What’s happening to America? I have much reason to be worried about the soundness of popular thinking on some very weighty issues if an American Enterprise Institute (AEI) report on the state of public opinion post-election has any validity. My concern isn’t due to the findings running counter to my opinions. It’s my suspicion – call it an informed suspicion – that there is little awareness of a counter point of view, or much of anything else for that matter. We appear to be well-connected but poorly informed, maybe predominantly non-informed.
Perhaps we have always been this way to a significant degree. Perhaps. But what of all that talk about our “great schools” and vibrant free press? Honestly, that “free press” isn’t so much “free” as it is monotone, at least for the big shots. As for the schooling, never before has so many Americans spent more years behind a desk and come out of it with so little. The prerequisites for sound reasoning are quickly disappearing. Our scandalous press has been much written about, so little need to go there. But what of our schools? The only real snapshot of learning attainment is the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP). We are forever exhorted to spend more, trillions more, but are getting less and less. Reading and Math proficiency scores have plummeted from 2017 to 2019 (pre-pandemic): Reading fell from 40% to 34% and Math from 37% to 34%.
And what of those other subjects, like those that contribute to cultural literacy? Could our graduating seniors pass a citizenship test? Call me skeptical given the state of the other subjects.
Money, or the lack of it, isn’t the problem. Something more fundamental is afoot. Are we a healthy society? Is the infrastructure for the schools – college preparation, grad school teacher-training, curricular materials such as textbooks, etc. – healthy? They are festooned with a rigorless leftist ideology, wokeness run amok.
And let’s pull the rug back on our commonly chaotic homes. Now there’s a new normal for you.
No wonder according to AEI, 60+% expressed hostility to the Electoral College. I’ll bet that most don’t understand it and the Founder’s complex reasoning for it. This is a discussion in a vacuum, and a poll result coming out of the vacuum.
Groupthink
The sudden popularity of marijuana is another thing. Let’s strip the debate of the much-ballyhooed medical benefits and get real. This is about getting high, and not much else. The popularity of weed has been on the upswing for at least a couple of generations, as getting high has made a comeback. As these young adherents pass through the age pyramid, they tow along with them the residue of their younger escapades. This might help account for the jump of 22% for legalization in the AEI analysis.
Combine the corrupted education with the increasing frivolity of our new techie world and we get the idea in polls that Biden will unite the country. Where’d that come from? Biden spent all summer threatening many of our jobs and imposing on us the semi-literate musings of a few half-wits in Congress. Unite the country by foisting on us over-complicated junk like hybrids, by having us grow more accustomed to intermittent blackouts and expensive energy, by having fewer guys and gals with guns and more overpaid Sociology majors patrolling our neighborhoods, by Soros-funded DA’s not enforcing the laws and emptying the jails, by freezing your kids out of college slots to benefit other upper middle-class kids who check the right identity boxes, by hiking taxes on job creators, by open-borders caterwauling . . . . ?
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer gets ready to begin her first State of the State address with Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey and Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist standing by. (photo: Casey Hull)
This isn’t the stuff of a “uniter”. The whole scheme is based on division and a smear: a parceling out of blame to one group and government bennies to categorical favorites. And then there’s the view in the poll that Biden will do better with COVID. Once again, where’d that come from? Biden is frozen in March 2020 when we didn’t know anything. He wants to double down on stupid. Measures such as lockdowns, school closures, and having us masked-up everywhere at nearly all times may have been appropriate when COVID-knowledge was a blank slate. Now we know a lot more about who is vulnerable (very few), the nature of the bug, and how to treat it. Instead of targeting efforts on the truly vulnerable, Biden and company wants to bring back totalitarianism, the kind of thing that failed at preventing our current second surge. Yeah, doubling down on stupid.
The polling analysis by AEI doesn’t say nearly as much about public opinion as it does about the condition of the minds behind those broader set of opinions. I think that it was Will Rogers who said, “It’s not what he doesn’t know that’s so dangerous. It’s what he knows that ain’t so.” Chew on that.
Hugh Hewitt’s radio program is a treasure. I savor his demeanor and interviews of all stripes of opinion-makers. However, his take on the two most important issues of today – the election and pandemic – drives me up the wall. He’s certainly not alone in his display of tunnel vision on these two matters.
Friday, while interviewing Steve Kornacki, NBC’s resident expert on polling, they both strayed into superficial comparisons of the 2020 election with previous ones. Right off the bat, it must be admitted that this election was like no other and hardly analogous. It’s the first election in my memory that a huge bulk, if not the majority, of the ballots cannot be assigned to particular living, breathing, and eligible voters with much certainty. Ballots were shot-gunned to buildings throughout the country, were taken inside, and nobody can legitimately vouch for each ballot’s treatment after that. It’s the exact opposite of the level of security when voting in-person. This election was strange, really strange. How is a comparison with previous elections even possible?
