Editor’s note: I’ve been skull-deep in a home improvement project this week (and the week before, and the next week), so today I’m cranking the WABAC machine to July 2020, for a reminder that the preferred “solution” to our supposed cultural woes (not the real ones, just the ones that they’ve chosen to make so) is dumbing down rather than lifting up.
Great column! It reminded me of the old slogan "Power to the People!". Those shouting it never quite got around to identifying who exactly the "People" were and what should be done with the "Power". Whereas, there is some evidence that "meritocracy" has been used as a way to keep particular groups down, you don't make things better by dumbing down your standards but by doing what we can to provide the opportunity for people to develop the skills they need to succeed.
When it's been used to keep people down, it's been a deceit and smokescreen to hide the nefarious, as you certainly know.
One of the most maddening things to me is how the progressives' diluting of primary education standards, in the name of "equity" or social justice or whatever, is a cover for the fact that they've been running schools into the ground for over half a century, and are doing this equity shit in order to hide their own failures.
Being "talented" artistically, academically, athletically or in any endeavor - mainly takes WORK. Lots of work. Some few of us are born gifted to naturally do this or that one thing, and if they're truly fortunate, they find their way to exploit that gift. But for most of us, it takes a LOT of work - practice, assuming risk and overcoming the fact we're NOT naturally gifted. That's just nature - and grift and quotas won't change that. What it WILL do is sink us into mediocrity. Because effort won't be rewarded with success - why put in the effort?
Indeed. Work ethic is usually a greater predictor of success than natural talent, and sometimes natural talent can even hinder success, because it can offset the need for a work ethic early in one's development.
There's a fun little movie called The Manhattan Project, from the mid 80s, where a high school kid builds a very small atomic bomb.
In it, he's described, off the cuff, as "bright but an underachiever."
I've seen a whole lot of that across my decades, and I've known more than a few very smart kids who coasted by their grade school and HS years, only to be confronted with a new reality when immersed in a body of equally smart kids, rather than being at the top solely due to innate talent.
You also see it in sports. For work ethic and perseverance, look at Mike Piazza, hall of fame catcher who was the last player drafted in his draft class. Or, if you prefer football, Brock Purdy, also drafted last (aka Mr Irrelevant), who is now a high level starter. On the flip side, sports are awash in top talent that never made it big, because they relied on talent more than on grit.
Great column! It reminded me of the old slogan "Power to the People!". Those shouting it never quite got around to identifying who exactly the "People" were and what should be done with the "Power". Whereas, there is some evidence that "meritocracy" has been used as a way to keep particular groups down, you don't make things better by dumbing down your standards but by doing what we can to provide the opportunity for people to develop the skills they need to succeed.
When it's been used to keep people down, it's been a deceit and smokescreen to hide the nefarious, as you certainly know.
One of the most maddening things to me is how the progressives' diluting of primary education standards, in the name of "equity" or social justice or whatever, is a cover for the fact that they've been running schools into the ground for over half a century, and are doing this equity shit in order to hide their own failures.
Being "talented" artistically, academically, athletically or in any endeavor - mainly takes WORK. Lots of work. Some few of us are born gifted to naturally do this or that one thing, and if they're truly fortunate, they find their way to exploit that gift. But for most of us, it takes a LOT of work - practice, assuming risk and overcoming the fact we're NOT naturally gifted. That's just nature - and grift and quotas won't change that. What it WILL do is sink us into mediocrity. Because effort won't be rewarded with success - why put in the effort?
Indeed. Work ethic is usually a greater predictor of success than natural talent, and sometimes natural talent can even hinder success, because it can offset the need for a work ethic early in one's development.
That's a great point I hadn't considered!
There's a fun little movie called The Manhattan Project, from the mid 80s, where a high school kid builds a very small atomic bomb.
In it, he's described, off the cuff, as "bright but an underachiever."
I've seen a whole lot of that across my decades, and I've known more than a few very smart kids who coasted by their grade school and HS years, only to be confronted with a new reality when immersed in a body of equally smart kids, rather than being at the top solely due to innate talent.
You also see it in sports. For work ethic and perseverance, look at Mike Piazza, hall of fame catcher who was the last player drafted in his draft class. Or, if you prefer football, Brock Purdy, also drafted last (aka Mr Irrelevant), who is now a high level starter. On the flip side, sports are awash in top talent that never made it big, because they relied on talent more than on grit.
Sherman here: I can help with that WABAC machine problem. Please contact my master, Peabody.
Thank goodness someone gets my weird references!