Neo Bigots

 The current slogan of the Washington Post is “Democracy Dies in Darkness” though they should re-brand with the new slogan - ‘Democracy Dies under DEI’; not that any article addressing this concept will ever show up in that rag. Written in 1215, the Magna Carta Libertatum (L. "Great Charter of Freedoms ") attempted to provide a level legal playing field for all Englishmen, this was done in the effort to replace Feudalism as Feudalism put forward the idea that all Englishmen were not equal as they held a ‘position’ within the social hierarchy; a position from which they could not easily escape. The Magna Carta along with its descendants such as the constitutions of England, The US, and Canada, seem have had a good run, all things considered.

 A feudal system is based on pigeon-holing people where all people are restricted to their allocated pigeon-hole; the children of peasants remaining peasants and children of Royals remain Royals with all of the hierarchal layers in between. The parallel between the pre Magna Carta feudal system and the current ongoing drive towards social re-allocation based on the ‘Oppression Olympics’ seems obvious. Both systems are predicated on pigeon-holing with the only difference being that the first tried to drag the majority of the population out of the pigeon holes, while the latter is seeking to populate and/or repopulate the available holes.

 Unfortunately this is not a war on a single front and when one has a war on many fronts it is never a trivial matter. Metaphorically, consider the following two situations, the 300 Spartan versus Xerxes’ army and WW2-Germany versus the English Commonwealth, the USA, and the USSR.

 A second frontal assault on maintaining the standards of Western society is being led by the eco-champions; for the sake of clarity, an eco-warrior is the person on the ground. The eco-warriors are literally on the ground as they seem to like to glue themselves to the road, slow march along a road, or attempt to spoil things that members of the public in general find enjoyment in. The eco-champions are those who fly to global destinations, with the exception of China, to hold fancy parties where they myopically discuss the primary food for plants, thus encouraging the regression of Western societies back to the days of old in feudal Europe, in regard to general energy security.

 Some people believe that the ideals behind Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) are waning within the corporate sphere. This view is understandable when one considers that a DEI department is a cost centre and many people see their economy is hurting, and so many companies will need to cut costs. DEI is not waning; it is being supplanted by both ESG (Environment, Society and Governance) and BRIDGE (Benchmarking Race, Inclusion, and Diversity in Global Engagement). ESG is a scoring system within both the fiscal and corporate worlds, a distinction without a difference some might say, it can be used as both the stick and the carrot towards ensuring compliance as it is a factor used to set interest rates and market capitalization recommendations. BRIDGE is still fresh faced and so understanding its impact will have to wait for some day in the future.

Perhaps coincidentally, the British band The Stranglers released a song titled ‘Skin Deep’ in 1984 and it is strongly recommended the reader listens to that song. Within DEI the diversity seems to be focused mostly on skin colour with religion coming in a close second and gender comes in third; thus making more pigeon-holes and stuffing in more pigeons. Oddly enough, it seems that for some people the determining difference between peoples is only skin deep, evidence of this can be seen by searching Google for ‘Larry Elder black face white supremacy’.

 While DEI sounds good in its full title, it falls on its face in practice. The acronym would be better matched to it praxis if DEI stood for ‘Differential Enforcement Ideology’. It is said that hindsight is 20/20 and the reader is asked to look to back to the past 10 years or so and see how well the DEI mantra has played out. Those who ran BLM post George Floyd were not diverse, did not provide equity of outcome and most certainly did not include the people whose businesses were hollowed out by fire nor any inclusion regarding the vast sums of monies donated; meanwhile the BLM leaders did end up with some very nice homes.

 Another possible expansion of DEI is ‘Dependency Encouragement Incentives’ and this one is probably the most insidious.  One has only to dawn their history glasses again to see examples of how this has been done before and some of the consequences. The American’s Affirmative Action policy is possibly the best example of this DEI derivative and so once again the pigeon holes got stuffed. Incepted on Sept 24^th 1965 as part of LBJ’s Great Society plan, this policy eventually became a quota system, a quota system with the unforeseen consequence of increasing the drop-out rate of those it was intended to help. This happened because in order to meet said quota, some schools lowered entry standards thus placing the ‘protected’ persons underwater within their educational experience; where as the same person may have done well at a not so prestigious institution. The Supreme Court of the United States of America (SCOTUS) overturned Affirmative Action in June of 2023.

 Sticking with the expansion above, another unintended consequence was disproportional incarceration and once again LBJ and his Great Society initiative is the source. According to Dr. Thomas Sowell, in the 1950s the fatherless homes within the black American community was around 20% and now it is around 80%. Dr. Sowell has posited that the cause for this meteoric rise was a government program that to this day is providing tax based funds to single mothers on a per child basis. Stepping outside of Dr. Sowell’s characteristic politeness, it seems that the general tax payer is getting screwed for the benefit of others without any conjugal benefit.

 The next expansion to play with is ‘Disinformation Exaggeration Incitement’. It is said that in the USSR a man would take the two papers Pravda (Truth) and Izvestiya (News) then riffle-shuffle them together like a cut deck of cards making both papers un-open-able, then the man would proclaim “finally there is truth in the news and news in the truth, unfortunately we can not read it”, his friends would then laugh.

 Phrases like ‘fiery but mostly peaceful protest’, ‘a one size fits all solution’, ‘YOU don’t know MY truth’, and ‘Trump has to be taken off the ballot to save our democracy’, all of which seem straight out of Pravda. Some will say that “the Internet” ruined the NEWS outlets, this is an overly simplified talking-point in these transitional times; the transition of note is the shift away from ‘one of us’ towards ‘not one of us’ seemingly all across Western societies. In days gone by the citizenry was more amicable exposing themselves to many sources with different perspectives, yet since those days the ‘different perspectives’ have: drifted further apart, become more anchored in place, and are increasing in number.

 The information highway is as equally culpable as a printing press when it comes to the distribution of information, from the good, the bad and the ugly, with disinformation somewhere in between; with the exception of post publishing edits. It is the opinion of this author that the pre-Internet era publishing can be characterized by two conditions: history and money. Modernity has reaped the benefit of history curating all of the trash out the public syllabus, money use to be a measure of meritocracy, a practice which seems to have ended with “modern art”.

 Another acronym many people may remember is PC, Politically Correct, or perhaps Provocateur and Contrarian depending on your attitude. Another gift from the USSR the term Politically Correct means that while a narrative may not be technically correct it is made in support of ‘the Party’; Lysenkoism being the prime example of this. Lysenko and his PC ideas added millions of deaths to the event known as the Holodomor. Other recent versions of this line of thinking can be found in the phrases such as “safe and effective” or “gender affirming care for children”. While the parties may have changed, the ideological tactic has not.

 This article has reached its conclusion with the intention of showing that words do matter. Then when presented as an acronym thus obscuring the actual words, further enhancing the confusion, thereby masking the true intent even more. While words are important, actions are literally more impactfull, hence why words that call for violent action are typically frowned upon; that is unless both the call and the violence ‘works’ for those who already have power or desperately want it.

  

From: V for Vendetta

“Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.”