Kornacki blithely tries to do just that with Hewitt in tow. Kornacki cited the increasing urbanization of Georgia and the demographic dominance of the counties within the orbit of greater Atlanta, counties that Hillary won by 30% and Biden wins by 40%, to help explain Biden’s razor thin victory in the state. I’m not convinced the fact has much relevance. Demographic changes don’t occur at the speed of flipping a light switch, even though they are gradually happening in real time. Four years isn’t long enough for that factor to account for a change of 10%.
How can anyone brusquely brush off the possibility of a once-in-a-lifetime loosey-goosey election system accounting for the surge in Biden support? Kornacki and Hewitt might be suffering from glaucoma.
Hewitt would probably respond by saying that there’s no evidence of substantial fraud . . . but fraud is beside the point. He sees most issues as a lawyer would, which he is, in clinging to his conclusion that there isn’t sufficient evidence to throw aspersions on the result. He’s right if all matters must meet the standards of jurisprudence, but that’s a rarified environment involving unique standards. For real people living in the real word, we can’t conduct our lives by measuring all that we do to “beyond a reasonable doubt”. We must act on what is likely to be true.
Evidentiary norms of the courtroom are ill-suited for policy making, decisions about your child’s education, and assessing an election system that incorporated what would have been considered fraud just two years before. The system hid voting behind walls – addresses – and counting procedures that poured ballots into huge anonymous piles like a rain drop landing in a pond. The system legitimized fraud and made it next to impossible to uncover the misbehavior in “sufficient” quantities.
Indeed, this Rube Goldberg election system was a disgrace. Party activists, greased with wads of lefty billionaire cash, became the principle means for distributing the ballots as they scurried to deliver and gather absentee ballot applications from their favorite constituencies, and became the principle means for their collection in legal and “questionable” ballot harvesting operations. Vote-by-mail essentially codified scandalous conduct.
The election was a system with few, if any, authenticity checks. You can’t expect underpaid and overworked poll workers to instantly become forensic handwriting experts. This election became a race to garner the biggest pile of paper, not necessarily voters, because the system was set up to place a premium on paper, not bodies. Under these conditions, paper is made easier to pile than bodies.
Mail-in ballots being prepared for counting. (AP Photo/Don Ryan, File)
Simply put, you can’t correlate each piece of paper with a live body. A leap of faith is required to overcome that problem. Hewitt and Kornacki are unknowingly mired in something akin to a religious act.
And then there’s Hewitt’s stand on the pandemic. He announced that Gov. Newsom “is doing his best” and implored public officials like LA’s Mayor Garcetti to cordially ask the population “to endure just 3 more months of restrictions”. Au contraire, Newsom and Garcetti are deserving of condemnation not compliments and supplications to be nicer.
We’re in the midst of the much-anticipated second surge and many in power act as if they haven’t learned a darn thing. We now know that the truly vulnerable are a narrow slice of the population: the aged with serious health problems. Outside of that demographic sliver, almost all people would probably find influenza a more dangerous threat. And yet, we are told that nearly everyone’s entire way of life must be upended to protect this very small number of people, or protect ourselves from a threat that is no more dangerous than the seasonal flu. The hidden truth is, we can easily protect the vulnerable without making everyone else’s life a living hell.
If we do get it, we have proven therapeutics with vaccines on the way. We won’t die, unless we have the health issues that would imperil some of us every flu season. We had good reason to know this fact at the start but powerful officials got caught up in a hysteria that was incited by grossly inflated death rates. Remember those? But Garcetti, Cuomo in New York, and Whitmer in Michigan still act as if the embarrassingly faulty fatality numbers in March came from the burning bush on Mt. Horeb. They behave as if a spike in “positive” cases equates with a spike in deaths. Few things are further from the truth.
Jay Bhattacharya
Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford in his presentation in Hillsdale College’s October issue of “Imprimis” clears the medical fog of war. Most importantly, he addresses the confusion that paralyzes Whitmer’s and Newsom’s mind on that notorious death rate. The number that corrupts their brains muddles “cases” with “infections”. The former is a much smaller number than the latter, with the former producing a much higher death rate if used as the formula’s denominator. “Infections” is a bigger number because it refers to people with the virus or having had it. “Cases” are just the number of people with the virus that show up at a medical facility. Seroprevalence tests – an analysis of the presence of virus markers in the form of antibodies and proteins – in Santa Clara County, Ca., and replicated in 82 studies around the world, showed 50 times more infections over cases. Thus, the death rate properly calculated must drop behind the decimal point and not in front of it. Bottom line: the virus’s lethality was and is greatly overstated.
Targeted mask-wearing, quarantining and assisting the vulnerable, and an opening of life for 95% of our people should be the order of the day. Above all, get the kids back in school. Increases in positive cases should no longer paralyze us into ruination. If you get it, see your doctor, stay home, and drink plenty of fluids. Sound familiar?
The two issues are linked on account of the virus-panic being used to mutilate our elections, in addition to butchering our entire way of life. Hewitt wallows in misconceptions about the 2020 election and the virus. The school closings and lockdowns are destroying the path to meaningful lives. Our third world-style election system gave us a person of mental incontinence who will be left to populate the executive branch, and the courts, with delusionary leftists. We are going to be in for a rough ride, and the disfigurement of rational treatment of the two events is no good service.
