The British tabloids are in uproar because Meghan ReMarkable claimed a member of the Royal Family questioned the color of her child's skin.
Why does that matter?
Why does anyone care who questioned the color of Archie’s skin?
Why shouldn’t someone question the color of Archie’s skin?
What if they’d questioned whether he’d have red hair?
Would that have been a racist crime against white people, or what?
That large numbers of people appear to care what, for a reported payment of seven million dollars, Meghan and Harry are moaning about indicates the imbecility of the Western world.
It’s time to remember the old English saying that “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
It’s time to restore the right of free speech and tell Meghan and Harry and every other victim-status-seeking politically-correct idiot to go piss up a rope.
And, yeah, what is the color of Archie's skin — and does he have red hair?
Related:
Motherhood abolished in British Wokestan
It captures the world's attention because our plutocrats find it necessary to distract us from what really does matter. That's all --100%-- what this crap is about.
ReplyDeleteWhen it began to become apparent, early in the twentieth century, people could be so distracted, the ruling classes let out a big sigh of relief. People who so completely lose sight of what's important are incapable of self governance. You have to keep your eye on the ball to hit it; you have to keep your hand on the wheel and your eye on the road to drive the car without wrecking it.
I found out through one of your earlier links Meghan is 25% "black". More "white" than "black" as you once pointed out. "Black" people know she looks "white" and there are still enough honest "black" people to express this knowledge and to know what it means. (You don't generally hear these people in the MSM-- they are screened and filtered out, just like everything else honest and decent.)
Twenty-five divided or diluted by half (and what is this crap of calculating it out mean and why am I doing it) means little Archie is 1/8 "black". It is simply in Meghan's calculating, scheming, and manipulating self-interest to pretend he's already a victim of racism. Or ever will be. It is simply in the ruling class's calculating, scheming, and manipulating self-interest to put these pretenses center stage, all spot lights and dimwit eyes focused there.
Exactly.
DeleteWhat I find hugely depressing is the contemptible failure of the so-called academic community to resist this crap that is being dispensed in their name, e.g., the University of Manchester (the largest university in Europe) announcing the abolition of all reference to motherhood, and non-gender neutral words, including, absurdly, the word "man" that forms a part of their own name. This without a bleat, apparently, from the so-called scholars.
I can't explain the academy's failure on the grounds they have no immunity from employment termination. There have to be tenured professors out there who know this is wrong and have the power to proclaim it is wrong. On a pretty nice little platform, too, all in all.
DeleteOne of my friends who has tenure still feels precarious, a part of the precariat so to speak, because he fears the closure of his university. I believe we both agree the private university is in danger, especially now with these lock downs and so forth making them even more out of reach for even more people.
So that's the only way I could explain their silence. It is not at all out of the question they're anticipating an unemployment situation even though tenured. Their remarks would be pilloried on social media and elsewhere, even distorted out of recognition. This would leave a trail and we all know employers use such trails in their evaluations of applicants.
The rot in academia begins at the head, although there are plenty of tenured professors who go along with the BS either as a matter of Machiavellian calculation or constitutional subservience to authority.
DeleteBut for those who can think and are intellectually honest, there seem to be only two paths: one is silence of which I am incapable, the other is to challenge the BS and be progressively destroyed by the bullies and sycophants who do the bidding of the University hierarchy.
At least that's my view from the outside. I did take up a tenure track appointment many years ago, but quit after three days -- probably the best decision of my life.
This knocked me for a loop:
Delete"...the University of Manchester ... announcing the abolition of all reference to motherhood, and non-gender neutral words, including, absurdly, the word "man" that forms a part of their own name. This without a bleat, apparently, from the so-called scholars."
By coincidence I was re-reading Nick Cook's biography, "Akhenaton: Egypt's False Prophet" in which we see Akhenaton doing much the same. Thirty-five centuries or so ago.
In his zeal to destroy the ancient Amonite priesthood, Akhenaton forced all names with "Amon" in it to be changed; written forms of it (even carved into stone) defaced. Since in that era there were tons of Amonhoteps and other names with Amon, most fellows found themselves with unwanted name changes.
Cleverly, the Amonites got Akhenaton to build a new city in the desert between the two halves of Egypt, apparently had it quarantined, and as Cook says, "Let the city and the prophet rot on the vine."
The similarity is amazing: Amon then, Man now. We only have to figure out a way to apply the Amonites excellent solution.
Interesting. Good to see that the cult of Akhenaton died with its creator. Let's hope that wokeness dies with George Soros or whoever is driving it. (Although Soros is so rich that one fears he will find some way of staying alive for ever, albeit in an increasingly wrinkled form.)
Delete