One of the more depressing features of modern life – sigh, so many to choose from – is the rise of the Race Relations Industry.

Depressing not because there are no problems with ‘racial’ and other discrimination. But because the issue is hijacked by ostensibly progressive activists of different shapes and sizes who define the ishoos so that their view of what is needed (and only their view of what is needed) prevails as The Paradigm, and so compels heavy public funding.

A nice big publicly funded earner for said progressives and their many friends, achieved in part by elbowing out of the way others from the ‘prgressive community’ who may have concerns but who believe in a more ‘conservative’ way of addressing them.

Part of what is wrong with this is a sub-plot which says that it is not the strength of one’s arguments which deserves most reward, but rather the intensity of one’s feelings. The more intense and angry, the more authentic and legitimate.

This excellent post on Power Line quoting Dafydd ab Hugh captures the point:

To me, one of the greatest crimes of liberalism is that it has "normalized" Rage Syndrome: black rage, lower-class (income) rage, feminist rage, road rage. The chimera of authenticity is invoked to justify any rage-response that benefits liberal fascism. From Ginsberg’s "Howl," to Spike Lee’s Joint, to Michael Moore’s rage of the overfed, pampered, and perpetually aggrieved, mindless fury is dubbed the most authentic of all emotions, thus unassailable and uncritiqueable. Rage is beyond good and evil… it simply IS, and is its own justification and excuse

But does it have to be that way?

What if public authorities began to empower a different way of dealing with these problems, giving a chance to people who believe in old-fashioned discipline, hard work and a classical education?

Could it start … here?