I have much to be thankful. God has blessed me with a wonderful wife, two fabulous sons, dear friends and relations, a superb career in teaching, and a beautiful Montana retirement. Mine is a blessed life. Personally, it’s sunny. Extending the purview nationally, though, dark clouds are looming. Much of the dread emanates from Hollywood.
Speaking of the weather, in the language of climate change – the fad-issue of the day – the word of choice is “anthropogenic”, or “man-caused”. Our current political and cultural storm is anthropogenic by definition. Reality is being distorted through the funhouse mirror of Hollywood and the near uniform bias that permeates the great bulk of our media. It’s sad that informed contemplation has been replaced by this stuff.
I’m reminded of our constant flirtation with Hollywood’s diseased mind in the productions that roll off the entertainment industry’s assembly line. Take for example Netflix’s “The Crown”. The third season is upon us and my wife and I have seen them all in binge-watching forays. It’s a soap opera, and it isn’t history; however, there’s not much standing in the way for it, and most of Hollywood’s other affluence, from becoming the History. After all the schooling from K through PhD to the tune of trillions of dollars every year, a 19th century pioneer in an isolated homestead on the Great Plains is better equipped to handle the cultural noise than today’s typical upper classman in a university’s ASB. For them, and probably the bulk of streaming subscribers, the noise is mistaken for the music because there’s not much in the head to contradict it.
After viewing the last episode of season 3, I have a chance to ruminate on what I’ve seen. My conclusion? It’s entertainment, not history – and extremely opinionated entertainment at that. The butchering of important personages in the life of Queen Elizabeth Il, especially those on the right, is all too obvious. Churchill is reduced to a whimpering and emotional wreck. The reality of his forthrightness is hard to perceive in his frequent, blubbering downpour of tears. In an attempt to build up Elizabeth in relation to the old white guy, the script writers concocted the fantasy of a young Queen Elizabeth lecturing the elderly Churchill on some point of the British constitution in season 1. It’s absolutely unbelievable, but maybe believable to a poorly informed audience.
The blubbering Churchill as portrayed by John Lithgow.
Prince Philip comes in for analogous treatment. In the course of 3 seasons, I can’t recall an instance of his influence and advice being treated in a positive and sagacious light. How could somebody spend an entire life and be wrong throughout? I have my doubts. Counterpoint is a useful plot device, but this one presents a towering female Socrates to a bumbling prince consort. Could this be another opportunity for Hollywood to present the “other” upstaging the patriarchy? Maybe not, but it’s a familiar theme in everything from ads to movies. The zeal to correct for a generalized “wrong” leads to a fiction that will be mistaken for non-fiction in a population unable to draw the distinction.
Tobias Menzies as Prince Philip in The Crown.
Take the character of Margaret Thatcher in this last season. Her character is molded into an emotionally scarred, rigid scold with strangely misogynistic tendencies. Imagine it, the worst of Britain’s aristocratic and sexist good ol’ boys in their men-only clubs have nothing on Britain’s first woman prime minister according to the people who put this thing together. The incongruency is profound.
Interestingly as a matter of fact, it’s well-known that she loved her mother.
The hard face of Gillian Anderson’s caricature of Margaret Thatcher in a seated position with her cabinet.
To make this portrayal a functioning theme, the setting of the 1970’s is stripped from the story. Other than a brief reference to strikes that lead to energy shortages during the tenure of Labour prime minister Harold Wilson – who’s portrayed positively by the way – we’re not given much to understand the reasons for the rise of Thatcher.
Let’s plow the fields of real history. In the 1970’s, the UN’s OECD had projected that the UK was on a glide path to the economic status of Albania. The unions had crippled the country with rampant strikes. Garbage wasn’t picked up due to strikes as shortages and inflation plagued consumers. Government-owned industries were mismanaged black holes at huge public expense. Anthony Scargill, President of the National Union of Mineworkers, an avowed Marxist, held the country hostage with his demands and strikes that periodically cut-off of the coal supply. The UK was a mess and ready for Thatcher. Don’t tell me that there wasn’t room for that context in a multi-season serial instead of the excursions into Princess Diana’s anorexia-bulimia.
Piles of rubbish lay uncollected on the streets in the winter of 1978/1979 amid strikes Litter mounted on the streets during the Winter of Discontent as collectors went on strike Gravediggers joined the strike action too, meaning that vans were filled with bodies to be embalmed and stored in disused factories.The miner’s strike crippled the country’s main source of heat and electricity.People queuing outside of bakery during flour shortage (‘the bread strike’) 1977, A sign reading ‘Sorry No Petrol’ outside a UK service station during a petrol shortage on February 1978. (Photograph: Pete Primarello/Getty Images)The unemployment rate began to spike before Thatcher became prime minister and remained high till the country is weaned off of the central planning of Labour’s socialism.
The Falklands War gets all of . . . 10 minutes . . . at most. And then it’s only mentioned as a backdrop to Thatcher’s narcissistic grandstanding. The reawakening of pride of country, and the magnitude of the success, was reduced to the scene of a self-absorbed Thatcher in a victory parade’s grandstand. The fact is lost on the producers that the success in the Falklands War gave Thatcher the breathing space to make headway in de-socializing the country. A much freer economy, a legacy of Thatcher’s reforms, would make possible the more prosperous UK of today.
