Posted on

Pouring SALT Into Open Wounds

Salt as sodium chloride is a necessity.  SALT as the State and Local Tax deduction is a luxury, and an irritating one at that — like pouring salt into open wounds if you live anywhere that didn’t give Hillary 60% of the vote.

One need not stroll into the culture war to be smacked with evidence of our great political and social divide.  The tax code is a lively arena for conflict. It is a monstrous affair, littered with baubles and beads, overlapping into almost all human activity,  and encrusted with boundless perks for politically privileged courtesans.  Not all tax code gimmes, though, are equal.  One – the deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) – has evolved into an icon of worship in blue state jurisdictions with a penchant for taxing and spending their way to heaven.  Take it away and they behave like alcoholics being forced into cold turkey treatment.

For low-tax locales,  they receive little or no benefit for their reluctance to turn their state tax offices into Soviet Lubyankas.  Their sole compensation is the exasperation of knowing that their self-restraint makes the subsidy more “affordable” to the public servants in hyper-taxed, Democrat-friendly environs.  People outside and between the urban and bi-coastal romper rooms know it.  It’s galling for them to know that the federal tax code incentivizes tax promiscuity.

SALT was born of the Civil War’s 1862 Revenue Act and the 19th century’s infatuation with sticking it to the super rich. (4)  Common terms  for the fat-cats that stretches across the last couple of centuries are “buccaneer capitalists” or “robber barons”.  It’s easy to find antique characterizations that align with the modern left’s preconceptions.

Cyrus Field, Jay Gould, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Russell Sage on bags of millions, “Puck” magazine, 1883.
John D. Rockefeller as “king”, 1901.

The excitement led to the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913, which legalized the fed’s tax on income.  The federal tax on income was reified into the Revenue Act of 1913, and the state and local tax deduction (SALT) tagged along.

The archaic justification for SALT was the fear of the federal government swallowing up all tax revenue, leaving little for streets and public safety.  SALT was thought to preserve a slice of the cash cow for city hall.  How quaint.

A more modern pretext is the avoidance of double taxation.  You know, the same dollar of income being slammed by the locals and then hit by the feds.  But what isn’t subjected to double/triple/quadruple taxation in our own tax Leviathan according to this logic?  Think about it.  For today, the excuse becomes less than a pointless gesture.

Look below at the growth of our federal tax monster by page volume.  (5)

Does anyone claim that multiple taxation isn’t at work here?  There are so many ways to tax income, and, when you’re done, tax the things that were purchased with that taxed dollar.  We don’t even need the income to be from human beings.  We extract the pound of flesh from ghosts in the form of businesses.  The requirement of breathing isn’t necessary.

Let me count the ways beyond the tax on personal income.

  • Estate taxes, assessments on your assets after you’ve left the land of the living.  Please remember, that stuff was most likely purchased with already taxed dollars.
  • Corporate income taxes, the tax on a business as if it were real human being.  These taxes are layered on top of all the income taxes generated by all of the buying and selling involved in doing business.
  • Tariffs and duties, the products being taxed at point of entry.  After facing this hit, these products will generate income to be taxed once again as estate, corporate, and income taxes.
  • Sales and excise taxes.  These extractions are mostly generated from spending originating in previously taxed income.
  • Ditto for property taxes.

Our whole tax system is a series of overlays of double/triple/quadruple taxation.  What’s the relevance of attempting to excuse state and local taxes from something that is so generic to our, or any, tax code?

If you believe the existence of “double taxation” is hyped – which some people do – the case for SALT teeters further.  A good portion of tax dollars to different levels of government goes to pay for different services.  Tax dollars to the feds for national defense aren’t the same dollars as those going to the state to fulfill a state’s policy of equalizing budgets among a state’s school districts.  It’s only when services overlap between layers of government do we run the risk of a taxed dollar being hit again.  The deduction purports to dodge something that doesn’t really happen in the first place.

Even more convoluted contentions have been summoned to keep SALT.  One mind-boggling claim is the belief, absent the deduction, state and local spending would be “sub-optimal”.  Wrap your head around that one.  Here’s the concoction: stir into the witch’s cauldron tax incentives to pay for more or less public services and add someone’s ideological preferences, and out comes the right amount of local spending.  Allegedly, SALT is the ingredient to go “optimal”.

Is it making any sense?  Only if you believe in magic.  The thing rides on the mystical power to glean SALT’s ability to encourage the funding of more local government services, services that might increasingly benefit non-residents.  Is that “optimal”?  I don’t know, though it smells fishy.  Strip away “optimal” and, in reality, you are left with a simple local decision to fund a service.  Nothing more.  Whether it aligns with a pundit’s conception of “optimal” is  meaningless.  In reality, SALT is the noise in the calculation to finance a park.

If the mystical sound of “optimal” doesn’t sound convincing, a second line of trenches in defense of SALT is thrown up by blue-state advocates when they contend that they get fleeced more by the federal government and, therefore, are more deserving of a bigger break.  They trot out such crude numbers as the return on federal taxes paid  – i.e., residents’ taxes paid out and federal spending coming in, as in this chart appearing in a 2015 issue of The Atlantic (7):

Deep blue, Hillary/Bernie-loving sanctuaries as New York and California reside at the bottom of the chart.  They get less than a $1.00 for every one sent to the feds.  In contrast, redder-than-red South Carolina gets a whopping $7.87 back. (7)  Are some states riding on the federal teat as they keep their tax burdens low?  Are red states hypocrites?  Are blue state victims and therefore deserving of SALT?

The numbers in the “return on federal investment” chart are too raw to be of much value.  Local circumstances muddy the picture.  Number one on the list of federal contributors is military installations.  Northeast states aren’t likely to be the source of cheap real estate for sprawling tank exercises and bombing runs.  A state like California ironically is (Does the Mojave Desert remind you of anything?), and so are states populated by now-posthumous “yellow dog Democrats”and represented by long since gone-to-room-temperature congressional mandarins: South/North Carolina, Texas, etc.

Marine armored vehicles at Twentynine Palms, Ca.

The presence of federal defense spending in a state has much to do with historical inertia.  Those states long in the game have the advantage.  It’s a mixture of red and blue states.  Of the top ten receiving the lion’s share of the defense pie, 4 are solid blue states (California, Maryland, Washington, and Massachusetts);  2 are purple (Virginia and Pennsylvania); 4 are red (Texas, Florida, Georgia, and Alabama).  (9)  Nothing remarkable here since the federal pipeline was long established before the current progressive/left mania came to make blue states “blue”. (10)

Hampton Roads with Newport News, Norfolk, and Portsmouth. It’s the location for major military installations as the Norfolk Naval Shipyard.
USS John Kennedy at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, 1983.

Looking at it from the perspective of the importance of the federal defense spending on a state’s economy (GDP), 4 of the top jurisdictions are solidly blue (Hawaii, DC, Maryland, and Maine) and the rest are purple or red (Va., Alabama, Alaska, Miss., Kentucky, Arizona).  (9)   Once again, a blend.  Regardless of a state’s political hue, Pentagon dollars mostly go to facilities that predate ’41 Pearl Harbor. (10)

So, what do we have?  We have some blue states with a large infusion of federal defense money, coexisting with a tax-spend-regulation frenzy, all the while screeching about the loss of SALT.  Suddenly, the picture ain’t so clear.

Anyway, the scramble by localities for bases resembles the hustle for the next Google server farm, and should be viewed in that light – not as a “federal handout”.  Defense is an industry, and like any industry, it brings paychecks to be spent in the state.    It works the same as an Amazon distribution center.  If it adds to the state’s coffers in the same way as a Google or Amazon facility, so what.  A state can’t present itself as a victim of the federal tax monster as it shuns, or is incapable of attracting, industry – federal or private.

A growing state economy from expanding industries means a growing state tax base and a decreasing bite for each taxpaying resident … under normal mathematical rules.  Hence, low tax states.  High tax states punish economic activity, restrict the role of business/industry taxes to the state’s balance sheet, and create a greater reliance on personal tax extractions.  Up goes their state-driven personal tax load, up goes the desire to hide the gouging through SALT, and down goes the federal dollar influx.  The result is the funky calculation called the “return on taxpayer investment”.

And what about a state’s inflationary character that drives incomes and tax receipts?  That’s the other side of the “return on taxpayer investment” equation: the money that flows out of the state.  Yes, there is such a thing as a cost-of-living and income feedback loop.  As a state’s cost of living rises, so does the income to keep up; and as incomes rise, so does the cost of living.  Are state policies compelling an increase in the cost of living, and necessitating a higher income to maintain residence?

To no surprise, according to one measure, mega-blue and high tax states like California and New York nowhere appear on the list of the cheapest states to live.  Pride of place goes to 9 red states (Texas, et al) and 1 purple (Michigan).  (11)

On the flip side, blue states occupy near the top in the necessity for its people to shell out lots of cash to continue to live there.  (13) Two of the big stimulants are housing and energy costs.  Both are highly sensitive to a state’s public policies.  Environmental, land use, and growth control measures wreak havoc on the cost of living.  Add “prevailing wage” inflators to the mix and you have a recipe for escalating wage demands.  Plug those inflated income numbers into a progressive tax code and a river of money flows to the state capital and DC.

Californios, take a look at your electricity bill for a familiar inflator.  All that  “green” energy is expensive, and it shows.  See below. (12)

Utility rates are one of the favorite social engineering tools of the green lobby.  In many blue states, the presence of an all-powerful green lobby defines what it means to be blue.  Living in a 3 bedroom/2 bath house in the Central Valley of California means a $400/mo. electricity tab, unless you knuckle under to the state’s commissars and load your roof with solar panels.

The price of everything inexorably climbs.  An inflated utility bill component is factored into everything you buy.  No wonder a comfortable existence in these locales requires more green of the kind with presidents on them.

Democrat bastions don’t seem to be aware of the trap that they created.  It begins with an infatuation for progressive tax codes.  Then, greenie fascinations raise the price of existence.  Lump onto the process the attempt to raise wages by ukase (minimum and prevailing wage law), add a plethora of regulations to assuage any chic cause that comes down the pike, and the pitchfork-wielding peasants end up demanding more in their paychecks.  As they do so, they’ll be trapped into higher tax rates to artificially inflate the flow of cash to the feds.  At this juncture, there will be no shortage of number-crunchers to produce a kind of mathematical demagoguery to justify a special perk for the victims.

