Enough With the Leftist Ideology, Read Some Thomas Sowell!

I've known for a while now that post secondary institutions are centers for the indoctrination of students, exposing them to only leftist ideology.  They are void of Free Speech and of Critical Thought. So, I found logical errors in a post secondary textbook. 

I'm taking a management course for work, and am having trouble with the chapters on diversity and discrimination.  Unproven claims are being taught.

First, the textbook says that there is a myth that disabled people don't want to work.  And, it claims, this is untrue as over 70% of disabled people stayed in a job longer than regularly abled people.  A simple venn diagram shows that this is an untrue conclusion.

If you are only measuring those disabled people who work as representative of all disabled persons--including many who don't work--the premises prove nothing conclusively. And, many animals will not hunt for their food when you hand feed them.

Second, it puts forward the idea of pay inequality (900/week for men vs. 700/week for women)--gender wage gap--being men discriminating against women, even though recognizing that women make up over 60% of the workforce.  That's a pretty big assumption.  Could there be ANY other factors?  Do men work longer hours?  Do men pursue jobs that pay better while women pursue jobs that are more satisfying.  Dismissing these things out of hand with no evaluation or investigation is disingenuous.  Basically, you're Affirming the Consequent.  You're arguing that if women don't make as much, it is due to men holding them back.  We know men hold back women, therefore this is the cause of women who make less.  Not only is there a logical fallacy here, but we can challenge the truthfulness of the second premise. 

The third claim that I dispute is that diversity makes businesses stronger.  Cited is the fact that, more diverse businesses perform better.  Correlation does not prove causation.  There could be an underlying trend causing a business to be both diverse and profitable e.g. balking at traditional management practices and being open minded to new ways of doing business.  Certainly, there are challenges and expenses with diversity. The complaint is also made that although the foreign born Canadians are more numerous in the work place, they are not promoted as much.  There is a possibility that this is language barriers, not racism.  Naturalized Canadians are not as skilled--normally--as native born Canadians.  If you think that native born Canadians=White, you are the racist. 

Two things that I want to clarify:

• I am not anti-immigration 

• I am not pro-discrimination 

          

I'll come back to these two points.  First, I want to address what I've proven.

You may have noticed that I have not proven my points either.  Indeed, I've proven nothing.  My problem is that, they are teaching these political points as facts without questioning them.  I didn't prove my beliefs, I just poked holes in the logic they put forward. Their arguments are not Sound; in fact, they're pretty week.

Okay, let me address the idea of me not being anti-immigration.  The political talking point is that diversity makes us stronger.  Well, how's that working?  I find multiculturalism divisive and find that it promotes tribalism and animosity as well as division and weakness in society, not to mention extrema violence in rare cases.  It it a challenge to overcome those things.  In spite of diversity, we continue.  True, diversity brings different points of view to the table, often.  Also, and this is an important point, in recent years the left has conflated the terms refugee and immigrant.  We need migration, but we need to recruit skilled immigrants to make us stronger, not burden us.

As far as refugees go, they are a burden and should be limited.  They are a burden on our social safety net and there is only so much room in the lifeboat before we lower the quality of living for all.  We can't save them all.  We just can't.  The math shows that.  You can't collect all the grains of sand.  Maybe, if we sent them back when it becomes safe for them, then we could afford to help more...

Also, immigration--which is not offering safe haven to refugees at the expense of our society--is needed.  We need it for a few different reasons.  First, non-naturalized Canadians are only having something like 1.4 children per couple; we are not self sustaining.  Second, at the current rate of government spending, we need immigrants in order to pay our government debt--the bill for our current spending on ourselves--before the shrinking GDP causes a fatal imbalance in the debt to GDP ratio.  So, the Great Replacement that White Supremacists speak of is, in fact, needed.

I personally value Mosaic society over Melting Pot (use the principal of charitable interpretation here).  I admire Chinese Canadians and Indian Canadians etc...  I respect their hard work and culture.  I admire their retention of their culture.  Also, I believe that it is an individual right, if not a Natural Right, to be free to be whatever you want.  ...provided you don't hurt anybody; I'm a Jeffersonian. So, even though I believe that increased multiculturalism is a bad thing, I feel that it is necessary to provide financial stability and also that it is the right of the individual in our society to be diverse.  We also have a moral obligation to help refugees.  ...which must balance with the moral obligation to protect Canadian citizens (again, not White people).  Immigration is needed, and although I don't feel that I've articulated it well here, diversity is a right.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android