It's interesting to note the ideological slants in Trip Gabriel’s NYT piece about Glenn Youngkin. I know, I know, everyone will say “Duh, Boghossian, obviously.” But it’s useful to look at just two sentences to clarify the bias:
1) "conservatives’ belief that classwork has become overly conscious of racial differences"
2) "Mr. Youngkin’s best known pledge is to ban critical race theory in schools on Day 1, even though that graduate-school thesis about the role of racism in American institutions has little impact on K-12 classrooms, educators say."
Understanding what's driving these interpretations is crucial to understanding why Youngkin won.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Very few of these individuals are actually influential, but they were mostly written about by people who are. 1)
It appears as if these individuals were chosen for reasons relating to superficial diversity and not actual influence. (Certainly not enough influence to be in the top 100.) Here are just two problems with attempting to artificially manufacture such outcomes. 2)
1) The legitimacy of the periodical is called into question. Readers won’t trust TIME because the people on the list are obviously not the most influential people. 2) Readers won’t trust that other people on the list are actually influential. 3)
I’m sitting in the pet ER waiting for Lola to come out of surgery. She was attacked by a porcupine. Watching people who love their pets so deeply is moving.
This is Biju. She’s recovering from a heart attack.
Listening to many stories of people who rescued their animal from abusive homes and now they’re dealing with the consequences of physical abuse. Heartbreaking and also inspiring that so many people have so much goodness and decency.
This beautiful boy is Sunflower. He’s having digestive issues. He barks when someone new enters.
We're a group of parents, teachers, and students who are trying to help educate the public about the Social Justice crusade going on in some South Dakota public universities.
What we do, essentially, is anonymously leak/share evidence of political bias and indoctrination with the public.
Here are some problems with factoring historical injustices into decision making processes. Also known as “equity.”
1) Groups will compete for the distinction of having been the most historically oppressed so that they will receive the largest share of resources.
2) Individuals and groups will undervalue the traits necessary for success to the extent that they’ll receive an unequal distribution in their favor. This cycle cannot be broken because merit is inherently disincentivized.