And then there’s all the intimate dialogue. Where’d that stuff come from? Sure, the script writers have to put together a story by stringing the characters in verbal interaction. But most of it was most certainly contrived. There was no-one in the rooms of private quarters taking dictation on the conversations. It’s a tool in the scriptwriter’s kit to craft the character for certain plot purposes. It’s also how ideological zealotry can infect a story, and replace reality with a politically useful unreality.
Be prepared for next season. It’s likely to be Diana, more Diana, and Diana all the time.
Am I going to hang out in front of the tv when season 4 arrives? I don’t know. I’m inclined not to. I have no appetite for the elevation of ex-Princess Diana to sainthood.
Some logos lose their currency after a history of clownishness and/or misbehavior. Some examples might be “lawyer”, “college-educated”, “journalist”, “systemic racism”, and “fact checker”.
USAToday’s indomitable fact checker, Chelsey Cox, on her editor’s insistence, looked into a story on the website Babylon Bee, a satirizing website in the mold of SNL down to its marrow, on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision to vacate the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Really, I kid you not (on the media’s gullibility, that is).
Here’s a part of Babylon Bee’s story. It’s a hoot.
[Headline] “Ninth Circuit Court Overturns Death Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.” “SAN FRANCISCO, CA—In a landmark ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. . . .’ Death, at its core, is a construct designed to subvert the rule of law by taking pro-choice liberal judges away from us too soon . . . We hereby rule any attempt by President Trump to appoint a replacement to be unconstitutional. We will block any attempt until we figure out a way to resurrect her or maybe clone her and restore her to her already ‘legally alive’ state. We’re still figuring that part out.”
Nicole Carroll, USAToday editor-in-chief
Our fearless fact checker, after a week of inquiry, concluded that it was “satire”. Without a hint of self-awareness, Cox writes,
“We rate this claim SATIRE, based on our research. A satirical article about the 9th Circuit “overturning” Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death has no basis in fact. It is true that the 9th Circuit has ruled against many Trump-era policies.”
Portland woman getting dowsed with white paint after challenging “protesters” for damaging property.
We are sorting each other out; however, events have accelerated the process, like the coddling of violent anarchists by woke metropolitan governing establishments. Moving vans have been pulling out of California for decades, and now the itch to relocate has spread up and down the Pacific coast from Seattle to San Diego. The driving force, unbeknownst to urban politicos, is something that they like to call “progressivism”, but in reality it’s “socialism” (public control – not ownership – of economic activity). Combined with the cultural leftism that is resplendent in urban public policies, a noxious brew of codes and mandates is offered up that is not conducive to healthy living.
Here is one mother’s account of what has happened to her beloved Portland.
Signs at a protest against racial inequality and police violence in Portland, Ore., July 30, 2020. (Caitlin Ochs/Reuters)
It’s better to put a face and life (and lives) to the great migration. Her rendition of the situation indicates that the problem is much broader and lies much deeper than a particular set of city councilmen or mayors. Granted, local elections aren’t attention-getters and turnout is low, but the majority who does show up at the polls is remarkably, consistently, and militantly of the left down to their personal values. These are popularly-elected governments. And as a result, the tolerance of the Sermon on the Mount has been turned into open and pervasive hostility for the few remaining holdouts of tradition.
“Joanna” in the article describes the stance of her liberal/left neighbors change from friendliness to sneers and bitterness for her support of Republicans and Trump. 2016 was a watershed in her mind. Everything went south as many residents on her street became surly after the rest of the country seemingly rejected their vision of the better world. To borrow a woke term, many urban denizens were “triggered” by the folks in flyover country actually voting their interests and values.
Trump sign vandalized in Eastern Shore, Md., Juyly 4, 2020.
The scene, in my mind, must have been reminiscent of Bolshevik agents in the 1920’s and 30’s stoking hatred among peasants for the ones who happen to be a little better off. Only in this case it isn’t Central Committee operatives doing the dirty work. Minds have been shaped for years in the fashionable media-saturated existence of our urban complexes and too much formal public education without wisdom. Portland has been a basket case for years, and the rest have been teetering on the edge of oblivion for quite some time.
The Great Skedaddle II, ironically, is now starting to include more than the few remaining Republican holdouts in our metroplexes. As one pundit (a Democrat) put it, law-abiding Democrats are joining the caravans. Even they can’t stomach the consequences of their beliefs.
Our left-leaning media, hot for any evidence of disenchantment with Trump by their blatant showcasing of anti-Trump groups like the Lincoln Project, missed, or simply ignored, the even more eventful sea change in the Democratic Party. In the July 7 Democratic primary in New York’s 16th Congressional District, Jamaal Bowman defeated Eliot Engel, a three-decade veteran of Congress.
