Have you ever wondered why social justice and "woke" adherents so often seem to be socialists, or at least of the wealth-redistribution mindset that's the current incarnation of “socialism” (see, “Democratic…”?
I remember a friend of mine who would argue that it was necessary that all "victims" of past "injustice" be "made whole" before we can proceed with any capitalist system (not that she ever wanted to reach a capitalist system anyway -- imposing an impossible-to-reach precondition made sense to her).
Affirmative action is one approach we have to delivering "reparations". But often, the black kids who benefit from affirmative action and wind up in elite schools are the children of immigrants, like Obama, who are not descended from American slaves. Oops.
And there are a lot of negative impacts of affirmative action, such as beneficiaries of affirmative action getting promoted to elite schools where most of their peers have GPA's and standardized test scores much higher than theirs, so they are unable to hold their own in tough majors, and have to transfer to easy disciplines just to get through, leading to a nationwide dearth of STEM graduates among the demographics that are beneficiaries of affirmative action.
I think there has been injustice, and just plain rotten luck. There are a lot of reasons to have a good safety net to help people who aren't doing well, no questions asked about exactly what sort of "injustice" or "bad luck" got them there, but that by itself is nowhere near adequate for the woke. I strongly suspect that actually harming "oppressors" is a major priority with them.
Your friend is, as you already know, lying. Perhaps to herself as well. She is probably unaware that Marx considered socialism a "next step" after capitalism, and therefore there'd be no reason to go 'backward.' But, that aside, it's just an excuse not to allow people the freedom to act as they wish, because they apparently can't be trusted with it.
The Thomases have had a lot to say - none of it good - on the impact of Affirmative Action on those it purports to help.
It makes no sense to install people in situations they're underprepared for - by the system that the installers created and have been running for half a century (see: public education) - and say "job done." Struggling in an elite school provides less benefit - both in terms of an education and re personal esteem - than going to a mid-range school, being able to handle the material, and coming out with a sense of self-worth.
Besides that, there's plenty of STEM work that doesn't require a degree from one of the top universities. In fact, I suspect that, as time goes on, many will go into coding careers without even going to college.
Thomas Sowell sub-titled one of his books "Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy," and it is a bulls-eye of a statement. All this woke stuff, all this social justice, is more about giving the warrior self-satisfaction - without any personal cost. It's a form of charity that doesn't actually require any personal giving.
When a socialist cries about poverty and inequality, the free market defender is usually playing…defense, citing wonky statistics or finger-wagging about “class warfare” and appearing about as empathetic as Mr. Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life”.
The campaign against socialism needs to play offense, not defense. Point out the many ways that government interference in personal freedom and free markets blocks opportunities to rise out of poverty. Just a few examples:
- Millions of poor/minority kids are trapped in dysfunctional urban public schools while “progressives” oppose school choice.
- NIMBY and environmental home building restrictions raise the cost of housing while killing potential construction jobs.
- Occupational licensing (ok for brain surgeons, not needed for hair braiders)
- In general, excessive business taxes and regulations hit hardest at manufacturing companies that offer decent paying jobs for non-college educated “regular folks”
- Lower income people don’t have much left to save and invest after putting 12.6% of every paycheck (including employer matching) into the Social Security Ponzi scheme.
More broadly, I think it's impossible to actually argue with the true believers on any basis of fact or empirical evidence. It's the Jonathan Swift notion: "You cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into."
The all-in socialists are lost causes. The goal should be to rescue those who are tempted by its siren song. It's why I only ever debate or argue in public forums and never via PM - there's no third party audience to be lured to my side of the fence.
My theory on the relationship between wokeness and socialism goes back to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the implosion of the Warsaw Pact.
This put the far left into a crisis, because most of the world now saw that they didn't know their asses from a hole in the ground about economics, since they had been so consistently unable to create an economy that delivered the goods.
A lot of moderate Democrats decided to learn something about economics. A basic understanding of Econ 101 became much more widespread among the moderate left in the US.
But the far-leftists had a problem. No one was going to listen to them about economics any more, and it had always been the main thing they wanted to talk about. So where to go? They went into:
- social justice
- the environmental movement
Both of these fields afforded them the opportunity to vilify their traditional enemies, just from new angles.
Social justice had the added plus that a large share of the population doesn't feel "free speech" should apply to it. Over the years, the SJW's have evolved this intolerance into the ability to get their enemies fired at will.
They've made a godawful mess of environmentalism, since most environmentalists do not understand or pursue market-friendly solutions. In 2016, I was at a panel discussion by some environmentalists talking about a carbon tax, and one of them foamed at the mouth for a couple of minutes about how much he hated "markets", and then he said "Even if I were talking with a conservative, not that that would ever happen, I wouldn't describe a carbon tax as a 'market solution'.".
