Paleo Retiree writes:
I’m gobsmacked on a day-to-day basis by how completely the country has devoted itself to the cause of “diversity.” As though it’s automatically and everywhere a Good Thing, if not the one and only Magic Cure to Everything That Ails Us. Apply a big helping of “diversity” to no matter what the challenge and/or situation, and instantly life is better for everyone, right?
Is diversity fanaticism — the conviction that diversity is everywhere and always the ultimate good — the prime, and maybe even defining, delusion of our era? Got any other contenders?
(Just to be clear: I’m hoping we can all agree that there’s a diff between “enjoying and appreciating different kinds of people, and doing a reasonable job of behaving decently and fairly” — I’m all for that — and what I’m calling “diversity fanaticism.”)
I think it is the prime one; not even ‘climate change’ hysteria comes close. Diversity-worship comes from the same place as Hollywood’s ‘Magic Negro’, except it’s pushed not only in the entertainment industry, but society-wide… I for one am happy today’s the last day of Black History Month, and we won’t have to put up with that particular flavour of propaganda for eleven more months…
Other contenders? Depends on the view. From “their” view, I suppose the other contender would be the Wonderfullness of Gaydom Fetish. From my view it would be The Flat Earth Society.
Equality. Applying a concept that only really works in mathematics to human beings, to perpetrate all sorts of mischief on society, and a subsequent race to the bottom, where equality might finally be obtained. “Marriage Equality,” yuck.
“Do it for the children” was big a few years ago. Current trends what they are, “do it To the children” might start gaining ground.
If it weren’t “diversity” it would be something else. A society needs concepts by which people can signal their “all rightness” by declaring their allegiance. In previous eras, it was mainly religious or patriotic concepts. The Victorians bonded by signaling their approval of sexual reticence, missionary work, and various genteelisms. In the US, it was up until recently mandatory to make patriotic declarations part of every public ceremony. Now, we all try to show that we are on board with “diversity” — whether we believe in it or not. That’s how the “good people” bond nowdays. If it’s not going to be one thing, it’s going to be another.
If it weren’t “diversity” it would be something else.
That seems like the stock, correct answer, but I’m not sure. Is it always this extreme and ridiculous?
Delusions? The re-emergence of faith in experts, technocrats, authority figures, sci & tech, big business, social engineering, pharmacological engineering, etc., not seen since the mid-century.
This is a cyclically recurring mass delusion, whereas the diversity craze seems more confined to our age. Both of them amplified each other during the Housing Bubble. You didn’t see anything that colossally moronic and destructive during the ’80s — nobody would’ve trusted the whole thing to hold together and work.
Maybe “diversity” has something to do with “giving back,” also unavoidable these days. The alternative to “giving back ” is “taking from,” so maybe the implicit message of diversity talk is: “sorry about all that taking, now here’s some giving back. You’re welcome, and please leave us alone to do some more taking.” Maybe that’s why it’s so popular with law firms, private schools, banks . . . all the most notorious taking fromers.
Of course, the chief appeal of a commitment to diversity is that it requires no commitment, which may explain it’s popularity among corporations as a form of giving back.
We’ll bring you the gifts of diversity and equality, and you better well like ’em!
Pingback: <drunken rant | Foseti
Apply a big helping of “diversity” to no matter what the challenge and/or situation, and instantly life is better for everyone, right?
It is pretty much our version of what Marxism-Leninism was in the USSR.
This is not an accident, given the orientation of the people who came up with “diversity”.
Pingback: Debating Diversity | Uncouth Reflections