The Myth of Equality

Seeking equality is a lot like seeking perfection — just without the perfection.

By Selwyn Duke

In a speech recently, Al Sharpton emphasized that the left’s white whale, equality, still eludes us. Martin Luther King’s dream “was not to put one black family in the White House,” said he; “The dream was to make everything equal in everybody’s house.” Ah, the profundity. Now, it could be pointed out that your house will likely never measure up to Tawana Al’s, even if you do manage to mainline government hand-outs. Not everyone is a reverend without a congregation who possesses a collection plate the size of Louis Farrakhan’s “Mother Ship” flying saucer. As to this, it could also be pointed out that if “Big collection, No Parishioners” didn’t find new mountains of white sheets to climb, he’d be out of a “job” — in a quote-unquote manner of speaking.

Yet, for every Tawana Al, Jena Jesse and X-Files Farrakhan, there are millions of moderns who sincerely believe that equality is the greatest good, even if they can’t make millions peddling it. It’s one of those assumptions people just don’t question.

Read the rest here.

Comments

[Philip France]

Selwyn Duke has hit it out of the park yet again. His articles get better and more powerful as the days pass, for which he should be commended.

I would add to his points the following:

1. The left’s infantile and unreasonable obsession with “fairness”. It pains me to hear this term repeated by wonks and commentators with whom I largely agree (as well as those with whom I universally disagree). “Fairness” Is a childish fantasy. Until our Lord shall return, this earth will never be “fair” (Selwyn alluded to this in his “equality of outcome” remarks. He is spot-on in his assessment thereof.
2. The grotesque misuse of the word “free”. You hear it all the time and every day in advertisements. Win a “free” laptop. Join now and get your first month “free”. I hate to break the news to you, but NOTHING is free. Not even freedom itself, which for us Americans was quite costly in the loss of the blood of our most brave and courageous warriors and defenders of the liberties that we seem to take for granted.

The laptop was not “free” in that SOMEone paid for it. That hamburger or that subscription was not “free”: someone paid for that enticement.

It is likely that all of us saw the epic movie “Braveheart” and the final shout of Sir William Wallace. Consider the price that HE paid for the “free”dom of his countrymen.

I exhort my fellow devotees at SelwynDuke.com to be cautious of the misuse of this word. I encourage us all to confront its misuse and to call to mind the many that gave their all to protect what freedom truly means and represents.

It is a deep subject, although worth a thoughtful man’s research, to consider the “perfect law of liberty” referred to in James, Chapter 1, verse 25 of the Holy Bible. This appears to be a contradictory statement; however an arrival to its meaning is worth its study. Eternally.

I offer my standing ovation to Selwyn Duke for another powerful and poignant article.

[Dan]

It is quite ironic that in the interest of "fairness" things are taken from the perceived haves and given to the perceived have nots.

The obvious examples are affirmative action and quotas. Everyone is supposed to be equal, yet someone is getting preferential treatment based solely on their race or sex (which I thought we were supposed to ignore). Where a more qualified person of another race or sex is purposefully being denied entry, for a possibly less qualified person of the race they need to fill a spot with(And thats not racist or sexist, how?). But of course, what race and sex is NEVER on such a quota? The white male.

They always talk as if this is 1940 and every single person is a racist and wont even consider a black man for a job. And that for a white person, getting a job is as easy as walking in the interview room, and upon their eyes seeing that the candidate is white, they leap from their chair and scream, "YOU'RE HIRED!"

And I've been told before "You're white, you don't need any help" Uhhh, excuse me? My skin color is not an all access pass to promotions, bank loans, and discounts at the car dealership. (when ironically, theirs can be)

Racism will probbaly never go away, and actively trying to make up for racism, will only fuel the fires. The only way to minimize it is to let it become the independent record store of the market place of ideas. The place that still exists, but hardly anybody even goes to.

[yoyo]

Really, you are using the John Birch Society as a reference, in 2010???? - the John Birch Society!!!! (Jaw drops). I had thought that like Country Clubs that wont take Jewish members, the JBS was beyond the pale, certainly not to be used as a source publicly at least.

Dan you are right that quotas are a blunt tool that often misfires. However, there is a surfuit of evidence that employers given the same CV with different names will generally chose the William Hunt rather than Saleem Jahish. I agree that I dont think quotas generally help, however good publicity for companies that have family friendly policies or make efforts to provide scholarships/apprenticships for poorer communities may be the way to go. By the way when I think poorer communities I am NOT thinking black/white, I think isolated or under stress such as Detroit or Appalachian areas etc

[Philip France]

Here she is again with another round of "WTF are you talking about?". The grapes that you favor appear to be much too ripe.

[Walt]

BIG NEWS!!! Leftist defames The John Birch Society. Trust me Yoyo, your distain for all things regarding God, the preservation of Liberty and the American way of life are a given here...no need to waste your breath (or finger tips in this case).

[Philip France]

Yoyo,

This: "(the party of forced pregnancy and gay hatred)" allegation is absurd.

I will start by stating that I am certain that Selwyn Duke agrees with me in agreeing with George Washington’s concerns that political parties were a bad idea. I am certain that he agrees that politicizing can and will likely result in a political leader favoring his party, rather than his nation. You do not know what Selwyn’s “party” is and neither do I. In fact, it is neither of our business. You are wrongheaded in this statement and you Selwyn and his readers an apology.

