a year ago, a well-known technical publication asked industry professionals
to write and tell them how "diversity in the workplace"
had helped their organizations. Based on the ludicrous premise that
diversity was by its very nature a good thing, they wanted people
with real world experience to confirm their prejudices. My reply
was not well received. I wonder why? Is the truth really that dangerous?
first premise I addressed was that diversity was a good thing. The
opposite of course is true. Strong organizations, like culturally
stable countries, are homogenous. This is simple logic and takes
no thought whatsoever, unless one has been fitted for dufus filters,
the kind that filter out any thought not squarely in tune with the
party line. One doesn’t have to look far for examples of those who
have dufus filters engaged.
the evolution controversy as an example of how these filters work.
The conclusions reached by the evolutionists are quite controversial.
Does anyone discuss the elements of the actual theory? Nope. There
is in effect, no dialog on this issue. There is an agenda at work,
one that makes use of anything that will denigrate the work of God’s
hands and push us toward the man-made utopia that beckons just on
is shocking to people who think about issues, is that Darwin’s work
is so incredibly racist. Yet the media/government power elite can
push this nonsense as fact because they control the dissemination
of information. I find it hilarious that blacks are in some cases
a party to this — boy are they in for a big surprise.
this media-dominated world we inhabit, information is hard to come
by! What we hear from "them" is usually wrong and deliberately
so. Thus they can propagate the racist theory of evolution while
at the same time deploring "racism." It boggles the mind.
this is a clue as to why the media works at a level similar to that
of the "Old Left" Marxist, cranking out propaganda leaflets
on a mimeograph machine in his attic. They are not trying to impart
information but to teach us how to think "correctly."
Substitute "blacks, gays, minorities" etc ad nauseam for
"workers" in those silly pamphlets of the aging prophets
of the dialectic and you have the network news. Simpering weasels
with hundred dollar haircuts insinuate themselves into our thinking
and ask only that we trust them. They have our best interests at
heart, don’t they?
a classic example consider how the Left dealt with Stalin’s pact
with Nazi Germany. All the anti-fascist propaganda stopped immediately
and overnight, reality, at least for the Marxists, changed. Then
it changed back with out so much as a "how do you do"
when Hitler attacked the USSR. How different is that from the war-like
stance of our leftist leaders, those same ones who came to power
by attacking the military industrial complex? Give peace a chance,
all in the ownership of the means of production — any Marxist will
tell you that. Now that the left owns the war machine, it will get
used to further left-wing and treasonous causes through out the
world. Kosovo, anyone?
my work in that ever-growing technical field, where propeller hats
are worn by people in suits, I’ve seen some teams with racial makeups
that made them look like advertisements for the UN. I’ve also worked
on teams that were all white, and all points in between. So how
did diversity affect productivity?
at all, or negatively. E Pluribus Unum rules. Racial makeup
of a team counts at best, not at all. Those are the teams where
despite the disparate backgrounds of the players, everyone is on
board and culturally in the same place. Since this is America —
American culture and language is the obvious glue that can bond
a diverse team into a successful one. Yet language difficulties
can be a problem, and cultural diversity is a disaster. Unless a
team is by its nature, wedded to the same work ethic, that team
will fail to be any more productive than the least productive member.
fact is, that two of my favorite and most talented colleagues have
been Hispanic and black, respectively. But their background has
nothing at all to do with my respect for them. It is their talent,
and their commitment to small-unit cohesion (team players to you
corporate types), and their personal self-respect. The black one
told me of how he had endured taunts as a child for being so smart,
and had been accused of "acting white." I wonder if those
ethnic purists who persist in "acting black," earn the
kind of money he does? That’s assuming legitimate career paths,
which is by no means a safe assumption.
large companies are force feeding their employees on diversity and
cultural sensitivity. Has this increased productivity? Not by a
long shot. It has the opposite effect — inculcating some with a
spirit of victimology, which makes them useless or worse, disruptive.
The others (white males) feel angry and contemptuous toward management.
Great team building. But then, a degree in human resources can be
had for ten bucks and a box top. It shows. Only public schoolteachers
graduate with any more fluff in their heads, and any less of a grasp
this leads inevitably to some comment on the Republican convention.
"Conservatives" are they? I don’t think so. Racists? Yep.
For once I agree with Daniel Schorr, the aging mouthpiece of Marxist
infantilism. Trotting out that left-wing statist, Colin Powell,
was a piece of blatant racism if there ever was any. Powell was
used because he is black, and because the party leaders had decided
to milk that, despite his pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action stance.
Then all the Democrats, excuse me, Republicans, wept bitter tears
as they rent their garments and repented their many sins of racism
and intolerance, as defined by a demonic media/government conglomerate.
Pathetic is a word that hardly packs the power to describe the charade
that occurred last week.
will speak out for the murdered unborn? Dubya? Don’t hold your breath.
Putting a Republican in the White House is the only thing that matters,
we are told. What are a few dead babies more or less?
much better the Republicans felt, after a refreshing bath in guilt.
