3 Questions to Ask Liberals

AT: As President Trump threatens to transport illegal aliens to sanctuary cities, suddenly, many on the Left are feeling significantly less generous and magnanimous regarding illegal immigration.

Colloquially, this is known as “skin in the game.”  When people have no skin in the game, then the issue is “no skin off their back.”  Cher, for example, was gung ho when it came to immigration, as she had no skin in the game.  However, when she had some skin in the game, her position suddenly became more conservative.

This conversation is surprisingly typical.  It arises so frequently that it has become one of the three questions I have learned to ask when dealing with liberals and liberal ideology.

I learned to ask this question while in graduate school for higher education administration, a discipline whose pedagogy is informed by social justice ideology.  A professor of mine always advocated for “redistribution of wealth from big business.”  I remember telling her how unstable business can be from month to month and year to year.  Due to this instability, would it not make more sense to redistribute wealth from a more stable profession?  The most stable profession I can think of is tenured professor.  Tenured professors have guaranteed contracts for life.  Not only that, but it was her idea in the first place, so one would think she would be in favor of implementing her own idea.

Believe it or not, she did not want to redistribute wealth from tenured professors.  When the money was coming out of her pocket, she was much less enthusiastic.

The second question is whether we are bringing people up or yanking them down.  When we raise a person, people, or things up, it is positive.  When it is not about someone rising to the level of another person, but about the lower person yanking the higher person down; when it is not about someone having what another person has, but about the other person not having it altogether; and when it is not about someone winning, but about another losing, we have the epitome of envy.

An example of raising people up is Black History Month.  Black history month is a celebration of a group of people in America who have traditionally been treated poorly.  By celebrating Black History Month, we are elevating the status of black Americans without taking anything away from anyone.  This is a good thing.

Compare and contrast Black History Month with this Washington Times newspaper headline from October of 2016: “Berkeley protesters form human chain to stop white students from getting to class.”  The student-protesters are preventing white students from getting to class without themselves gaining anything, nor rising up in any way, shape, or form.  The exclusive goal of the protesters was preventing white people from getting to class, taking from white people without benefiting themselves.  This is the epitome of envy and should obviously resonate as a poor basis for social policy.

The final question concerns assessment and evaluation.  You felt good, but did you do good?  This question concerns the results of a policy that sounds good or feels good to implement.  more