What started out as an honest gesture in the dawn of income taxation is a higher mountain of contradictions today.  The old pretext, along with these more modern ones, is baloney.  CPA status isn’t required to figure it out.  The real reason is something more simple.  After 104 years, people have grown attached to SALT, whether it makes sense or not.  In this sense, SALT is like today’s opioid epidemic.  An addict begins with raiding the medicine cabinet, a dependency develops and grows, and the person ends up as a client of the drug cartels.  Like an addiction, entire financial lives become wrapped around ages-old tax provisions.  Threats to take it away lead to the political equivalent of withdrawals.

Heebie-jeebies can erupt at any time from a blue-state anybody.  D’s we expect to be afflicted, but R’s aren’t immune from the spasms brought on by the threat to take away the perk.  It’s simply a blue or purple state thing – aka tax-happy jurisdictions – no matter the partisan color of their advocates.

Rep.’s Peter King (R-NY) and Tom MacArthur (R-NJ) threaten opposition to tax reform that includes the elimination of SALT.

Yesterday’s absurdity has morphed into today’s “necessity”.  As such, the inmates of tax-happy jurisdictions haven’t limited their defense to now-discredited claims.  They’ve invented additional arguments based on prudence.  Come to think of it, really, it’s the prudence of the addict.

The abolition of SALT, it is asserted, would wreak havoc on a state’s bond rating.  In essence, blue-state defenders are admitting that without the sweetener of SALT their residents would seek to be residents elsewhere.  Probably true.  Without SALT, residents would be exposed to the full effect of their blue-state’s tax mania.  The logic: out flows an alarming amount of the tax base, down goes the ability to make good on their bonds.  Elementary, my dear Watson.

Understandable, probably true, but as a defense, it’s bunkum.  The blue-state perk shields a state’s residents from the full effect of sky-high taxation while simultaneously making it easier for the state’s tax collectors to have a crowd to fleece.  The image recurs of a vampire with a herd of human livestock to feed upon.  Drugging the victims with SALT to make the experience more tolerable isn’t a valid justification for bleeding them white.  If they were sober, they’d flee like hell.  The argument for medicating the victims is an argument for exsanguination (sever loss of blood), without the slightest recognition about whether they should have their hemoglobin stolen in the first place.

Instead, sticking with the metaphor, wouldn’t it be wiser to start a campaign to eradicate vampires by recruiting an army of priests armed with wooden stakes?  In our case, cloning an army of Arthur Laffers would do the trick.  The effort would be expedited by a clear-headed confrontation with the horror among the patsies.  Eliminating SALT might produce outcomes such as an exodus (and a run on U-Haul rentals), mob exterminations of blue-state Republicans, and/or the patrons of Starbucks turning into icon-smashing peasants as they march to the homes and offices of the state’s revenuers and their abettors.  Maybe all three.

Number 2 on the probabilities list is a very real possibility: the extermination of blue-state Republicans.  Blue-state Republicans are already an endangered species.  SALT might make them go the way of Martha, the last known passenger pigeon who died in the Cincinnati Zoo in 1914.

The fate awaiting blue-state Republicans if SALT is repealed?

Or so it is argued.  That might be the short term effect.  Beyond one election cycle, after the hypothetical  wipeout, the residents would be accosted with more tax-crazed “public servants”, further intensifying the state’s slide.  Don’t forget, your most likely choice on the ballot is between a tax lunatic (a “D”)  or  a now dispirited R.  After multiple waves of tax bingeing, an alcoholic’s bottom would be reached.  Then there’d be sobriety and a cleaning up – i.e., a return to tax sanity.  A short term loss might be acceptable if it results in a long term fiscal clean-and-sober.

But try selling the logic to a soon-to-be-unemployed Republican legislator in a hostile state.  Yet, is the preservation of his job a sufficient justification for keeping an iniquitous tax perk?  The rationale worked to keep the antebellum South married to slavery.  The South’s entire way of life , they cried, couldn’t survive the loss of their human property.  The argument was as dubious then as it is today in its latest incarnation for SALT.  The only difference in the 2 scenarios is the object of veneration and preservation.

While the tax perk may preserve a few “R” politicos, it continues to do violence to equity among the our sovereign states.  States that prudently restrain their state Leviathans also have modest tax regimes.  They receive little, if any, benefit from the perk.  There’s just too little to deduct to reduce a taxpayer’s overall burden.

The calculus is reversed in most blue states.  Nanny states are expensive, and so is their tax bite.  The deduction is a salve to a gaping wound.  Not surprisingly, it is coveted by tax hells and viewed contemptuously by places not located anywhere along Dante’s descent through tax “Inferno”.

There you have it: love of SALT is synonymous with jurisdictions defined by words such as spendthrift, irresponsible, gouging, and excessive.  For those locales not so enamored by SALT, words like prudence, modest, and limited apply.  Put the two sentences together.  SALT enables all that should be avoided in a universe with a reasonable relationship to reality.

It is, literally and figuratively, pouring salt into the open wound between the states.  It has no rationale other than to make the consequences of  irresponsibility less felt.  But that isn’t reasonable, is it?

RogerG

 

Bibliography and sources:

  1. “Congress might eliminate California state and local tax deductions. Here’s a look at the numbers”, Kurt Snibbe, Orange County Register, 10/27/2017,   http://www.ocregister.com/2017/10/27/congress-might-eliminate-california-state-and-local-tax-deductions-heres-a-look-at-the-numbers/
  2. “Which Places Benefit Most From State and Local Tax Deductions?”, Alan Coe, Tax Foundation, 4/27/2017,   https://taxfoundation.org/map-state-and-local-deductions/
  3. “The State and Local Tax Deduction: A Primer”, Jared Walczak, Tax Foundation, 3/15/2017,  https://taxfoundation.org/state-and-local-tax-deduction-primer/
  4. For a modern leftist rendition of the demographic, see: “Michael Novak’s Ethics of Buccaneer Capitalism”, Frank Cocozelli, 10/1/2007, Daily Kos,  https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/10/1/392711/-
  5. “Look at how many pages are in the federal tax code”, Jason Russell, Washington Examiner, 4/15/2016,   http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/look-at-how-many-pages-are-in-the-federal-tax-code/article/2563032
  6. “Which States Rely the Most on Federal Aid?”, Morgan Scarboro, Tax Foundation, 1/11/17,  https://taxfoundation.org/states-rely-most-federal-aid/
  7. “Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers?”, John Tierney, 5/5/2014, The Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/
  8. This article was cited in the above piece: “2017’s Most & Least Federally Dependent States”, John S Kiernan, Senior Writer & Editor, 4/21/2017, WalletHub,   https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/  .
  9. “MILITARY’S IMPACT ON STATE ECONOMIES”, National Conference of State Legislatures, 2/21/2017,  http://www.ncsl.org/research/military-and-veterans-affairs/military-s-impact-on-state-economies.aspx
  10. Virginia’s Hampton Roads has 20 military facilities, many date back to the Civil War and before.  For one compilation refer to wikipedia, “Hampton Roads”,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hampton_Roads#U.S._military
  11. “Top 10 States With the Lowest Cost of Living”, Rick LeBlanc, The Balance, 5/16/2017,  https://www.thebalance.com/states-with-lowest-cost-of-living-4137935
  12. “Electricity Prices Rise for 30 States, But Some State Leaders Want Them Even Higher”, Heath Knakmuhs, Senior Director, Policy for the Global Energy Institute, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 4/8/2016,   https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/electricity-prices-rise-30-states-some-state-leaders-want-them-even-higher
  13. “See how your state scores for living costs”, Natasha Sporn, MSN: Money, 12/22/2016,  https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/personalfinance/see-how-your-state-scores-for-living-costs/ss-AAlEaoG#image=31
Posted on

Posting a comment

FYI: If you wish to leave a comment, simply click on the title of the article as it appears on the left , or go to “Recent Posts” or “Archives” on the right for the article.  Click on the article.  When the article comes up, at the bottom of the article, normally below “Bibliography and sources” and a Facebook text box, there is a “Leave a Reply” section with a “Comment” box. Type your comment in the box, enter your name and email address, and click “Post comment”. There will be a delay as I review the comment before allowing it to be posted. That’s to keep everything honest and clean.

RogerG

Posted on

Ban-o-mania

A current  incarnation of the urban sophisticate is the “hipster”. If I may be excused for engaging in a loose generalization, like other versions of the breed, they are equal parts confident, media-savvy, and clueless.  Prime examples of the cross-fertilization of fashion and politics, they are susceptible to pleas to prohibit almost anything presented as irritating and outside of their lifestyle experience.  They are one for the constituencies for ban-o-mania.

Don’t like something?  Ban it!  Why ban it?  Simple: it’s too jarring to the mind of your average urban and self-anointed sophisticate.   That mind is riddled with the prejudices, half-baked ideas, and unexamined assumptions of a person limited to the secular equivalent of a mountaintop monastery … without the serious study of real monks (“echo chamber” keeps popping into my mind).  Ban-o-mania reigns supreme as the preferred option for anyone within the materialist abbey, while adversely affecting everyone  not so mentally and geographically insulated.

The locations for the secular monasteries generally matches the 2016 election map.  Below is a precinct-by-precinct rendering of the 2016 election results. (1)

2016 election results by precinct. Blue is for the Democratic candidate, red for the Republican.

The blue dots on the map are outposts serving as the intersection of radical chic in culture (some might call it “lifestyle”) and politics.  The journalist and essayist Tom Wolfe had a great time back in 1970 with an exposé of cosmopolitan affections for radical left politics of the time. (2)

New York Magazine cover, 1970, with Wolfe’s “Radical Chic” essay.
Leonard Bernstein (seated at center), his wife Felicia Montealegre (left) and Don Cox (standing), Field Marshal of the Black Panther Party in the Bernsteins’ 13 room penthouse on Park Avenue in Manhattan, January 14, 1970

I won’t speak to the map’s much rarer blue blobs – I suspect these to be mostly concentrations of post-1965 Immigration Act ethnic and racial minorities and Indian reservations- but today’s metropolitan islands have persisted in the habit exemplified in Leonard Bernstein’s fête to the Black Panther Party.

Though, a vocabulary update to “radical chic” is in order.  Yesterday’s “radical chic” is today’s “cosmocialist”, a marriage of “cosmopolitan” and “left-liberal”, typically among our tech elites but also littered throughout most of our corporate and academic boardrooms (hosannas to Reihan Salam for bringing the term to my attention [3]).  The “left-liberal” side of the equation is an infatuation with imperial environmentalism, high taxes, and almost anything “anti-poverty”.  “Cosmopolitan” is a reference to suspicion about regulation (except, of course, of the enviro variety, a huge contradiction), big labor (even though the teachers’ unions are 100% socially and 80% politically aligned) , and a fondness for open borders and multicultural everything.

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg (left) with California AG Kamala Harris in 2015. (Reuters photo: Robert Galbraith)

Oh, let’s not forget their contempt for traditional institutions.  The Bible as the Word of God, Christianity as understood for millennia, marriage, and morality don’t stand a chance in these micro-universes.  Currently, transgenderism has pride of place.  As a matter of fact, they have conjured “equality” into behavioral license.  Any coupling and self-concept among and within humans must be granted sanction by the state.  Those who disagree face ostracization, loss of livelihood, and censorship.  Is confinement next?  Has it already started?

Now we are well on our way to ban-o-mania – the frenzy to prohibit counter-thought, and counter-things.  If only Orwell was here to see it.

It’s become next to impossible to talk about these kinds of things without mentioning California, ground zero for cosmocialist social and political tinkering.  Bans on things previously considered innocuous are becoming increasingly common in this political zoo.  Examples are many.  The state couldn’t refrain from an assault on, of all things … free plastic shopping bags.  The usual suspects crafted Prop 67 – the always fashionable environmental lobby – and the always fashionable electorate, dominated by its always fashionable coast, approved it in 2016.

Grocery shopping in the not-so-golden state instantly changed from this:

to this:

Bring your own bags: filthy, torn, too small,  not enough, or spill out cash to buy some more.  People in the zoo will adapt, no doubt.  But grocery shopping instantly became a bit more of an annoying experience.

Another example, this time from the elected “geniuses” in the state’s madhouse, called a “legislature”: marketed as an animal welfare measure, the inmates passed AB 485.  It would ban the sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits if they didn’t come from shelters.  In essence, due to the way the law is written and it’s probably effects, say “bye, bye” to the ritual of taking the daughter down to the pet store to buy a puppy.  For Patrick O’Donnel (D-Long Beach), the bill’s author, pet militants like him can’t envision themselves doing it, so ban anyone else from doing it.  Such is the auto-reflex of the ban-o-maniac.  The legislation’s fate is in the lap of Gov. Jerry Brown, another cosmocialist. (4)

Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell, D-Long Beach, and rescue dogs.

For the cosmocialist, dogs are cute; Christian fundamentalists are not.  The progressive fatwa against them has already begun.  With dim-witted sleight of hand, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego) sought to impose her social opinions on the entire faith community in California.  Through legislation, she tried to nullify the Supreme Court’s Hosanna-Tabor decision that buttressed a church’s religious freedom exemptions to government’s contraceptive and abortion mandates. (5)  She preposterously claimed that the Court didn’t say what it said.  For the Court, religious freedom reaches out to longstanding church functions beyond the sanctuary.  She didn’t get the message.  Fletcher’s logic is the equivalent of a child’s attempt to make a parent’s admonishment of “no” into “yes”.

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher (D-San Diego)

If mangling the Court didn’t convince, she tried the gender equality angle.  For her, the moral code in the Torah, Quran, and the Old and New Testaments must be sacrificed because a woman can show the results of a sleepover with her boyfriend.  Since women get pregnant, and men can’t (there’s no place to put the fetus), scripture must now go into the garbage disposal.  The minister can preach God’s law from the pulpit – I think – but, according to her, he shouldn’t be able to do anything about single moms and womanizers staffing his school (Was she trying to improve the job prospects for Bill Clinton?).  And this passes for serious thought in the California legislature?

A reprieve for Baptists was granted by Gov. Brown’s veto of Fletcher’s abortion to logic.  Don’t think for a moment that she and her compatriots have given up.

The Old Testament, evangelicals, pet stores, and traditional institutions are verboten to the tin-eared metro-chic.  Similarly verboten is a healthy skepticism about wild-eyed climate-change apocalyptics.  They won’t shrink from criminalizing, or subjecting to civil forfeiture, anyone who happens to make the mistake of conjoining a position of authority with cynicism about enviro end-times.  Metroplex electorates appear to have affection for Maduro-type (of Venezuela fame) DA’s and AG’s to accomplish the desired end.

Former California Attorney General Kamala Harris in September 2015.

Not wishing to leave California out of the scrum, former AG Kamala Harris (now Senator) joined the AG’s of New York, Eric Schneiderman, and Virgin Islands, Claude Walker, and Massachusetts, Maura Healey, to form an Inquisition to ferret out “counter-revolutionaries” to Al Gore’s fashionable doctrine.  It’s the latest craze sweeping the blue-dot jurisdictions: spend millions of dollars to haul into court the petroleum industry for questioning the supreme leader.  (6)  Ban-o-mania encompasses the campaign to silence opinions.

For everyone else without a corporate lawyer, loss of tenure, livelihood, or excommunication awaits.  It’s a reincarnation of Mao’s Cultural Revolution.  They’re making Mao proud … if the old bloody tyrant was alive today.

Public humiliation by Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976).
Cultural Revolution poster. Smashing the old to make way for the new.

The same is true for guns.  Guns are as gauche to the chic denizens of metropolis as the climate views of anyone not in tune with the fashionable orthodoxy.  Not surprisingly, respect for the 2nd Amendment fades as fewer and fewer people among the self-described “betters” in urban America have knowledge and experience with the things.  This is their mental picture of gun owners, a product of too much late-night tv viewing (late-night comedians, SNL).

Yes, it’s a plain old prejudice, but it matches their ignorance.  They live a life without firearms and so conclude nobody needs them.  It’s easy for urban electorates to grant the state’s vast prosecutorial powers to AG’s giddy with the prospect of hanging a few gun manufacturers.  The aforementioned Maura Healey of Massachusetts set her sights on Glock.

Massachusetts AG Maura Healey with Eric Schneiderman, NY AG, 2016.

Whatever their rationale, come on, it boils down to, “We don’t own them; therefore, you can’t either”.  Really, lifestyle is their governing north star.

The corporate boardroom is as populated with hyper-sensitive ban-o-maniacs as deep blue state attorney general offices.  The tekkie industry is particularly infected with them.  “Caution” is the watchword for any true free-thinker in these occupational habitats.  Just as Brendan Eich, co-founder of Mozilla, learned in 2014.  He was run out of his own company when it came to light that he contributed $1,000 to the California Prop 8 campaign to defend traditional marriage in 2008.  The lefty hive in Mozilla and Silicon Valley swarmed at the knowledge.

Brendan Eich

Ideological cleansing targets anyone outside the metro groupthink.  In Eich’s case, he cavorted with those who think that marriage is by nature heterosexual, and can only be homosexual if sodomy is accepted as the act of consummation.  Of course, consummation could be dispensed with, but then marriage is reduced to a state-sanctioned friendship pact with the option of wide open conjugal behavior.  The whole concept of “gay marriage” enters the grammatical territory of “non-sequitur”.  Such thinking, though, is assigned to the Klan in the blinkered imaginations of cosmocialists.

The lefty piranha weren’t satisfied with the corpse of Brendan Eich.  They will always need to feed on anyone with the temerity to express a different point of view.  James Damore fell into the infected waters at Google when he sought to explain the small presence of women in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) industries in words different from the politically correct orthodoxy. (8)

James Damore and Google

He presented the proposition that women are underrepresented due to the fact that fewer girls have inclinations for STEM, not because of some overhanging pall of misogyny. (9)   The snowflakes erupted and the impromptu inquisitors at Google went on a rampage.  Damore found himself out of a job, fired by Google CEO Sundar Pichai.

Steve Jobs juxtaposed to Google’s Sundar Pichai amid the Damore firing, by LA street artist Sabo.

The “diversity” police went into action mode to defend the sanctity of the party doctrine.  Every one of the tech biggies has a Ministry of Diversity Truth.  They sprang in defense of Google.  At Google, its commissar is Danielle Brown.  Intel has commissar Barbara Whye.  Maxine Williams is installed at Facebook’s commissariat.  Helping the biggies is a nomenklatura of consultants.   Paradigm’s Joelle Emerson is an example.  All of them are the keepers of the diversity holy grail.

Paradigm Consultancy’s Joelle Emerson

The whole diversity shtick is profoundly open to question.  Yet, it is accepted as the closest thing to a self-evident truth among a class of people who have long ago rejected such truth when Thomas Jefferson in 1776 tried using the concept.  Their’s is a pseudo-science meant to perform an ideological function: widely propagate the dogma while simultaneously swamping disagreement.  They are the practitioners of the ban-o-mania of thought.

The tennis aficionado John McEnroe recently stepped in it when he declared what is obviously true.  Men and women aren’t physical equals on the tennis court.  For that, this time it was the equality police that leapt into action.

John McEnroe appearing before the press about controversial remarks.

McEnroe offhandedly stated in response to a question that Serena Williams would be ranked 700 among professional men’s tennis players. (10)  Boy did that get the ant hill all abuzz.  But for the equality commissariat, there was the disconcerting face-off in 1998 with a 203rd ranked men’s player, Karsten Braasch of Germany.  The Williams sisters were teenagerly brash and over-confident, bragging in the ATP men’s office that they could whip any tour player ranked in the top 200.

Karsten Braasch (center) and the Williams sisters at the 1998 Australian Open.

Braasch, ranked 203 at the time, overheard the remark and took up the challenge in a lark.  After playing a round of morning golf, Braasch arrived to play each sister one set.  The event attracted quite a crowd.  During changeovers, he smoked a cigarette and drank a beer.  He bested Serena 6-1 and Venus 6-2.  The Williams’ points had all the appearance of gifts. (11)

Was McEnroe all that wrong?

There is a sense of unreality in the blue-dot world.  The here-and-now must be made to conform to ideological fantasies.  In movies, women punch out burly men with skeletal and muscle structures that would collapse on contact if it didn’t occur before cameras and with the assistance of computer assisted graphics.  We might be able to accept these illusions since, after all, it’s the movies.  But the fantasies don’t dissipate after leaving the theater.  There’s legions of prosecutors, politicians, consultants, and academics devoted to making the movie unreality a real life reality.

To make it happen, massive mind control and social engineering are required.  All the tools of ban-o-mania are enlisted in the effort.  Ostracize, prosecute, legislate, fire, and propagandize (the Bolsheviks called it “reeducation”) anyone not in conformance with the cosmocialist zeitgeist.  The sad part is their push to take the campaign national.  Their appetites won’t be satiated with dominance over metropolis.

Watch out red America.  You’re one election away from being forced into living and thinking like a Greenwich Village hipster.  You may not know it, but you have a metaphorical bulls-eye planted on your forehead.

