Saturday, March 25, 2006

Britain shakes hands with the Devil

It's become so common, it almost passes without notice these days.

A lecturer at Leeds University in England has been suspended for expressing publicly what everyone in the field of intelligence testing knows -- that different ethnic groups score differently, on average. The results have been replicated any number of times, and many of the tests have taken into account sociological differences such as wealth versus poverty.

What the implications are is rightly debatable. Personally, I can't think of any discriminatory change -- certainly not in law -- that should ensue. For one thing, the IQ differences among races and ethnic groups are averages; they say nothing about any individual. I am sure there are Hottentots and Australian Aborigines who are brighter than certain people of Anglo-Saxon ancestry that I would go out of my way to avoid.

Regardless, if there is a dispute about the facts -- and to the best of my knowledge, there is none other than that based on politically correct ideology -- it should be settled in the court of scholarly and public opinion. That, however, is not how the ruling elites in Britain see it. They believe there are ideas that are "cursed," that must not be spoken. We have seen how Her Majesty's government has prosecuted people for opposing immigration; here, in a less dramatic but equally revealing example, it is evident that even a university lecturer, who presumably was hired on the basis of some qualifications, can be cast into outer darkness and denied his position for expressing an idea that is officially verboten.
... University secretary Roger Gair said in a statement that details of the disciplinary process "must remain a private matter" between employer and employee.

But he said three issues were being looked into.

  1. In publicising his personal views on race and other matters, Dr Ellis had acted in breach of the university's equality and diversity policy, "and in a way that is wholly at odds with our values".
  2. He had "recklessly jeopardised" the fulfilment of the university's obligations under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.
  3. He had failed to comply with "reasonable requests" - for example, to apologise for the distress which his remarks on race and other matters have caused to many people, or to give an undertaking he would make no further public comments suggesting one racial group is inherently inferior (or superior) to another "unless there is no possibility whatsoever that anyone hearing or reading his comments might reasonably associate him with the University of Leeds".
"Equality and diversity policy." "Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000." "Reasonable requests 'to apologise.'"

Here are echoes of every totalitarian nation in modern history, from Soviet Russia to apartheid South Africa.

How long will it be before the U.K. not only demands a craven apology from any dissident from the enforced orthodoxy, but declares them insane and sends them to permanent residency in a "mental hospital," as in the Soviet Union?

So far, all the guardians of the party line can do is deprive people like Dr. Ellis of their position and livelihood for causing "distress" to anyone within hearing distance. So far.

But it's obvious that those who make the rules in today's Britain have no faith in the free market of ideas, no concept of intellectual give-and-take. All that matters is appeasing any groups that are primed to feel "distress" at any thoughts not to their liking.

It's the culmination of trends long in the making. There is probably no one under the age of 30 in the British Isles who can even remember a time when you could speak freely. They have been educated, if that's the word -- conditioned is more accurate -- to believe that there is no truth except what the State tells them, that no value exceeds "diversity," that offending any group is a thought crime, and that the only way to deal with thought criminals is to drop them down the oubliette.

Half a century ago, British people performed untold acts of heroism and duty -- often at the cost of their lives -- to safeguard freedom in their land. Today's Britain is making fools of them. It has chosen repression under the guise of diversity.

Everyone of my generation can remember a certain Rolling Stones song: "Pleased to meet you ... hope you guess my name."

No comments: