I’ve been toying with the idea of writing a satirical piece on intersectionality, but then someone asked a question, in a Facebook group, about globalism. The statement was made that globalism seems dead – that Canada will likely throw out Trudeau in the next election, that Le Pen is leading all the polls in France, that the largest political party in Germany is suddenly on the political right, and that Trump is President of the United States. I thought about it, and realized that I am somewhat pessimistic about our future. Rather than writing a satirical piece, I ended up making some thoughtful comments. The following is adapted from that. This is, to me, a very important issue, and I think this article discusses it much better than a satirical piece could have.
I don’t know that my thoughts are fully formed on this topic, so I invite you not only to read and share this post, but to comment. I would like to hear the thoughts of others – and particularly of those who disagree with me. If possible, let’s keep it civil.
I think the best chance globalism has left is to end democratic institutions, and I think they know it. There are already calls for different groups’ votes to count more than other groups. There is, for example, an intersectionality calculator available online that says I am oppressive against 96% of the population. Under the ‘usage’ section of the website (which describes how to use the calculator) it says that in elections, my vote should count as .04% of a vote. If I were a transsexual gay woman (which would be functionally the same thing as a man, and gender now being fluid, I could easily claim to be one), I would be, on the same calculator, oppressed by 86% of the population, so my vote would count as 21.5 votes, compared to my white, straight, cis-gendered self. Use of this calculator in voting would supposedly give marginalized groups the political power to find parity. It would also allow the DNC to do whatever the hell it wants, politically, without opposition, and even if supposedly marginalized groups began to turn on the DNC, they could simply play with how much each person’s vote counts in order to stay in power. There are, after all, an infinite number of ways to describe people, making the 13 sliders on the current calculator purely arbitrary. There would be nothing stopping the people running the calculator from adding and subtracting sliders, or changing the weight of different sliders, to create whatever outcomes they want.
The Intersectionality Calculator does not specify who made it. This leads me to think it may be satirical, but if it is, the left missed the joke. Such left-leaning groups as Huffington Post and Vox are up in arms about how great the calculator is, and about how we can (and should) rebuild our society around it. As a consequence, even if the idea started as satire, it has gained traction on the political left.
The point is that as soon as Democrats are in power again, there will be a HUGE temptation to look at the Trump years in terms of ‘how did we get here, and what changes do we need to make to ensure that we never elect another Trump again,’ and the obvious answer to that is to end any semblance of a Democratic election system, replacing it with something else to ensure that only ‘good’ people can win. What better solution than to weigh the vote based on intersectionality?
It’s like in California. It is now legal for third parties to turn in absentee ballots for people they are not related to. This resulted in over 250,000 absentee ballots being turned in by Democrat operatives after the election results across the state were known. The result? Orange county, just as one example, ended up with more total votes than they had people, and Democrats won every election in the state, including in places like Orange County, which has a sizeable Republican majority.
If you listen to Democrats, they are adamant that every vote counts. That is subtly different from ‘every voter counts,’ and in a very important way. There are many people out there who believe in rules only when they can be used as political weapons against their opponents, and I think we are starting to see the left take that view to its logical conclusion.
There was another case this past election, in North Carolina, where a Republican won, but only after Democrat operatives turned in large numbers of absentee ballots (again – after the results of the election were known). It is not legal for a third party to turn in absentee ballots in North Carolina, and those ballots were not counted (had they been it would have given the Democrat the win), but there were enough of those votes to make a statistically significant difference between the number of Republican absentee ballots that were thrown out, and the number of Democrat absentee ballots that were thrown out. Not just a statistically significant number either – that’s a HUGE understatement. Some people vote in the wrong precinct and have to cast provisional ballots – obviously only one of their ballots can be counted (the one in the correct precinct) so there are always a few votes thrown out for legitimate purposes. But on the Republican side you only had votes thrown out for reasons like that, whereas the Democrats had tens of thousands of absentee ballots that were thrown out for having been turned in illegally, making a HUGE discrepancy between the percent of Republican votes that were thrown out, and the percent of Democrat votes that were thrown out. One might think people would say that the Democrats were caught cheating, and that would be the end of it, but that is not what happened. Instead the Democrats are taking the election results to court on the ground that the discrepancy between Republican votes and Democrat votes that were thrown out prove the REPUBLICANS cheated.
Such is the state of our democracy, and this is all after the DNC made a complete mockery of the 2016 primary. Don’t think for a second that the Democratic Party gives a rip about democratic processes. They don’t.
So no – I don’t think there is much hope of Conservatives regaining power in the long term. I think the Democrats will probably win in 2020, by hook or by crook, and then we will never have anything in any way resembling a democratic election again.
You’ll notice that the intersectionality calculator site also says that whenever you have a meeting, everyone in the meeting should start by telling everyone else what their intersectionality score is, and that those with lower scores should keep their mouths shut. Not only are some groups not going to be allowed to vote – they will not even be allowed to speak.
I don’t hold much faith that Conservatives will win in the end. We have one HUGE handicap, which is that we actually believe in rules. Since we believe in rules, we follow the rules. If we violate them, we get called out and marginalized. Other conservatives believe in the rules (which is why they are conservatives), and as a result, conservatives who break the rules aren’t supported by their own party. Democrats? They are free to break the rules whenever they like, and nothing happens to them. Obama lies? Politics as usual. Trump lies? Impeach him. Hillary Clinton went so far as to openly admit that she has two separate political platforms: one for the public to hear, and another, unrelated platform, to actually implement. That’s like lying on an institutional scale, and the media failed to call her out on it. Trump, in the meantime, is called a liar even when he tells the truth.
Trump is no hero, and let me be absolutely clear on that. Trump is more of an anti-hero. Sometimes one needs an anti-hero, but understand how easy Trump is to vilify. I think Trump is a very easy target in 2020, and I suspect that Democrats will ride his unpopularity into a Senate majority as well. They have already said they will expand the Supreme Court to get a majority in the court, so I think in 2020 our Republic may well come to an end, and the era of intersectionality will begin.
As always, if you agree with our message, we ask you to share. In this case, if you have time, please comment as well.