They purged themselves of their many sins, to their father confessors
of the media, who mocked and reviled them. And rightly so, but for
the wrong reasons.
were a plethora of the worst liars in America, pledging to take
our money and force more state sponsored despotism down our throats,
while cheering throngs shouted "Sieg Heil." (or was that
just in my head?) Leni Riefenstahl would have been proud of that
production. "The Triumph of the Will," the will to take
back the White House — as opposed to the triumph of rule of law,
under a Constitution paid for in blood
party values the rule of law. They have made a moral desert, and
call it prosperity. Not content to bring America to its knees, usurping
power where once it rested on the Constitution, they poke their
long mendacious noses into other countries, looking for chances
to pontificate, and acquire yet more power. And find themselves
and reviled, just like here at home.
while these silly, cynical rascals create havoc with foreign policy,
they continue to degrade our military defense posture so when the
inevitable results come in – namely deadly, dangerous war against
some adversary who can fight back – we will be unprepared. How dreadful
it is to be a soldier of the United States. We always let them down,
and they always pay in blood.
sorry, conservatives, to be your worst nightmare, but I’m voting
third party, and if Gore wins, oh well. Would that be a disaster?
Sure. However, I’ve voted "lesser of two evils" long enough.
My personal estimate of the situation is that we are in a crisis
of proportions that will only become clear after the hammer comes
down. So I’d rather risk kicking the card table over, than drawing
to a pair of jackasses.
the USSR? It wasn’t America that brought that evil empire to its
knees, it was God, and its own inherent contradictions. And this
evil empire we’ve allowed to grow right here in our backyard is
nearly as bad. One fourth of the world’s prisoners languish in US
jails. We’ve attacked how many countries in the last twenty years?
Ten? Fifteen? Which of these two political parties has considered
that we might be on the wrong track? Each of them calls for more
of the same — if at first you don’t succeed, just keeping doing
the same stupid things as before, only more so. It doesn’t make
for a very plausible public policy.
was right there with Clinton on bombing the Serbs to protect Muslim
terrorists. Will voting for him be a vote for the Constitution?
Yeah sure, just like it was with his wonderful daddy, George Sr.
who you may recall attacked a country with our armed forces to pursue
a personal vendetta. What’s different from Clinton about that? That
was only Panama, but not all of us thought the Gulf War was all
that dandy either. Killing Iraqi kids to protect the Bush family’s
dinner guests fails to light up my warlike nature. For you see,
I’ve fought in a war. I know what it’s like and I believe that statesmanship
should have one goal — to stop wars from occurring. I’m quite certain
a nation that is as warlike as this one is a threat to all humanity.
It must stop.
the statesmanship on display was personified by Liddy Dole — who
complained that Clinton failed to use ground troops in Kosovo. Has
that airhead ever wondered how her husband’s arm was destroyed?
Sometimes the enemy shoots back. Every once in a while, we might
even want to consider the moral implications of using force!
is a judgment of God – see the scripture for verification. It is
never a good thing. At worst, it is a necessary thing, and then
only if the bad guys are kicking in your door. When you go looking
for trouble, or "projecting power" as the liars call it,
you will find trouble, and eventually, more trouble than you can
voted Republican for twenty years because I hate abortion, because
I hate taxes, because I believe in a strong national defense, and
because I believe in rule of law. I’ve got none of the above.
All I’ve got is the warfare state – not strong enough protect us
from a real enemy, but plenty strong enough to bully the folks our
wonderful elitists think need kicking around.
This country frankly deserves Al Gore. Because I’m a patriot, I’m
voting a third party candidate who at least has read the Constitution.
But Gore/Bush? Who cares? Let ‘er rip. I see chaos in our future
so I’m voting the only hope I see on the horizon. If you think Russia
is bad now, wait util the next economic downturn here.
till our somnambulant, television addicted Americans realize their
army can’t fight and we have to sue for peace because we picked
on somebody who kicked back. Wait till white Americans have heard
one too many whining politician telling us why more of our money
must go to immigrants or blacks, all of whom we are accused of picking
upon. Wait until we’ve seen one too many appalling manifestations
of that oxymoron known as "gay pride."
wonderful Republican party has come out for diversity and wants
us to buy in. Perhaps we should push aside layer after layer of
propaganda and look at what went on in Yugoslavia. Was not Serbia
the country of all countries in the world that paid most attention
to diversity? Were not miniscule ethnic groups allowed to use their
own languages, have their own schools? Are the results of that well
meaning attempt not staring us in the face right now?
these politicians really be this stupid? Of course not. Theirs is
the sin of venality, theirs is a lust for power that can never be
satiated. The only chance we have is to show them the door, and
no longer sure whether this country is worth saving — scripture
suggests we are well overdue for judgement. But I’m going to vote
for a wild card and hope the Lord is in a real good mood – he does
after all, save sinners by Grace alone so maybe we get another chance.
that chance’s name is not George Bush.
Peirce fought with the Rhodesian freedom fighters (the Ian Smith
side, of course).