Sunday, March 13, 2011

Fear Our Diversity

There are apparently too many white males in the U.S. Military.

Damn white males volunteering to putting themselves in harm's way for the defense of the country.  Of course, as Roger Hedgecock suggested, tongue firmly in cheek, if the military set up heavy recruitment programs in inner-city school districts, they'd be accused of taking advantage of poor minorities, using them as fodder for the Hegemonic Corporate-Industrial-Military Complex.  But since the military has relatively few minority volunteers, it's clearly RAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST.   (And sexist and homophobic.)

Never mind the fact that, since the 1940's when FDR turned up the dial to 11 on identity politics (and we've had to expand the scale since then) that the majority of "protected" minorities (ever noticed that Asians don't tend to suffer like the "protected" ones do?) align themselves with the party that champions entitlements over defense.

And on that "phobic" bit.  That's another bit of newspeak we have neglected to fight.   The left cleverly takes these phrases and weaves the narrative in the media (TV, comedy, movies, newspapers, magazines, 24 hour news channels) until it becomes the language everybody uses, and they do this on purpose.  But like newspeak, it prevents meaningful dialogue on  the subject at hand.

I saw a comedian last night launch into a bit of a NASCAR fan bashing routine where he referred to them sweepingly as "homophobic".   And I got to thinking.  While indeed I imagine a large chunk of the NASCAR crowd is less accepting of homosexuals, "phobic" is a way to belittle and make fun of those who believe the behavior is wrong.   I know a guy I work with, for instance, is a big NASCAR fan.  He is not only tolerant of gayness, he's accepting of it, and as a matter of fact, is totally cool with it.  He used to work with a state agency fighting AIDS, and spent a lot of time in gay bars talking to patrons and disseminating helpful information.   I have other good friends that are devout Christians who believe homosexuality is wrong -- but they're not scared of them. And many of them are NASCAR fans.  But the language we are basically forced into when talking about these issues dictates that if you don't approve, you are afraid.  Which is nuts.

I would also be willing to bet there are gay NASCAR fans.

While that was a bit of a digression, I use it to illustrate how completely crippled we are as a country in talking about issues of diversity.   While our American philosophy rightly dismisses race as a dividing trait, it does not dismiss culture.  And it should not.  But that is exactly what forces on the Left do when they promote "diversity" as something to strive for rather than something to just let happen.

With that as a guiding principle, people are apparently able, with a straight face, to formulate sentences that start out (as someone did in the MLDC report) .... "Leveraging diversity as a vital strategic military resource..."

Yeah, buddy.  You may have chemical weapons, but we'll overwhelm you with our massive "diversity".


Cylarz said...

I utterly fail to understand something, with all the questions asked in regard to: who is eligible for military service, who serves in combat, and what groups are targeted for recruitment.

And that something I don't understand, is this...

The job of the military is to defend American national interests. It does this by being the best at its primary mission - killing people and breaking things, as Rush once said.

When considering who enters that military and in what capacity, why would any question be asked except, "Does this person or policy enhance military strength and combat readiness, or detract from it?

While our military is learning how not to offend homosexuals, China's is building missiles, conducting training exercises, and modernizing its air force, mechanized ground units, and surface and submarine fleets. Are we going to watch missiles start tearing gender-integrated ships in half?

Cylarz said...

Reasonable people may argue about the answer to my question, but it at least needs to be asked.

Severian said...

But that is exactly what forces on the Left do when they promote "diversity" as something to strive for rather than something to just let happen.


For all their hootin' and hollerin' about how they listen to NPR for, like, the classical music and shit (as opposed to the sweet, sweet propaganda), they're actually the least cultured people on the planet. And yeah, they like to claim that their dinner napkins are "hand-woven by Hopi Indians" or some such, but they couldn't get within a continent and a century if you asked them where the Hopi actually are, and when they flourished.

That's because the left, being fundamentally Marxist, is fundamentally hostile to actual culture. Real culture -- as opposed to approved forms like "Soviet realism" and whatnot -- exists outside The Party, and to the leftist nothing can exist outside of politics.

That's why the USSR, the Chinese, the Norks, etc. are all so gung-ho on athletics, especially the Olympics, and Iran and Lebanon and whatnot would be too if they didn't suck at everything -- sport is a way to proclaim civilizational superiority without having to, you know, have any civilization to display. Why else is it that the first thing socialists do upon attaining power is issue everyone with a uniform?

philmon said...

Severian, I love it when you get all riled up.

That thar was some funny (and sadly dead-on true) stuff there!

Cylarz said...

hat's why the USSR, the Chinese, the Norks, etc. are all so gung-ho on athletics..

Remember the infamous "Nazi Olympics?" The 1936 Games held in Berlin, while Hitler was in power and shortly before the war started?

Funny thing is, I don't think the Nazi athletes took home too many gold medals. Seems to me they got shown up by sprinters and whatnot from a bunch of countries the Germans considered inferior. Oops.

Well stated as always, Sev.

Severian said...


I've often wondered why people don't make more of this. Back in the Cold War the USSR poured some comparatively huge fraction of their GDP into the Olympics, and so did most of the Eastern Bloc (those famous East German women weightlifters, for example). This was supposed to demonstrate the triumph of the New Soviet Man or something. And yet a bunch of US amateurs, training largely through donated money, managed to hang tough with them all the time, and beat them quite often.

I don't ever recall seeing anyone analyzing the hard-on the Warsaw Pact had for sports, though to me it seems obvious -- it's the only place they can compare themselves openly with the west. If I wanted to argue that, say, the collected works of Kim Jong Il rank up there with Shakespeare, all I'd have to do is trot down to the local library and check out a few books (and if they didn't have a North Korea section, there are always back issues of The Nation). Nobody in any communist country could rationally defend that claim, since Shakespeare -- being part of actual Culture -- says some things that don't meet the Party line.

The same is sadly true in the Middle East today. The only place they compete with us on anything close to a level playing field is "depth of religious fanaticism," so that's where they put all their resources.

I think we could turn the whole Middle Eastern situation down a few notches if we could give their proletariat something mindless at which to beat us, Israel, etc. I dunno, cricket or something. Let Iran take out the Great Satan in the world cricket finals or something. I bet they'd chill out a few degrees....