Affirmative action is nothing but racism and no good arguments exist to morally support it.
It is based upon a seriously defective and harmful principle.
The principle is that under certain circumstances it can be necessary to punish some for things they never did and reward others for things they never did.
In other words, some people who look like one group may have done something a very long time ago to people of another group. Therefore, it is appropriate to punish members of the first...
All racism is based in ignorance. An ignorance that believes a person can be understood, and should be judged based upon certain inherent and immutable characteristics.
However, ignorance should never be illegal and is impervious to legal sanctions.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked a serious deviation from the heroic fight to obtain equal rights before the law for the black population. It crossed a very important line and we have been reaping the consequences ever since.
That line was the one...
I believe it was Ben Shapiro who said that the facts don't care about your feelings. The other side of that truth coin is that feelings don't care about the facts.
This is why you cannot reason people out of a position that they didn't arrive out using reason.
One very important explanation for the rise of Socialist tendencies among the young is that they are struggling economically and don't see a bright future ahead. That is the appeal of the Democratic Socialists of America's policy platform.
Unfortunately, it cannot succeed.
This provides an opportunity for those on the right to provide solutions for these very real problems which actually can work.
I came upon a couple of interesting terms recently. The first, 'telescopic philanthropy' was coined by Charles Dickens to describe the behavior of people like Mrs. Jellyby in his 'Bleak House' who concerns herself with the conditions of natives in Niger while neglecting her own children.
The second, 'telescopic morality' was coined by one of my favorite British authors and public intellectuals.
He defined the term to mean "... the feeling that, by espousing some cause in the abstract, and...
It is a life and death issue for parasites that they avoid killing their host.
If they do, and have not found another host to migrate to, their days are numbered.
When one observes the parasitic 'Social Democrats' of the day in their incessant demand for free things paid for by the productive, they can only wonder when this tipping point will be reached.
The left hates billionaires. At least that's what we're told.
The facts however tell a rather more nuanced story.
So, Musk is actually not hated so much for his wealth, but rather for his positions on social issues.
It strikes me as ironical, if not downright hypocritical, that no one on the left bats an eye at billionaire Soros' organization spending 50 million dollars on Zamdani's campaign?
It should surprise no one with an IQ north of 80 that after decades of teaching (by state run institutions) a people to hate their civilization, they should vote to dismantle it.
The leaders in this brainwashed vanguard are leftist white women who consider trashing their civilization as a badge of moral honor.
Long before we are faced with a moral choice, we have been methodically and mostly unconsciously, piecing together a moral philosophy or value system which will guide our moral choices in the future.
Consequently, very little actual thinking needs to occur at the moment of choice.
The only moral justification for the use of force is for self-defense. There is no other.
The most important precondition of any civilized society is the absolute barring of any and all uses of physical force in social relationships.
I've discussed the issue of censorship here before.
What I have not discussed is those actions which many (particularly on the left) deem to be censorship, but which actually are not.
I am not censoring you if I refuse to allow you to espouse your views on my platform.
I am not censoring you if I refuse to fund policies which you advocate.
I am not censoring you if I refuse to buy your products or services since I consider your policies harmful.
In none of these cases have I prevented you from...
Some people's reading of The Declaration of Independence indicates to their minds that happiness is an inalienable right. Nothing could be further from the truth.
What is a man's inalienable right is that of pursuing happiness, and this right should under no condition be impinged upon.
The only restriction is that he refrain from impinging on other's exercise of the same right.
Meritocracy, like so many other important principles, is under assault today. Actually, it has been for some time.
The reason is obvious. If we support and maintain a system of meritocracy, there will be winners and losers.
No one likes to lose, and especially not if it was because their performance was not as good as that of others.
Thus, it is the poor losers whose hue and cry is to deconstruct this system and in its place build one which will favor certain select groups.
The rationale for...
I do believe that laughter is good medicine.
I also believe that you can tell a good deal about a person's mental and emotional health by whether or not they have a well developed and functioning sense of humor.
People who are incapable of laughing at themselves, including their opinions and ideas, are not mentally and emotionally healthy.
The term 'Public' is one of those meaningless terms, but it is not without harmful implications.
There is no public, only a specific group of individuals.
Thus, when it is claimed that something is in the public interest, what that means is that it is in the interest of a certain group of individuals and probably not so much in the interest of a different group.
The word's existence only serves to confuse and manipulate people, much like the phrase the 'general welfare' which would more...
I believe it was Aristotle who observed that political systems begin as masculine republics, morph into feminine democracies and eventuate into despotism.
I believe the truth of that observation is on full display today in the west.
I believe it was the wonderful Longshoreman philosopher Eric Hoffer who called my attention to the most dangerous class of people in contemporary society.
It is the intellectual class and especially that segment of this class which is underemployed and considers itself woefully under appreciated.
They are envious of the 'Masters of Production' who make far more money and garner more in the way of adulation.
These childish imps are in positions of power across not only academia but also other...
Socialism has never been a movement of the mass of common men. It has always and everywhere been a movement driven by the elite.
The pretense of being a movement of the working classes was nothing but intellectual camouflage, a ruse to take in the unwary dumbed down masses.
Look at who is promoting Socialism in this country today. Do they look like Mr. Everyman to you?
They fly around in private jets while promoting Socialism while the ignorant masses (all liberal Democrats by the way) have...
If you're like me you've never stopped hearing about the immorality of 'Income Inequality."
If you observe who the constant squawkers are, you can't help but notice that these same people are the one's promoting the Socialist policies which explain why people in South Korea on average earn 50 times more than their North Korean brethren.
It was the same with West and East Berlin before the Soviet Union imploded.
I believe it was the American biologist E. O. Wilson who said: 'Socialism, great...