Wednesday, December 5, 2012

For The Other Social Conservative Left In America...

If there is any question whether popular culture influences political actions, the Boise City Council just added sexual orientation and gender identity to the city's antidiscrimination ordinance -- and did so unanimously.  Here's a harsh reality: the entertainment business has been banging the drum for why homosexuality is perfectly fine for three decades now -- and the result is that the sexual minority that used to demand a right to have the government leave them alone ("What consenting adults do in private is none of the government's business") is now insisting, "If someone does not want to do business with me, that is the government's business."  This is not even a libertarian position.

Anyone who is in business in Boise city limits would be well advised to STFU about their disapproval of homosexuality -- because you can be sure that it will be used to prove any conflict with an LGBTIQQ (or however many letters there are on the abbreviation now) is based on homophobia. And that's pretty much the goal, I suspect: to make people afraid to express disapproval, for fear of what will happen in court.

16 comments:

Josh said...

And that's pretty much the goal, I suspect: to make people afraid to express disapproval, for fear of what will happen in court.

Oh, worse than that. They don't want you merely afraid of what might happen in a courtroom, although that's always a plus. By making it extremely expensive to speak or permit employees to speak on a topic in 'homophobic' ways at work (or in ways that can be tied to work -- remember, off-hours speech can be evidence of on-duty discrimination), they seek to change discourse in the court of public opinion. It's not exactly a subtle thing: they're quite willing to admit it, as long as everyone around has said the right shibboleths.

It's not even terribly tricky as a tactic. Make something verboten for the folk who want to achieve something, and the remainder that walk in that society will have to follow those norms, too.

Matthias said...

I just saw a post in which you said you were planning to make a video. What sort of video?

Clayton said...

Matthias: see http://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/2012/11/this-film-idea.html

Rich Rostrom said...

Although I wonder what would happen if a Moslem defied this law...

Rich Rostrom said...

If there is any question whether popular culture influences political actions...

Of course it does, and always has.

Mark Twain believed that the Civil War would not have happened without the influence of Sir Walter Scott. It was not that Scott was a racist or pro-slavery. He created a cult of romantic illusion about war and violence that was particularly influential in the South.

More recently - I am fairly sure that much of America's recent confused thinking about immigration reflects Jewish sensibilities. American Jews have entirely understandable pro-immigration sentiments ("Ellis Island nostalgia") and equally understandable reflexive subconscious aversion to any sort of nativism. They also have had enormously disproportionate influence on American popular culture. (What proportion of film and TV scripts were written by Jews?) I'm not suggesting any sort of conspiracy or malevolent intent.
It's just that those whose voices are amplified through the mass media will be heard more, even in things they aren't consciously saying.

And when dominant mass media creators deliberately push a meme, it will spread.

AlanKH said...

If I had the talent, I'd write a dystopian novel where harmony is achieved by segregating society along ideological lines.

Clayton said...

Rick, there is another group that really pushes the open borders idea: libertarians, who like the idea of free markets for labor. There is an additional, somewhat smaller part of the idea: if enough Mexicans show up for work, it will end support for the welfare state, since there are obviously jobs out there, for those with a good work ethic.

ErisGuy said...

Libertarians are simply the stalking-horse for fascism. I've yet to meet a Libertarian who doesn't want his morality enforced in law.

Clayton said...

I think that this is a bit unfair. Unless a libertarian is an anarchist, of course he wants his morality enforced in law: only force or fraud is a criminal matter. But unless you are an anarchist, everyone wants the government to impose his morality.

Unknown said...

Clayton said: there is another group that really pushes the open borders idea: libertarians, who like the idea of free markets for labor.

Yeah, talking to Libertarians at the Raul Labrador town hall earlier this year when I challenged Labrador about his promotion of bringing more Indian nationals in to take American engineering jobs away they thought Raul's approach was great.

Since companies that use this labor WILL NOT talk to or consider an American candidate even if they are willing to work for the lower wages not so sure how that is truly "free!"

Clayton said...

One of the reasons that employers prefer hiring H1B visas over U.S. citizens and permanent residents, even at the same wage, is because an H1B visa applicant cannot just change jobs.

Hiring an H1B visa holder is rather like hiring an indentured servant (although one who can quit and move back to his home country, at least). The whole H1B visa scheme is really not even a free market, and at least what Labrador is apparently trying to get through Congress will allow more direct immigration -- not part of the H1B visa scheme. This is still not good for Americans who are out of work, because it drives down wages, but at least these immigrants will be competing on the same low wage, freedom to quit basis as Americans.

The right solution would be to enforce the existing law requiring H1B visa workers to be paid at the same level as those who are legally able to work, or if this is beyond our government's ability to enforce, turn off the H1B visa spigot. But Congress won't be happy until wage rates are the same in Bangalore and Los Angeles.

TMLutas said...

I believe that it is already current law that H1B visa workers are not paid lower wages than natives simply by virtue of their visa status. Proving this is difficult but creating systems to gather evidence and perhaps lawyers on retainer to take these cases via a rotating fund would significantly reduce abuse.

By a rotating fund I mean that you get a starter amount in the fund and replenish/increase the fund by a percentage of winnings from cases.

Clayton said...

Yes, it is current law, but it is also pretty clear that this law is not followed much of the time. Unfortunately, companies that abuse H1B are typically wealthy enough to keep lots of lawyers to protect their abuses.

Unknown said...

Regarding H1B pay all I can say is when I worked at HP a Wipro employee from India left some pay info lying about. He was only making in the $40K range when I am 99.999999% certain that no American engineer doing the same job out there was making less than $60 and most were making $80K+.......

Joseph said...

What will happen if a Moslem violates an anti-gay discrimination law? If this occurs in the near future, I suspect that there will be one or two imams who will claim that such discrimination is not commanded by Islam and they will be appointed spokesmen. If it occurs more than a decade or two in the future, the A list of the left may be completely different and they may have dropped gays, Moslems, or both. The A list of the Left changes in random directions at unpredictable intervals.

Alessandra said...

This is what I don't understand, are there no other social conservatives in Idaho? No one aside from you has sufficient intelligence to put together an action program to counter these moves on political, cultural, and legislative levels?

What conservatives need to do is to engage in a series of discriminatory actions based on politics and ideology: if you espouse a homosexual agenda, no matter what kind of sexual dynamics you have in your mind (homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual) - others have the right to discriminate against you. I am not a lawyer, but this should not be liable under "sexual orientation."