Mar 27 2025

The Left’s Campaign Against Christianity Continues

     If you’ve been in any doubt that the Left has a hateboner for Christiainty, this should reassure you:

     A Seattle suburb canceled its upcoming “Coffee with a Cop” event after it faced protests because of the coffee shop owner’s Christian beliefs.
     Seattle radio host Jason Rantz reported that the city of Shoreline, Washington, canceled the community event, which aims to strengthen the relationship between police officers and residents, after the city’s Facebook page was flooded with negative comments from liberals upset that Pilgrim Coffeehouse would host the event.
     Pilgrim Coffeehouse is owned by Keith Carpenter, head pastor of Epic Life Church. The church states it believes marriage is between “one man and one woman” on its website.
     Commenters vowed to hold a protest and one even called for the coffee shop to leave the city, saying that Carpenter’s views on marriage did not align with the progressive city’s ideals.

     Apparently, they who hold “progressive ideals” cannot abide the existence of divergent views. We all remember what happened to Sweet Cakes By Melissa, Jack Phillips’s Masterpiece Cakeshop, and Memories Pizza in Indiana. Now we have this.

     Does anyone really need more evidence of the total intolerance and exclusivity of the Left? The very people who accuse Christians of intolerance merely for holding different views? Of excluding those who differ with us?

     It’s saddening to note that the Shoreline police department has so little courage:

     In response to the backlash, Shoreline abruptly canceled the event, Rantz reported.
     “It was neither the department’s nor the City’s intent to make any community member feel unwelcome based on the selection of the event venue and the values that the venue may or may not hold. When planning future events, we will be more intentional with our venue selection,” Shoreline City Hall wrote in a March 12 statement posted to Facebook.

     I would expect more from our supposed guardians and enforcers of justice. But apparently, crossing the Left is simply too risky for such brave souls.

     At the time of the Founding, James Madison expressed the opinion that the best protection any sect in America has against persecution is the numerousness of sects. Of course, Madison lived at a time when virtually everyone in the nation was either some variety of Christian, or favorably disposed toward Christianity in general. He did not foresee the arrival of pseudo-religions such as Islam and Progressivism.

     (To those who are about to prattle about the Westboro Baptists, note this: there are no reported cases of any Westboro Baptist allegiant doing harm to anyone else. They protest, weakly though somewhat offensively. But they have yet to make any event impossible to run or attend.)

     It begins to look as if a pushback against such “activism” is required. Someone’s livelihood is endangered, once again, merely for being a Christian. Are there enough decent persons in Shoreline, or in the state of Washington, to mount such a pushback? Securing media attention would not be difficult, if local and regional papers were barraged with sufficient emails and phone calls. Have all Washington’s decent persons had their spines removed?

Mar 27 2025

The Most Ruinous Addiction

     I’ve said it before: there’s no drug more addictive than money – especially “free” money. Millions of welfare clients testify to that mutely, day after shiftless day.

     So do welfare continents:

     The continental ruling class bristled vigorously over [Vice-President J. D.] Vance’s Munich speech in which he told the gathered natsec worthies that it’s time for Europe to wean itself from the Pentagon’s teat, deal with their domestic challenges, and figure out how to shoulder more of their own defense. Trump signaled in his first administration that he was dissatisfied with Europe’s sponging on American defense capabilities, but most Europeans didn’t take him seriously. Well, in Trump 2.0, the reckoning is here.
     What European elites hate about Vance and the administration he represents is that he reveals their own poverty. Why shouldn’t the great and rich nations of Europe be doing more to stand on their own two feet? Why should American taxpayers, over thirty years since the close of the Cold War, continue to subsidize Europe’s defense so European politicians can build generous welfare states while at the same time refusing to deal with the mass migration crisis, which is a clear and present danger to European stability and security?

     There’s that word “should” again. Vance is as plainspoken as politicians come, which was surely part of President Trump’s reason for selecting him for the VP post. The meat of the matter under discussion was whether the U.S., which has a relatively small stake in Suez Canal shipping security, should send the Navy into the Canal to guarantee freedom of passage. The principal beneficiaries would be the countries of Europe: America’s welfare clients since 1945.

     Just now the arguments about NATO – including whether it’s time for the U.S. to pull out – are flying thick and fast. Without American participation, the European members would have to fund their own defense establishments, which would put quite a hurt on their social-welfare-heavy national budgets. The security of the Suez Canal shipping lane is only one example of the sort of burden Europe would have to shoulder for itself.

     Europe would rather not… but is it in America’s interests, whether short or long term, to permit the Old World’s military dependency on us to continue?

Mar 27 2025

Chronicles Of Language Abuse

     High-energy physicists and nuclear chemists are as liable to misuse or distort a word as any untutored groundling:

     How Japan took the lead in the race to discover element 119

     At the start of the new year, nuclear chemists Hiromitsu Haba and Kouji Morimoto slide precisely 119 Japanese yen into the collection box at their local shrine. They are seeking good fortune in their hunt for an elusive entity: element 119.

     Element 119! That’s deep into the transuranics. Where will it be “discovered?” Well, in a cyclotron, of course:

     Haba and Morimoto are part of a research team at Riken Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science, just outside Tokyo. The team has spent the past 5 years using a particle accelerator to smash atoms together at high speeds in a bid to synthesize the new element.
          Once created, element 119 will contain 119 protons—the most of any element discovered. It will sit on a new, eighth row of the periodic table, and it could be the first element to be named since 2016.

     Just a moment: didn’t the article say Haba and Morimoto were hunting for element 119? It sounds to me much more like they were attempting to create it. Let’s read on a bit:

     After around 4 trillion atomic collisions, just three atoms of element 113 were detected, and each existed for around 2 ms before breaking apart. But that was enough. Element 113 was the first element to have been discovered in Asia. It was given the name nihonium after Nihon—a name for Japan that translates to “land of the rising sun.”
     Hideto En’yo, Riken’s then director, wrote that the discovery of a new element had been “an impossible dream for Japanese people” and that “thereafter, Japanese became fanatics of the Periodic Table” (Pure Appl. Chem. 2019, DOI: 10.1515/pac-2019-0810).

     Is it linguistically legitimate to claim that one has discovered something that he actually created by technological artifice? Doesn’t seem kosher to me, but then, everyone knows what a fussbudget I am about using words according to their proper meanings.

