Left-liberals remind me of a conversation between a man and a servant in a movie I no longer recall very well. The man tells his servant that he doesn’t know why “dog” is a cuss word. The man says he loves dogs, that dogs are the most lovable animals he’s ever known—and that he’d be honored if someone calls him a “dog”. The servant calls him just that, and gets slapped hard across his face. Left-liberals are like this man. Left-liberals don’t know elementary social science. But this is not the only reason why they don’t see themselves as cheap, little rascals. They are not introspective enough. So they are not able to see how their conscious beliefs clash with their assumptions.
Now how do their beliefs clash with their assumptions?
A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court upheld death penalty for the four convicts in the Delhi rape case. Liberals condescendingly call this girl “Nirbhaya”. Even her mother thinks there is somethingwrong with this. It’s a damning indictment of Indian journalism that even today, virtually all Indian journalistsbelieve rape is not about sex. Every self-aware man knows this is nonsense. Every decent researcher who professionally handles literature on gender knows this is nonsense.Feminist dogma is not science. Activists, politicians and journalists are not scholars. It is entirely besides the point that many unhappy single women well past their prime think rape is about power. Facts lie flatly against this. All credible scholars think this is nonsense. But lame Indian journalists are convinced that rape is about power and abuse. Why does this happen? The really smart kids don’t become journalists. So, it’s not surprising you see all the shabbiness of third world self-styled intellectuals in its fully glory in Indian journalists. But why are they so bent on believing that rape is about power? There are many reasons, but this is one reason: They assume if rape has roots in male sexual desire, rape is excusable.Continue Reading
Oh, Happy Women’s Day. But, sorry. It is not true that women are more oppressed in any society—or that they were, at any point in time. It is just that women’s suffering is taken more seriously. These two books are good places to begin:
“I think one unfortunate legacy of feminism has been the idea that men and women are basically enemies. I shall suggest, instead, that most often men and women have been partners, supporting each other rather than exploiting or manipulating each other. Nor is this about trying to argue that men should be regarded as victims. I detest the whole idea of competing to be victims. And I’m certainly not denying that culture has exploited women. But rather than seeing culture as patriarchy, which is to say a conspiracy by men to exploit women, I think it’s more accurate to understand culture (e.g., a country, a religion) as an abstract system that competes against rival systems — and that uses both men and women, often in different ways, to advance its cause.”
“Sexism negatively affects not only women and girls, but also men and boys. While the former manifestation of sexism is widely acknowledged, few people recognize or take seriously the fact that males are the primary victims of many and quite serious forms of sex discrimination. Male disadvantages include the absence of immunity, typically enjoyed by females, from conscription into military service. Men, unlike women, are not only conscripted but also sent into combat, where they risk injury, both physical and psychological, and death. Men are also disproportionately the victims of violence in most (but not all) non-combat contexts. For example, most victims of violent crime are male, and men are often (but again not always) specially targeted for mass killing. Males are more likely than females to be subject to corporal punishment. Indeed, sometimes such punishment of females is prohibited, while it is permitted, if not encouraged, for males. Although males are less often victims of sexual assault than are females, the sexual assault of males is typically taken less? ?seriously and is thus even more? ?significantly under-reported. Fathers are less likely than mothers to win custody of their children in the event of divorce.?”?
People are wolves.I think this is the most under-appreciated fact about human nature. I find this obvious. I have no idea how anyone who has lived on earth long enough can deny this. How do I know this? Everyone I have worked until now was a cheapo who was willing to take what is for his grabbing before fleeing. This is true of almost everyone I have known otherwise too.
People often tell me that I live in the wrong bubble, or that I am generalizing too much. But, I have lived on the earth long enough to know better. I cannot be wrong. I never understood why people do many things that they do, even if they are bad people. It serves no purpose. Little people might say that there is no point in saying all this, even if this is true. But, if this is true, social scientists and intellectuals of all sorts are making a huge mistake, though not an innocent one. But, why are people convinced that this is wrong? If only people with a particular sensibility can appreciate the truth, they might as well be wrong.
If cruelty and violence does not outrage people, probably nothing will. Do people notice violence and cruelty? Now, it is very fashionable to support the cause of women. I think there is nothing unusual about the cruelty against women, but people have not always found the cause of women hip. This is a scene from an Indian city more than two decades ago: Continue Reading
Income inequality is considered a social evil. But, it need not be true that income inequality is unjustifiable. It is perhaps true that some people are brilliant, and work harder. But, there are some clear-cut cases where this simply does not apply. Many workers can raise their income twenty folds by moving from a third world country to a western capitalistic democracy. A large majority of the people on the earth earns far less then they deserve because income is “locally determined”. This is obvious, but few intellectuals take this seriously enough. Therefore, what pains them is not inequality.
Humility is considered a virtue. But, it is not clear that someone who has a modest opinion of himself accurately perceives reality. It is still possible that they are overestimating themselves. Hitler might claim that he had his flaws. It is not clear that someone who has a high opinion of herself is overestimating herself. Ayn Rand had once said that she wanted “The Fountainhead” to sell at least a hundred thousand copies. But, there are situations where it is perfectly safe to not rate yourself very highly. I think the world would be a better place if people were willing to trust the experts. Experts have spent decades studying subjects of which people know nothing about. They know more than the common public. But, when a common person disagrees with Milton Friedman, he is not likely to think that Friedman could be right. People do not value such humility. Therefore, what pains them is not lack of humility. Continue Reading
Given my kindness and compassion, the last thing I want is to hurt another person’s sentiments. Sometimes I feel that I should have laughed at their faces or at least slapped, but it all goes unrewarded. Does truth hurt as much?
With age, comes wisdom-and humility! Hopefully, I won’t be an exception. Certainly one reason I prefer a dowdy old hag who understands my insults to a pretty young girl who can’t tell Satire from Sartre, to make a general categorical statement not intended at anyone in particular. More than common honesty and common decency, I prefer common sense. One should at least cringe in shame. Continue Reading