How About Them Islamophobes Homophobes and Other Deplorables?

000There are also xenophobes, misogynists, sexists, irredeemables, and regular old racists.   I wonder, are all Islomaphobes also homophobes? Can a person be one class of deplorable without being another? Can these people be cured? Is there any benefit gained from counseling? Some Islamists seem to be homophobes.

These are all important questions. Perhaps all of these wayward folks should be rounded up and quarantined. There could be a weekly roundup. Eventually there would only be nice gentle people out in public.

It is a work in progress for sure. This is the world we live in but it is not the real world.

In the real world, people don’t get along with each other all that well. As previously explained, there is this process called social evolution. Back in the good old day, different races went centuries after centuries without even knowing other races or societies even existed. When there were encounters the two sides were likely to try and kill each other. That is how racism started. Tolerance managed to sneak in as groups finally decided that trading and communicating was preferable to killing and stealing. Racism came first but began diminishing due to social evolution.  The process is not complete.

Homosexuals and straight people deal with one another just fine most of the time. What is called homophobia is not really fear. Straight folks are nauseated by the thought of homosexual practices. That is not a voluntary response. It seems to be biologically based and is reflexive. This makes no sense to homosexuals because they are not nauseated with one another. There is no fear. It is a natural aversion.

Muslims are different than Christians and Jews, religiously, politically and culturally. Much of the Islamic lifestyle is not compatible with that of Christians and Jews.

All people are born into a system that is governed by laws of dominance and subservience. Individuals survive by dominating or submitting to domination. The practice is so much a part of nature, it is normal to lose awareness that it is happening.  Groups people identify with try to dominate other groups they don’t belong to. This is peaceful most of the time but sometimes wars break out. Most dominance and subservience is by tacit agreement.

Unless various groups are free to dislike one another and work out differences no progress is ever made in terms of social evolution. When the words cited at the beginning of this article are used it is actually an attempt to dominate another party. Place a label on a person and he and anything he says are dismissed.  When all groups of people are deemed good and no criticism is allowed, social evolution comes to a halt. Nowadays, a person can hardly speak a rational sentence without being given an unflattering label.

My standard for defining racism is as follows: denying someone rights based on race is racism. It is o.k. to dislike someone based on race. It is not o.k. to deny a person a home in a neighborhood, a job or even a place in line based on race. We can’t deny others the right to have their own criteria with respect to personal preferences, likes and dislikes. If we end up being judged according to who we are and nothing else, that is the person’s privilege. Laws can’t force people to like each other. Laws can be used to insure everyone’s rights are respected.

There are differences in people based on race, religion and countless other areas. Over time differences start to disappear when opposite minded people interact. When it becomes a social convention that everyone in the world must think the same, the positive nature of social evolution stops.

When someone places a label on you for speaking or acting in opposition to their sensibilities, it is to dominate you. Lots of times it is to keep the behavior of the one doing the labeling from being examined in the light of reality. Don’t expect sincerity or good will from someone who calls you names.

Sweet Suzie’s Kool-Aid    A fine Tune written by Curbside Jimmy.

 

(Visited 47 times, 1 visits today)
0 0 votes
Article Rating

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.
This entry was posted in Daily Comments and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments