Posted on 06/20/2021 4:15:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
Recently, at the G7 summit, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, a Conservative and, allegedly, a “conservative,” declared that the main post-pandemic aim of world leaders must be “building back greener, building back fairer and building equally and – how should I put it? – in a more gender-neutral and perhaps a more feminine way.”
He certainly did not realize it at the time, but his statement was a shining example of the moral and intellectual muddle that defines the ideology of the left-leaning global elite. His views and proposals are as senseless as they are destructive.
Let's unpack his stupidity line by line.
First, the Prime Minister did the usual bowing and scraping to the cherished ideal of a “green” transformation of the world economy, which would halt the allegedly fatal effects of climate change. He went on to sing the praises of “fairness” and equality, which might refer to the goal of reducing income inequality or might be an allusion to the even more fashionable obsession with “equity,” which implies the (enforced) equalization of outcomes between people of different backgrounds. In practice, it means race and gender quotas and the abandonment of objective standards of merit.
The truth, though, is that, whether or not Johnson's ideals are worthwhile, they are simply incompatible. Consider the fact that global income inequality has not been rising in recent decades. It's been in steady decline. Why? Because of the rapid development of what used to be known as the Third World.
More and more people in Latin America, Asia, and even Africa are enjoying modern, middle class lifestyles, and fewer people than ever are hungry and destitute. One of the biggest reasons for this transformation is the ability of developing countries to industrialize, urbanize, and make agriculture more efficient. To do so, however, they need access to energy, obtained overwhelmingly from fossil fuels, to power cities, factories, vehicles, personal electronics, and more. The quickest way to short-circuit the phenomenal progress being made in these developing countries would be to impose punitive anti-carbon policies on their upstart economies.
We in the developed world can (barely) afford to pay through the nose for energy produced by solar panels and windmills. Developing regions assuredly cannot.
The world probably could be made “greener,” i.e. less dependent on fossil fuels, therefore, but only if the vast majority of countries, and the vast majority of people, were willing to become poorer in the bargain. Is this what Boris Johnson really wants?
The more straightforwardly nonsensical claim made by Britain's Prime Minister, though, was the idea that the world needs to become “more gender-neutral” and “more feminine” simultaneously. It does not seem to have occurred to him that one cannot minimize and maximize the impact of gender in the same breath – or, rather, one can do so in purely rhetorical terms, but it beggars belief that a coherent policy could arise out of such balderdash.
What Johnson means, of course, is that we need to make the world more friendly to transgender people and to women (the “oppressed”) and less in thrall to men (the “oppressors”). And, to that extent, Johnson is merely giving voice to what now seems the stock assumption of most establishment thinkers: that race and gender are mere theoretical social constructs, BUT they nonetheless magically acquire solidity and permanence when we are talking about categories of people we either like (non-whites, the transgender crowd, and women) or don't like (white people and men). Then these categories tell us precisely whom to praise and to condemn; whom to reward and to penalize; and whom to shift to the center of public policy and debate, and whom to marginalize. Race and gender are, in other words, purely imaginary, fleeting, and meaningless...and they are at the same time the most important things in the world and define our position in it.
Got it? Good!
To be sure, Boris Johnson's pronunciamentos are utter folly. One might be tempted, then, to take solace in the fact that, like virtually everything that is said at a G7 summit, his remarks were mere hot air. They will have little impact as individual nation-states pass laws, appropriate funds, and make policy decisions.
The sad part, though, is that the West, and the world, are increasingly run by men (and, yes, it's still mostly men, even if they're ashamed to bear the stigma of their “toxic masculinity”) who champion such convoluted, and often divisive and toxic, ideas.
Even sadder must be the realization that Boris Johnson supposedly represents the “stodgy” political right. How much more unhinged, self-contradictory, and asinine, therefore, are the ravings and dogmas of the Left?
Egad!
Blacks suffer because of daily individual decisions that hobble their children and their future. No government program or money for reparations will ever be able to fix that. .. and I have completely lost interest in helping. It’s time to salvage what is left of America.
They don’t want fighters against their evil that they have to deal with they want feminine emotional people who will obey
There really ought to be some sort of informal test that can be applied to politicians and media personalities to see if they are "conservative".
Opposed to abortion?
Actively seeking cuts in spending with the goal of making government smaller?
Support nationalism over globalism?
Celebrating men as men and women as women and then considering all bases covered?
Certainly the list could be extended (in the US, I'd include 2nd Amendment, but that's not part of the British system).
I think people should score 100% on that test to be "conservative" and I dare say that not a single "official media conservative" would pass. And most conservative politicians would also fail, because the Left has infiltrated both parties.
The views on Race and Gender being inflicted on Americans thanks to access to the levers of power held by the establishment are Asinine and Hypocritical. They are so contradictory and the goalposts are in such flux that it *almost* looks like they are making it up as they go along.
I remember when Abortion was a litmus test, and what was driving that was access to fetal tissue and stem cells for medical research that held out promise for miracle cures.
This guy is preaching to a globalist audience on the subject of lowered income inequality in developing world countries gained by destroying the American middle class while the Billionaire class consolidates power over our lives. Remember the goal is that we will own nothing, have zero privacy, and we’ll be happy about it (or else?!)
Let’s Be Honest: Establishment Views on Race and Gender are Asinine and Hypocritical
____________________________________________________
The Establishment could care less whether you think their views are “asinine and hypocritical”. They’re gonna shove their views straight up our a@@es with a candle on top.
Since Lyndon Johnson, America has continually paid reparations to America’s blacks. The Great Society destroyed the Black family and created a new plantation, one run by the Government.
All of the UN sponsored conferences are like the Oscars — posturing elitists speaking to other posturing elitists about how they as so, so much better than the common ruck of humanity. The UN, like the League of Nations, was a good idea but like overage fish, it is time to go. There might be a good program or two in there, but darned it I could find them.
Gender-neutral AND feminine. Politicians are the most culturally illiterate boobs in the world. That said, this is also reminiscent of Fal Albert Gore’s statement in 2000, while on oprah’s show, that “I work hard every day to get in touch with my feminine side.” (Of course, he got it just the opposite: he should have been trying to find some masculinity in his makeup.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.