Skip to main content

Three cheers for David Brooks and the New York Times!

Yesterday I had this to say about the Orwellian events at Google, where an engineer was fired for writing a nuanced, carefully documented, and eminently reasonable memo suggesting, among other things,  that while men and women are equally intelligent and that there are individual men and women are every bit as good at just about anything you can think of, science does increasingly conclude that male and female brains are wired differently, that men as a class and women as a class may each tend to have different strengths and weaknesses, and that to some unspecified extent that-not even "rather than" but "as well as-"   discrimination, might explain why there are more men in certain jobs and more women in others.

James Damore also touched on another ideological third rail in his memo. He acknowledged the degree to which his company had become a political and social echo chamber, noted that this has serious consequences for any enterprise in which objectivity was important, and suggested   that political and ideological diversity might be a concern to which Google might do well to address.

As soon as the story hit the wires, the libel and slander against Damore began. The overwhelming majority of the news accounts I've seen misrepresented the memo and claimed that he had questioned the competence of his female colleagues or suggested that there were jobs which women were inherently incapable of doing as well as men simply because they are women. To be sure, there has also been a push-back from the right, accurately characterizing Google's action as an attempt to punish thoughtcrime which offended against leftist ideology but in fact constituted nothing more than a sober acknowledgment of objective reality. But as usual, the smaller and less-influential conservative journalists of the nation have been largely drowned out in a chorus of "progressive" outrage.

Today, however, they got an ally, and in the last place, I would have expected. David Brooks wrote an objective and eminently reasonable op-ed piece in the New York Times in which he defended the memo, accurately described what it said and what it did not say, explained the scientific background of the controversy, suggested that Google CEO Sundar Pichai had mishandled the entire incident and called for his resignation.

I commend the article to you. It's one of the most sensible things I've read on an op-ed page anywhere, let alone in the Times, for a very long time.

It's good to see that there are "progressives" who are able to transcend the demands of an orthodoxy which rejects science and objective reality in order to insist that war is peace and that freedom is slavery.

Yes, "progressive" friends.  One of your own has finally admitted that sometimes you guys do that, too.


Popular posts from this blog

Jan Chamberlain's rhetoric is too strong. But the stand she has taken is right.

I do not share the religion of Jan Chamberlain. I don't even pray to the same god. But I can't help but admire the integrity of the woman who quit the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rather than sing at Donald Trump's inauguration.

Ms. Chamberlain, like me, voted for Evan McMullin in November. Like me, she holds no brief for Hillary Clinton or her agenda. But she cannot, as she put it, "throw roses at Hitler."

As I've said before, comparing Trump to Hitler strikes me as harsh. I believe that Trump is a power-hungry narcissist who exhibits disturbing signs of psychopathy, like Hitler. Like Hitler, he has stigmatized  defenseless minorities- Muslims and undocumented aliens, rather than Jews- and made them scapegoats for the nation's troubles. Like Hitler, he has ridden a wave of irrational hatred and emotion to power. Like Hitler's, his agenda foreshadows disaster for the nation he has been chosen to lead.

But he's not going to set up death camps for Musli…

Neither Evan McMullin nor his movement are going away

Evan McMullin has devoted most of his post-college life- even to the point of foregoing marriage and a family- to fighting ISIS and al Qaeda and our nation's deadliest enemies as a clandestine officer for the CIA. He has done so at the risk of his life.

He has seen authoritarianism in action close-up. One of his main jobs overseas was to locate and facilitate the elimination of jihadist warlords. Evan McMullin knows authoritarians.

And when he looks at Donald Trump, what he sees is an authoritarian like the ones he fought overseas. He knows Donald Trump. After leaving the CIA he served as policy director for the Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives. He tells about his first encounter with The Donald in that role in this opinion piece he wrote for today's New York Times.

In fact, when Mitt Romney and Tom Coburn and all the others who were recruited to run as a conservative third-party candidate against Trump and Hillary Clinton backed out,  McMulli…

Huzzah! Once again, 45 does something majorly right!

First. he appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and now 45 has- at long last- initiated a sensible space policy, with a plan to promote a "rapid and affordable" return to the moon carried out by private enterprise by 2020.  Afterward, it will be onward to Mars and beyond.

This is a great idea for three reasons. First, private enterprise is the future of space exploration, and as far as I know we will be the first spacefaring nation to put most of its eggs in that basket. Second, it's nice to have eggs! Since the Obama administration canceled the Constellation program to develop the Ares booster and the Orion crew vehicle (though it subsequently reinstated the Orion part of the program), the United States has been twiddling its thumbs while China has taken great leaps toward the moon and other countries- including Russia, India, and Japan- have to various degrees intensified their own space programs. It would be both tragic and foolhardy for the nation which first…