This reference and retreat to “values” or “our core values” is something worth a bit more thought. It triggers and touches on something that makes me bridle whenever I hear it.

As I wrote on Saturday: —

𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 “𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐬” 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐲 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐭 𝐬𝐦𝐮𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬  𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐯𝐢𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐨𝐧 𝐚 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐫, 𝐞𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐬.

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐬𝐧𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐲 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟𝐬, 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐬, 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐫 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐥.

𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐒𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐀𝐫𝐦𝐲 𝐊𝐧𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐮𝐭-𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐯𝐢𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐞.

We all intuitively know and understand what is meant by values in the Australian and Western context mean.

Mateship, loyalty, a fair go, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, fair dinkum, — we say what we think — equality of opportunity and commitment to the rule of law, to name a few.

But when people, playing vague and dumb, pretending not to know, ask that about or make reference to values, we immediately know where the conversation is headed and it’s time to move on because you’re about to be embroiled in an argument over cultural and moral relativism.

Think, how they’ve tried to inject values and moral relativism in to any discussion comparing the moral turpitude and barbarity of Hamas with Israel’s right to surgical retaliation

It’s quite apparent that for many years there has been, as part of the cultural wars and the attack on Western civilisation and Christianity, an agenda to erode, break down and redefine our commonly understood, core values.

The main drivers in this have been the creation of a confected sense of entitlement and victimhood derived from and turbo charged by, identity politics and the all embracing virtues of the left, tolerance and diversity as embodied in the holy doctrine of DEI.

These twin virtues hold that all cultures are equal, when they’re clearly not, and therefore all cultural practices and concomitant values are also equal and entitled to respect and automatically accepted and adopted as part of our core values without scrutiny, comment, judgement or criticism.

There is no latitude or tolerance for total rejection of any or all such values no matter how offensive. This is where tolerance gets you.

As Karl Popper observed, “𝐮𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭. 𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲”

An example of this this casual, redefinition and race too the bottom of the values barrel is how the New York Times several years ago decided to refer to Female Genital Mutilation as genital cutting because FGM is too “culturally loaded”.

I await the ABC to follow suit. Maybe they already have. I never watch.