about this dogma of the Left?
If groups of humans do not comply with this dogma and tensions and grievances develop between groups, then it must be the faulty attitudes or institutions of parts of these diverse groups, not the natural and unavoidable outcome of placing incompatible groups in close proximity.
Does anyone actually believe this? But for multiculturalism to make sense, they'd have to.
Any group of humans whatsoever,The assumption is that they must all subscribe to universal (aka liberal) values and support a set of legal, social and economic institutions designed to promote justice and equality.
regardless of how apparently different,
can live together peacefully.
If groups of humans do not comply with this dogma and tensions and grievances develop between groups, then it must be the faulty attitudes or institutions of parts of these diverse groups, not the natural and unavoidable outcome of placing incompatible groups in close proximity.
Does anyone actually believe this? But for multiculturalism to make sense, they'd have to.
3 comments:
Pace Rodney King and Ex Cathedra, a "group of humans" don't have to exactly get along. In fact a certain amount of disharmony makes liberalism feel less "smothery" to desublimation's small-time Huck Finns.
We must suppose that the "idle and quarrelsome" man vilify'd by John Locke is the cultural ideal of desublimational liberalism.
P.S. Intra-group grudge matches are most pseudo-enlivening, don't you think? Where's the charm if a chess fanatic and Britt Ekland can make no sense of each other? They could neither get along nor not get along.
... We could sort-of enjoy but with a clear conscience the anti-racist white commenter vs reactionary white commenter dynamics in the interpretation of Trayvon and Zimmerman if the text were a hoax; that is, if Trayvon is alive and well and living somewhere under a new identity provided by the FBI.
Speaking of hoaxes in the no longer that great game, conservatives point in indignation to the remark made by the president during open-mike night in Moscow recently, when he advised that he would be able to govern much more freely after November when he will no longer have to consider re-election. I must wonder if the 'dog whistling' in this instance isn't to his own base, i.e. that he is flagrantly hinting on the record to white liberals that starting in 2013 he will give them the Bobby Kennedy presidency that they have always wanted. And how likely is this?
DADT has been repeal'd and maybe all Americans will have medical insurance under Obamacare. Yet the military-industrial complex will probably soldier on, and priests will continue to be able to Resist!
Not that Obamacare and repealing DADT are objectionable or not worth voting for.
Post a Comment