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  1. The 2016 precinct map was garnered from “Creating a National Precinct Map”, 4/30/2017,  https://decisiondeskhq.com/data-dives/creating-a-national-precinct-map/
  2. “Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny’s”, Tom Wolfe, New York Magazine, June 8, 1970, http://nymag.com/news/features/46170/
  3. Reihan Salam is executive editor of National Review, contributing editor of National Affairs, advisor to the Energy Innovation Reform Project and Niskanen Institute.  “Cosmocialist” first came to my attention in his article, “Democrats and Plutocrats”, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/451463/democrats-silicon-valley-rich-entrepreneurs-changing-partys-working-class-image
  4. “California pet stores may be required to only sell rescue animals if this bill passes”, Courtney Tompkins, The Los Angeles Daily News, 9/15/2017,   http://www.dailynews.com/2017/09/15/california-pet-stores-may-be-required-to-only-sell-rescue-animals-if-this-bill-passes/
  5. “Anti-discrimination measure or blow to religious freedom? California bill sparks debate on employer codes of conduct”, Melanie Mason, Los Angeles Times, 3/29/2017,   http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-an-anti-discrimination-measure-or-blow-1490826757-htmlstory.html
  6. “Left-Wing AGs Are Playing Politics with the Law”, Jim Copeland and Rafael A. Mangual, National Review Online, 9/29/2016,  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440542/state-attorneys-general-political-abuses-power
  7. “Mozilla CEO resignation raises free-speech issues”, USA Today, 4/4/2014,  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resignation-free-speech/7328759/
  8. “Google Episode Sends a Message: Diversity Is a Tough Sell in Silicon Valley”, Georgia Wells and Yoree Koh, WSJ, 8/10/17, https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-episode-sends-a-message-diversity-is-a-tough-sell-in-silicon-valley-1502383625; also at http://www.4-traders.com/INTEL-CORPORATION-4829/news/Google-Episode-Sends-a-Message-Diversity-Is-a-Tough-Sell-in-Silicon-Valley-24924773/.
  9. The complete text of James Damore’s offending email can be found here:  “Here’s the Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google [Updated]”, Kate Conger, Gizmodo, 8/5/2017,  http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320/amp
  10. “John McEnroe: Serena Williams world’s best female tennis player but would rank ‘like 700’ among men”, Scott Allen, The Chicago Tribune, 6/25/2017,   http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/ct-john-mcenroe-serena-williams-tennis-20170625-story.html
  11. The episode is recounted here: “Serena Williams once challenged men’s player at Australian Open”, Sandra Harwitt, USA Today, 1/21/2017, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/tennis/aus/2017/01/21/serena-williams-nicole-gibbs-australian-open/96876832/
Posted on

The Bluster of “We Need to Make Sure This Never Happens Again.”

A chant applied to the Las Vegas massacre, almost anything bad involving guns, almost anything bad involving kids, and almost anything that’ll agitate the news cycle for more than a day.

The mass shooting in Las Vegas around 10 pm, Sunday, 10/1/2017.

Lately, we’ve developed a nervous tic nearly every time an incident of mayhem invades our tranquility.  It won’t be long before a grandstanding politico trots out in front of a mike and cameras to announce, “We have to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”  The fact is, it will.  So what is up with the nonsense declaration?  It’s the intro to the politicization of tragedy.

It begins with the unquestioning belief in the magical healing powers of legislation.  Someone demands that we “do something”, and “do something” means “write a law”.  Encapsulate the cure in a 20,000-word statute.  What’s up with that?

Has anyone ever taken a look at the “geniuses” who’ll craft the cure?  Sorry, high-wattage thinkers don’t heavily populate the upper rungs of those who play the game of politics (i.e. acquiring power, or getting elected), especially on the lefty side of the political spectrum.  They may know the art of gaining power, but once in power we quickly learn that they really don’t know or understand much.  They’re fumbling, and sometimes dangerous, empty suits.

Nancy Pelosi, (D) San Francisco, Democrat majority leader.

They normally trot out their ready-made, off-the-shelf nostrums.  They don’t even have to be relevant to the issue at hand.  Just plug ’em in anyway.  In a recent CNN townhall after the Las Vegas shooting, Nancy Pelosi (D, San Francisco) quickly pivoted to her current favorite: background checks.  The question directed to her was about actions to prevent the Las Vegas shooting.  Her answer was nonsense.  Do we have background checks?  Yes.  Would of any of their proposed changes to them make any difference?  No.

Simply put, she didn’t answer the question.  Besides, her response wasn’t pertinent.  The killer, Stephen Paddock, passed background checks as he went about building his arsenal.  It’s not that he didn’t go through any.  The guy simply flew way under everyone’s radar, including his family’s.

On those “background checks”, all relevant records to a gun purchase are digitized with instant access for any government agent sitting time zones away from the site of the purchase.  It doesn’t take long to do a check.  States don’t vary that much in doing the look-see, only in the amount of arbitrary inconvenience for the buyer with their waiting periods.  Nothing much is accomplished with waiting periods; much is accomplished in irritation.

Still, even with the Democrats’ background enhancements, Paddock would fly under those too.

And with Pelosi and her gang’s proposals, she’d effectively put “dead” to due process in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments for gun buyers.  The Constitution is quite inconvenient for those in a hurry to win the political brass ring.

So, what’s she up to?  She’s up to politics, gaining the majority in Congress, and impatient in imposing blue America’s values on the rest of the country.

I could bore you to tears with examples of politicos and their love affair with silliness.  Here’s congresswomen Carolyn McCarthy, (D) New York, back in 2013 unable to describe a gun item (barrel shroud) mentioned in a bill that she supported.

You think that she’s the only one?  Here’s 2 New York state politicos intent on their own bans.

Incendiary bullets are “heat-seeking”?

The confusion among the left about semi-automatic and automatic guns is rampant.  The mixup extends to the progressive punditry.  CNN’s Don Lemmon steps into it.

The ignorance is pervasive.  The bulk of these people don’t own guns, haven’t really lived among them, and have SNL skits running around in their heads about rednecks and working stiffs.  Their’s is the world of gentrified neighborhoods, bistros, smartphone-saturation, and the college bubble.  Yet, they want to legislate for the rest of us.  When they get their hands on the levers of power, the result is absurdity.

From where do we get get this tic to legislate our way to nirvana?  It’s built into the progressive worldview.  Progressives are intoxicated with the idea of using state power to manufacture a new world, and new human beings to go in it.  That means legislation, laws, rules, decrees, and other such commands.  Out goes anything not familiar to them in their cloistered existence.

Maybe something can be done about “bump stocks”, but don’t expect it to change the dynamic of fevered imaginations intent on killing large numbers of people.  If the desire is there, a means will be found.  In other words, it will happen again.

Evil resides in the souls of some men and women … but, first, you have to recognize the existence of evil.  Now that’s something to scoff for your average run-of-the-mill urban sophisticate.

RogerG

Posted on

A Cause Without A Cause: The NFL Player Protests, Black Lives Matter, the “Blue” Cocoon, Trump’s SOB’s, and the 1947 Movie “Boomerang!”

Most Oakland Raiders sit during the national anthem on Sunday Night Football, 9/24/17.

The NFL player protests, Black Lives Matter, the “blue” cocoon, Trump’s SOB’s, and the 1947 movie “Boomerang!” came to mind during the sit-ins by half-million-dollar-per-year protesters Sunday,  September 24.

The first three on the list are animated by a faulty postulate: American law enforcement is riddled with racism.  It’s the “cause without a cause”.  In this case, “cause” being a premise without some relation to facts .

The slander has its biggest and loudest following in urban and academic centers, the so-called “blue” precincts.  It has spread beyond the street and campus into professional sports – who, by the way, are centered in “blue” America – and earning the ire of a huge part of the fan base in “red” America and President Trump.

As for the movie, “Boomerang!”, it reminded us that “justice” is the ultimate goal of all legal proceedings, and hopefully resistant to mobs inflamed by falsehoods (more about the movie later).  Real justice is an inconvenience for those in a hurry to hang a few cops.  Now, professional athletes are getting sucked into the sordid enterprise.

So, in the end, we have the NFL tarnishing its reputation, players heightening their profiles as political firebrands, fans registering disgust, and all because of a demonstrably false proposition.  Don’t expect justice here … but reckon a humbling decline in the once-vaunted NFL.

It’s a lesson for all high profile sports: Don’t insult your fans!

A good chunk of sports fans might have a very different take on issues like policing the streets of many of our wannabe Kabuls and Baghdads.  Your average fan sitting in font of his big screen TV on Sunday afternoon probably doesn’t see the world like your typical Sociology professor or average campus SJW (social justice warrior), and for good reason.  The alleged racism in police departments, so readily accepted in faculty lounges and by impressionable  college sophomores, isn’t supported by the facts.

First, crime, like wildfires, isn’t evenly distributed.  Local circumstances produce divergent results, without ever getting into the racism of the “man”.  Certain areas of the country have a fecundity for crime as areas of thick forests produce a fire season.  An infamous example is LA’s “death valley”, South Vermont Ave.  Read the captions. (1)

Since 2007, 61 people have been killed on a two-mile stretch on or near South Vermont Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Imperial Highway. The area is the border of the Westmont and Vermont Vista neighborhoods.
L. Christopher Caver Jr., 38, shows a scar on his stomach, a result of a 2012 shooting when he was hit seven times inside his car. He has lived in the Westmont area of South L.A. for more than a decade.
People hang out in front of a pawn shop along Vermont Avenue and 83rd Street in the Westmont area of South Los Angeles.
A woman and child walk down an alley between 93rd and 94th streets in Westmont. The 1.8-square-mile area has seen 100 homicides in the last seven years.
A German shepherd stands sentry in the front yard of a home in the Westmont area of South Los Angeles.
“I’m just fed up in this area,” said Aaron Eden, 38, about crime in his neighborhood. His house has been broken into twice, the Westmont resident said.

Some self-styled crusaders of justice cite deceiving statistics to hold up the edifice of rampant racism.  Weaknesses in their assertions abound.  For instance, their comparisons of crime to population over a broad space hide a serious problem in certain sectors.  The overall crime number in a specific locale may register no concern since the good numbers coming out of some neighborhoods depress the frightening stats emerging from others.  Examine the maps for New York City, Chicago, and Milwaukee. (2)

Source: City of New York crime map
Source: Chicago Tribune
Source: Milwaukee Police Department

The theme throughout is the same: the highest crime rates occur in the locations with the highest concentrations of poverty.  These areas correspond with the greatest assemblage of ethnic and racial minorities.  The higher the incidence of crime, the greater the opportunity for run-ins with police for people of a particular hue who predominate in these places.  We have a crime problem within certain sectors of our population, not a police problem.

Such subtleties might not course through the mind of an athlete whose life has been spent focusing on other things.  The field is  wide open for pop-culture grandees or media-savvy racialists to set the tone for the ill-informed.

Some may sound reasonable like Killer Mike above, but they still repeat a now well-worn mantra of a generalized campaign of racial injustice.  Rapper T.I. pontificates, “Police brutality is really just a tentacle to a larger problem — the racial divide and the systemic racism that goes on from the highest of highs to the lowest of the low of society in America.” (3)

And of course we have Al Sharpton, the race hustlers’ version of the legal profession’s ambulance chaser.  Here he is whipping up the congregation after the 2014 Ferguson shooting.

For many quick to have their biases confirmed, facts on the ground can be inconvenient.  As it turned out, the deceased in Ferguson was no saint (see below).  So much so, Pres. Obama’s Justice department, always on the hunt for the ghost of Bull Connor or Jim Crow, couldn’t gin up a case against the officer.  No facts, no case – to borrow a much abused cadence.

After Ferguson, a movement was born: Black Lives Matter.  Out of the garbage can, also, is resurrected the old conjoining of “cops” and “pigs”.

Like a teen girl watching the Emmies, the fashion is picked up by the impressionable tuning in.  Thus is born Colin Kaepernick  as self-anointed conscience of the NFL.

Kaepernick’s infamous socks as worn during an August 2016 practice.
Former Green Beret Nate Boyer, second from right, stands next to a kneeling Colin Kaepernick during the national anthem on Thursday Night Football, 2016. (Chris Carlson / Associated Press)

The case of Colin Kaepernick is interestingly instructive.  Having shown no prior desire to publicly pontificate as a SJW, all of a sudden he’s kneeling during the national anthem and brandishing cops-as-pigs socks.  More than a few have speculated on the influence of his fiance/girlfriend, Nessa Diab.

Nessa Diab and Colin Kaepernick on the way to the gym, September 2017.

Most recently, she spouted off on Ray Lewis’s suggestion that Kaepernick keep his opinions private as Kaepernick was being considered by owner Steve Bisciotti for a position on the roster.  She implicitly referred to Lewis as a “house negro” to Bisciotti’s slaveholder on Twitter.

Nessa’s tweet: Bisciotti/Lewis above, deCaprio/Samuel J. Jackson from “Django Unchained” below.

She’s quite the pollinating bee fluttering from the blue-dot worlds of celebrity, MTV, San Francisco, and a DJ gig at the HOT97 in New York City.  She seems to have a thing for 49er players after dating Aldon Smith.  She’s also fully immersed in the lingo of the left.  Here she is commenting on the shooting death of Alton Sterling:

Imagine the victim #AltonSterling as your brother, father, son, cousin, friend, co-worker. You didn’t have to know him personally to feel this horrific pain. This is a MAN who wrongfully got murdered!!! Don’t let this “system” now criminalize Alton Sterling to help justify these coward actions by the police. They will try and they will also try to discredit the store owner’s account of what occurred because he’s Muslim and we know Islamaphobia is at an all time high in this country.

This kind of stuff isn’t hard to find in her social media posts.

Celebrities like Nessa Diab arrive at the 2015 MTV Movie Awards held at Nokia Theatre LA Live in Los Angeles, California on April 12, 2015.

As a Muslim and familiar with Saudi Arabia, she should be aware that her chic glam would attract the attention of the Mutaween, the kingdom’s religious police, if she traipsed around in Riyadh’s nightlife in her figure-hugging and revealing sartorial beauty.

Women in Burkas, in Mina near the Saudi holy city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia in 2011.

Bringing a Bible into the country is a crime; women can’t get driver’s licenses; and the public dress code for women centers on the burka.  It’d certainly be hard for her to display her natural endowments robed like above.

You’d think that she would have greater appreciation for life in the good ol’ USA.  Instead, she treats a multiracial country of 330 million experiencing the rare  police shooting as if it is a hotbed of racial bigotry.  She ignores the nature of life in dar al-islam (lit. territory of Islam).  The lack of any sense of proportion is a hallmark of the ignorant.  But nonetheless, she appears to be an influence on poor Colin.

A little digging by Colin and Nessa would undermine their jihad.  Blacks are not shot or otherwise accosted by police in a broadly unjust fashion.  If anything, they are disproportionately represented in the incidence of crime, particularly of the violent kind.  And their victims are disproportionately black. (6)  Yes, black lives matter, and, for their lives to matter, police need to seize their assailants … who happen to be disproportionately black.  No wonder the high number of police confrontations with blacks, overwhelmingy male.

Yet, in the recent high-profile police shooting cases, few have resulted in convictions of the officers.  Some hustlers use the fact as conclusive evidence of something airily called “systemic” racism.  In other words, these pantomimes of racial justice want convictions no matter what.  If so, why bother with a trial if media buzz is enough to condemn?

Prosecutor Henry Harvey (r), played by Dana Andrews, and murder suspect John Waldron (Arthur Kennedy) in “Boomerang!” from 1947.

The matter was brought into clearer focus while watching the movie “Boomerang!”.  It’s the story of a prosecutor who refused to pursue charges against a murder suspect after being subjected to intense political pressure.  The DA couldn’t remove from his mind the legal profession’s standards of ethical conduct for prosecutors.  Put succinctly, “The duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict.” (7)  Is it asking too much to demand a similar sobriety in the celebrity world and the media-incited mobs?

Pres. Trump at campaign rally for Sen. Luther Strange, September 22, 2017.

Well, into the frenzy jumps Pres. Trump.  Echoing the thoughts of many, speaking at a campaign rally for US Sen. Luther Strange, he said, “Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when someone disrespects our flag to say, `Get that son of a bitch off the field right now! Out. He’s fired! He’s fired!“ (8)  Leaving aside the language, the sentiment has currency among many – if not most – veterans and a sizable swath of the country’s population, mostly in “red” America.  Undoubtedly, the comment angered some of the marginally inclined in the locker room.  So, we experienced the NFL’s own “black Sunday” on September 24.  Here’s a sample.

Buffalo Bills take a knee, September 24.
Jacksonville Jaguars take a knee, September 24.
Indianapolis Cols take a knee, September 24.
Some of the Chargers resort to the old black power salute.
Several New England Patriots players kneel during the national anthem before an NFL football game against the Houston Texans, Sunday, Sept. 24, 2017, in Foxborough, Mass. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

It happened throughout the NFL on that day.  And it drew criticism from fans.

In a debate on MSNBC between Brian Mitchell and Hugh Hewitt, Hewitt raises the scepter of the NFL losing touch with its fan base.  As for Mitchell, he accepts the received wisdom of a pervasive racism.  Take a look.

Some like Brian Mitchell  see the players’ actions with all the integrity of The Grand Remonstrance of 1641.  In 1641, the English Parliament presented to King Charles I a list of grievances, The Grand Remonstrance, which His Highness quickly dismissed.  The result was over 40 years of civil war and social disruption.  The players’ protest could do the same by inaugurating a civil war between the league and its fans.  I don’t think the league will come out of it any better than Charles I.  He lost his head.

The execution of Charles I, 1649.

The full effect of the protests will take awhile to gestate.  The players have certainly displayed their right to free speech, and some fans are exhibiting the same right.  Free speech for everyone, including the right to express that speech in the abandonment of the NFL.  Many prescient owners and players can envision dollars whisking out of their wallets like so many autumn leaves on a windy day.

Could the NFL players’ racialized outcry have the same fallout as the 1994 baseball players’ strike on Major League Baseball?  A person could argue that Major League Baseball hasn’t fully recovered from it.  What waits in the offing for the NFL?  Much depends on the NFL’s response to players using the national anthem as a forum to present their social and political discontents.

Entire Cowboys’ team kneels before the national anthem on Monday Night Football, September 25.

Sensing the trouble, Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys knelt with the players and then everybody stood for the anthem.  A compromise, but why kneel?  What’s the reason for the kneeling?  Is it to show solidarity for a broad charge of racism for which there is no valid proof?  What’s the point?

The whole thing rests on a premise without much of a foundation.  Indeed, it’s cause without a cause.  To be clearer, it’s a political movement without much justification.  Thus, any compromise gives credence to a sham.

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  1. “South Vermont Avenue: L.A. County’s ‘death alley’”, Nicole Santa Cruz and Ken Schwencke, Los Angeles Times, 1/19/2014, photos by Genaro Molina, http://homicide.latimes.com/post/westmont-homicides/
  2.  “The Debate Over Crime Rates is Ignoring the Metric That Matters Most: ‘Murder Inequality’: Focusing on the neighborhood level is the best way to understand violence in America. Here are six charts that prove it.”, Daniel Kay Hertz, The Trace,  7/25/2016,  https://www.thetrace.org/2016/07/crime-rates-american-cities-murder-inequality/
  3. “T.I. speaks out on police brutality”, Deena Zuru, CNN, 8/14/2017,   http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/24/politics/ti-us-or-else-movie-police-brutality/index.html
  4. “CLASSY: Kaepernick’s Girlfriend Compares NFL Owners to Slaveholders, Ray Lewis to ‘House Negroes'”, Eliot Hamilton, The DailyWire, 8/3/2017,  http://www.dailywire.com/news/19319/classy-kaepernicks-girlfriend-compares-nfl-owners-elliott-hamilton#
  5. “COLIN KAEPERNICK: EXPLAINS PIG COP SOCKS
    … Shot At ‘Rogue Cops'”, TMZ Sports, 9/1/2016,  http://www.tmz.com/2016/09/01/colin-kaepernick-cop-pig-socks-rogue-cops/
  6. “The lies of Black Lives Matter”, Kelly Riddell, The Washington Times, 7/18/2016,  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/18/lies-black-lives-matter/
  7. “Criminal Justice Standards; Prosecution Function, Part I, General Standards”,  https://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_pfunc_blk.html#1.2
  8. “Trump Calls on NFL Owners to Fire Players Who Kneel During Anthem”, Daniel Politi, Slate, 9/23/2017,   http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/09/23/trump_calls_on_nfl_owners_to_fire_players_who_kneel_during_anthem.html
Posted on

Recommendations for Avoiding the Disease that Knows No “Red” or “Blue”

The following is an email exchange with a dear friend over my post, “The Disease That Knows No ‘Red’ or ‘Blue’ Boundaries”.

My friend complimented the post but wanted some specific recommendations.

My response:

Yep, you’re right.  No recommendations.  Yet, it’s purpose was to establish the existence of a fiasco, much like the 1986 Challenger disaster.  If everyone had blinders attached to their eyes, we’d continue to shoot people up into space without repairing the design flaw.  NASA’s graveyard (if they have one) would be more heavily populated.  Same with our nation’s systems of schools.  Do we really recognize the thoroughness of the rot?  Quite understandably, parents desperately search for the best options for their kids.  The problem: the best options are mostly window-dressed routes to, once again, mediocrity.  It’s everywhere from pre-school to grad school, from the ghetto kid living among the social chaos to the legions enrolled in the college curriculum’s assault on classical instruction and the relentless infusion of the identity nonsense and calling it scholarship.  The situation cries for a storming of the Bastille.
Here’s some recommendations … if you want them:
  • If a classical education is desired, look for a school – secondary to college – with a curriculum based on the great books.
  • Electoral politics gave us the people who sanctioned and produced the nightmare, and electoral politics is the essential route to the antidote.  Elect people who will work to decertify the ed schools and force a return to a classical instruction.  No greater advance in education can be accomplished than to remove the monopoly power of the college ed schools.  Leave John Dewey to rot in the grave, and stop trying to resurrect him in the naive minds of the young.
  • Don’t start, right out of the gate, with any reform with utopian titles like “No child left behind” or “All students will succeed”.  Anything implying “all” should be reserved for thoughts of heaven and the pew.  Fact: “All” students won’t succeed!  The attempt to do so has led to unending reforms and a never-ending teat for the consultancy class.  If nomenclature is your thing, “all” should be replaced by “removal” of some.  The school must be made safe for the scholar and the scholar-to-be.
  • Speaking of scholars, let’s produce some and place them in the front of the classroom.  Of course, “scholar” should be a reference to one with his/her head screwed on straight, with feet planted in the here-and-now.  A school is no place for the airy effete with pretensions of an ethereal and secular paradise.  To produce adult scholars, out goes [fill in the blank] Studies Departments – and with it, all the tolerance/multicultural crap.  Real minds require an introduction to the great minds.  Sorry, they aren’t distributed according to the likes of Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus.
  • Not everyone is cut out for formal, classroom instruction and its subsequent route to slipshod cognitive development. Recognize that some kids like working with their hands.  Better a cutting torch in their hand than a knife at the throat of a convenience store owner.  I’ve always been a strong advocate of professionally-approved apprenticeships with the trade unions and businesses.
  • Let’s stop the feminization of pedagogy and the curriculum.  Make education more attractive to boys.  Cut out all the grouping; end co-ed PE; and return to instructing the natural inclinations of a discipline.  Those “natural inclinations” are obvious.  History should be taught with an eye to the great men/women, great events, and littered with the great stories that define us.  Instructional periods might have to be limited to 45 minutes to avoid the male ants-in-the-pants syndrome.  For the Language Arts, classical literature should be the touchstone.  The Iliad and the Odyssey is a great war story.  Teach a vernacular version.  The same is true of much of Shakespeare.  It’s better to a know a few great books well than the cover stories of Time magazine.  Of course, these old authors are a bit prickly to the ears of your average snowflake in the staff, desk, and professoriate.   To hell with ’em!
  • Back-to-School Night should be reserved for teaching the ins-and-outs of being a tiger mom.  Lock up the video games.  Better yet, do a buy-back thing like the one for guns.  All tekkie communication stuff should be embargoed and computers placed in the community section of the house.  One parent must be home at all times.  Parents should read, read anything so they can be seen by the kids.  TV should be limited to a single planned-for program, like a person does with a movie.  After that, it’s turned off.  It should never be allowed to be a constant background noise.
Just some ideas … if it’s recommendations that you want.
RogerG
Posted on

The Disease That Knows No “Red” Or “Blue” Boundaries

 

Unsurprisingly and generally speaking, parents strive to grease the skids for their kids’  future success.  Particularly, middle class parents will drive themselves to near bankruptcy in order to guarantee their offspring’s advancement.  Yet, when they buy into a nicer neighborhood to enroll junior in a “better” school, are they really getting a “better” school?  There’s good reason to doubt that proposition.  Much of the corruption in our schools has deep tentacles, and is no respecter of “red” vs. “blue” states, public or private schools, inner city or suburban schools, parochial or secular, and even reaches down into home-schooling.   It’s equal-opportunity corruption.

I suppose that the issue hinges on what is meant by “better”.

Sure, avoidance of gang rape in the school’s bathroom, classrooms-as-battlefields, and the accidental straying beyond the school’s chain link fence into feral environs are legitimate parental concerns.  Many parents would assign “better” to any school without these traits.

Under the belief that a geographic relocation might improve things for the munchkins, many parents can’t wait to hook up the U-haul and move to a richer zip code.

A moving truck is shown at a house that was sold in Palo Alto, Calif., Tuesday, June 19, 2012. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)

However, zip codes of the affluent present their own problems, leaving aside the schools.  Websites catering to the school-conscious parent have sprung up in places afflicted with a cost of living commensurate with Warren Buffett’s investment portfolio but many people possessing a net worth more in line with the denizens of 1950’s Levittown.  California is a hotbed for these conversations.  One site for Bay Area moms and dads,  berkeleyparentsnetwork.org, is filled with advice such as “Of course, if you can afford to buy in a place with good schools then by all means buy.” (12)  Though for most Californios, being able to make the rent, or mortgage, hangs overhead like the sword of Damocles.

Some have opted to jump ship and leave the state.  For many, housing costs are just too big an obstacle to overcome in the quest for better family environs, including schools.  From 2000 to 2009, the SF Bay Area  registered a net outflow of 600,000 domestic migrants (mostly citizens, not immigrants).  After a 5-year pause due to falling house prices from the Great Recession, the exodus resumed as shelter resumed  its eye-popping California norm (house prices returning to 6x’s income, beyond the acceptable 3x’s).  The 2016 losses for the whole state were on the order of 110,000, most of it from the heavily populated but very expensive coastal enclaves. (9)

Those “domestic migrants” – residents of one state moving to another – seem to be emerging from states with uniform ID: those with the adjective “high” before cost-of-living, taxes, crime, and regulation, and “low” for upward mobility and successful business formation.  The usual suspects are California, Illinois, New York, et al.

Destinations are South and West — EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA!  Look at the top and bottom of the chart below.  The top is reserved for the welcoming states and the bottom for states that shed people like my dog does hair. (15)

Interestingly, the combination of escalating house prices and California’s hostility to suburban living is making for a return of feudal manorialism.  A fleeing middle class, sensitive to rising prices for a family hearth, in combination with foreign immigration into the state (2.7 million “undocumented” live in the state – see 13 below), is resurrecting something resembling a lord/serf society.  Two researchers characterized the situation like this: “Essentially, the model [for California] is that of a gated community, with a convenient servant base nearby.” (9)

“Convenient servant base”?  Sounds much like “serf”, or maybe peasant, to me.  “Gated community”?  Sounds like “castle”, or chateau.

Is this a French manor from the Middle Ages or contemporary California?
Gated development, Carlsbad, California.
East Los Angeles neighborhood.

For many, moving for better schools and a more affordable roof most likely means leapfrogging the state entirely.  But don’t delude yourself into equating a middle or upper class student body in a new state with a high quality education.  Housing is cheaper but the vast majority of schools are likely, at best, to be only marginally better.  The only real difference between the middle class kid and inner-city one is the poor kid’s path to mediocrity is a lot rockier.  Yes, a mediocre curriculum and poor teacher training awaits all irrespective of better cars in the student parking lot or a student enrollment that’ll do the homework.

Students listening to Ernest Jenkins III in his Manhood Development class at Oakland High School. Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Suburban school in school uniforms.

All schools draw from the same pool of teacher candidates and curricular resources.  You’ll find the same textbooks on a home-schooler’s kitchen table as you will find in a Catholic school classroom and a suburban or inner-city public school.  The vast majority of teachers are given a remarkably homogeneous college education and teacher training centering on the mind-numbing writings of John Dewey.  The sameness is quite remarkable.

30 years worth of experience  as a public high school and community college teacher has made me aware of the phenomenal uniformity of what is taught, how it is taught, and who is teaching it.

Two textbooks that were a staple of 20 years of high school instruction and widely adopted are displayed below.

A widely-adopted World History textbook.
Ditto U.S. History text.

Over the years, textbooks have declined in narrative with a surge in graphics.  Technical, thought-provoking theory has disappeared.  Identity politics is amply displayed: for instance, out goes Henry Bessemer and in comes Mary Wollstonecraft.  Much space is reserved for our historical sins as these crowd out the richness of debate over the nature of our federal system.  Labor history is reduced to a Marxist distillation; excluded is the role  of violent anarcho-socialists in some of that history.  Immigration and immigrants, of course, are always saintly.  The 1960’s reads as if it was cleansed through the censors of the radical left.  I could go on.

For pedagogy, teacher trainees are immersed in the mind of John Dewey.  Who’s John Dewey?  He’s a turn-of-the-century socialist who wanted to turn the schools into factories for making socialists.

Prof. John Dewey at Columbia University.

He’s famous for such arcane mumbo-jumbo as “constructivism” and seemingly commonsensical “child-centered learning”.  The “construction” in “constructivism” is simply the matter of raising (or constructing) the child’s receptivity to socialism.  “Child-centered” is an assault on the established canon of western civilization.  The child’s wants are the guide to instruction, not Plato, the Apostle Paul, or the Founders.  The teacher as the adult in the room is to be replaced by the chaos of adolescent urges.

Howard Gardner dispensing his gospel in India.

On this foundation is built the everyone-wins-a-trophy philosophy of “multiple intelligences” via Howard Gardner.  Everybody is assumed to be smart, but in reality nobody is smart … if you think about it.  The whole thing is a levelling of all students.  From this we get the dilution of the curricular core to include excursions into all the “intelligences” to the detriment of a traditional core.  It’s conducive to “heterogeneity” and grouping in almost everything.

About that “grouping”, “cooperative learning” are watchwords.  Kids are thrust together into groups of varying abilities – the “heterogeneity” thing – and responsibility is socialistically distributed.  What better way to “construct” the new child for the socialist future?  Keep this in mind as your kid comes home with stories of his or her classroom group.

Don’t think for a moment that AP courses are immune to these influences.  AP Literature guidelines now reflect Dewey’s “child-centered” nonsense.  AP US History deemphasizes a mastery of historical facts and their connections.  They demand mature judgments from immature minds.  Across the curriculum, we’re creating opinionated ignoramuses.

It didn’t take long for me to realize that our professional goal wasn’t Jefferson’s ideal of an educated citizenry.  It’s about making good little Democrats — by Democrats, I mean the Democratic Party as part of the consortium of the world’s Social Democratic Parties.  Read “socialist” for Social Democrat … mostly of the mild sort.