Mar 26 2025

Expectation Management

I was listening to the Jesse Kelly show some days back, and he pointed out that there will be no impeachments of the rogue judges that are currently doing the Democrat’s dirty work of holding up Trump’s agenda. As much as I would love to see these black-robed marxist activists drug out from their offices and humiliated as they slunk off into the distance, it’s not going to happen. You need 67 votes in the Senate to impeach a judge, and the GOP only holds 54. And yes, the Democrats will refuse to impeach anyone who’s doing their bidding. You could have hand-written notes from George Soros to Judge Boasberg instructing him to issue injunctions that violate the Constitution, and the Democrats will keep that corrupt judge on the bench because he’s working for them, not for the USA.

So, in much the same vein, I would love to see charges against the people who allowed this, but I know it’s not going to happen.

During their conversation, Mike Benz shared how Barack Obama was using money to USAID to pretend to send “aid” overseas. In actuality, Obama was laundering the taxpayer dollars and using it to train “rent-a-mobs” instead!

In short, Barry O’Bumblefuck was running a scam using US tax dollars to attack the US. Because he’s a communist who hates America. And he’s still running the Democrat party right now. He was the puppet pulling Drooling Joe’s strings.

So no, I don’t expect anything to change on that front. But taking their money away is almost just as good as seeing them dance a jig in mid-air. The pain that these communists must be going through as they see all their hard work of corrupting institutions fall by the wayside due to a lack of funds, it’s delicious to me.

Sometimes you have to be satisfied with a lesser result. Manage your expectations. But despite the blockade thrown up by communist judges, I’m still enjoying Trump 2.0. And watching the Democrat party come part is a side benefit.

Just some random thoughts from a random guy.

Mar 26 2025

Attention To This Oddity

I have a small breakfast every morning that I insist be a half grapefruit.

While visiting in California, I purchased a bag. It was from Florida: normal, juicy and sweet.

When I returned home to Florida, the bag I purchased was from California: smaller, dryer and more tart.

Do truckers have a lock on shipping bundles of grapefruit across the country simply so they don’t have to return empty or what? No that makes no sense either, but I can’t imagine why I’m stuck in Florida with worse product when the best is home grown.

The prices of the bags were essentially the same.

Can anyone explain this waste of trucking?

Mar 26 2025

Baroque By Steps

This may be the most widely recognizable of Bach’s compositions. As I saw this as a fascinating way to “finger” an organ, it serves as a lighter start to my day than the usual.

Mar 26 2025

The Laagering Continues

     In July of 2023 – doesn’t that seem like an eternity ago? – I wrote:

     When the members of a society perceive that the dangers to them are increasing, they will contract their loyalties – i.e., they will move their allegiances from larger affinities to smaller ones – in response.

     This tribalism dynamic has predictive power of the sociological sort. It doesn’t offer delivery dates, and it can be a bit vague about what tribes will form around what shared characteristics. Yet we see the contractions, and we note how they conform to our own impulses when we sense threats gatherings around us.

     Political Establishments visibly obey the dynamic. A few recent examples:

     Yes, our Establishment’s attempts to keep Donald Trump out of the White House failed. But that doesn’t mean they’re failing everywhere. Neither does it mean that our Establishmentarians won’t keep trying.

     The European Establishments’ behavior can be seen either as a precursor to the sort of atrocities practiced by the Biden Administration or as a reaction to the failure of the American Establishment’s efforts to suppress the populist revolt that elevated Trump and Vance. In any case, it shows plainly that “they’re laagering up.” They see what’s happing on our shores, and are determined to keep it from happening to them. They have tools to wield that are unavailable to our own Establishmentarians, and those extra tools just might carry the day for them.

     I feel for our European cousins… those that only want to be left alone, at least. Their governments want to keep them from speaking their minds, and will punish them as harshly as necessary to prevent it. There is no other conceivable reason for the laws against “inciting hatred” on the books of those nations. Nor is there another explanation for the asymmetry with which those laws are applied.

     Still, their misfortune is a warning to us. For the moment, we have the protections of the First Amendment. Move swiftly against those who would weaken them.

Mar 25 2025

Rollin’ On

     YES! This piece shall forever be categorized as Uncategorized! The reasons you, Gentle Reader, will surely know, sooner or later.

     It’s not because I have nothing to rant about. Rather the reverse.

     I’d venture to guess that the readers of Liberty’s Torch average a mite older than most Web addicts. I’m a mite older myself – 73, if you must know – so I can assure you all that we’re mutually in good company.

     Older men congregate as we do for the same reasons that younger folks do the same… and that whites congregate with whites, and Negroes with Negroes, and Christians with Christians, and Jews with Jews, and brain-damaged Leftists with… oh, never mind. We have compatible histories. We’ve lived through the same events and have drawn (largely) the same lessons from them.

     Mind you, they might have been the wrong lessons. Anyone can be wrong about anything at all. Indeed, large numbers of people have been wrong in the same way at the same time, many times throughout history. That doesn’t vitiate the underlying mechanism: we see things largely the same way. That enables us to converse intelligibly with one another.

     There’s been a lot of talk about the “loneliness problem,” especially as it afflicts middle-aged and older men. It’s a real problem; many of our kind are unwillingly alone. Remedies are hard to come by, unless congregating around the digital potbelly stove here and at similar sites should qualify. Most of the attractants that still draw Americans together are skewed toward younger folks and women. We must make do with what we’ve got.

     Which is a giant part of my feeling of obligation for running this site and doing my best to put up fresh material every day.

     I had occasion, just a little while ago, to replay an old favorite:

     At first blush, that grand old song sounds fatalistic, even futile. But it’s not so:

Small wheel turn by the fire and rod
Big wheel turn by the grace of God
Every time that wheel turn ’round
Bound to cover just a little more ground

     We old farts know that, mostly. Yes, there are setbacks. Yes, there are periods where all our efforts seem to do no more than keep us in place:

     The Queen propped her up against a tree, and said kindly, “You may rest a little now.”
     Alice looked round her in great surprise. “Why, I do believe we’ve been under this tree the whole time! Everything’s just as it was!”
     “Of course it is,” said the Queen, “what would you have it?”
     “Well, in our country,” said Alice, still panting a little, “you’d generally get to somewhere else— if you ran very fast for a long time, as we’ve been doing.”
     “A slow sort of country!” said the Queen. “Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!”

     [Charles Lutwidge Dodgson a.k.a. “Lewis Carroll,” Through The Looking-Glass]

     …but in the main, we do make progress, even if only slowly. We learn. We accumulate. We gain at least a wider perspective, if nothing else.

     Much of what flows from that perspective is the inclination to leave well enough alone.

     The desire to interfere in others’ lives is irregularly distributed. It’s found copiously in certain identifiable demographics – politicians, cult leaders, and mothers-in-law come to mind at once – but I’m reasonably sure that we all feel the urge now and then. Fortunately, in most cases it doesn’t last very long. (In most cases, I said. How else would we explain Cause People?)

     As we age, even the most intervention-minded of us tend to lose that urge, or learn to suppress it. That’s another fortunate thing. As our lives lengthen and our futures shorten, the sense that what time we have is not to be wasted doing pointless things becomes very strong. Trying to improve others is almost always pointless.

     That insight is coupled to an increasing irritation with others who try to improve us. Their ubiquity can easily lead us to prefer our own company… after which we congregate here.

     I want something back. It was once commonplace. No doubt a few still exist, but along the coasts it’s hard to find one. It’s the neighborhood tavern.

     Call it what you will: the corner bar, the pub, the local watering hole. Men could go there at the end of a working day for a beer or two and some conversation with the like-minded. There were always plenty of like-minded there; those who didn’t fit the mores of the crowd swiftly found other places to shoot the breeze and wet their beaks. It was particularly unfriendly to the well-meaning sort who want to improve you.

     But I can no longer find one. I know where a few were, and in a few cases when and why they closed. I miss them; they were an important part of the older man’s support system.

     When Cheers was popular, it might have been because neighborhood taverns were already dying and we yearned for them to come back. Friends had a little of that feeling, but the romantic motifs and tensions worked against it. The last thing a neighborhood-tavern devotee wanted when he visited it was romance.

     Is there any chance those taverns might be revived? I have a feeling they’d be good for at least some of what ails us.

     I know I’ve been rambling. It’s my privilege as Chief Cook and Bottle Washer. But I also know a ramble must end before it becomes tiresome, so I shall strive forthwith to close this one.

     Item: I’m glad to have you here. I hope you’ll be back often. I’d miss you were your patronage to cease.

     Item: The longer you’ve frequented this dump, the more likely it is that you don’t “need” anything you find here, except for the sense of a kindred spirit or two. I need that too. So even on days when I don’t feel inspired, or especially insightful, I’ll keep putting stuff up here. I want you to have a prima facie reason to stop by. After all, you have to have something to tell your Significant Other, don’t you?

     Item: If you feel isolated, or even just a little alone, drop me a line. The email address is in the sidebar. If you do, I’ll email you back, and who knows? Maybe we can get a little fire going. I made the acquaintance of my all-time best friend that way, God rest his soul.

     You may feel isolated, out of step with “what’s happening.” Your neighborhood may not have a warm and welcoming gathering place for such as you. You may feel that you have nowhere to go that would be worth your time. But you’re welcome here. You always will be. Please know that.

     All my best,
     Fran

Mar 24 2025

Why They Lie

     [I was pondering a recent essay from Victor Davis Hanson when I remembered the following piece, which first appeared at Eternity Road on June 6, 2006. — FWP]

***

     Have you ever wondered why politicians and their affiliates lie? Why they betray their oaths and scamp their duties by deliberately misinforming the public? Why they strain to seduce — often quite successfully — the mainstream media into affirming or substantiating their deceits?

     In one sense, the answer is simple. Politicians lie for the same reason anyone lies: to get something that would otherwise be unavailable to them on acceptable terms. If a lie is the lowest-cost / least-risk way of getting it, and their morals don’t inhibit them from the approach, they’ll lie as volubly as a teenager caught with one hand wrapped around a bottle of Jack Daniels and the other deep in his date’s panties.

     But politicians do tend to lie more than non-politicians. More effectively, too. They’ve succeeded in misdirecting millions of people at a time, persuading them that politicians’ words, suitably echoed by journalists and approved by tame commentators, are more trustworthy than a mountain of contrary evidence in plain sight. Success in the use of a technique for getting what one wants increases the probability that he’ll use it again.

     In other words, why they do it might seem obvious, but how they get away with it deserves some investigation.

     To borrow an image from Edwin Abbott, the author of How To Lie With Statistics, your Curmudgeon’s treatment might seem like a course of instruction for the aspiring pirate in the fine points of cutlass work. Nevertheless, one must understand the techniques to detoxify them, and to assist others muddled by them in achieving clarity.

     When Smith wishes to deceive Jones, he must contrive to do all the following:

  1. Misdirection: He must avert Jones’s attention and credulity from any convincing contrary evidence.
  2. Confidence: He must instill in Jones an adequate degree of confidence in his (Smith’s) trustworthiness.
  3. Plausibility: He must frame his deceit in a manner consistent with the applicable context.
  4. Affirmation: He must ensure that the preponderance of voices to which Jones is likely to listen will affirm, or at least not contradict, his deceit.
  5. Neutralization: He must discredit contrary voices which have access to evidence, or channels of persuasion, that are outside his control.

     If the subject matter of the deception is significant, which in politics is more often the case than not, the effort must be especially skillful and thorough. A single small tear in the veil thrown over the truth could bring disaster upon the liar. Thus, in the case of imperfectly constructed deceits, such as the 2004 Rather / Mapes “TANG memos,” all it took was one sharp-eyed observer, familiar with the properties of typewriter fonts, to destroy what might otherwise have been a successful campaign to slander the president of the United States, who was running for re-election.

     The “Haditha massacre” currently causing a stir appears to be a highly imperfect deceit. Those who wish to persuade us that a Marine detachment in Iraq wantonly slaughtered a gaggle of innocents in revenge for the death of one of their own did not take sufficient care about the contrary evidence, the credibility of their affirmers, or the availability of credible accounts other than the one they preferred. Though there are still grave matters to be determined, the scales are swiftly tipping in the Marines’ favor, and against the Dishonorable John Murtha and those like him who were willing to see them preconvicted of murder for political gain.

     But your Curmudgeon has a larger point to make, which underpins all the important aspects of deception already presented: one cannot deceive a knowledgeable man. The precondition for all successful deceits is the target’s ignorance of the critical facts. He who already knows the truth is all but impossible to mislead:

  • He’ll already have access to reliable evidence.
  • He’ll be skeptical of accounts that contradict that evidence.
  • He’ll quickly spot incoherencies between mendacious constructions and the facts on hand.
  • He’ll demand much more substantiation from those who affirm the deceit.
  • He’ll be predisposed to believe those whose accounts accord with what he knows.