An old-style liberal of the JFK stripe, Engel faced a socialist – which is a more truthful word for radical progressive – in the person of Bowman, and lost. The Party is stampeding left, pulling the old party war horses along with them, and nary a word from the media about this coup d’tat. Now, this is a party more at home with Marx than James Madison — when they aren’t busy concocting excuses for toppling his statue.
Oh how 15 years can make a big difference. In a 2005 interview, Engel said the despicable (despicable to the ears of the Squad and BLM), “We, as a country, aren’t perfect. We’re all human, we all make mistakes. But I think our vision—what we want to share, what can be taken from our experience—is overwhelmingly positive. I don’t agree with the Blame America crowd.” Sounds about right to me; however, today, those words are more likely to only come out of the mouths of Republicans. Today’s Democrats are fire-breathing advocates for the construction of their soviet.
Like Trump or no, him and his party are opposed by a socialist revolutionary party. That is the pertinent fact on the ground.
I was watching Fox News this morning as I was making breakfast for my family and, low and behold, there was a piece on the controversy of mail-in balloting. They poo-poohed the concern about the potential fraud in massive postal voting. The whole report was a crock.
They narrowly focused on malfeasance once the ballots get to the county clerk, trumpeting all the checks in place there to prevent it. That’s NOT the real threat! Come on! The problem lies at the other end of the process: the ballots arriving at the homes.
Let me lay it out for our journos: we are seeing the end of the Australian ballot – i.e., the secret ballot. What’s that? It’s how we vote: go to a polling place, receive a ballot, and then vote in a booth. No one knows how you voted and no one can intimidate you into voting a particular way. Say goodbye to it.
Mail-in voting murders the freedom of the person to vote their conscience. Tens of ballots can arrive at a residence and plopped on the kitchen table … and who knows who’s filling them out. Do you really think that a signature underneath a perjury statement matters? Get real.
Anybody who has performed canvassing with voter registration rolls (they’re public documents by the way) will notice the single residence with 5, 6, or 8 registrations. What’s to stop one person voting 8 times? Answer: NOTHING!
Our media is a fount of ignorant reporting. No wonder opinion polls favor the monstrosity. The public isn’t informed of the ways that widespread voting-by-mail can produce one huge scam.
Rioters throw back tear-gas canisters fired by federal law-enforcement officers in Portland, Ore., July 29, 2020. (Caitlin Ochs/Reuters)
Please read the interview between National Review’s Michael Brandon Dougherty (a man of the right) and Michael Tracey ( a left-leaning independent journalist) found here.
Michael Brandon DoughertyMichael Tracey
What you have been reading and viewing in mainstream media about our current urban disorders is a sham. It is the duty of the responsible citizen to ferret out fact from fiction, there being much to filter and uncover. The needs of our current moment require something more than quips on Facebook.
A party line was evident since the disturbances first erupted in our cities a couple of months ago. The Democratic Party line is to characterize the events as “peaceful protests”, with emphasis on “peaceful”. Jerry Nadler (D, NY), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, went so far as to characterize contrary reports of violence as a “myth that’s being spread only in Washington DC.” The word “peaceful” is ubiquitously attached to “protest” in Dem Party circles and throughout much of our biased legacy media: CNN, MSNBC, the networks, and big city urban dailies like the NYT and WaPo. But is it true?
No, no, no! Tracey went across the country reporting on the events. He didn’t find “peaceful protests”. He discovered something that can only be described as an insurrection. While ostensibly the “protests” started as an outcry against racism, at the tip of the spear were white middle-class urban twenty-somethings, and the victims were overwhelmingly minorities, many black. Far from there being only marches and speeches, Tracey discovered a bombed-out, boarded-up, and vandalized urban landscape stretching for blocks, a hulking mass of dystopia.
A portion of downtown Minneapolis after the riots.
Portland he describes as “unique”. It has been in a permanent state rebellion for years. So, why are the Democrats so keen on hiding the truth about Portland, et al? One answer: politics! Since the election of Trump, the “Resistance” became the “Movement”, not that there’s much difference between the two. The “Movement” encompasses more than the armed militia of the Democratic Party on the streets of Portland – BLM, Antifa, and other muscular utopians – but also the cores of our major cultural institutions. Aleksander Solzhenitsyn’s account of Russia at the dawn of revolution depicts a similar malign disorientation. The threat is real and broad based.
Louis Vitton store front, downtown Portland, May 29.
We are facing a real revolutionary march down the well-traveled road of the French Revolution’s Reign of Terror and the Bolshevik’s Red Terror. This will not end in a pretty place if allowed to fester and grow. The American people will have to steel themselves against an onslaught of misinformation meant to advance a huge totalitarian-like power grab. So, please read.
Priest and landlord condemned before a Red Tribunal during the Bolshevik Red Terror..
Someone adds fuel to a fire set in downtown Portland during protests on Friday, May 29, 2020, in downtown Portland. (photo: Mark Graves/The Oregonian)
People wonder where we got the screaming college students who demand the immediate surrender to their opinions by everyone. People also might wonder where we got the roaming gangs of radical left twenty-somethings who claim the wisdom to pass judgment on centuries-old personages not advantaged from sitting at the feet of narrowly doctrinaire professors like they did. Seldom can it be said that fanatics are born. They are bred in the culture, family, and schools. Probably, the first two set the stage for the influence of the third.
Then these twisted minds filter out into corporate boardrooms, the professions, media, and teaching positions to perpetuate the cycle. I was reminded of the phenomena after reading a back issue of National Geographic Magazine from December 2018.
After the first four articles, I began to wonder whether I was reading “Mother Jones Magazine” under another title. They amounted to a single op-ed for bigger-getting-bigger government of the international variety, of cultural left agitprop, socialist redistribution, and the lionization of a once honorable activist who descended into rank partisanship (John Lewis, D, Md.). The National Geographic Society has been absorbed into collectivism’s Borg.
One common technique in the arsenal of today’s Left is “branding”. Subsuming totalitarianism under a catchy phrase – or “brand” – frequently does the trick. For example, the conservative-looking President and CEO of the National Geographic Society, Tracy Wolstencroft, opined on the need for a “Planet in Balance”. What does that mean? I’ll tell you what it means: it means Control, control of the mind and everything else through government power.
Tracy Wolstencroft
It’s the same old ploy first pushed by Stanford’s great gift to the cause, Paul Ehrlich and his “The Population Bomb”. First Ehrlich postulates X number of people and Y number of resources and, voilà, we have disaster – unless we adopt Ehrlich’s tome to replace the Bible, erect a plethora of government carrots and sticks, and implement mammoth brainwashing in the schools-turned-reeducation-camps.
Wolstencroft goes through the trite litany of the usual suspects of overpopulation, apocalyptic climate change, and no more tigers, et al, and we arrive at the all-too-familiar ground of environmental totalitarianism. His unacknowledged eco-socialism, like all socialisms, has an alluring fetish for eco-totalitarianism. Of course, Wolstencroft’s gazillions earned in the securities industry will insulate him from the consequences of his beliefs while everyone else enters the new normal of personal malaise common to all socialisms. His kids will be okay; as for everyone else’s …?
Following Wolstencrofts’ sermon was chief editor Susan Goldberg’s softball interview of John Lewis in a piece titled “We Can Lay Down the Burden of Race”. Au contraire, Lewis can hardly put it down. He has spent a lifetime in the fever swamps of race politics. For Lewis, it’s Jim Crow and 1955 Montgomery, Alabama, forever.
John Lewis
He makes much of the Charlottesville “riot” (2017) but was dismissive of the rioting and looting in Ferguson, Mo., (2014). He called for an end to the violence in Minneapolis (2020), to his credit, but couldn’t avoid the society-wide “justice denied” mantra for which he clung till his last breath. He didn’t seem too concerned for the rights of property owners (black or white), the right to self-defense (black or white), the right to equal protection for Asians and “whites” in college admissions, while advancing the cause of other nations’ citizens who happen to be in our country in violation of our laws: an odd stance for someone who claimed to be a stalwart of justice for African-Americans as he ironically pushed the interests of another group (the “undocumented”) to the detriment of his own.
He just couldn’t let go of the race thing when he said, “… the scars and stings of racism are still deeply embedded in our society ….” He never wanted to get rid of it and kept moving the goal posts to retain its usefulness as a whipping boy. He’s like Christopher Reeves who couldn’t shed the stereotype of Superman. Lewis rose to fame fighting Jim Crow and he would forever claim its presence, even when the nation did all it could to eradicate it. Unlike Reeves, though, Lewis reveled in his race-baiting persona and rode it to fame and a career in politics.
There was no pushback by our stalwart (?) member of the fourth estate, Susan Goldberg.
The socialism line was front and center in the next piece on the Inupiat people of Alaska. A frequently repeated angle in the story was the tendency of the glorious Inupiat people to equally share the proceeds of the glorious hunt. All well and good for a small tribe wishing to remain the same, except they weren’t … remaining the same, that is. These folks weren’t wearing animal skins and possessed weapons and tools that didn’t come from the bones of the bowhead whale, the tools and weapons of choice for their ancestors. The outfit of an Inupiat hunter pictured in the article belied the impression of an indigenous people at one with nature. The rifle slung over the shoulder came from one of those factories belching pollution and exploiting hundreds of wage slaves in a scheme to bilk unearned profits from the masses, or so the young writer might have written if he wasn’t so enamored with patronizing another non-white colonized people (using the lingo of the “social justice warrior”).
Inupiaq Eskimo hunters carry a rifle and walking stick while walking over the shore ice along the Chukchi Sea, Barrow, Alaska. (photo: Design Pics Inc/Alamy)
To be honest, the depiction was one of manifest incongruency. Some association with capitalism must have its appeal for the brave Inupiat people. They seem to want a lot of our stuff. I would too if I was beset by a polar bear and had to resort to a sharpened piece of whale bone at the tip of a wooden shaft.
Wanting a lot of our stuff was one theme in the next excursion into a mind that tilts left. Who’d the editors choose to join the lineup? It was Jared Diamond, UCLA Geography prof and author of Guns, Germs, and Steel. He presented an incoherent piece of punditry that rambled through the 9/11 hijackers, ebola, social envy, and to his main point: inequality is the single biggest threat to harmony and the march to kumbaya (pidgin English for “Lord, come be here”).
Jared Diamond
Let’s take a timeout to unwrap the “inequality” thing. Definitions first. Don’t confuse “same” with “equality”. Things don’t have to be the “same” to be “equal”, and vice versa. It depends on your metric for both. If your measuring stick is quantity of wealth, as it seems to be for Diamond, he obviously means the equality in wealth and not a demand for people to be the same in all things as they pursue it. Diamond’s obsession is with “wealth”.
But is the inequality of it always and forever bad? Is it the principle cause of all bad things today? Color me skeptical. Inequality is found everywhere in nature. Why not with us? Everything from rocks to trees and from snakes to apes are not equal. Watch a herd of hippos and the dominant alpha male protect his harem. He’s got more than the rest of the male pachyderms. I’ve got a forest of pines on my property and none of them are equal. Some have obviously hogged more light. The only way for equality to exist is our forcible intervention to cultivate uniformity in a tree farm behind fences, something reminiscent of a gulag.
So with people. Individuals, tribes, groups, and societies vary in their accumulated wealth. I suppose that the riches could be resented if it was capriciously extracted by force. But what if it was sanctioned by time-honored custom? What if it was an outcome of some person’s natural affinity for acquiring it and having the freedom to pursue the natural affinity? Ditto for societies. Some possess an ethos that comports well with rising standards of living, and the acceptance of some having more, they being the catalyst for the wealth that unavoidably spreads to many, many others.
Got it? If not, read a little from Joseph Schumpeter.
Fon Ndofoa Zofoa III of Babungo, the Northwest province of Cameroon. He inherited 72 wives and 500 children after his father’s death. (photo: CNN)
Diamond can’t seem to grasp the naturalness of inequality. And he can’t grasp the fact that when you try to impose it, as in a tree farm, you never really get rid of it. You only changed the protocols for it. Instead of a Vanderbilt getting rich from providing a cheaper and more luxurious service to the public, the Bolsheviks created the grasping party and state apparatchik – the nomenklatura in Soviet-speak. If you want to talk about arbitrary, that’s arbitrary. The whole system is only possible if the state is the sole proprietor of the guns in the place – i.e., the police, secret and otherwise, and the armed forces (no posse comitatus laws here). Those unwilling to tolerate the scheme disappear or find themselves in the “tree farm”. Inequality oozes out despite their best efforts to eradicate it.
A Soviet-era poster of the heroes of the Soviet state.
Nonetheless, Diamond charges forward into his diagnosis of our greatest sin: inequality. You see, in Diamond’s words, the 9/11 killers were born of “inequality” in his final analysis. You see, in Diamond’s words, the conduit for inequality is globalization. From the interconnectedness of globalization, we are supposed to get envy on the part of the non-white everywhere. And envy translates into resentment, and then he gets back to the terrorism thing. His whole schema is a binge of rambling incongruity.
Yes, Jared, ease of travel and communication makes it much easier to spread the hatred of America as the Great Satan and provide the opportunity for boxcutter-wielding fanatics to turn airliners into missiles. But what genuinely animated them? Was it really their anger at not possessing a house in the ‘burbs? If you listen to their words, they are bitter about Western decadence. Remember, these are the same people who throw homosexuals off of six-story buildings. They want a return to their seventh century. Diamond, go ahead, try to uncover their hidden motivations through Jungian projection. I’ll rely on their words.
ISIS fighters.
The internet and diesel and fan turbines don’t make murderous zealots. People do that quite on their own. Who knows the origins of the world’s worst bad ideas? They have popped up since man first put stylus to clay. The last century and into our own was especially plagued by them. And some of them reside in the cranium of Jared Diamond. One could be Diamond’s infatuation with levelling. He won’t come out and say it but it’s all about international and national socialism. According to him, we must flood the zone – the zone being everywhere America’s upper and pampered middle-class are horrified – with dollars. Government-engineered Robin Hood is another way of saying “socialism”. Diamond is all into it.
But we’ve been doing it since the US first emerged as the numero uno economy at the dawn of the 20th century. After WWII, we jumped in with both feet with the Marshal Plan and endless foreign aid ever since. What has it earned us? We got the moniker of Great Satan and despots in poor countries peddling socialism as the path to power, and more inequality under their thumb. Redistribution, the go-to for the myopic like Diamond, hasn’t worked. It hasn’t even worked here with our own interminable War on Poverty. Is Diamond insane, following the well-known formula for its presence: repeating the same mistake but still expecting it to succeed?
A vacant and blighted home on Detroit’s east side. (photo: Rebecca Cook/Reuters)
The error will be repeated so long as there is a constituency for it. The more, the merrier. One way to inflate the fan base is to internationalize it. Marx saw the advantage: Workers of the world unite! Diamond has no more use for the nation than Marx. He invents an “evil” – inequality – and pushes on to internationalism. People like Diamond have an instinct for it and quickly move to empower unaccountable international authorities to take what didn’t work in America – a War on Poverty – and implant it in a UN commissariat without the slightest say-so from the people who had their money appropriated. Internationalization is essentially autocratic bureaucratization. For Diamond, he doesn’t get it. He’s still wallowing in the ether of the heady days of the First International (1864), the agglomeration of 19th century socialist pinheads. He’s there with our century’s edition of the silly trope.
