Many people on the left believe that all cultures are of equal value and that, above all other things, a people’s culture should be preserved and prevented from any kind of assimilation or westernisation. Today I would like to challenge this line of thinking–not, as is commonly done, with an appeal to western nationalism and decaying imperialist sentiment, but by accusing this line of thinking of being reactionary and logically unsuitable for the political left.
Author: Benjamin Studebaker
The 47%
Recently, Mother Jones leaked a video of Mitt Romney talking to some potential donors, in which he says the following:
The video (ironically discovered by a grandson of Jimmy Carter) shows Romney claiming that 47% of Americans pay no income tax, that this 47% is dependent and has a mentality of dependency, and that he has no hope of gaining their votes. Since this amounts to almost half the electorate, he argues, it will take quite a bit of money from these donors to help him win the election. But who are the 47%? Are they really dependent welfare scroungers? That is today’s topic.
Examining the Word “Retard”
There is a considerable effort presently ongoing to get the word “retard” banned from broadcast, and to make it socially considered on par with negative terms that deride various races, ethnicities, or sexual orientations, that is more or less the same as them in terms of what it means and what it does. While I agree that abusing or mistreating those who are now clinically considered “intellectually disabled” is a cruel, hurtful, and unnecessary act, I do think that there are misconceptions surrounding the word “retard”. It is not quite like the other words it is being compared to. Here’s why.
Utilitarianism and Equality
One of the key topics in moral philosophy is utilitarian ethics–the notion that some principle or concept, usually happiness or pleasure or some variant, should be maximised across society. Famously created by Jeremy Bentham, the system of ethics has attracted many famous supporters over the years, most notably John Stuart Mill. However, many writers and theorists critical of utilitarian ethics, including John Rawls, have claimed that utilitarianism attempts to justify high inequality, forcing some to toil in misery for the gain of others. Today I’d like to explore this criticism of utilitarianism to see if it holds water.
Critiquing Malthus and Overpopulation Theory
Recently I have seen a resurgence of Malthusian thinking. Thomas Malthus, the late 18th and early 19th century British economist, put forth An Essay on the Principle of Population, in which he argued that the world was becoming overpopulated at an unsustainable rate. Malthus’ ideas have come in and out of fashion since the early 19th century. Having heard a few people recently make Malthusian arguments, I would like to put forth a few compelling reasons to continue to disbelieve them.
Continue reading “Critiquing Malthus and Overpopulation Theory”