     To keep the people easily deceived, one must deny them knowledge.

     The above probably seems too elementary to require reflection. Yet politicians and activists routinely perpetrate huge campaigns of deception that succeed in persuading millions of Americans of notions that prove, sooner or later, to be the reverse of the truth. That’s evidence that, however knowledgeable, clever, insightful, and skeptical we might think we are, we’re not knowledgeable, clever, insightful, or skeptical enough.

     Colonel Bunny at The Intergalactic Source Of Truth provides a fine example today:

Consumer inflation in Zimbabwe over the past 12 months hit 1,193% in May, said the country’s Central Statistical Office on Friday, following 1,042% in April. Zimbabwe continued to have the highest current level of inflation in the world.

     Yet Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor Gideon Gono remained optimistic, saying he expects inflation to fall to 400% by the end of 2006 and to 50% by June 2007. But some economists considered his forecast unrealistic, while political analysts said the economic crisis poses a serious threat to President Robert Mugabe’s tenure.

     Thank you and welcome to the Eternity Road blogroll, Colonel.

     Inflation at 1200% per year means that on July 1, one’s savings are worth approximately half what they were worth on June 1, measured by their ability to buy real goods. Under such conditions, to save is inherently irrational; one must convert one’s currency earnings into tangible goods as quickly as possible, against the contrary inclinations of those who hold such goods to retain them. It’s the worst non-natural, non-military disaster that can be visited upon a nation, as we can see from the histories of revolutionary France, Weimar Germany, and postwar China in the interval before the Communist takeover.

     But why is it happening? Why did the reporter consult the “Governor” of the “Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe?” More relevant to Americans, why isn’t it happening here?

     Has it happened here? Could it happen here again?

     Politicians would prefer us to believe that inflation has nothing to do with them. It’s “an increase in the price level,” entirely beyond their control. It might just have something to do with those evil capitalists, who “set” prices and occasionally conspire in cartels to gouge us. Fortunately for them and unfortunately for us, very few Americans know the history of inflation or possess the modest body of knowledge required to debunk such claims.

     Runaway inflations have indeed happened in America. The first was the paper-money inflation perpetrated by the Continental Congress during the years of the Revolutionary War. It gave rise to the aphorism “not worth a Continental.” The second was the inflation of the Civil War years, during which President Lincoln commanded the issuance of “greenbacks” and the Confederate government did much the same. The third was the inflation of the Twenties, during which the American money supply expanded at an annualized 7.7%, to prop up the speculative boom in the stock market. The fourth was the Ford / Carter inflation of the late Seventies, which gave us 20% mortgage interest rates and gold at $800 per Troy ounce.

     How much do you know about these inflations, Gentle Reader? Were you aware that they were purely monetary phenomena, driven by the creation of vast new amounts of currency and / or credit by a politically controlled central bank? Were you aware that all inflations are generated in that fashion? Where did you learn that?

     Most Americans don’t know that. Most Zimbabweans have no idea what’s happening to them, either.

     Politicians are unceasing in their attempts to create and perpetuate ignorance. Politicians who seek expanded power and perquisites — i.e., just about all of them — will always slant their presentations of “facts” to the public in such a fashion as to imply that only expanded State power, and unquestioning trust in the probity and competence of our “leaders,” will save us from disaster. He who suggests that the State is the source of most social and economic problems, rather than the solution to them, is their blood enemy, to be neutralized by any means necessary.

     Could it be any clearer why politicians place such emphasis on controlling the mechanisms of education and communications? Could it be any clearer why they strive unceasingly to seduce journalists and commentators to their support, and exclude those who refuse to enlist in their causes? Could it be any clearer why they cultivate the affections of entertainment celebrities and other bellwethers of our society?

     Could it be any clearer why the Internet, the freest and most flexible instrument for communications and mutual education ever invented, must be protected from their mercies at all costs?

     Inform yourselves.

“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it — no matter if I have said it! — except it agree with your own reason and your own common sense.” — Gautama Boddhisattva (the Buddha)

Mar 24 2025

An Ugly Thought

     After reading Ashe Schow’s account of Matt Van Swol’s “SWATting,” a possibility occurred to me that I can’t dismiss. Indeed, the longer I dwell on it, the more plausible it becomes.

     Quite a few persons in the Right have been SWATted recently:

     (There has also been a wave of false orders for home-delivery pizza aimed at conservatives with large public profiles. The Van Swols have been targeted that way, too.)

     This could well be intended to produce deaths in more than one way. Most plainly, a SWAT raid aimed at an innocent homeowner could bring about his demise and / or that of his family members at police hands. But somewhat less obviously, if SWATtings become sufficiently frequent, they could result in the police not showing up in response to a real attack on a conservative commentator. The Left’s activists have displayed enough propensity for violence to make that a significant possibility. Finally, ponder what could happen should a fraudulent late-night pizza delivery frighten an armed homeowner into responding to the banging on his door with gun in hand.

     Things are getting dangerous. Be alert. Be armed. And order any pizzas in-person at the pizzeria.

Mar 24 2025

Quote Of The Day

     “At the bottom of every stack of Government paperwork is a loaded .45″ — Dio of the Workshop.

     I think this will go into the LIS Codex as well.

Mar 23 2025

Barren Trees

     Today, the third Sunday in Lent, we read from Luke chapter 13:

     There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
     He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

     [Luke 13:1-9]

     It’s certainly not one of the more upbeat passages in the Gospels. It’s laden with the feeling of doom. We get the sense that the owner is displeased with the fig tree. More, he intends that something be done about it: Why allow this barren tree to exhaust the soil? Other, more fruitful plants could be planted in its place. But the gardener asks that it be spared a year more, and the owner assents.

     The parable could be read several ways: as an urgent call to repentance; as a warning to those who fail to heed God’s decrees; or as a reminder to us that we are not here merely to amuse ourselves. All are applicable, but the third of the three is much in my thoughts today. It hearkens back to Genesis: to God’s command to the life he had created to “be fruitful and multiply:”

     And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. [Genesis 1:23]

     I wrote of this in fiction as well. From the novelette “Farm Girl:”

     “So what do you think of New York so far?”
     She scowled. “Not much. You don’t use what you’ve got. God gave us the land to grow something. To give life.” She took up her cup of soda and emptied it in a single long draught. “You folks don’t seem to realize that. Unless your neighbors are different from…what I’ve seen so far.”

