Tag Archives: freedom

Affirmative Action Liberal Style

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve written before about the inherently racist and sexist nature of the Left’s “affirmative” action programs.  Here’s another example of that, courtesy of Harvard University.

The US Department of Justice has opened an investigation into the use of race in Harvard University’s admissions practices and has accused the university of failing to cooperate with the probe, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

The Justice Department is investigating complaints that formed the basis of a federal civil lawsuit filed in 2014 in Boston, according to the documents. That suit alleges Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian-Americans by limiting the number of Asian students who are admitted.

Apparently, the only thing affirmative about such programs is the affirmation of the Left’s view of minorities (and of women, come to that) and their ability to compete on a level playing field, an affirmation first made appallingly plain by President Woodrow Wilson (D, and proud Progressive):

[S]egregation is not a humiliation but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen [of the black press].

Wilson held this position because he considered blacks inherently inferior and so needed to be protected from competition he assumed they could not win.  Today, the Left takes the same view, using a different tool. Today, the Left’s “affirmative” action also assumes blacks (and women) cannot compete on a level playing field, so it gives, openly and blatantly, additional weight to race and gender—because without that additional weight blacks and women can’t compete.

In Harvard’s case, too, the “affirmative” action program also apparently affirms that Americans with Asian heritage are so inherently superior that they must be held back so that those inherently inferior blacks (and women, mind) can keep up.  It’s unimportant to the Left that this denies those held-back Americans their own equal opportunity right, the right as another Progressive icon, Theodore Roosevelt, put it at Osawatomie, Kansas, that

each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.

Go figure.  And then go vote next fall and again in 2020.

German Democracy

Posted on by
Reply

Germany’s President, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whose position is less than that of the Chancellor’s (the current incumbent is Angela Merkel of the Christian Democratic Union) but currently has a critical role, has let the cat out of the bag regarding the attitude of that nation’s political elite toward democracy and the people of the nation.

Recall that Germany held an election a few weeks ago in which the governing CDU/SPD coalition was heavily defeated.  The Social Democrat Party, a center left party, lost most heavily, and it has announced that it will not ally with the CDU in any new government.  The CDU also lost heavily, although it retains the most seats in the German parliament, the Bundestag.  That most seats, though, is a bare plurality, not enough to govern effectively.  Merkel entered talks with The Greens Party and the Free Democrats Party, whose numbers combined with the CDU’s would have given such a coalition a (bare) majority in the Bundestag.  These were difficult talks since the three parties are polar opposites socially, economically, politically, pick a dimension (and yes, I’m aware of the difficulty of a three-way opposite construction—as were Merkel and the heads of those two parties, but they went for it, anyway).

The talks broke down, and with the SPD in firm opposition, Merkel is left with the choice of a minority government or new elections.  She prefers new elections.

Here’s where Steinmeier has exposed the elite’s Know Better attitude.  The Wall Street Journal has quoted his position:

The parties have campaigned for responsibility in the Sept 24 elections, a responsib[ility] that Germany’s constitution says can’t simply be handed back to voters.  This responsibility goes far beyond someone’s own interests.

Except that the German Constitution says exactly that, were the newly elected Bundestag unable to agree on a new coalition or a Chancellor.  However, the elites Know Better, and they insist that the people—the voters, Germany’s citizens—can’t be trusted with governance.  After all, they screwed up their just concluded chance, right?

Hmm….

Mao is Dead

Posted on by
Reply

Long live Mao.

People’s Republic of China’s newly crowned Emperor and President-for-Life Xi Jinping has mounted his throne and is starting to exercise his power.

Under Mr Xi’s orders, mandatory political-study sessions emphasizing his speeches and policies were revived for all party members.

And

So was the Mao-era practice of members criticizing others and themselves.

Can we look forward to reeducation camps, too?  Maybe.  Here’s Xi on necessary fervor and “right thinking:”

We must continue to rid ourselves of any virus that erodes the party’s fabric[.]

And

Many government agencies and state-owned businesses require party members to attend study sessions at least once a month. Some officials organize weekly discussions, ask members to spend an hour a day on political self-study or arrange field trips to revolutionary landmarks.

And here’s an indication of the level of Orwellian micromanaging control over individuals that Xi expects the party to exercise:

Rank-and-file Communist Party members must take notes in standard-issue journals and submit them for review, as well as spend spare time studying for regular political discussions and quizzes.

We’re going to live in interesting times.  And so are the Chinese people on the mainland.

Centralizing Power

Posted on by
Reply

China’s Communist Party granted President Xi Jinping authority on a par with Chairman Mao, revising its constitution to inscribe a political theory bearing Mr Xi’s name and endorse policies to make the nation a world power.

A weeklong party congress that ended Tuesday appeared to give Mr Xi unassailable power as he begins a second five-year term.

The move was unanimous, with not a single Party member out of 2,336 willing to vote no—an indication of Xi’s already present overweening power.

Adding to the significance of this power grab, only two other People’s Republic of China leaders have had their “thoughts” added to the nation’s constitution: Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, and both of these were dead before the CPC codified their “thoughts.”  Xi is alive and well and in a position to build on this move.

It seems as though the running dog is, indeed, the permanent leader of the pack.

A couple of questions come up in my pea brain: Will he get his own statute, too?  Does anyone in the Communist Party of China have the stones to ask Xi about his caldrons?

Mobile Encryption is a Huge Problem

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the position of FBI Director Christopher Wray.

To put it mildly, this [mobile device encryption] is a huge, huge problem.  It impacts investigations across the board.

Certainly, consumer-done encryption of our communications devices can temporarily hinder investigations of the criminals who also use this encryption.  But as the FBI demonstrated regarding an encrypted cell phone involved in the San Bernardino terrorist attack, its initial claims notwithstanding, the encryption can be broken without the cooperation of the device’s owner.

Every tool can be misused.  The problem is not the misuse of the tool but government efforts to apply one-size-fits-all solutions to the misuse that end up harming all the rest of us more than the bad guys.

The FBI’s continued demand for a “government-mandated backdoor” that the government’s agents can use whenever they take a notion puts a premium on the encryption side of the question.  Think Government wouldn’t misbehave?  Ask anyone on the right about the behavior of the Obama administration.  Ask anyone on the left about the behavior of the Trump administration.

It’s always going to be an arms race between the good guys and the bad guys.  It’s a critical arms race, though, when it’s our own government that wants to pry into all of our private communications because a few of us are bad guys.