It sounds like you are advocating for CRT, and SJW nonsense. Step back a little, and imagine you are talking to an SJW with your argument. What does it sound like?
I will grant the modern progressives a singular credit in that they acknowledge differences between groups of people. That is the only point on which we agree. The difference is that I am willing to accept, and work within this reality. They are not. They want to beat humanity into a paste of equality with the bludgeon of pure political force. I don't believe equality exists, nor can it ever exist in nature. Trying to enforce it will only end in suffering. I'm quite willing to allow hierarchy. In fact I believe hierarchy to be inevitable and healthy for a human society.
It's also worth mentioning that there are plenty of people on their side who don't give a rat's ass about equality and are just opportunistically pushing their group's interests, which is completely understandable and expected from human nature. People are more loyal to their groups than they are to any abstract idea. Hence why I mentioned before, different groups cannot live together in peace.
Let's be honest, if different groups of people could coexist peacefully, history would have shown it to be the case. Humanity has been around for awhile now. I have yet to see a realistic example of that ever happening.
I think this is the fundamental difference between right and left (as much as those terms mean anything anymore): equality vs. hierarchy, borders vs. openness.
I don't want equity at all. As I mentioned, I am perfectly willing to accept hierarchy. Some will do better than others, as nature intends. It's not 'fair', but trying to fix it will only lead to destruction, as the 20th century has shown us. What I want is a return to sanity. My politics would be completely mainstream in Europe or America any time before 1965.
It sounds like you are advocating for CRT, and SJW nonsense. Step back a little, and imagine you are talking to an SJW with your argument. What does it sound like?
I will grant the modern progressives a singular credit in that they acknowledge differences between groups of people. That is the only point on which we agree. The difference is that I am willing to accept, and work within this reality. They are not. They want to beat humanity into a paste of equality with the bludgeon of pure political force. I don't believe equality exists, nor can it ever exist in nature. Trying to enforce it will only end in suffering. I'm quite willing to allow hierarchy. In fact I believe hierarchy to be inevitable and healthy for a human society.
It's also worth mentioning that there are plenty of people on their side who don't give a rat's ass about equality and are just opportunistically pushing their group's interests, which is completely understandable and expected from human nature. People are more loyal to their groups than they are to any abstract idea. Hence why I mentioned before, different groups cannot live together in peace.
Let's be honest, if different groups of people could coexist peacefully, history would have shown it to be the case. Humanity has been around for awhile now. I have yet to see a realistic example of that ever happening.
I think this is the fundamental difference between right and left (as much as those terms mean anything anymore): equality vs. hierarchy, borders vs. openness.
They don't want equality, they want equity for their races. Which s similar to what you want, equity for your race.
I don't want equity at all. As I mentioned, I am perfectly willing to accept hierarchy. Some will do better than others, as nature intends. It's not 'fair', but trying to fix it will only lead to destruction, as the 20th century has shown us. What I want is a return to sanity. My politics would be completely mainstream in Europe or America any time before 1965.
Do you want to exclude a race and make your race better? That's equity.