     And later in the same novelette:

     “God gave women wombs for the same reason He gave us the land: to grow something. To make life.”

     Unless you’ve been in a coma for a few decades, you’re probably aware that we First Worlders haven’t been doing much of that.

     I could go on a long rant from here, but there’s no need. The contra-natal trends in the Western nations are quite clear, as are some of their more conspicuous consequences. But as I’ve written on other occasions, it’s hard to persuade present-moment-oriented people to reproduce. Telling them that the future needs their children is especially futile. Anyway, for many of us, the moment is past.

     Some Gentle Readers have “more future ahead of them” than the rest. To those younger readers: Don’t imagine that the “birth dearth” will have no impact upon you personally. The unfruitful decades will change many things – socially, economically, and politically – for those who will live on. It would be wise to make your major decisions with that in mind.

     Do you prefer society, or to be relatively isolated? The former will be harder to arrange than the latter.
     What occupation do you have in mind? What will the steady diminution of our numbers do to its profitability?
     Diminished population is also likely to mean diminished production. The law of supply and demand tells us that the prices of goods will rise. Some goods may vanish, as those who know how to make them die off.
     Current conditions continuing, I wouldn’t count on immigration to keep things as they are. Most of those arriving today don’t come with a big work ethic or an impressive array of skills. Also, they aren’t exactly in accord with American law and social norms.
     Whatever your political preferences, be aware that some segments of America’s population are reproducing faster than others. Have you thought about what that will mean for political trends, at both the neighborhood and the national levels?

     No, I’m not trying to depress you. But one of the reasons for being fruitful and multiplying is to perpetuate and improve what we have achieved. If you’re proud of America and its achievements, that is.

     As the years have passed, I’ve become ever more convinced that our departure from Christian faith lies at the root of many of our problems. Consider the social norms it promulgates: the emphasis on work, on family, and on community. Work, in our nation today, is coming close to being a dirty word. It’s natural to want more for less, but it’s unnatural and irrational to expect it to be given to us by some invisible benefactor. At least, not long-term.

     The present-moment-oriented don’t think about marrying and forming a family, or what takes to make a family healthy and prosperous. Neither do they think much about becoming active in their communities: meeting and getting to know their neighbors, learning about what’s going on among them, looking for ways in which they can help out. Present-moment satisfactions and mobility are what matter to them. The word “rootless” comes to mind, especially in view of the weak state of existing family bonds.

     The post-Christian future is looking thin: fewer people, fewer and smaller families, smaller economies, and less fellowship. All that is in progress as we speak. Which is why that barren fig tree, and what the Owner is likely to do with it, is so much on my mind.

     May God bless and keep you all.

Mar 22 2025

Second To The Party

     Apparently, men’s discovery of the minefield that is marriage in America today has been mirrored from the distaff side, albeit not for the same reasons:

     American women have never been this resigned to staying single. They are responding to major demographic shifts, including huge and growing gender gaps in economic and educational attainment, political affiliation and beliefs about what a family should look like.
     “The numbers aren’t netting out,” said Daniel Cox, director of the survey center at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank. He ticked off the data points: More women than men are attending college, buying houses and focusing on their friendships and careers over dating and marriage.
     Stories of women complaining about the lack of quality men have long infused pop culture—from “Pride and Prejudice” to Taylor Swift’s oeuvre. Yet women throughout history rarely questioned whether finding and securing a romantic partner should be a primary goal of adulthood.
     This seems to be changing. Over half of single women said they believed they were happier than their married counterparts in a 2024 AEI survey of 5,837 adults. Just over a third of surveyed single men said the same.

     It’s not surprising that the general dismissal of marriage and family as a goal should have become bilateral. The tensions between the sexes have been stoked to an unprecedented level. Men have much to fear from the potential dissolution of a marriage, which is effortless for a wife to contrive. The socioeconomic changes since the Sixties have weakened one of women’s former inducements to seek a husband. Perhaps worst of all, contemporary media have encouraged both men and women to seek mates only available in fantasy novels.

     Yet until recently, single women still sought the marital bond more enthusiastically than did single men. If there’s been an addition to the stew that specifically discourages women from seeking a mate, I’m unaware of it. But I have a particular interest in the “fantasy mate” business, as you might expect from one who… ah… writes fantasy.

     Statistically, there will always be very few pinnacle-level individuals of either sex:

  • There will always be very few men who are tall, extremely handsome, traditionally masculine, wealthy, and faultlessly chivalrous.
  • There will always be very few women who are tall, beautiful, demurely feminine, and willing to devote themselves to a man.

     The Bell Curve is like that. Add to the paucity of such fantasy mates that the god[dess] you yearn for must be unattached, sane, and must take a reciprocal interest in you. Most of us are unlikely to meet and click with such a paragon.

     But modern entertainment is shot through with fantasy mates. They’re ubiquitous in both the printed and the visual media. Thus, we are subtly encouraged to seek them, and discouraged from taking an interest in anyone who “fails to meet our standards.”

     Among formulas for failure, this one is near the top.

     There’s no “solution,” if one views the situation as a “problem.” It’s the way things are and will probably remain for quite some time to come. Perhaps the swelling of the ranks of lonely singles, puzzled about how their lives have turned out, will stimulate some fresh thought about it, as our population dwindles and older folks’ stories for the young change coloration. But it will take more than occasional regret.

Mar 22 2025

The Counter-Flood

     There’s been a lot of chatter about how, by moving in so many directions simultaneously in its first weeks, the Trump Administration completely confused its opponents on the Left. The shorthand applied to this effect is “flooding the zone.” And it does seem to have flummoxed the Democrats… for a little while.

     But there’s no such thing as a sword that can cut your enemy yet can’t cut you. The Democrats have responded with their own version of “flooding the zone:” left-wing District Court judges have issued a flurry of injunctions and orders intended to halt the MAGA initiatives, or at least confuse the Administration about whether the judicial branch has the authority to override presidential executive orders. Fresh reports of such leftist judicial intrusions arrive daily.

     These injunctions and orders have little to no Constitutional basis, yet they’re having the desired effect. Executive branch deference to judicial decrees has been a feature of conservative administrations. The jurisdictional monkey wrenches they’ve thrown into the works have slowed many Administration moves. Some may prove impossible to overturn, especially given Chief Justice John Roberts’ reluctance to take them up quickly.

