I loathe the intersectionality craze we are subjected to these days in our political environment. That's why I came out of my seat when I saw the clip of Ricky Gervais lampooning its absurdity in his Golden Globes monologue, saying:
"We were going to do an In Memoriam section, but when I saw the list of people who had died this year, it wasn't diverse enough. It was mostly white people. And I thought, ‘No, not on my watch.'"
But what continues to amaze me is the fact that those who deify diversity-for-diversity's-sake continually turn out to be the biggest offenders of intersectionality dogma. Whether it's MSNBC blasting the monochromatic nature of Republican officeholders during their monochromatic primetime line-up, college campuses championing diversity while censoring diverse thinking, social justice race activists adopting the racist narrative that you're not a legitimate black person if you aren't a liberal, or high-profile progressives like Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Virginia Governor Ralph Northam being excused for their racist blackface scandals simply because they are politically left, the whole charade is just loathsome.
And that's precisely why it is so glorious when they are exposed and called out for it. Take NBC's late-night liberal Democrat commentator Seth Meyers. The Saturday Night Live alum hosts a pseudo-comedy program called "Late Night with Seth Meyers" which is – like so much of late-night "comedy" these days – an awkwardly futile attempt to mimic the now defunct Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
Towards the end of last week, like a dog returning to its vomit, Meyers was going back to the well of mocking Republicans on Twitter. And what better way to do that, of course, than calling them all racists:
Unfortunately for Meyers, it didn't take long for the Senate's conservative firebrand Ted Cruz to come back with guns blazing:
Ouch. To make matters worse, notice how the Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez responded to questions about the very lack of diversity Cruz highlighted:
"We've set a remarkably inclusive and frankly low bar throughout the campaigns and I'm proud of that."
I can't be the only one that sees the uncomfortable implications there: first, that minorities somehow need a low bar in order to compete; and second, that even with no barriers to selecting the most talented and best minority candidates out there, his party still chose old, wealthy, white people as their preference.
Again, let me reiterate that the current racial make-up of the Democrat Party presidential slate does not offend me in the least. I don't care that they're all white any more than I'd care if they were all black. I don't make my decisions on who should be in power based on a melanin count, and frankly I'm intellectually turned off by anyone who would.
While I respect those of a different ethnicity, while I appreciate those with different culture, while I am at times fascinated by the life experiences of those from other places, I have never, and will never worship at the altar of diversity. The reason why that is worth pointing out is to address and condemn the hypocrisy of those who do.
If you are going to make melanin into an idol, then you are inviting judgment when you fail to pay proper homage to that false god – particularly when those you criticize for not worshiping alongside you prove they are still better at keeping your rules.