Tuesday, 15 March 2016

The intolerance of social justice

From Quillette - How Marcuse made today’s students less tolerant than their parents

The idea of “liberating tolerance” then is one in which ideas that the left deems to be intolerant are suppressed. It is an Orwellian argument for an “intolerance of intolerance” and it appears to be gaining traction in recent years, reshaping our commitments to free speech, academic freedom, and basic democratic norms. If we look only at people under the age of 40, intolerance is correlated with a “social justice” orientation. That is, I find that people who believe that the government has a responsibility to help poor people and blacks get ahead are also less tolerant.

Importantly, this is true even when we look at tolerance towards groups other than blacks. For people over 40, there is no relationship between social justice attitudes and tolerance. I argue that this difference reflects a shift from values of classical liberalism to the New Left. For older generations, support for social justice does not require a rejection of free speech. Thus, this tension between leftist social views and political tolerance is something new.

Indeed, and the politically ambitious have an uphill struggle if they intend to oppose these trends. It should come as no surprise if they go with the flow.


Edward Spalton said...

If you Google "Peter Sutherland House of Lords Immigration" you will find Sutherland's evidence to the House of Lords Committee on Migration. Sutherland is a former EU Commissioner, former head of the World Trade Organisation, non executive Chairman of GoldmannSachs and now head honcho of the UN body which deals with migration - oh and he is a regular attender at Bildeberg conferences .

He made the usual claims that massive and increasing immigration was good for the economy. But he also stated that the EU should increase the process specifically to " break up homogenous peoples" . This is profound racism, aimed at all the historic nations of Europe. I think it could well come within the definition of genocide or ethnocide ( take your pick!)

Political Correctness has been a form of moral disarmament of native peoples in the face of deliberate, government-sponsored, demographic invasion. The Blair government speeded up the process by increasing both Third World immigration and removing available checks on free movement of people from newly joined East European member states " to rub the Right's noses in diversity" and create a permanent, irreversible, demographic shift. They were literally electing a new people which, they calculated, would eventually be reliable Labour supporters.

The most hard-hit victims of this invasion are their own natural supporters, the native working class. A trade union activist of my acquaintance was in a quandary over this. It would be "racist" to oppose immigration but, he had decided, it was all right to oppose "free movement of labour"'as guaranteed by the EU.

Henry Kaye said...

I lived abroad for 32 years and came back to this country to retire at the end of 1999. I was immediately aware of all that are referred to here but was unable to put a name to it. The vast majority of the population are not even aware of it let alone put a name to it so there is little hope that the process can ever be reversed. This must surely be the biggest change in our national culture/philosophy that has ever occurred.

A K Haart said...

Edward - it's disturbing. I think people such as Sutherland, Blair and Cameron see no future in protecting their own people against cultural dilution. I think this is because cultural values are the only ones worth voting for, so destroy them and people more easily led.

Henry - I agree, the change is enormous and almost certainly cannot be reversed.