     Perhaps we ought to have expected it. The Biden Administration put quite a lot of leftists on the federal bench. What else do the Democrats have, besides their pet judges and the filibuster? Attacks on Tesla dealerships?

Mar 21 2025

Growth Always Comes At A Price

     Courtesy of Knuckledraggin’, we have this reflection on a greatly changed America:

     “It wasn’t always like this.”
     I looked up from the litter I was collecting in the park. Discarded trash was a constant battle in the city in which we lived before returning home. It became so bad that my wife and I organized events to pick up litter in the park followed by yard games with other families. The voice belonged to a very old man and I asked him what he meant, fully expecting to hear a lecture about how people were just more diligent back in his day and had more civic pride. He surprised me though.
     “Nothing had its own packaging.” he explained. “Now everything has its own wrapper that you throw away.”

     Please read it all. It’s a touching reflection on traditions that have vanished, or have been greatly weakened, over the postwar decades. But it also omits something: a bit of context that goes along with the other developments in American society since the end of World War II and the immense demobilization that followed.

     Why was it, generally speaking, that “nothing had its own packaging” in those pre-war decades? The unnamed gentleman who said that may have had more in mind than just the litter itself. Though it’s a seeming paradox, an expanded context helps us to see the details more clearly.

     Convenience foodstuffs – both “fast foods” and the sort of snack foods that are purchased on impulse, eaten outside the home, and which generate the greater part of the litter the article mentions – were both fewer in number and less frequently purchased before World War II. The ones that existed were less appealing. Their purchasers had the means to buy them far less often. This must be factored into an analysis of the postwar changes.

     Production and consumption operate in tandem. Producers need something to produce, but their choice will always be constrained by what consumers choose to consume. Similarly, consumers cannot consume what hasn’t been produced. Something that’s being consumed enthusiastically will be produced in increasing numbers, and by increasing numbers of producers. The immense demographic transition the U.S. experienced after World War II changed a great deal in that regard:

  • Nearly 11 million American men were demobilized into civilian society;
  • A large number of American women were freed from wage labor to become wives, mothers, and homemakers;
  • The men found the women and started producing children;
  • An economy that had been oriented toward war production shifted back to civilian goods with a lurch.

     At first, the emphasis was on houses and cars, but that couldn’t carry the tide for very long. Houses and cars are expensive; besides, how many people need more than one of each? A substantial number of women found that they missed their workplaces, and were willing to divide themselves between the duties of the workplace and the demands of the home. Concurrently with those trends, true mass marketing, supported by the burgeoning of broadcast radio and television, exploded nationwide. When new consumer goods arose, the marketers and advertisers were quick to popularize them.

     Men, absorbed by their occupations, typically were away from their families during the daylight hours. That left their wives with nearly the whole burden of homemaking and child-rearing. Convenience products aimed at alleviating that burden arose immediately, were promoted on the airwaves, and were embraced by their target market: the American housewife. The swelling of postwar prosperity also meant more discretionary family income, some of which found its way into juvenile pockets.

     Production stimulated consumption; consumption stoked production. Nearly all the new products came in cans, cardboard boxes, or plastic wrappers. Quite a large percentage of those products were sold to children, who were spending ever more of their time outside the home, essentially unsupervised.

     The behavioral changes were inevitable. Both the economics of the marketplace and the economics of home and pantry pushed them along.

     America in the Fifties was still highly civic-minded. Adults took care not to litter. Apartment buildings provided centralized disposal services, sometimes through incinerators. Parents taught their children that littering is an offense against good citizenship and good taste. But all that would change as disposable products and their packaging proliferated and the burdens on homemakers increased.

     Other influences would have their part, especially the large inflations of the Seventies, which practically eliminated the one-income family as the American norm. In aggregate, the pressures on private citizens pushed them away from traditional American kitchen practices and toward the use of convenience foods and “snack” products. The rise of the “fast food” restaurant, which became pronounced in the late Sixties, partook greatly of those trends.

     Unless a consumable product came straight from the greengrocer or the butcher, it came in packaging. The packaging had to go somewhere. It didn’t always go into the trash can… and even when it did, it didn’t always make it to the dump.

     It was predictable that there would be an increase in disposable things. Indeed, if there hadn’t been such an increase, the economy wouldn’t have expanded as swiftly as it did, whether or not you think that was a good thing. We of today must cope with the remnants of what we consume. Generally, we do pretty well. But the attitudes of those that produce the mounds of garbage are often less than pleasant, as the city of Baltimore has shown us:

     Look, we appreciate anyone who is willing to roll up their sleeves to help Baltimore. More than 170 people came from all over the country and cleaned up nearly 12 tons of trash, according to Mr. Presler’s Twitter feed. He doesn’t post any photos of the totality of the trash, so we’ll have to take his word for it….
     Whatever he says his motives were, Mr. Presler’s presence in Baltimore reinforces the tired image of our failing urban cores. That the poor people in this dilapidated city can’t take care of their own neighborhoods and all the public officials around them have failed as well. The bureaucratic, all-talk Democrats strike again. If a crowd of volunteers could clean up 12 tons of trash in 12 hours, how incompetent and helpless must Baltimoreans be if they can’t manage it in decades, right?…
     The silver lining in all of this is that the residents of West Baltimore did get a much needed cleaning up. That is something that they deserve. Streets and alleyways free of trash go a long way in improving the psyche of a neighborhood and its residents. Not to mention deterring crime. Mr. Presler says that people around the country are planning similar clean up events in their own communities. A loud round of applause for that as well. Spiffier neighborhoods are good for everyone.
     We also hope Mr. Presler keeps his promise to return to Baltimore once a month. It would definitely give his motives more credibility. It might also give him better perspective about the city’s problems than any single visit can provide. Maybe it could even lead him and his followers to advocate for federal housing, health care, transportation, education, criminal justice, civil rights and anti-poverty policies aimed at urban communities.

     It’s not just economics, to be sure.

Mar 21 2025

What Did They Expect?