Very good column.
I remember a friend of mine who would argue that it was necessary that all "victims" of past "injustice" be "made whole" before we can proceed with any capitalist system (not that she ever wanted to reach a capitalist system anyway -- imposing an impossible-to-reach precondition made sense to her).
Affirmative action is one approach we have to delivering "reparations". But often, the black kids who benefit from affirmative action and wind up in elite schools are the children of immigrants, like Obama, who are not descended from American slaves. Oops.
And there are a lot of negative impacts of affirmative action, such as beneficiaries of affirmative action getting promoted to elite schools where most of their peers have GPA's and standardized test scores much higher than theirs, so they are unable to hold their own in tough majors, and have to transfer to easy disciplines just to get through, leading to a nationwide dearth of STEM graduates among the demographics that are beneficiaries of affirmative action.
I think there has been injustice, and just plain rotten luck. There are a lot of reasons to have a good safety net to help people who aren't doing well, no questions asked about exactly what sort of "injustice" or "bad luck" got them there, but that by itself is nowhere near adequate for the woke. I strongly suspect that actually harming "oppressors" is a major priority with them.
Your friend is, as you already know, lying. Perhaps to herself as well. She is probably unaware that Marx considered socialism a "next step" after capitalism, and therefore there'd be no reason to go 'backward.' But, that aside, it's just an excuse not to allow people the freedom to act as they wish, because they apparently can't be trusted with it.
The Thomases have had a lot to say - none of it good - on the impact of Affirmative Action on those it purports to help.
It makes no sense to install people in situations they're underprepared for - by the system that the installers created and have been running for half a century (see: public education) - and say "job done." Struggling in an elite school provides less benefit - both in terms of an education and re personal esteem - than going to a mid-range school, being able to handle the material, and coming out with a sense of self-worth.
Besides that, there's plenty of STEM work that doesn't require a degree from one of the top universities. In fact, I suspect that, as time goes on, many will go into coding careers without even going to college.
Thomas Sowell sub-titled one of his books "Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy," and it is a bulls-eye of a statement. All this woke stuff, all this social justice, is more about giving the warrior self-satisfaction - without any personal cost. It's a form of charity that doesn't actually require any personal giving.
When a socialist cries about poverty and inequality, the free market defender is usually playing…defense, citing wonky statistics or finger-wagging about “class warfare” and appearing about as empathetic as Mr. Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life”.
The campaign against socialism needs to play offense, not defense. Point out the many ways that government interference in personal freedom and free markets blocks opportunities to rise out of poverty. Just a few examples:
- Millions of poor/minority kids are trapped in dysfunctional urban public schools while “progressives” oppose school choice.
- NIMBY and environmental home building restrictions raise the cost of housing while killing potential construction jobs.
- Occupational licensing (ok for brain surgeons, not needed for hair braiders)
- In general, excessive business taxes and regulations hit hardest at manufacturing companies that offer decent paying jobs for non-college educated “regular folks”
- Lower income people don’t have much left to save and invest after putting 12.6% of every paycheck (including employer matching) into the Social Security Ponzi scheme.
Agree.
More broadly, I think it's impossible to actually argue with the true believers on any basis of fact or empirical evidence. It's the Jonathan Swift notion: "You cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into."
The all-in socialists are lost causes. The goal should be to rescue those who are tempted by its siren song. It's why I only ever debate or argue in public forums and never via PM - there's no third party audience to be lured to my side of the fence.
My theory on the relationship between wokeness and socialism goes back to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the implosion of the Warsaw Pact.
This put the far left into a crisis, because most of the world now saw that they didn't know their asses from a hole in the ground about economics, since they had been so consistently unable to create an economy that delivered the goods.
A lot of moderate Democrats decided to learn something about economics. A basic understanding of Econ 101 became much more widespread among the moderate left in the US.
But the far-leftists had a problem. No one was going to listen to them about economics any more, and it had always been the main thing they wanted to talk about. So where to go? They went into:
- social justice
- the environmental movement
Both of these fields afforded them the opportunity to vilify their traditional enemies, just from new angles.
Social justice had the added plus that a large share of the population doesn't feel "free speech" should apply to it. Over the years, the SJW's have evolved this intolerance into the ability to get their enemies fired at will.
They've made a godawful mess of environmentalism, since most environmentalists do not understand or pursue market-friendly solutions. In 2016, I was at a panel discussion by some environmentalists talking about a carbon tax, and one of them foamed at the mouth for a couple of minutes about how much he hated "markets", and then he said "Even if I were talking with a conservative, not that that would ever happen, I wouldn't describe a carbon tax as a 'market solution'.".
You've probably seen this:
https://therootsofliberty.substack.com/p/critical-theory-and-the-frankfurt