Here is a nice bit of insight into the Boy Scouts recent decision regarding homosexuals in their organization: Whither the Boy Scouts? The author points out that homosexual advocacy groups and atheist groups are already dissatisfied with this decision because is allows local BSA groups to decide their policy on the admission of atheists and homosexuals.
According to these advocates, that simply will not do. The BSA must not permit any “discrimination” in their groups at all, or the attacks will continue. In other words, this ‘retreat’ did not end the war over this. Apart from the details of this case, it illustrates the fact that behind most of the “anti-discrimination” advocacy groups, there is a collectivist mindset.
We live in a collectivist world, as anyone who pays attention knows. You are not ultimately allowed to control anything as an individual – not even with the classic proviso that subjects such control to the equal enjoyment by others of the same right. Once on this road, it was inevitable that no small groups of people would be allowed control of the affairs of their groups.
So private clubs, organizations, churches, businesses (fill in your favorite category here) are all subject to the will of the collective, at least as the will is expressed in the political system, including the courts. The President’s recent “you didn’t make that” speech was nothing new. We have lived in a collectivist society long, long before he came on the scene.
When you think carefully about this, you discover that it was one of the negative eventual consequences of slavery in this country. Some of the Founders worried about what would come of slavery, and they were justified in doing so. It led to a horrible war within our country, to the radical reconstruction punishment of the loosing area in that war, to the anti-negro (that’s what they would have said then, at least) discrimination society of the south (which was just as intense in most of the ‘north’ for that matter) to the “civil rights movement” of the mid-20th century.
That movement, which rightly insisted that government-owned entities be open to everyone, pushed that same idea into every part of society, even the private parts like clubs, businesses, and other private organizations. In the end, the effect was to say that nothing is private. As reprehensible as I find the idea, if the Elk’s Club can’t exclude anyone it wants from its group, the group has been collectivized – taken control of by the collective. If the owner of the corner pub can’t decide who will and will not be served in his establishment, it has been collectivized – taken control of by the collective. And, please note, so have the club members and the pub owner.
Now, extend this idea from blacks to any conceivable category of discriminated-against’ people and you have . . . our world.
Consider the irony of all this. Slavery was the forced control of one person by another. The effort to do away with that practice, and even that idea, led to our current situation in which no one is permitted to control himself. In other words, the efforts to rid our society of slavery led to our current society in which everyone is ultimately controlled by the collective and is thus a slave.
I know that has been pointed out before, but I think that, now and then, it is worth remembering again.