As for “forced pregnancy”, are you accusing Selwyn of rape? Who else but a rapist has “forced” a pregnancy? I realize that your intention is that Selwyn Duke, myself and most of his readers believe that a pregnant woman should carry her child to term. We are right and you are wrong. I’ll bet that you boast of being “pro-choice”. You are a liar. If you are truly “pro-choice”, then abstinence, contraception, adoption and raising your “accident” would be a far more preferable “choice” than to destroy a vital fetus. That you claim to be a mother makes you to be a filthy hypocrite on this subject. You are not “pro-choice”, Quite the opposite; you are ANTI-choice. If you have EVER witnessed a plant or a weed growing out of solid rock. You KNOW that EVERY living organism struggles to survive. That you might agree to the destruction of the most INNOCENT of these organisms paints a very dark and black image of your human soul. This also causes us that cherish life, especially human life, to wonder if you even have one.

I would like to believe that you are smart enough to accept that the “abortion” debate is historically not about “reproductive rights” but rather it is the fascist and elitist idea that “defectives” (mainly blacks) could be removed from the human gene pool. If you fail to realize this, then you are nothing more than a useful idiot to this horrific, hateful and bigoted idea. I shudder to think that you, as likely having seen a sonogram of your own children while still in fetal development (and thus witnessing this extraordinary miracle that we dismiss as “life”) would rather cling to your error and promote the destruction of innocent life than admit that you are blatantly and fatally wrong.

Lastly, you accuse Selwyn Duke and those that agree with him (rather than his “party”, of which you only presume, but do not actually know) of “gay hatred”. How DARE you? How do you presume his thoughts and emotions? You probably think that I hate gays- correction: the more accurate and appropriate term homosexuals (is there anything “gay” about sodomy?). You would be wrong. I love ALL human beings and I cherish ALL life, especially the privileged human life. I oppose with vigor the radical homosexual agenda. I would bet that Selwyn Duke feels the same way.

You see, those of us on the political Right (and I hesitate to use these facile labels) do not HATE anything except evil. We, by and large, believe that if you Patrick Fitzmichael wants to sodomize Michael Fitzpatrick, then knock yourselves out. Go for it! It’s a free country and it is your business to do so and to take pleasure in it. Where the line is drawn, however, is where radical homosexuals seek to “normalize” such aberrant, unwholesome and unhealthy behavior. We also oppose the indoctrination of our children to the notion that this aberrant and deviant behavior is “normal”. It is not. In short, Selwyn Duke, me, and my philosophical brethren do not “hate” gays. We oppose, and with righteous indignation, the radical homosexual agenda. If your brain were screwed on straight and if your optic chiasma were pointed in the right direction, you would whole-heartedly agree.

[yoyo]

Lets see, the JBS opposed the civil rights movement, and the Civil Rights Act. Was obsessed with red's under the bed, devolved into some fairly nasty antisemitism. Was kicked out of the mainstream conservative movement by the William Buckleys of this world. Cant think of the date off the top of my head (very early 80's I think). Disinvited to things like CPAC etc.

Now you have weird libertarians like Rand Paul running and succeeding on similar platforms except libertarians approve of a whole lot of things social conservatives dont. Eg gay marriage, end of the war on drugs, legalising suicide etc. The fact that they are also anti safe workplaces, environmental protections, etc is just part of the intellectual mess that follows when you believe that the only force that matters is a free market.

Philip calm down and stop being so hystrionic. Follow the thought here ok? If a woman gets pregnant and you ensure that there is no way she can end the pregnancy without delivery or her death, what is that but forced pregancy? You are using your power either directly or by state. I apologise for falling into the trap of discussing abortion with a bunch of hard liners, I know we will never find common ground on this one.

I leave with the predictable end result of your approach.
A pregnant woman in a Phoenix hospital was in a dire state: she was suffering from severe pulmonary hypertension, a condition made much worse by the pregnancy, and was at risk of heart failure. The hospital did what had to be done, with the approval of the family: the 11-week-old fetus was aborted, and the life of the mother saved. This was routine, and I think there was no moral ambiguity at all in this situation: either the mother's life was saved and the fetus was destroyed, or both mother and fetus would die.

Except that this was in a Catholic hospital. One of the people on the ethics committee that reviewed the case before the abortion was a nun, who agreed that this was the right thing to do. Predictably, Thomas Olmsted, bishop, has deplored the procedure and declared that the nun is automatically excommunicated.

I promise not to raise abortion with you lot again because I cant debate with people who think the potential life of an 11 week foetus is worth more than that of the woman carrying it, especially when they are never going to risk their own lives in this issue.

[yoyo]

PS I must admit that always find the obsession that obstensively "straight" men have with anal sex rather amusing. Given that it is a sexual act practiced by many heterosexuals, especially those opposed to contraception and that it is not the only act practiced by male homosexuals, I wonder where all the fear and fury comes from hmmm? Other people's sexual practices often raise an "ick" feeling with us if they are not our choice of activity but I really cant see why an act that is common to both hetero and homosexual males should be the reason to deny someone legal rights. PS it's also rather interesting that lesbians seldom figure in these discussions, seems that gay = male in this forum.