Ignoramus intelligentsia and the consequences of enforced equality
My brother, one of the most athletic students in his year group, hasn’t been selected to represent his school on sports day.
Instead of selecting the fastest, fittest and strongest kids, they’ve selected randomly. It now seems that even PE teachers — many of whom chose the profession because of their athletic prowess as youngsters — are being squeezed to wear diversity top hats by their equality police higher-ups. The problem with these policy enforcing suit-wearing ignoramuses is their fundamental misunderstanding of the complexities of human nature. Coupled with an ability to smooth talk, to shout a few decibels louder than reason, and the power to enforce punishment or at least ostracise those who don’t agree, their delusions inevitably manifest in a multitude of backward, perverse, narrow-minded, stupid propositions. One pertinent example of which is their relative definition of the word ‘random’: a biased leaning towards representation of groups who’ve historically not been given a shot at sports day — that is, those who typically don’t end the day with any medals: the fattest, the slowest, the weakest, the nerds. Here’s the thing: the chronicled low representation of these groups is not because of discrimination; it’s simply a matter of ability.
Sport is firstly about competition, then about fun; in fact, without the former we can’t have the latter. We watch Nadal, Messi, Tiger Woods and Anthony Joshua because they’re the best — not because of their respective identity, race, gender, sexual orientation, or religious beliefs. We pay less attention to the championship, the undercard, a women’s tennis match between unseeded players, and a golf match between gay old aged pensioners at the local golf lodge NOT because we’re prejudicial, discriminatory, malevolent, racist, sexist or homophobic. It’s simply a matter of interest.
Interventionism and policy making in the name of equality/diversity is almost always a bad idea. The result is less recognition — and therefore, reward — for talent, skill and hard work, and more for effort-free association with a minor group able to produce loud noises about ‘equality’.
It’s good, I think, to be an optimist, but the increasing prevalence of this ugly ideology — that the world is structured so first and foremost because of discrimination and oppression — makes it very hard indeed. Just recently, book publishers Penguin announced their new mission: ‘both our new hires and the authors we acquire to reflect UK society by 2025.’ Which translates as ‘high-quality writing is no longer their main concern; publishing deals will from here on in be awarded according to group identity, instead of what genuinely matters when it comes to writing: competency, beauty, meaning, scholarship, depth, personality — all the attributes long admired about great literature, journalism, poetry, science fiction, and so forth.’
This poisonous ideology is infiltrating the atmosphere of every workplace: companies, just like PE teachers, are being forced to view candidates from the perspective of everything except attitude, capability, and potential. If you can’t see what’s wrong about this, I can’t help. What can be done about it? Contrary to the vocation of the ideologues, societal reconstruction isn’t the answer. Neither is ideology. The answer is to root ourselves — our opinions, ideas, decisions, actions, relationships, time — to truth, reason, and proper communication; to expose fraud and bullshit and bad ideas; and most critically, to protect that which our ancestors worked so hard for, the privilege we take for granted at our peril: free speech.
Life has been getting better at an astonishing rate for the past hundred years, and continues to do so. Slavery has been legally abolished; racism isn’t acceptable; world poverty has decreased 80% since 1820; homophobia, albeit slowly, is heading the same way.1 To credit these massive strides to group rallies and radicalism is a mistake. It’s more the result of technological advances and the concomitant increase in wealth; and more than that, humanism.
The continuation of this progress is under immense pressure, ironically, from those pushing for it in all the wrong ways. An interesting question is what percentage of the feminists, diversity preachers and equality police are open to changing their minds, to pushing for progress in the right ways. It’s in these people, and the power of reason, truth and frankly, common sense, that we must place our faith. Else we have an interesting future in store, and not of the pleasant type.
- Check out the works of Steven Pinker.