     Here are the photos of the South African Antarctic expedition that’s been in the news recently:

     From The New York Post:

     Nine members of an Antarctic expedition are locked up together at a research station 2,000 miles from civilization.
     And one of them is a madman — accused of violently beating, threatening and sexually harassing at least two of his teammates.
     The Post can reveal that the South African crew of three women and six men includes a glamorous doctor with her own skincare line and a deputy team leader who helped produce a short horror film during a previous stay at the station — along with engineers and a meteorologist.
     The researchers on South Africa’s SANAE IV outpost won’t be relieved until December, when temperatures at the South Pole are at their warmest for the year and seasonal ice storms pass.
     […]
     According to urgent emails fired off to authorities from the remote base, an unidentified male member of the South African crew stuck at SANAE IV became “deeply disturbed” within weeks of arriving.
     This was despite, the complainant alleged, authorities being warned about his behavior even before the team left South Africa on Feb. 1.
     […]
     The message, which was sent Feb. 27, alleged the crew member assaulted and sexually harassed colleagues, and even threatened to kill one of them, creating “an environment of fear and intimidation,” the Guardian reports.
     “His behavior has escalated to a point that is deeply disturbing. I remain deeply concerned about my own safety, constantly wondering if I might become the next victim,” the email said, as first reported on by South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper.
     The identity of the crew member believed to have snapped was not released.

     Hm. Six Negroes, an Asian, a Muslim, and a beautiful white woman. Confined together, inescapably, for 13 months in the harshest land conditions on Earth. There’s no reason to exercise a little forethought about such a crew, is there?

     Quoth Divemedic:

     Take 6 black men, a Muslim, a Black woman, an Asian woman, and a white woman. Put them in an isolated research station on Antarctica. What could go wrong?

     The who-what-when-where of the threats and “sexual harassment” aren’t given. I can’t imagine why. Apparently the unnamed “madman” at the center of it all hasn’t been forcibly restrained by his colleagues. I can’t fathom that, either. Can you, Gentle Reader? As for what possessed a beautiful white woman to sign on for such a hitch, I decline to speculate.

     But the South African “authorities” are “remotely monitoring” the situation and assure us all that it’s “under control.” Such a relief to know!

Mar 21 2025

You’re Not Imagining It

     The Democrats really are at war against America:

     We knew. They’d hardly troubled to conceal it. But to have their Senate bigwig confirm it openly removes all doubt, or should. There will still be a few who claim this is “the normal cut and thrust of politics,” but after a few Republican Congressmen have been attacked, their families harassed and their homes vandalized, no one will listen to them.

     Some have called this a symptom of panic. They’re right. But a tactic adopted out of panic can be effective if it’s not properly countered. If you have a good Representative who holds to the Trump agenda and speaks about it to his constituents, consider attending his public meetings and lending your support.

Mar 20 2025

Everything Everywhere All At Once

     Did you ever wake up an ungodly hour and find yourself muttering “It’s going to be one of those days, isn’t it” — ? Has that happened to you lately? It’s been happening to me rather frequently.

     I tried my best, Gentle Reader. Really and for true. I got up, lit the lights, fed, watered, and walked the dogs, made coffee, made the bed, showered, shaved, and dressed, ate the ritual cup of yogurt, and compelled myself to smile – and it changed nothing. The Future Columns folder is still overflowing. And you know what that means.

1. Future War.

     Some technologies are purely benevolent in application. Others, not so much:

     Approximately 60 drones were launched from Ukraine overnight to attack the Russian capital city of Moscow. This is the largest escalation of drone/missile attacks into Russia so far.
     […]
     Hitting Moscow with a wave of 60 drones is a major escalation, because face-to-face meetings with U.S and Ukraine officials are at a critical inflection point. Each uptick in the offensive action from Ukraine is directly proportional to the increased seriousness of the peace talks.

     Let’s leave aside the politics of the situation for the moment. What does the use of drones as combat instruments portend? Some have claimed that it will ultimately remove humans from the battlefield. I find that to be unsupported by either logic or experience. Whatever the case, today’s combat drones are precursors to something more frightening: combat drones guided by artificial intelligence.

     Warfare in the Information Age implies that such drones would not merely inflict damage on things. Rather, they would target important strategists and tacticians. By removing the guiding intelligences of enemy forces, they would create disorder and reduce enemy efficacy. As the strategic / tactical pyramid always has the political leadership at its pinnacle, such drone swarms would attack heads of state.

     Does that strike you as a stabilizing change?

2. It’s Out In The Open Now.

     This news is frightening even by recent standards:

     The website “Dogequest” reportedly doxes Tesla owners and employees of Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), listing personal information and Tesla dealership locations.
     The site encourages vandalism of Tesla vehicles, stating it supports “creative expressions of protest.”
     Recent incidents include vandalism at Tesla dealerships, gunfire attacks in Oregon, and harassment of Cybertruck owners.

     David Strom notes:

     We have already seen a huge spike in terrorism from trans activists. Many of the attacks on Teslas and Tesla showrooms were done by trans “women,” and a number of mass shootings have been as well. “Kill TERFs” has become a common slogan as well.
     Relatively normal AWFLs are fantasizing about violent resistance, and while they won’t do it themselves, they have already cheered it on, up to an including endorsing Luigi Mangione’s cause and helping fund his very expensive defense.
     As far as I can tell, there is no backlash among Democrats to the increasing violence, which instead has inspired a bunch of “I don’t endorse violence, but…” tut-tutting. That is, in fact, a tacit endorsement of violence, and we know that the Democrat-controlled ActBlue is raising money for the extremist wing of the Party that commits these terroristic acts.

     We’ve been wondering when the sotto voce civil war would burst out into the open. I submit that it has. This puts us to the test: What are we willing to do about it?

     Ace suggests that we treat the militant Left like an American chapter of HAMAS:

     The antifa left needs to be dealt with, like Hamas — once and for all.

     I concur.

3. Chaos Is The Goal.

     Lincoln Brown spells it out:

     Encouraged and protected by teachers, legislators, social media, and, for that matter, the press, the chaos of the day has been a long time coming and is practically institutionalized. These miscreants have appointed themselves the marshalls of a dystopian Dodge City. They have no problem violating social contracts, such as not burning things that do not belong to them, because they recognize no social contracts other than their own. They have the right to do as they wish to administer their version of justice. In return, you also have the right to do as they wish. Or face the consequences. Consider the irony of fascists calling people fascists. When it comes to such people, the revolution will not only be broadcast, it will be promoted, lauded, and bankrolled. By way of reminder, one of the reasons for all the violence is to remind us that none of this would have been necessary if we had only voted for Giggles McPantsuit and Uncle Fester. This isn’t just intimidation; it’s a warning about how you better vote next time.

     Remember, Gentle Reader: It takes only about 2% of the population of a society to destroy all pretense of order in that society. Is the insane, destruction-minded component of the Left is that numerous? I don’t know… but I think we’re about to find out.

