Richard Boyd-Barrett, has declared a new far-Left crusade in the Dáil, and this time it’s against exams and the concept of “competition” itself.
Speaking earlier this week, Boyd-Barrett said that “the problem starts with the Leaving Cert itself.”
“It is fundamentally perpetuating an inequality and a hierarchy and limiting access to education in a way that it shouldn’t.
I believe that if we are serious about an overhaul we have to get rid of all of the barriers. Remove all of the barriers. In the same way that we would think it unthinkable now that you would ration access to primary or secondary, why on earth would you ration – through Leaving Cert exams, through fees, through other barriers – access to further education or whatever? Why would you do it? It makes no sense.
It creates competition, pressure, hierarchy, it leads to drop outs, and it’s bad for our society at every level. So I would put it to you that those barriers need to be removed, and that starts with the Leaving Cert. It simply has no place anymore as blocking entrance essentially for some.”
Note his critique of “hierarchy” and “competition” itself. So, in other words, when dealing with vitally important jobs and qualifications, such as electricians, or medical doctors, apparently we’re not supposed to have any sense of “competition” or “hierarchy”. Nobody is any better or worse than anyone else at those jobs, and everyone can do them just as well as each other.
Now, is there an argument for making Third Level education free? Sure there is – at the very least one can understand why it would feel unfair that some hyper-intelligent whizz kid couldn’t get into his chosen degree because his or her parents couldn’t afford it. That’s absolutely a conversation that reasonable people can have about grants and the like.
But that’s not what Boyd-Barrett is saying. What he is arguing here is the very fact that some students do well in their exams, and go on to third level to do specialised degrees, while some do poorly and can’t, is fundamentally an injustice in and of itself. In other words, anyone should be let into college, regardless of their academic ability.
So, hypothetically, in Boyd-Barrett’s world, someone who couldn’t pass Junior Cert Science, should be able to attend Trinity and take up a degree in astrophysics. There are no exams or “barriers”, right? That means no limits. This is the logical outworking of what he’s saying.
But why stop at college and education? There are lots of other areas in Irish society, like, for example, the defence forces.
Why can’t someone who is paralysed from the neck down join the Irish Rangers? Or someone who’s blind? I’m sure Deputy Boyd Barrett would agree that these stringent selection tests are extremely unfair to people with no legs who might want to join elite military units. That’s an injustice that should really be rectified, right?
And what about basketball? Why can’t 5 foot tall fat balding men who look like George Costanza play for the Irish national team? How come all of our players are in shape and an average height of 6 foot 4? It’s an outrage to short people everywhere.
Brain surgery is another one – why can’t someone clumsy or with shaky hands become a brain surgeon? That is an unfair barrier to entry that the capitalist pigs in the medical community have set – right?
Unbeknownst to Richard, however, there is another possibility. And that is that maybe not everyone has the same abilities and capabilities. Maybe, just maybe, some people are suited to university, and the army, and basketball, and brain surgery, while others simply aren’t.
Ultimately, you can’t blame Boyd-Barrett for this kind of reasoning. It’s not his fault – he’s just trying to be consistent with the Marxist philosophy he’s wedded to. Equality at any costs, no matter how preposterous the outcome.
That’s why you see groups on the Left endorsing transgender biological males in female sports – because to not let them in would be “unequal”.
Male to female transsexual fighter Fallon Fox, who twice broke an opponent’s skull to win a match, has been called the bravest athlete in history in new op-ed for Out Sports. https://t.co/K2YwaWz1EX
— Andy Ngô 🏳️🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) January 22, 2020
They’ve even supported making sure that Ireland’s abortion bill is “trans inclusive” – as in, making sure that men can have abortions too.
Dail debating abortion legislation. 3 day wait clause is not supported by doctors, is patronising and should be dropped. Bill must also be changed to be trans inclusive. #repealedThe8th #thisisme
— Mick Barry TD (@MickBarryTD) October 4, 2018
Trans men can self evidently get pregnant.
— Paul Murphy 🏳️⚧️ (@paulmurphy_TD) April 19, 2018
It’s why they have gender and racial quotas for politics – under normal circumstances, you’d just vote for the candidate who was best. But that would be “unequal.”
https://twitter.com/Ben_Scallan/status/1370320378225164288
https://twitter.com/Ben_Scallan/status/1370321022579265538
Lost in the n-word controversy was Leo Varadkar’s reply in which he said the civil service was “very white” and there should be targets and special recruitment drives for people of colour. He said it’s also important for kids to see PoC principals, judges & leadership figures
— Seán Defoe (@SeanDefoe) June 11, 2020
They are committed to the idea of “equality” come hell or high water – even where it doesn’t make sense.
Any excuse to shout on camera, I suppose.