Saturday, January 15, 2011

What else is wrong with Wong?

++Addition++Coldequation does a better job of expressing my sentiments than I'm able to. These professions are all ancillary, supporting roles, entirely contingent upon the wealth created by others, but not parasitic in the sense that they suck the lifeblood out of the host (although professors of anything that ends in "studies" can probably be accurately described as such).

---

I realize it's way late, but after multiple exposures to the story of UCLA professor Kent Wong celebrating the presumed ethnic replacement of whites by non-whites, I find some humor in reflecting on how totally clueless these racialist zealots are about wealth creation:
When that day happens, the young people of the DREAM Act movement will go on to accomplish and do great things with our lives. You will go on to become lawyers, teachers, doctors and members of the U.S. Congress [my emphasis] to replace those old white men. You are the hope and future of this country. You represent the hope and future of your generation.
Set aside the realistic consequences to the salaries of parasites like Wong as productive whites continue their exodus from California. The occupations he celebrates, even if NAMs suddenly became as productive as the whites it is ordained for them to replace, are all as parasitic as his own. A nation of lawyers, teachers, doctors, and legislators is a nation that doesn't produce or develop anything of value.

Mangan's thread is full of comments from people wondering what Wang expects the dwindling proportion of whites who he and others like him leech off of will do going forward. Better hope they all go into engineering, research, and software development to work 80 hours a week!

The progressive worldview is deeply opposed to the progression of humanity's collective standard of living.

6 comments:

coldequation said...

I think the characterization of those professions is a bit harsh. A doctor is not a "parasite" like a professor of Postmodern Whiteness Studies - he provides a valuable service. At least some members of all the professions you name are necessary. I think what you meant to say is that none of those professions is the base of the economic pyramid.

Anonymous said...

Software has "value" and doctoring doesn't? Which of the two would you rather permanently and entirely renounce consuming, starting right now? Somehow the answer to this question is conditioned by leftism/rightism?

Whatever you are trying to get it, this is far too idiosyncratic an expression of it. I'd critique it if I could, but I don't see what you're saying in the first place.

Audacious Epigone said...

Cold equation,

Yes, you're correct. Reflexive reactions do not constitute worthwhile blogging material. Thanks for reminding me of that.

Anonymous,

Point taken, although honestly, I'd go with healthcare, since, with the exception of a few required but unnecessary physicals, I haven't been to a doctor in a decade. A lack of software would result in much less utility in my life and effectiveness in my work.

Anonymous said...

Wong makes a cool $120K every year for his contribution of nothing to the world.

http://www.sacbee.com/statepay/?name=kent+wong&agency=&salarylevel=

Anonymous said...

"with the exception of a few required but unnecessary physicals, I haven't been to a doctor in a decade."

That's because you're young. If you are lucky enough to get old, chances are you'll be up for a joint replacement, an angioplasty or some other type of intervention.

Anonymous said...

Wong gets $120k? great job governator I really see your state broke