4. Alternate Outcomes.

     Sundance at The Last Refuge highlights a recent speech by Vice President J. D. Vance:

     During a speech to the American Dynamism Summit, JD Vance outlines his optimism for the future of the U.S. economy, as boosted by the technological advances in artificial intelligence.
     Within his remarks, Vance correctly notes some voices are saying there is going to be a major fracture between the “Techno-optimists” and the “populists.” However, Vance defines that chasm, and then refutes that fear/concern around jobs, advanced AI, automation, innovation and the economy. He misses what will be the root cause of the fracture completely.
     Vice-President Vance notes there is nothing to fear from innovation, artificial intelligence, robotics and advanced industrial application of emerging technology. Indeed, all facets of economic growth through the use of all the aforementioned enterprises are correctly framed by the vice president.
     There is nothing to fear on the economic front from the technological advancements currently underway.

     But economics are only a part of the picture:

     It is not the economic side of the AI system Vance supports on behalf of his benefactors that is problematic; it’s the creation of a compliant surveillance state that flows as a natural outcome of advanced and automated AI systems within a highly weaponized government. That’s the problem. That where the fracture will occur.
     […]
     The problem for Americans is how advanced AI will be deployed under the guise of efficiency to create a comprehensive DHS surveillance state.
     The predictable system will automate, connecting every aspect of our lives to our compliance in living that life in the manner approved by those who control the system.

     In his darkest nightmares, George Orwell could not have imagined such a world. Yet the union of inexpensive video cameras, high-bandwidth Internet, facial recognition software, government databases, and artificial intelligence makes it perfectly plausible.

     Really now, Gentle Reader: how much longer do you intend to tolerate the obscenity we call the State?

5. For Your Perusal.

     In light of all the above, I’d like to suggest a review of some previous essays:

     Is their pessimism still justified, given the segments above? Or are we really making progress back toward a free and peaceful America?

6. On A Lighter Note.

     Populism, in essence, is about the rising of previously neglected (or suppressed) voices. It appears to be ascending throughout the Western world. Peoples in nations across the water are feeling abused in several ways that are already familiar to Americans. One such people, the Irish, have an unexpected spokesman in martial-arts figure Conor McGregor – and the Irish mainstream media are incensed:

     It was a ‘dismal’ sight, cried the Irish Times. It was ‘beyond distressing’. It was ‘enough to curdle many a pint of stout’. ‘The shamrock bowl lies wilting’, the paper wailed, like one of those be-shawled auld women who once stalked the lanes of Ireland issuing dark prophecies to all and sundry. What has happened to stir up such fright and foreboding at Ireland’s newspaper of record? Have the Brits returned? Is a new potato blight afoot? Are the Magdalene laundries reopening? Nope – Conor McGregor went to the White House.
     […]
     The meltdown over McGregor’s jaunt to Washington, DC has been equal parts hilarious and terrifying. No sooner had the UFC braggart done his ‘billionaire strut’ outside the White House than Ireland’s scribes were pounding their keyboards in fuming disapproval. ‘The Irish image abroad took a hit’ when this ‘MMA fighter was given the microphone in the White House’, said one at the Irish Independent. They really can’t believe a Crumlin boy was allowed to speak in public. The horror!

     Please read it all. After the segments prior to this one, I’m sure you could use a laugh.

     That’s all for the nonce, Gentle Reader. Enjoy your Thursday, if that’s possible.

     “This must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays.” – Arthur Dent.

Mar 19 2025

Creeping “National Security” Syndrome

     Americans must keep an eye on this practice:

     United States District Judge James Boasberg of the District of Columbia ordered the Trump administration to turn around two planes the White House says were carrying members of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang to El Salvador.
     Homan strongly defended Trump’s decision to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport members of the Venezuelan gang, calling it a “game changer.”
     “I don’t know why. I don’t know why any judge would want terrorists returned to the United States. First of all, that video, what a beautiful thing to see,” Homan told the Fox host.
     “Look, President Trump, by proclamation, invoked the authorities of [the] Alien Enemies Act. Which he has a right to do and it’s a game changer and we removed over 200 violent criminals from the United States. Just not TdA, but also MS-13,” Homan continued. “The actions of President Trump made this country safer. Every criminal alien, every criminal public safety threat, and national security threat removed from the country makes this country safer. That’s what American voters voted for. That’s the mandate of the president, and the president is keeping his promise.”

     I added the emphasis.

     I’ve ranted about “national security” before, of course. It’s a dangerous pseudo-concept, more often than not used in defense of some federal action that could not be justified on statutory or Constitutional grounds. But there’s no need to invoke it when the subject is the deportation of criminal illegal aliens, so why do so?

     I don’t know why Tom Homan did so, considering the lack of necessity. Perhaps it’s a reflex of sorts. Longtime federal employees develop habits from such service; this could be one of them. (A fellow I worked with, some years ago, replied to virtually every inquiry with “You have no need-to-know.”) Nevertheless, it’s an impulse that should be resisted.

     Politicians and bureaucrats who defend actions and policies on the grounds of “national security” are seldom challenged to be explicit about the matter. I don’t have an example to hand, but I’d give odds that on at least one occasion, a politician who was challenged on it would reply “I can’t answer you because it would impinge on national security.” Such persons find an undefined concept with a handy shibboleth exceedingly useful for deflecting unwelcome probes of their actions.

     Sharp questions that demand clear, specific answers are the things politicians and bureaucrats most hate to face. One of the sharpest is “What do you mean by that?” If pressed home relentlessly, it can pin its target as immovably as a specimen butterfly is pinned to an entomologist’s display case. Quoth Arthur Herzog:

     [T]he best tool the radical skeptic has is the sharp question—“Why?” “What for?” “When?” “What do you mean?” “Who?” These are terrifying questions, in a way, considering how seldom they are answered. And when answers are given, they don’t appear to be the right answers.

     Considering how widely it’s proliferated in political rhetoric, a few sharp questions about this “national security” business could prove vital to the future of the Republic.

Mar 19 2025

Conversations

     Mine is a rather silly household:

CSO: What’s your plan for today?
FWP: Plan a Wednesday? Naah. They’re too easy. Now Fridays, those I have to plan.

CSO: When do you do that? Late Thursday?
FWP: No, Friday morning, the moment I get out of bed.

CSO: Sounds risky, doing that before you’ve had any coffee.
FWP: It does account for how my Fridays have been going.

<rimshot />

Load more