Equality Means No Idea Can Be Better Than Others

What they found especially egregious was Wax and Alexander’s observation that “All cultures are not equal.” That hissing noise you hear is the sharp intake of breath at the utterance of such a sentiment. The tort was compounded by Wax’s later statements in an interview that “Everyone wants to go to countries ruled by white Europeans” because “Anglo-Protestant cultural norms are superior.”

…As William Henry argued back in the 1990s in his undeservedly neglected book In Defense of Elitism, “the simple fact [is] that some people are better than others—smarter, harder working, more learned, more productive, harder to replace.” Moreover, Henry continued, “Some ideas are better than others, some values more enduring, some works of art more universal.” And it follows, he concluded, that “Some cultures, though we dare not say it, are more accomplished than others and therefore more worthy of study. Every corner of the human race may have something to contribute. That does not mean that all contributions are equal. . . . It is scarcely the same thing to put a man on the moon as to put a bone in your nose.”

Fahrenheit 451 updated,” The New Criterion, April 1, 2018

Apparently, no one bothered to think about what “equality” means. On the surface, it means that you treat everyone as if they were equal, but in reality, since they are not equal, that form of equality would still end in inequality, so instead it means that you subsidize the weaker. You deny their failings. You give them an extra boost. You champion their cause.

In the future, people will realize that equality is a destructive human virus that causes pathological self-destructive behavior. Like pacifism, it promises a life without struggle, which creates a uniform mediocrity because struggle is how improvement occurs. It also banishes the possibility of every finding better methods, since all must be equal so no culture is shamed by its failing methods.

Why Europe Suicides: Nobodies Becoming Somebodies

Finally we are seeing some attention to the genocide of European peoples by their elected leaders, revealed in a new book by Douglas Murray which explores Euro-suicide as a psychology:

The in-migration was initially hailed as an economic boon; then as a necessary corrective to an aging population; then as a means of spicing up society through “diversity”; and finally as a fait accompli, an unstoppable wave wrought by the world’s gathering globalization. Besides, argued the elites, the new arrivals would all become assimilated into the European culture eventually, so what’s the problem?

As British journalist and author Douglas Murray writes, “Promised throughout their lifetimes that the changes were temporary, that the changes were not real, or that the changes did not signify anything, Europeans discovered that in the lifespan of people now alive they would become minorities in their own countries.”

…A key point of the book, reinforced through anecdote and abundant documentation, is that Muslim immigrants have not assimilated into their European host countries to any meaningful extent. Indeed, there is a growing feeling among many of the new arrivals that these aren’t host countries at all but merely lands ripe for Islam’s inexorable expansion.

…Murray explains the motivation of those who engage in such flights of moral dudgeon thus: “Rather than being people responsible for themselves and answerable to those they know, they become the self-appointed representatives of the living and the dead, the bearers of a terrible history as well as the potential redeemers of mankind. From being a nobody one becomes a somebody.”

In other words: individualism.

To be pro-diversity is to assume the role of a wise sage, a powerful king, and a godlike emperor all in one. It makes people feel smarter and more powerful than their neighbors and, in an age where everyone is made equal, the only real resource is being unique or more powerful than someone else. They need to find someone else to be better than.

In the meantime, all of the excuses for immigration turn out to be lies, because the real goal of those in power is to destroy any impediment to the expansion of their commercial, political, and social interests. How did we get leaders like this? We elected them, and by doing it repeatedly, created a political environment so toxic that no one of any sanity would enter it because they knew they would lose.

And so we have elevated to the level of elite those who are merely opportunists and actors willing to pantomime the play onstage. They know the right thing to say after every tragedy; they know how to connect powerful people, siphon money, reveal opportunity, and manage a system in which the conclusions are extensions of the assumptions. “More equality” and “more business” are always the right answers.

Original Western European society kept individualism in check with a strong sense of culture, religion, heritage, and purpose. With egalitarianism, purpose was lost, because it created a hierarchy based on who could achieve it, and that debunked and invalidated equality as a notion. So we junked it, and now, we have criminal actors on a stage made up of insanity as the whole thing sinks into the mire.