Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Legal Discrimination and the Death of Virtue Signaling
The Trump administration is reportedly considering an executive order granting broad religious freedoms (you know, the kind we enjoyed prior to Barack Obama). From the Nation:
A leaked copy of a draft executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” obtained by The Investigative Fund and The Nation, reveals sweeping plans by the Trump administration to legalize discrimination.
I find myself unmoved. By far, the biggest source of discrimination in American society is political — i.e., discriminating against people with the “wrong sort” of politics — which is legal in most states and universally approved of by the Left. Of all the varied forms of discrimination I’ve faced, political discrimination was by far the worst and the most difficult to fight. Unlike other forms, it’s almost impossible to plan for; it strikes randomly, like lightning (note, I am not talking about discrimination on the basis of political opinions, but on membership in broad political coalitions).
After politics, the second worst form of discrimination I experienced was the result of corporate anti-discrimination and diversity policies. Sometimes I wonder if employers would be happier if I brought a list of the popular “oppressed” groups I belong to job interviews, but I’ve never been able to bring myself to do it; it would be a deeply painful violation of my privacy.
I loathe anti-discrimination laws, and I hope President Trump gets rid of each and every one of them. It isn’t possible for the government to ban discrimination any more than it was possible for it to ban alcohol, homosexuality, or gambling. All these laws do is feed the narcissism of our virtue-signalling professional class, and serve as weapons whereby they can bully each other — and those beneath them — into submission.
Trump got elected in part because a large number of Americans were facing politically correct forms of discrimination. But, instead of trying to pass yet more anti-discrimination laws, he is trying to weaken the ones we have. He is wise to do so.
Published in General
Some discrimination is good, some is bad, and some is illegal. The only people who don’t discriminate are dead people. I would not want to reduce the good kind.
I don’t think I’m crazy about any of the suggested options. [And the last one won’t work because I’m a research lawyer for the state appellate court – not a “practicing” lawyer!] A cabin in the middle of 40 heavily wooded acres (with lots of No Trespassing signs) is beginning to look really good. But thanks, guys, for the suggestions!
Public debate and condemnation are OK. We can speak out without requiring government intervention for every disagreement.
A bit more on Leftist Religious Fundamentalism and why they can’t accept defeat civilly; from John David Danielson at The Federalist:
“The obstinacy of Senate Democrats reflects the mood of their progressive base, whose panicked anger is the natural reaction of those for whom politics has become an article of faith. Progressives, as the terms implies, believe society must always be progressing toward something better. Always forward, never backwards. After eight years of Obama, they believed progressive politics in America would forever be on an upward trajectory.
Trump shook that faith. But his election also unmasked the degree to which progressivism as a political project is based not on science or rationality, or even sound policy, but on faith in the power of government to ameliorate and eventually perfect society. All the protests and denunciations of Trump serve not just as an outlet for progressives’ despair, but the chance to signal their moral virtue through collective outrage and moral preening–something that wasn’t really possible under Obama, at least not to this degree.”
“Religious fundamentalism of course rests on immutable truths that cannot be negotiated.”
I don’t know about you, but I just don’t get the now sacred and soooo… utterly profound and obviously “immutable” belief system of the Left and I hate having it shoved down my throat, every other second. That is why this Trump Executive Order on Religious liberty that puts the Left in it’s place is so important.
Right. I was talking about private sector discriminatory behavior, and yes I agree that public-sector persecution of religion is a worse problem today.
It’s called “capitalism.” Economic growth is the enemy of discrimination.
I was beaten into a bloody pulp by 5 Nazi Skinheads when I was 15, taking a steel-toed boot in the side of the head. Left a dent that still gives me tinnitus whenever I accidentally sleep on it.
Also older Asian women sexually harass me wherever I go. Even when I’m with my wife. I once almost lost my pants when I accidentally walked into a Bingo Hall filled with drunken 50-year-old Laotian women.
You are definitely in the 5% ;-)
Great place to write a manifesto. Would you welcome other white males?
You complainin’ or braggin’?
I have been around a while. Color me skeptical. I see the argument for non-interference by the state but I doubt it will be effective to minimize discrimination.
As long as they check their white privilege and can pass the entrance exam!
Would that be a Bar the door exam? @pugshot
I agree with the gist of your article, Joseph, but I’d like us to be more careful with the language. It isn’t possible for the government to ban prejudice or bigotry — attitudes held in the consciences of individuals. It is possible for the government to punish people for discriminatory behavior. The question is — should it?
I think (for the most part) not. It used to be a compliment to say, “he’s a man of discriminating taste.” Why is “discrimination” now universally accepted as derogatory? It’s an attribute of human reason and common sense. It’s why we don’t install wheelchair ramps in baseball dugouts. It’s why this 5’3″ fifty-five year-old housewife isn’t recruited by the NBA. Heck, the government discriminates all the time!! It won’t issue driver’s licenses to the blind and it won’t accept people with heart conditions into the military. It’s called “having standards.”
While we’re restoring American greatness, let’s restore the meaning of words the Left has succeeding corrupting, like “discrimination” and “nationalism” and “religion.” There are good and bad versions of all these things.
Always both Patrick. Come on, you know this about me!
That is not entirely true. Jim Crow laws were obviously the products of governmental action, but private hotels, restaurants, lunch counters etc. were run by private sector individuals who believed in segregation and required little to no encouragement from the law. I’m pretty confident that there were large swaths of segregated private sector facilities that operated without state encouragement. Are things different today? Sure, but the roots of the public accommodation laws addressed a public and private sector issue.
I know that problem with women — man, I can’t get a break.
I’ll just repeat myself, and add emphasis.
Even in 2017 America, individuals have the right to be racists/bigots [and/or leftists!]. The government doesn’t.
Correct. Everyone discriminates every day of their lives.
Examples of discrimination:
When I set my alarm clock to wake me up tomorrow morning, I discriminate between setting it to 5 o’clock in the morning and setting it to 6 o’clock in the morning.
If a white male asks an Asian female for a dinner date, the Asian female might decline the invitation. She could decline because she thinks the while male is unattractive or unintelligent. She could decline because she prefers dating Asian men. She could decline because she is homosexual and prefers dating women.
If a parent throws a birthday party for her child, the attendees might be all Hispanic or all White or all black, depending on who her child’s friends are.
To eliminate discrimination is to eliminate freedom.
Well said. Very good explanation and very lucid thoughts. Thanks.
Bad analogies. Discrimination is the point of love or friendship. We choose people who are compatible with our personality. But at work, we should choose the most qualified person even if we don’t enjoy them socially, so long as they are not crazies that ruin other people’s productivity.
This is all discrimination.