Posted on 10/28/2017 5:00:05 AM PDT by LibWhacker
The Washington Post published an article Thursday that called for a constitutional amendment to ban inequality and racist speech.
As part of the publication’s series published Thursday called, “Fix this democracy—now, 38 ideas for repairing our badly broken civic life,” the Post featured author Ibram X. Kendi’s proposal for “A Constitutional Amendment On Equality.”
Kendi writes that the United States needs, “an Anti-Bigotry Amendment that would constitutionalize a critical principle: Group inequity is evidence of discrimination.”
“The amendment would make group inequity illegal and ban the incitement of bigotry, as the incitement of anti-Semitism is banned in Germany. Claims that inequity is evidence of a group’s dysfunction or inferiority would be outlawed. The amendment would establish equality as a human right and inequality as anti-American and anti-human,” he continues, seemingly endorsing a crackdown on free speech.
Kendi is a professor and director of American University’s “Antiracist Research & Policy Center.”
He describes himself as a, “hardcore humanist and softcore vegan.”
“The Anti-Bigotry Amendment would permanently establish a federal agency that investigates inequities and punishes institutional and individual discriminators. This Department of Equity would repair inequities caused by past discrimination. It would be charged with building a nation of equal opportunity where only the diverse materials of merit pave the roadway toward success. This is the only equitable path toward a healthy U.S. democracy,” Kendi also wrote.
Other ideas included in the Post’s 38 ideas were “Celebrate Government,” by Joan Williams, which urged readers to post photos and videos on social media celebrating how great government is.
Another idea was to “End American Arrogance,” by teaching everyone more about the past injustices of America “neuter the concept of American exceptionalism and perhaps temper American arrogance.”
What a faggot.
Kendi writes that the United States needs, “an Anti-Bigotry Amendment that would constitutionalize a critical principle: Group inequity is evidence of discrimination.”
What an absurd thought. But it is what much of the identity politics of the Left is based on.
The absurd notion that group inequity is evidence of discrimination.
Note, the author does not define what “discrimination” is.
Most “discrimination” is done for logical, rational reasons. We discriminate against criminals by putting them in prison.
We discriminate for people who produce what we want by giving them money.
We discriminate against idiots by avoiding them.
Pure leftist blather.
No. Thought police we do not want or need.
But they are also going to have a Bad-Hair-Day prohibition clause, so its alright.
BLM is of, by, and for bigots and bigotry, so let's ban that, and leave the Constitution alone. Great tagline, too.
If the Washington Post really believed what they wrote they would close down the Washington Post. That would end a lot of the anti-American bigotry right there.
But I doubt they will, since the Washington Post is one fifth-column leftist hypocritical bigot.
An aspiring fascists’ dream come true. A law that could easily be used to imprison everyone who disagrees with you.
All the Amendments after the first ten (Bill of Rights) have had negative effects (we'll probably have to live with the Nineteenth even though it gave us the "Pretty Presidents": JFK and BHO).
“an Anti-Bigotry Amendment that would constitutionalize a critical principle: Group inequity is evidence of discrimination.”
Gobsmacked. The academic personification of a gimmidat. How would this idea not invalidate about half of our constitution?
Some people just can’t handle freedom.
False premise.
The Washington Post published an article Thursday that called for a constitutional amendment to ban inequality and racist speech.
-
But that would get rid of Black News, The Black Congressional Caucus, Black History Month, Black Lives Matter, end race-based Government handouts AND affirmative action.
Right, then. So, if this guy got his way, bullying would become enshrined in the Constitution. Because we all know that claims of racism and discrimination are used extensively by the bullying left to further their agenda and destroy people who stand in their way.
Kendi is a professor and director of American University’s “Antiracist Research & Policy Center.” He describes himself as a, “hardcore humanist and softcore vegan.”
Ah, I get it. He is not receiving adequate nutrition, and his brain is functionally limited as a result. I think the effect is analogous to the effects of long-term drug abuse. Furthermore, we cannot rule out the possibility that he is drug-addled, as well.
This type of “incitement” law is used in Europe to jail people who tell the truth about Islam and immigration. Of course libs would love it.
As long as its still ok to hate Washington Post readers.
” once you allow the government to decide what is and what is not appropriate then you lost free speech altogether.”
This is very true.
Free speech is a Binary value. Either the first amendment is inviolate or it is non existent. The way I see it, we lost the first amendment long ago. And the rest of the constitution goes with it.
The social contract is broken. The broken remnants scattered on the floor are but to be swept away in some future crisis. Likely it will be borne of the godlessness carried in by the Marxist takeover of the governmental and educational infrastructure.
I’ll then pull from Winston Churchill
“
1) If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed;
2) if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly;
3) you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival.
4) There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
”
I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that we are at level 2 of the Churchillian societal collapse. Our Society and culture could still conceivably be rescued in a political manner. There is still time. But not much of that really; Maybe two or three more generations.
“You only have power over people so long as you don’t take everything away from them. But when you’ve robbed a man of everything he’s no longer in your power — he’s free again.”
“1968 - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The First Circle”
As far as I am concerned if they enacted this law every African studies professor would be doing time.
Would this prevent charges of “White privilege?” No, I didn’t think so.
Obviously that means anything a White says or does, or doesn’t say or doesn’t do. But they already have their “hate crime” laws which do just that. They want to go beyond the current fascism, and throw Whitey in jail for the drawing of a corn pop that is darker than the others.
Jail for saying that *slam is a religion of violence, death and destruction?
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.