[FRIAM] Liberal dilemmas

[Marcus Daniels]

Dave writes:

< Honors degrees, curricula, and courses are racist reasons that students from northern New Mexico cannot succeed at other universities and, as such, cannot be tolerated at Highlands. >

Universities find and mature talent.  They don’t make it.  Students attach their talent to the brand, and the university invests and uses the students’ accomplishments to advance the brand.  It is especially clear what is happening with basketball or football.   With a HBC, say, part of the brand is that it is historically black.   It is important for administrators to think about what makes their organization and market special and how to advance their brand, otherwise they will go out of business.

< Posters: woman in question was a 30+ year old grad student (we shared the same advisor). The posters were in my office for my enjoyment, purchased at the university bookstore. Meeting was held in my office at her request. They were prints of Dali work considered "great art." The human figures are totally androgynous as well as being distorted in typical Dali style. Her motive for filing the complaint was, she stated in an email a year later, to discredit me with our advisor who she thought showed a preference for my work over hers. The HR office, because of their "enlightened liberal policies" accepted her complaint on its face, no investigation; as the same policy stated one was not needed because, as a male and academic staff, I had no defensible position to consider.>

HR also looks after its brand.   They need to make examples out of people and to level the playing field from time to time.  This is not a enlightened liberal policy thing, this is just dogs eating dogs, you know?   At the end of the day HR protects the organization, and that may be as simple as keeping up appearances.   Don’t leave weapons on the table unless you want to see them used.

< Ranchers: this particular family took 'stewardship' seriously and made hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of improvements to public land. but my point is simply that bureaucrats, kowtowing to liberal environmental lobbyists set policy without regard to any 'facts on the ground' or any science, simply on liberal philosophy of how things "should be." >

Yes, it is a world of politics.   Isn’t that your whole thing with the ethno-everything schtick?   Just forces acting against one another?   Arbitrary preferences.   Nihilism.

This reminds me of my grandmother’s house where an ex-con lives for crazy low rent (like 8 times less than my mortgage payment).    Now sure, he does things like cuts holes in walls for new windows he wants, patches leaks in the roof and tears down out buildings because he wants to install a chicken house, and so on.   Do these investments means he owns the house?   Gee, he’s starting to act like it, isn’t he?    I bet they made these “improvements” to the public land because it was in their interest to do so.  Didn’t they?

< Access: I too am a taxpayer. There are some very nice hot springs on BLM land near by. They are maintained and upgraded by a volunteer public group (pretty informal, word of mouth kind of stuff). Being old and feeble, my access is increasing dependent on the use of an ATV. BLM policy dictates constant reduction of motorized transport on that land, so it will not be long before my access is de facto denied. This is a personal example of a "woke" policy on increasing wilderness designations thereby denying access to elderly, handicapped, and otherwise marginally abled.>

A good libertarian would buy one of those wheelchair accessible bathtubs?

Marcus


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210902/117d6aef/attachment.html>