The kids’ minds have long been pried open to being college snowflakes and Antifa recruits.  Intolerant and propagandized since shortly after becoming bipedal, many of them are now subjecting us to their partisan and ideologically-laced rhetoric.  The rhetoric supplants mature thinking.

Listen to this exchange between a taxi driver and his youthful customer over a hula doll on his dashboard.  Count the number of times political boilerplate and the word “offensive” is used by the female rider.

We are reaping the whirlwind as tantrums and thuggishness displace reasoned debate.

We are witnessing the results of 4-5 decades of a blinkered and tendentious instruction.  It has penetrated nearly everywhere.  Buying a home in a better neighborhood will buy you a preppy student body; it won’t guarantee you a education free of the bacillus.  Fleeing a blue state to a red one won’t change the dynamic.  A private or parochial school might only provide a safer and more accomplished route to mediocrity.  Home schooling might be an option if the curriculum can be kept free of the college ed schools and government’s embrace of identity politics, an unlikely occurrence.

Education reformers are everywhere, and have been arising zombie-like throughout my career.  Yet, reform seems to always originate from the same worn out premises.  We’ve reached the point that real education reform may require us to ignore the reformers.  Unless it happens, we had all better keep an eye on Tommy (see below).

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  1. Interesting and brief account of treating inner city school students: “An Inner City School Social Worker Shares Two of His Cases”, Howard Honigsfeld, Psychotherapy Networker,  7/28/2015, https://www.psychotherapynetworker.org/blog/details/607/therapy-strategies-for-working-with-underprivileged.
  2. An account of the challenges in an Oklahoma urban school: “A look inside an inner city school struggling with multiple challenges, including ‘needing improvement’ sanctions”, Danniel Parker, The City Sentinel,  5/15/2011, http://city-sentinel.com/2011/05/a-look-inside-an-inner-city-school-struggling-with-multiple-challenges-including-%E2%80%9Cneeding-improvement%E2%80%9D-sanctions/.
  3. Interesting advice in teaching inner city students: “4 Tips to Being a Good Teacher in the Inner-City”, The Libertarian Republic, 11/11/2014,   http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/4-tips-good-teacher-inner-city/
  4. Excellent maps showing  a changing Los Angeles ethnic demography from 1940 to 2000: “Los Angeles County Ethnic/Racial Breakdown 1940-2000”,   http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=169073.0.
  5. “White Flight Never Ended”, Alana Semuels, The Atlantic, 7/30/2015,  https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/07/white-flight-alive-and-well/399980/.
  6. “Data shows how major U.S. cities are slowly re-segregating”, Kenya Downs, 3/7/2016, PBS NewsHour,  http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/major-u-s-cities-may-seem-integrated-but-not-for-long/.
  7. A synopsis of John Dewey’s harmful impact on American education can be found in this critical review of Henry Edmondson’s book, John Dewey and the Decline of American Education, Dennis Attick, PhD candidate in Social Foundations of Education at Georgia State University,  http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=eandc. The author is clearly supportive of the major tenets of Dewey’s education philosophy.
  8. For an account of the most widely adopted textbooks in today’s America go here: “Widely Adopted History Textbooks”, American Textbook Council,  http://historytextbooks.net/adopted.htm.
  9. A summary of recent migration trends for California can be found here: “Leaving California? After slowing, the trend intensifies”, Joel Kotkin and Wendell Cox, The Orange County Register, 4/23/2017,  http://www.ocregister.com/2017/04/23/leaving-california-after-slowing-the-trend-intensifies/.
  10. Metrics of school quality don’t vary that much for schools within the same school district is asserted here: “Do Better Neighborhoods for
    MTO Families Mean Better Schools?”, Brief No. 3; Kadija S. Ferryman, Xavier de Souza Briggs, Susan J. Popkin, and María Rendón; The Urban Institute, March 2008,   https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/31596/411639-Do-Better-Neighborhoods-for-MTO-Families-Mean-Better-Schools-.PDF.  ** The metrics for measuring school quality were performance on state exams, the school’s poverty rate, and exposure to white classmates and students with limited English proficiency.
  11. ** “Our kids are still in early elementary school too but I think you will find the answer varies widely. Obviously… not ”everyone” can go to private school! I know some parents who have had their kids just tough it out at a not-so-great middle school, then get a scholarship for private high school. Others with more resources opt to start private school earlier on. And, even some high earning families I know chose Oakland public high schools including Skyline, Oakland Tech, and charter schools. Ultimately it’s hard to say before your child starts school, what type of high school will work for your family. That said, we chose our home based on both elementary and middle schools we liked, at least ”on paper” as you say, figuring high school was too far off to gauge.”; from “Moving for the Schools”, Berkeley Parents Network, August 2012,  https://www.berkeleyparentsnetwork.org/recommend/housing/schools.
  12. Ibid. From the segment “Moving vs. private school – how to make the decision?”.
  13. “II. Where Do They Live?”, Jeffrey S. Passel and D’Vera Cohn, Pew Research Center, 4/14/2009,  http://www.pewhispanic.org/2009/04/14/ii-where-do-they-live/.
  14. “5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.”, FactTank: News in the Numbers, Pew Research Center, 4/27/2017,  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/.
  15. “California, Illinois, and New York Keep Losing People to Other States”, Ryan McMaken, Mises Wire, 5/10/2017, Mises Institute,  https://mises.org/blog/california-illinois-and-new-york-keep-losing-people-other-states
Posted on

Substituting Their Judgment: Lesson 2 from “The Earth is Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West”

The Progressives’ zeal to mold people to fit an ideologically-driven stereotype is abundantly evident today as it was in the latter 19th century.  Back then, the recipient of their benignly intended efforts – but with malign results – was the American Indian.  Today, the target is the entire American population, if not the world’s.  The modern Progressives’ gaze became vastly more panoramic as they substitute their judgment for the wishes of anyone directly impacted.

Connecting Progressivism’s dots between the 19th and 21st centuries isn’t hard.  Progressivism wasn’t a product of spontaneous combustion.  It’s got a lineage – or, if you will, a trail of tears.  Its 19th century roots became evident just as one expansive civilization began to swamp a nomadic one.  The Progressives of the era – call them “reformers” with their Obama-esque “arc of history” rhetoric – planned a quick transformation of the American Indian into rural gentry.  The tinkering with humanity ensued and misery erupted.

Nathan C. Meeker, previously mentioned in another post, was one example of an archetype littered about the civilian branches of the U.S. government.  Many were utopian, and near utopian, in outlook with a powerful confidence in their ability to engineer better human beings.  The American Indian seemed to be the preferred guinea pig in their social laboratory.

Vincent Colyer

Another scion in the Progressive line was Vincent Colyer, the Indian Board of Commissioners secretary.  In a 1871 “peacemaking” tour of New Mexico and Arizona reservations, he upset a happy arrangement for the Chihenne band of Apaches and all others concerned.  They were ordered from their much-loved Canada Alamosa reservation (sometimes called Ojo Caliente) in the New Mexico territory to the more inhospitable Tularosa valley, a hundred miles northwest.  Colyer simply substituted his judgment for the Chihennes.  He would set off an Apache/US conflagration that would sputter on and off for 15 years and only ended with the capture of Geronimo in 1886 and decimation of half the Chiricahua Apache population.

Chiricahua Apaches, 1880s.
Apaches on the San Carlos Reservation waiting in line for government rations, 1870s.
Chiricahua prisoners, including Geronimo (front row, 3rd from right) being transported to Ft. Marion, Fla., 1886.

“Substituting their judgment” is a common trait of those consumed with the self-perception of possessing superior wisdom.  It is the blind spot of the Progressive.  Their unquestioning faith in the “expert” is without limit.  Jump forward to the middle of the 20th century and we have “urban renewal”.

What started out as “slum clearance” ended up as slum intensification.  Social planners – an established squadron in the ranks of the nomenklatura – substituted the haphazard arrangements of neighborhood residents for Sovietized housing monoliths and called it “urban renewal”.  In 1954, they gave us Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis.

Pruitt-Igoe (actually Wendell O. Pruitt Homes and William Igoe Apartments) just before completion and its first occupancy in 1954.

It didn’t last 20 years.  By the end of the 1960s, it was uninhabitable and a massive eyesore.  Its chief architect, Minuro Yamasaki, exclaimed, “I never thought people were that destructive”.  The thing was demolished in 1972.

Pruitt-Igoe, 1970.
Pruitt-Igoe, 1969.
The demolition of Pruitt-Igoe in 1972.

If there was a FBI most-wanted list for such things, the following grandiose public housing projects would join Pruitt-Igoe (see 7 below):

  • Queens Bridge Houses, Queens, NYC.  It was raided in 2005 as the home of the “Dream Team” drug syndicate.
  • Robert Taylor Homes, Chicago, Il.  In an already crime-plagued city, Robert Taylor displays some of the highest rates of violent crime and gang activity in the city.
  • Jordan Downs, Watts, Ca.  Crime and gang violence are its watchwords for today.
  • Magnolia Projects, or “Da Wild Magnolia”, New Orleans, La.  Let’s just say that the place’s reputation isn’t conducive to raising kids.
  • Marcy Projects, Brooklyn, NYC.  Rapper Jay-Z, a former resident, wrote the rap “Murder Marcyville” as an anthem to its atmosphere.  Need I say more?
  • Cabrini Green, Chicago, Il.  No list of the infamous should go without this lovely specimen.  Prior to its closing in 2010, USA Today called the place a “virtual war zone, the kind of place where little boys were gunned down on their way to school and little girls were sexually assaulted and left for dead in stairwells.”

The benighted gaze of the “expert” isn’t limited to housing.  They’ve destroyed entire swaths of cities in the name of “redevelopment”.  A similar roster of the infamous could be constructed for this imperial march of eminent domain’s elimination of private property (see 5 and 6).  Lost in the imbroglio is the unique character of a place, evolved over many years of human interaction, only to see it replaced by a modern sterility.  This is devolution, not evolution, thanks to the Progressives’ “experts”.

Not happy with fiddling with the cities, under the guise of “climate change”, the “experts” want to bring to all of society what they brought to the urban landscape.  Climate change is so protean of a concept that it will abet almost any government meddling in our existence.  Now here’s a mandate for the know-it-alls.

California is the epicenter for this latest craze among Progressives.  “Climate change” enthusiasms have made the place almost unlivable for anyone aspiring to the middle class.  Utility bills and fuel prices are exorbitant.  Solar panels are everywhere but that is only possible with a ponzi scheme of subsidies and utility rate manipulation.

