About 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?
The 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.
Consider 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 the horizon.
What 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.
In 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.
Perhaps 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?
For 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, eh?
It’s 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?
In 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?
Not 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.
The 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.
Many 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 on reality.
All 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.
Who 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?
How 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.
Here 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
Neither 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 mocked and reviled, just like here at home.
And 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.
I’m 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.
Remember 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.
Bush 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.
Yet 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!
War 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 handle.
I’ve 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.
Enough. 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.
Wait 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."
Our 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?
Can 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 soon.
I’m 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.
But that chance’s name is not George Bush.
August 7, 2000
Mr. Peirce fought with the Rhodesian freedom fighters (the Ian Smith side, of course).
