In the case of good books, the point is not to see how many of them you can get through, but how many can get through to you.
Mortimer Adler, The Wordsworth Book of Humorous Quotations (1998), p.2.
For example, Congress could pass his kill-DEI legislation immediately. But Biden would have to sign the bill, and it’s Biden’s administration which has been pushing the horrific DEI federal mandates.
An initialism for “mediocrity, inequity, and exclusion” — “diversity, equity and inclusion,” actually — DEI designates enforcement of race-based, gender-based, irrelevant-characteristics-based criteria for hiring and promotion. It’s a continuation of old-style affirmative action quotas but nastier, and often attended by extra helpings of censorship and hectoring indoctrination.
On June 12, 2024, Senator Vance and Representative Michael Cloud introduced legislation that would, per their press release, “eliminate all DEI programs from the federal government.”
More specifically, the Dismantle DEI Act would “eliminate all federal DEI programs and funding for federal agencies, contractors which receive federal funding, organizations which receive federal grants, and educational accreditation agencies.”
Seems to cover the waterfront.
Vance argues that our tax dollars should not be “co-opted” to promote an agenda that “breeds hatred and racial division.”
One of the bill’s cosponsors, Senator Kevin Cramer, observes that DEI “doesn’t promote diversity of thought or merit-based employment and promotion,” which is something of an understatement. DEI doesn’t merely neglect but actively opposes rewarding of merit whenever doing so would conflict with the DEI agenda.* An agenda that obtrudes continuously.
Of course, Vance’s attack upon DEI doesn’t require Vance to be Vice President, what is required is a Republican president to sign the legislation, should it pass through Congress.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
* More than a few commentators have suggested that Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle was a DEI hire and that contributed to last weekend’s utterly botched Secret Service protection of Donald Trump, previously discussed.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
Whenever a Government assumes the power of discriminating between the different classes of the community, it becomes, in effect, the arbiter of their prosperity, and exercises a power not contemplated by any intelligent people in delegating their sovereignty to their rulers. It then becomes the great regulator of the profits of every species of industry, and reduces men from a dependence on their own exertions, to a dependence on the caprices of their Government. Governments possess no delegated right to tamper with individual industry a single hair’s-breadth beyond what is essential to protect the rights of person and property.
William Leggett, “True Functions of Government,” New York Evening Post, November 21, 1834.
He’s either “literally Hitler” or you wish him a speedy recovery. Ya gotta pick one of those two. You don’t wish Hitler a speedy recovery. . . . If “democracy’s on the ballot” and this is “the end of America” (as Hillary Clinton has said) . . . well then, OK: but then political violence is justified.
Comedian Dave Smith, on his “Part of the Problem” podcast, July 16, 2024, discussing illustrious Democrats’ pieties about non-violence immediately following the assassination attempt of their most hated opponent, and after years of calling Donald Trump the very worst things imaginable.
On July 16, 1931, Ethiopia’s Emperor Haille Selassie I signed a new Constitution. Not exactly a model of limited government, the new document proved that the emperor was in keeping with the time, which was a period of weakening constitutional limits in America, Europe, and Britain. A flavor of the document can be gained by its most “rights-oriented” measures:
Art. 22. Within the limits laid down by the law, Ethiopian subjects have the right to pass freely from one place to the other.
Art. 23. No Ethiopian subject may be arrested, sentenced, or imprisoned except in pursuance of the law.
Art. 24. No Ethiopian subject may, against his will, be deprived of his right to be tried by a legally established court.
Art. 25. Except in cases provided for by law, no domiciliary searches may be made.
Art. 26. Except in cases provided by the law, no one shall have the right to violate the secrecy of the correspondence of Ethiopian subjects.
Art. 27. Except in cases of public necessity determined by the law, no one shall have the right to deprive an Ethiopian subject of any movable or landed property which he owns.
Art. 28. All Ethiopian subjects have the right to present to the Government petitions in legal form.
Art. 29. The provisions of the present chapter shall in no way limit the measures which the Emperor, by virtue of his supreme power, may take in the event of war or public misfortunes menacing the interests of the nation.
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
All images created with ChatGPT 4o
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
On April 22, 1724, philosopher Immanuel Kant was born.
Aside from being the pre-eminent modern philosopher and originator of transcendental idealism, Kant was also a major figure of Enlightenment thought, a classical liberal, and the originator of the notion of the Categorial Imperative. He was an early and important astronomical theorist in his early career, but produced his greatest works towards the end of his life, including The Critique of Pure Reason and The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. He was also author of the 1795 essay “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch.”
Arthur Schopenhauer is widely known as an admiring and astute critic of Kant’s thought, while philosophical opponents include Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand. Kant’s approach to ethics continues to excite interest today, with some of the revival a result of the work of John Rawls.
Kant died on February 12, 1804, in Königsberg, Prussia (now Kaliningrad, Russia), where he had lived the bulk of his life.
“In Brussels, in the heart of the European Union, in a western liberal democracy, we’re unable to have a conversation about identity, migration, borders, family, and security without facing attempts to have it shut down,” says Matt Goodwin, a British professor.
The mayor of a Brussels district, Emir Kir, had ordered the shutdown of the National Conservatism Conference in order, he said, to “guarantee public safety.”
But Kir also stated the real reason, that in his neck of the woods “the far right is not welcome.” He apparently disagrees with viewpoints to be elaborated at
Police took steps to stymie would-be attendees.
Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán said: “The last time they wanted to silence me with the police was when the Communists set them on me in ’88. We didn’t give up then and we will not give up this
This is a more open targeting of political speech than erasing the “misinformation” of social media posts. Does it signal a new strategy
Hard to say. The immediate reaction of other European politicians, including many on the left, was dismay and shock that anybody would attempt such a thing.
“Banning political meetings is unconstitutional. Full stop,” proclaims the Belgian
“Extremely disturbing,” says a British spokesman.
Could be sincere; could be a realization that “Uh oh, we’ve gone too far”; could be a mixture of both.
The next question: will it happen again?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts