where does it stop? Should we stop learning foreign languages? Should we stop eating foreign food? Should we not learn about other cultures? Perhaps we should stay in our own lane. Perhaps we should never stray from our own silo. Perhaps people of different cultures should not work together. Perhaps they should not be educated together. Perhaps they should not live in the same neighbourhoods.
When the illiberal left decry cultural appropriation what they are in fact demanding is that which earlier generations knew as segregation, as apartheid.
Now we live in a country where even a harmless joke can be deemed a “hate crime”
How on earth has this happened? The UK is, according to the 2018 World Press Freedom Index,
One of the worst-ranked countries in Western Europe in terms of respect for press freedom.
The UK is placed 40th in the world. The home of Parliament, the country whose very name was a byword for freedom of expression. Now we live in a country where even a harmless joke can be deemed a “hate crime”, where important issues cannot be debated for fear of being branded “phobic”.
In an era when it seems someone will take offence at anything, maybe the best bet is to say nothing.
How do you deal with someone who would rather see his own people gassed and bombed rather than relinquish power
With the world sliding closer to another world war, you have to wonder if history is repeating itself.
The US President Trump arrived as a man of the people, an outsider whose supporters thought might make a difference. Certainly during the election campaign, where foreign policy was concerned he struck a very isolationist view. However, now he is in office he is following the usual post-WW2 policy of American interventionism. Was this an about face or the realisation that America cannot turn away from the world? I suspect it was the latter.
What choice did he have? Russia is led by Putin. He has managed to create a veneer of democracy, but beneath the surface, he is no better than the Soviet leaders of old. He is trying to recreate the Empire, flouting international law, invading neighbouring countries, and sowing the seeds of dissent in the former Soviet states. There is also China, flexing her military muscles, much to the concern of her neighbours.
Since WW2, we have lived through a relatively peaceful era, and it is sobering to think that era may be coming to an end. We may consider ourselves civilised, more tolerant, less bellicose, but there will always be those who seek power and wealth and will not care about the human cost of achieving their goals. A prime example is Assad of Syria. How do you deal with someone who would rather see his own people gassed and bombed rather than relinquish power, rather than lose the wealth and influence he thinks is his right?
Words mean little to such people, and perhaps direct conflict is ultimately the only way to deal with despots and dictators.
Perhaps we just have to accept that the acquisition of power, and the resulting conflicts and even war that this spawns is, and will always be, part of the human condition.
Perhaps we will just have to accept that history will continue to repeat itself.
the last few weeks simply highlight the fact that what we have politicians who are incompetent, vainglorious, self serving buffoons.
Boris Johnson utters some nonsense that could result in an innocent British citizen being held in an Iranian jail for another 5 years. Priti Patel holds high level meetings with the Israeli government without bothering to tell anyone of her plans. The Pestminster furore rumbles on and now there is outcry over the tax avoidance schemes of the rich and powerful. But where is the uproar about the greatest injustice of our time?
Ordinary working people continue to suffer the consequences of the financial crash, leaving those least able to do so to shoulder the financial burden. Ten years after the crash and the gap between average earnings and the tax avoiding super rich grows ever wider, pensions are worthless and housing is unaffordable.
With Brexit looming on the horizon there is a need for strong and competent leadership. Sadly the events of the last few weeks simply highlight the fact that what we have politicians who are incompetent, vainglorious, self serving buffoons. They stumble from one crisis to another, more concerned with winning elections and promoting their own careers than properly addressing the problems that confront us. The future looks bleak.
Multi-culturalism has been a disaster for this country.
It had to happen. As with most large companies, my employer has established an inclusivity policy, and the process of lecturing us on the benefits of multi-culturalism have begun.
I'm sorry boss, but this goes well beyond the scope of my job and strays deep into the realms of societal and political issues.
The need for lessons on inclusivity has arisen only because of the perverse effects of multi culturalism which has, rather than bringing all sections of society together instead deepened the divisions. As far as I'm concerned it has been a disaster for this country.
Boss, it is not your place to tell me what I should think of multi culturalism. It is not your place to compel your staff to think in a particular way on subjects which have ramifications beyond the working environment. I for one will not be participating.
Finally boss, why make the subject so complicated? The inclusivity policy could be summed up in one sentence;
Treat everyone you meet with the dignity you would expect others to afford you.
The hashtag #CentristDad has been trending on Twitter over the last couple of days. Unsurprisingly it has gained traction with the illiberal left, but for the life of me I can't fathom why those smug and oh so clever intellectuals think it is an insult. A centrist is the very antithesis of an extremist, a dad is someone who has taken responsibility for his offspring. What could you possibly find offensive about that? I am more than happy to describe myself a centrist dad!
This is another assault on Western Society. This was not just an attack on a minority group, it was an attack on liberal society.
And once again our screens are filled with the news that dozens of innocent people have been murdered. This time however the incident has quickly descended into an argument about minority rights, homophobia, Islamophobia, the right to bear arms, and the Liberal Left tying themselves up in knots.
Some are claiming this as a hate crime against the gay community. Yes, it was a gay club that was attacked, and yes the perpetrator was undoubtedly homophobic, but we should recognise what happened in Orlando for what it is. After Brussels, and the Bataclan, after Charlie Hebdo and the murder of Lee Rigby, this is another assault on Western Society. This was not just an attack on a minority group, it was an attack on humanity, it was an attack on liberal society.
The common theme linking each of these attacks is Radical Islam. The formulaic response to these attacks is adding flags to profile pictures, while others will attend vigils singing songs by candlelight, proclaiming that love will overcome. Sadly love is not enough. Nothing will change until the Government accepts there is a problem with Radical Islam and take action to deal with it effectively. Of course that won't happen. The fear of being accused of Islamophobia now seems to trump homophobia. Those in power will not call Muslims out on their anti-gay rhetoric. As one commentator noted, the gay community is now being sacrificed on the alter of political correctness.
Another important element of this attack is however one the Americans have brought on themselves. Gun control. The killer was wielding a semi-automatic rifle. This was a man suspected by the FBI as having links to ISIS and al-Qaeda. This was someone who his former wife says was mentally unstable. And yet he was able to buy a rifle that serves no purpose other than to kill people. Whatever motivates these killers the fact they can readily lay their hands on assault rifles leads inevitably to large numbers being killed and maimed. Making guns so readily accessible that anyone with murderous intent can obtain one is criminally irresponsible.
Sadly, there will always be mentally unstable individuals who will want to hurt and kill others. Identifying and dealing with such people will always be very difficult. However America can take action to control access to guns and thereby deprive these people of the means to commit acts of mass murder. Until they do so killings on the scale seen in Orlando will be repeated.