I read this piece with interest, wondering how FAIR was going to spin this dehumanizing, bigoted and caustic new brand of American 'leadership' into something good, and sure enough, you found a way to continue to support it broadly by condemning a few examples of supposedly isolated extremism as 'fringe.' It's very similar to the wonderf…
I read this piece with interest, wondering how FAIR was going to spin this dehumanizing, bigoted and caustic new brand of American 'leadership' into something good, and sure enough, you found a way to continue to support it broadly by condemning a few examples of supposedly isolated extremism as 'fringe.' It's very similar to the wonderfully creative FAIR position that America can now openly despise this micro-minority of transgender folks without actually being intolerant. As someone who likes to write, I actually appreciate the dexterity of language-twisting that it requires to carry water for the hateful while calling it moderate common sense.
When I read FAIR, and scrape past the self-admiration that some writers have for their more pure and just life views, I feel that the foundation of FAIR's point of view is the idea that the playing field of human pursuit is level. Race, gender, country of origin, sexual orientation, religion, income - these are all just aspects of someone's identity but in this wonderful, merit-based world they don't need to play a role in advancement or opportunity. The histories of treatment for these people and communities doesn't need to be dwelled on, in fact that need to be ignored because it creates an unnecessary emotional burden for the rest of our good society. The wonderful fair-minded people will just work it out, promote the hard-working folks who 'deserve' it, admit the most thoughtful candidates to their university, pay people what they deserve regardless of their race or gender. It would be amusing to read the fantasy version of our culture if it wasn't so horribly malignant.
No one who understands American history can play this little game with sincerity. If left unchallenged, America would still have a country where black people and women were considered property, where housing options were race-mandated, where being gay was illegal, and education is a right for only for the wealthy. Trying to prevent measures that start to level that playing field, teaching actual history starting with the indigenous, being honest about the oppression that has come before and is being strengthened very day by FAIR's favorite electeds)... this is the work you've committed to - twisting words and realities to keep the status quo in place. Spare me the hand-wringing about the frightening new fringe ... these are your people spouting your ideas, just out from behind the curtain.
Colorblind equality of opportunity. May the most able and qualified person for the job win. In the event two or more candidates are indistinguishable in aptness and ability for the position, a coin toss (NOT racial, gender, or other flavors of pokemon points) should decide the winning candidate. Like it says in the rulebook—the Constitution of the United States of America, as amended.
I read this piece with interest, wondering how FAIR was going to spin this dehumanizing, bigoted and caustic new brand of American 'leadership' into something good, and sure enough, you found a way to continue to support it broadly by condemning a few examples of supposedly isolated extremism as 'fringe.' It's very similar to the wonderfully creative FAIR position that America can now openly despise this micro-minority of transgender folks without actually being intolerant. As someone who likes to write, I actually appreciate the dexterity of language-twisting that it requires to carry water for the hateful while calling it moderate common sense.
When I read FAIR, and scrape past the self-admiration that some writers have for their more pure and just life views, I feel that the foundation of FAIR's point of view is the idea that the playing field of human pursuit is level. Race, gender, country of origin, sexual orientation, religion, income - these are all just aspects of someone's identity but in this wonderful, merit-based world they don't need to play a role in advancement or opportunity. The histories of treatment for these people and communities doesn't need to be dwelled on, in fact that need to be ignored because it creates an unnecessary emotional burden for the rest of our good society. The wonderful fair-minded people will just work it out, promote the hard-working folks who 'deserve' it, admit the most thoughtful candidates to their university, pay people what they deserve regardless of their race or gender. It would be amusing to read the fantasy version of our culture if it wasn't so horribly malignant.
No one who understands American history can play this little game with sincerity. If left unchallenged, America would still have a country where black people and women were considered property, where housing options were race-mandated, where being gay was illegal, and education is a right for only for the wealthy. Trying to prevent measures that start to level that playing field, teaching actual history starting with the indigenous, being honest about the oppression that has come before and is being strengthened very day by FAIR's favorite electeds)... this is the work you've committed to - twisting words and realities to keep the status quo in place. Spare me the hand-wringing about the frightening new fringe ... these are your people spouting your ideas, just out from behind the curtain.
Colorblind equality of opportunity. May the most able and qualified person for the job win. In the event two or more candidates are indistinguishable in aptness and ability for the position, a coin toss (NOT racial, gender, or other flavors of pokemon points) should decide the winning candidate. Like it says in the rulebook—the Constitution of the United States of America, as amended.