The place is so regulated that even getting a plastic bag to carry your groceries to the car demands another purchase … or, alternatively, bring your own filthy things from home.  Owning and maintaining a car is now a grueling experience.  Illegality might await if you buy a water heater outside your air district.  Expressing the desire to start a business could be justifiable grounds for an insanity declaration and commitment to a state institution.

And, of course, the tax burden is back-breaking.  No surprise here since the expert-driven paradise is an expensive proposition.

The invisible hand of Adam Smith becomes a deadening hand if it is attached to a Progressive “expert”.  In their wake, we have the plight of the American Indian, the inner-city poor, and the California middle class.  If success is measured by failure, a place like Sacramento – or any blue dot on the 2016 election map – should have a hall of fame, or shame, dedicated to the Progressive “expert”.

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  1. For a history of Apache resistance, read The Earth Is
    Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West    , Peter Cozzens, hardback edition, pp. 358-415.
  2. A good survey of early urban renewal efforts can be found in “The History of Hamlin Park Part VII: Early Housing Acts and Start of Urban Renewal”, Mike Puma, Buffalo Rising, 9/23/2013,  https://www.buffalorising.com/2013/09/the-history-of-hamlin-park-part-vii-early-housing-acts-and-the-start-of-urban-renewal/
  3. More on Pruitt-Igoe in wikipedia, “Pruitt-Igoe”,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt%E2%80%93Igoe
  4. An early criticism of “urban renewal” from 1965 can be found here: “The Failure of Urban Renewal”, Herbert J. Ganns, Commentary, 4/1/1965,  https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-failure-of-urban-renewal/
  5. More on “urban renewal” failures: “5 Disastrous Urban Renewal Failures”, Modern Cities, 3/10/2016,  http://www.moderncities.com/article/2016-mar-5-disastrous-urban-renewal-failures-/page/1
  6. More on “urban renewal” failures: “Redevelopment Wrecks: 20 failed Projects Involving Eminent Domain Abuse”, Castle Coalition,  http://castlecoalition.org/pdf/publications/Redevelopment%20Wrecks.pdf
  7. “The 7 Most Infamous U.S. Public Housing Projects”, Newsone staff, Newsone,  https://newsone.com/1555245/most-infamous-public-housing-projects/
Posted on

Avarice, Deceit, and Cruelty: “The Earth Is Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West” by Peter Cozzens

The book is a corrective for anyone wanting to go beyond politically correct fairy tales and the myths of manifest destiny. Naiveté is rampant alongside cruelty and bigotry.

Interesting to me is the now-familiar use of the momentary state of science to draw grand conclusions about people, such as the Native Americans (or American Indians, if you will). Couple that with “progressive” reformist zeal and disaster awaits.

Nathan C. Meeker

No better example can be found than the brief career of rookie Indian agent Nathan C. Meeker (above). A utopian down to his bones, it took him only a year to rile up the Utes as he impetuously and zealously embarked on the all-too-familiar crusade of socially engineering the Utes of Colorado in 1878-9 (pictured belwo). It would end in death all around, including Meeker’s own, the rape of his wife and daughter, and the near destruction of the Utes (illustrated below).

Utes in 1870s photo.
Meeker’s destroyed agency in 1879.

Is there a lesson for us in this whole sordid affair?

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  1. The Earth Is Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West, Peter Cozzens, read pp 341-357.
Posted on

Journalism as Wish-Fulfillment

Sonam Sheth, politics and national security reporter at Business Insider, from her Twitter page.

While scanning Yahoo news, I ran into an article by Sonam Sheth (pictured above) of Business Insider about Trump’s pardoning  of Joe Arpaio, the sheriff accused of challenging one judge’s definition of the amorphous abstraction of “racial profiling”.  What was presented as a straight-up news piece was essentially a stitched together product of lefty wish-fulfillment.  The article went along a boozy path from the pardon to Trump-as-mafioso.  Journalism isn’t journalism any longer.  It’s fevered imaginations run wild.

To grasp the pitiful state of journalism, let’s go on a journey through Sheth’s personal profile.  It will illuminate a lot about her unconscious – or conscious –  mingling of bits of hard news with barnstorming lefty politicization.  This will be brief.

Her’s is a compressed odyssey from a Rutgers University classroom to a couple of extensions of the classroom in internships and a “columnist” for the college newspaper.  While in the college cocoon, she had a 3-month layover with Citizen Action of New York.  Currently, Citizen Action is one of the lefty activist groups in the vanguard of The Resistance.  Check out these gems of left wing boilerplate from the website:

“Build the Movement. Add Your Name to the Restistance Rapid Response: We’re building the statewide movement we need to take on Trump and make health care for all a reality. Build it with us.”

“Gov. Cuomo: Stop Trump’s Climate Attack!  While we fight the Trump administration every step of the way in D.C., New York must lead on climate change by transitioning to 100% renewable energy. It’s up to Governor Cuomo.”

There’s more, but you get the idea.

What would attract a future Business Insider staffer to an organization of politically strident lefty activism?  Hmmmm.

Oh well, from there she dropped into a short internship with CNBC and was picked up by Business Insider.  I’m sure that the Rutgers econ degree drew attention with the HR departments, but with the degree comes a load of ideological fixations.  They make it easy to leap from assumption/premise to disjointed fact to conclusion, all in a surreal and dreamy narrative landscape.  It would make Salvador Dali cringe in envy.

Salvador Dali

Now to the article.  The title says it all: “Trump’s decision to pardon Joe Arpaio could be a crucial piece of evidence in the Russia investigation”.  A person could stop with the title and be just as informed.

The article was riddled with so much bounding from point to point that my wife could only hear, as I was reading, my repeated refrain of “This is bull@#$&*!”. The bravo sierra begins with the grasping for a link  between the pardon and hoped-for proof of obstruction of justice.

First, right out of the gate, she constricts Arpaio’s sin as “criminal contempt in July for violating a court order to stop racially profiling Latinos”.  “Racial profiling” is one of those politically loaded terms that are bandied about like a frisbee.  It’s become so expansive that a victim might shy away from using the word “black” to describe a black  assailant.

Besides, Arpaio’s tough illegal immigration stance, and his use of “racial profiling”, might have something to do with the overwhelming type of illegal that a sheriff might confront in a state that shares a border with the Latino world south to the Strait of Magellan.  In effect, the judge is either ordering the sheriff to ignore the rule of law – immigration law that is – or pretend the obvious doesn’t exist as he does so.  Either way, it’s a court-ordered charade.  Trump’s pardon put an end to the judicial lunacy.

Illegal immigrants sit in a group after being detained by U.S. Border Patrol agents in McAllen, Texas. (Associated Press).

For our budding journalist, it may never have occurred to her that an immigration hawk of a presidential candidate has a natural affinity for a sheriff thinking, and doing, the same.  It’s not proof of criminal intent and conspiracy to clear a sheriff from the clutches of an activist judge for carrying out policies in line with the policies and constitutional authority of the president of the United States.  But no, Sheth’s surreal potboiler must take precedence.

From the pardon, she builds the edifice.  In quoting a single source, Renato Marriotti, she tries to weave a story of criminal intent from, once again citing Marriotti, Trump hypothetically “ending investigations as to his friends”.  The presence of “friends” is not evidence of “intent” of criminal conspiracy to “obstruct justice”.  Arpaio isn’t an example of the kind of cronyism typical of the Clintons.  If viewpoint sympathy can be strung into the kind of relationship most typically found in criminal conspiracies, then most assuredly Bill Clinton should be dressed in striped livery for the pardoning of Marc Rich.  There was much more evidence of illicit behavior in that whole unseemly affair.

President Bill Clinton and Denise Rich attend a funraiser for ‘The G & P Charitable Foundation for Cancer Research’ in October 1998, in New York City. (DIANA WALKER/LIAISON)

As for Sheth’s insinuation of  “obstruction of justice”, where’s the underlying crime?  You know, the criminal conduct that a person seeks to hide.  For Bill Clinton, it was perjury in Federal District Court in Arkansas and his subsequent dissembling testimony before a federal grand jury in Washington, DC.  For Trump, as the constitutionally ordained chief executive officer of the United States government, he simply asked about the possibility of ending the investigation of Michael Flynn.  Even here, Sheth can’t present proof of an order by Trump do so.  She’s only got Comey’s “feelings” of pressure.

I’m reminded of my discussions with my teenage sons after they came home late.  Certainly they felt “pressure”.  Am I guilty of “obstruction of justice” simply because they felt “pressure” … but I’m hiding no crime for which the “pressure” is applied?  Sheth’s pseudo-logic enters the realm of the ludicrous.

Of course, lurking behind the curtain is the fantasy of all denizens of the left: the Trump/Russian criminal conspiracy, the philosopher’s stone of explanations for the 2016 election results.  There’s been no evidence of “criminal conspiracy” … up to now.  But, then again, there’s no evidence of an underlying crime in my sitdowns with my clock-challenged sons … up to now.  I can only hope and pray that they never discover Sheth-logic.

Possibly Sheth could benefit from 2 doses of reality.  First, the president is the federal government’s alpha law enforcement officer.  In essence, he’s the chief DA of the federal government.  He can inquire into any investigation under his purview.  It may prove to be embarrassing to his supporters and much fun to his detractors, but voters can deal with that at the next election.  Alan Dershowitz, no card-carrying member of the “vast right-wing conspiracy”, said as much in June of this year (see 6 below).

Furthermore, the president’s pardon power is near absolute.  If Trump so wished, he could pardon the entire roster of inmates in the federal penal system.  He doesn’t even have to wait for convictions to fling the power around.  It may not enhance his electoral viability, but he could do it.

Sheth’s story is a mess.  It is more lefty wish-fulfillment than it is journalism.  It doesn’t even make for good commentary, and more resembles a bad term paper.  As per the old cliché, there’s no there there.  For the Sheths of the world, it’s as if they want to overturn an election with smear-mongering and an endless manipulation of the criminal justice system.  The more appropriate venue for their angst is the ballot box … which, by the way, they have difficulty in winning.

RogerG

Bibliography and sources:

  3. Sonam Sheth Twitter page, https://twitter.com/sonamsays
  4. Citizen Action of New York website, http://citizenactionny.org/
  5. Sonam Sheth’s brief profile at Business Insider website, http://www.businessinsider.com/author/sonam-sheth
  6. “Alan Dershowitz: History, precedent and James Comey’s opening statement show that Trump did not obstruct justice”, Alan Dershowitz and contributor, Washington Examiner, 6/8/2017,  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alan-dershowitz-history-precedent-and-james-comeys-opening-statement-show-that-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/article/2625318