I’m fascinated by how God puts us together. To one he give a first class intellect and another he makes a simple and dull boy. To one he gifts a sweet beautiful voice and to the other the melodic  resonance of a bullfrog. But not all advantages are of God. If I am truthful, I know the diligent has an advantage over the lazy, and, ironically, a dunce is capable of ruling a nation. So why is it that the so called intelligent educators and liberal politicians these days press so hard to find equality and inclusion?  Is it that they resent the stronger?  That there are people smarter and more cleaver than themselves and they are afraid them? Or is it just envy?

I find the vain creatures who believe in equality  can be the most brutal humans. The whole diversity, equality, and inclusion trend is not democratic but more like fascism. It seeks power and ironically tries to destroy hierarchy. Sure it’s noble to to desire equality where it is due, but it is also ignorant and hateful to shame nature and excellence. If one man is faster than another it is ok to honor that man. And if a woman is faster than a man it is ok to honor her too.  But we cannot repair the inequalities of nature by giving a trophy to the runner in last place or celebrate the faster man who thinks he is a woman. Just as we cannot reward the student who refuses to pay attention in the classroom. Worse yet, why do most schools force the imbecile to graduate? If the student would rather draw cartoons than learn proper english let him fail. In all likelihood he may become a successful entrepreneur or the guy who unclogs your toilet. Both are better outcomes than keying code in a cubicle if you ask me. Which is better, for the student to realize for himself he should have listened in class or have him envy the position of another because he thinks his degree, race, or gender is  insufficient to warrant his equality with others? Of course it gets much more difficult when we add to democracy so called social and cultural inequalities, but there are sane solutions. I’ll address this further on.

Boiled down, our world will have gone completely bonkers when it gives diligent boys no advantage over stupid and lazy boys.  (Of course I mean girls can be diligent, stupid and lazy too.)

The whole concept of diversity and equality is to abolish advantage. To take this to its miserable end we must take away hard subjects, hard jobs, jobs only boys can do, jobs only girls can do. You do know what the messengers of this idiocy are saying? “boys can have babies too!” To accomplish this nonsense they are lowering absolutes to subjective feelings. How low? As low as Buffalo dung if you ask me.

The propagator’s of this fashionable democracy fail to realize that our enemies are not so dense.  To make social metoricacy work it must exist everywhere. In a socially democratic nation the dunce cannot be viewed as ignorant nor the intellectual as brilliant; they say a man is only a man if he identifies as one. Are our leaders in war to be found amongst the mean? Do we really want mediocre (metrosexual) men leading a military unit or to watch overly emotional women slamming their notebooks and crying over a colleague being removed from a committee on C-span? Misogyny, you cry out! No, feminisms dark side.

A nation repaired of its inequalities will not survive the assault of its superiors. C.S. Lewis said in his essay on a Democratic Education, “a nation of dunce’s can be safe only in a world of dunces.” Lewis not only applied this concept to education he forsaw that all political democracies are doomed if they try to extend the demand for equality into other spheres. He said,  ethical, intellectual, or anesthetic democracy is death. It’s a very relevant essay worth reading. It was the inspiration for my essay, I only added to and modernized its precepts.  At the end of the essay Lewis states,  “democracy dies when it is full of little men who think they are big themselves.” So much for identifying oneself as something they are not! I’m sure glad God made us uniquely different.