After four articles, the pressure had built up in me to such an extent that I had to respond. This is what goes for as “mainstream”. Nothing can be further from the truth, unless the poison of the past has suddenly become broadly chic again. In that case, we’re back to broadly popular insanity. If that is true, we’re in more trouble than I thought.
National Geographic Society and its signature publication is part of the problem, not the solution.
The word “callous” comes from the Latin “callum”, hardened skin. The idea of a nice pair of Nikes was unknown for most of human existence. A lifetime of barefoot travel means hardened skin and “callouses” on the feet. See the connection? So, can a lifetime of committed political zealotry lead to an emotionally hardened personality, one with a furtive substratum of acceptance of wrecked lives to achieve long-sought ends? “To chop down a forest splinters will fly” was famously invoked by Lenin to signal his desire to build a socialist utopia on a corduroy road of corpses. I’m wondering that somewhere deep down in the psyche of your average Left/Democrat officeholder lies a little Lenin.
Maybe the thought shouldn’t be so surprising given their affection for Lenin’s ends, just without the holocaust … or, then again, I might be too optimistic. There’s no doubt that avowed socialists are piloting the Biden campaign bus in more ways than one. Assisting them along the way are a cadre of public executives at the state and local levels. I can’t think of a better way for them to reach their socio-political nirvana and upend a detested incumbent cruising to reelection than to create the stench of failure around him by fabricating an economic depression and lawlessness in the streets. Instilling a sense of fear and dread in the public works wonders for those seeking power over the body of Donald Trump.
I’m loathed to think that people could be so cruel, but there they sit in their little local soviets. They create their own banners to hide the reality, like Cuomo’s “New York on Pause”. California’s Newsom was the first to jump at closing down 14.6% of the US economy. The others followed suit. Soon 44 million Americans were out of work. Thousands of small businesses were shuttered as “nonessential” while the big boys – supermarkets, big-box stores, etc. – were allowed to reinforce their near-monopoly because they were labeled “essential”. Economic feudalism engineered by government dictat.
The media picks up on the drumbeat. Indeed, they are the drumbeat. The incessant dark message of doom about a virus whose ill-effects were egregiously overstated and whose lethality was highly targeted on a narrow segment of the elderly was churned into an apocalypse … and an excuse for statewide and local totalitarianism.
No wonder that in a recent Axios-Ipsos Coronavirus Index poll 51% of parents were stricken with fear about sending their kids back to school in the fall. Forget about any conception of risk, about any conception that risk is chronologically uneven, that risk follows their kids the moment that they leave the house at any time. Applied consistently, helicopter parents should morph into gulag superintendents.
Soon, a sixth-grader becomes a fourth-grader after “distance learning” under the tutelage of distracted and overwhelmed adults and the ever-present allure of the nearby Xbox. Some parents are wealthy enough to keep the learning spigot flowing with hired help. Economic feudalism will be followed by education feudalism.
Then we have the same culprits in many cases – already experienced at the nullification of federal immigration law – thumbing their noses at the White House by allowing their streets and downtowns to be turned into playgrounds of violent anarchy. Remember Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan’s “We could have a summer of love!” in CHAZ? In-between the arrests of unmasked joggers in Central Park and the painting of Marxist Black Lives Matter graffiti on New York City’s avenues, Mayor Bill de Blasio slashes the police force, mutes his constitutional role as guardian of public safety, and pronounces justifications for mayhem. The scene is repeated throughout the country in any deep blue bastion.
The economic misery and violence are quietly sanctioned, or at least seems to be. These lefty poobahs don’t seem to be in much of a hurry to quell the disorder, or bring the kids back to school, or get the adults back to work. Oh, I forgot, it’s the virus and “race justice”, they say.
And, by the way, if it ain’t “race justice”, it’s “science”. They have tried to corner the market on “science”. Yes, “science” is helpful in decision making, but these politicos have choices to make. That’s why we elect people: to make choices. Recognizing relevant scientific information, though, isn’t a green light to the Disneyland of Bernie/AOC’s dreams. “Science” can give you the nature of the virus but it can’t tell you the choice to make among competing risks. Socialists like those who run the Democratic Party always think that “science” is their personal handmaiden and, funny, always ends up with them being ensconced in the catbird seat of some all-powerful commissariat. Hogwash! “Science” and despotism aren’t peas in the same pod.
In the end, if polls are any indication, the Lefties have proven successful in creating the stench of failure around Trump, even though, remarkably, they are wholly responsible for the anguish. Which brings to mind the state of education in America. What else could explain the easily-achieved bamboozlement of the American public? The Democrats discovered that enough blue state governors and mayors exist to put American society into a tailspin. Are they calloused enough to do it? Are they cunning enough? I don’t know, but I’m suspicious given the wide lane of misinformation and ignorance open to them.