MC returns with a sardonic look at equality, harmony, and other magic ponies of the Modern Multicultural New World Order.

I’d like to teach the world to sing…
by MC

In perfect harmony. Didn’t we get that thrust down our throats?

But it does raise some questions, such as: Who is the ‘I’ there? In answer to my own question, we now have a major religion, a powerful religion, that worships the god of ‘equality’ and ‘harmony’ (but of course the believers are more equal than non-believers, and those believers are the ‘I’ because they define the harmony), but those who create disharmony are the enemy, because creating disharmony is the ultimate in crime and terrorism.

At best ‘equality’ is an assumption based on moral relativity. It means that one must shut one’s eyes to history and limit discernment to the here and the now. Yesterday Hamas fired missiles at Israeli children; today Israel killed Gazan children in retaliation. It’s simple, stupid: those Joooos create disharmony so they are in the wrong; Muslims are the long term victims of Judeo-Christian exploitation (enforced inequality); therefore we must restore equilibrium by blaming the Joooos wherever we find them etc., etc.

In the science lab in school we had old-fashioned balances in wooden cases for weighing substances and things, and using the balance was quite a skill in itself. After each addition of weights or substance, one had to wait for the swinging to subside. To get to a state of equilibrium could take hours so one learned to average out the swing to save time.

As the weights added got smaller and smaller they became harder to manipulate as well, and the tiny ones had to be manipulated with tweezers and seemed to take on a life of their own and fight back.

It took an incredible amount of work to get a balance, so we rationalized and weighed stuff to the nearest gram, which took a fraction of the time.

[…]

The White Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture achieved an enviable dominance for several hundred years. Instead of asking Why? (because the answer is unpalatable), moral relativists assume that it is undeserved and random, based upon geographical evolution rather than theological rationality; it cannot possibly be due to the fact that the society in question sought to straighten the cloth, untwist the cue and round the balls can it?

More here.