Jul 03 2023

The Drip, Drip, Drip of Buried Scandals Now Leaking Out

The rush to “Unexpectedly” find and release information about long-buried scandals is heating up. Here is one such scandal that the DOJ was complicit in burying.

At some point, it’s all going to avalanche, as the DimWits in the administration start throwing out other people, in an effort to claim “Hey, I had NO idea that this was all happening” and escape career ruin for their complicity.

They knew. They ALL knew. And, while it lasted, gloried in their flouting of all established norms. And, now, they are going to be Born Again Virgins.

Allegedly.

Jul 03 2023

Pretending As Policy

     You’ve probably seen this cartoon:

     While it originated during the Obama years, it expresses today’s theme in a particularly striking way.

     America’s cities are in a state of chaos. Crime of all sorts is exploding. The American food supply is being threatened with restrictions in the name of “climate change.” (Of course, that’s already happened to the American energy supply.) Perverts have been granted free access to American “public” schoolchildren. District attorneys are refusing to prosecute felons. Judges are releasing persons indicted for felonies – persons with substantial criminal records – without bail. Governors are defying explicit Supreme Court rulings. The economy is tottering due to outrageous government spending. The dollar is being destroyed by inflation. Our armed forces are steadily being disarmed. (Disarmed forces?) The current occupant of the White House, a habitual liar in the throes of senile dementia, is shoveling our money at a kleptocrat in the name of “democracy,” while the “Justice” Department strains to imprison his chief political opponent.

     The American social order is crumbling. The United States has fallen as a Constitutional matter. By the usual standards, it’s a “failed state.” But we’re not supposed to talk about it. The major media don’t even hint at it. The idea seems to be that if we can only be persuaded to pretend that none of the above (and a lot more) is happening, everything will be fine.

     Where do you stand, Gentle Reader?

***

     There’s been heightened interest in my fiction recently. It’s not the kind of interest I’d have expected, but an obscure indie writer has to take what he can get. The feedback has been gratifying. I just wish it had a more positive tone.

     Readers have been writing to me to ask, “This Onteora County of yours: where is it? You did base it on a real place, didn’t you? Do you live there, or are you planning to move there?” One email of that sort would be good for a laugh. A slew of them sends a chill through me.

     No, Onteora County is purely a figment of my imagination. I’d love to be able to say otherwise, but it’s not so. There is no hidden reserve of heroes and geniuses soon to be let loose upon the nation to dispense justice, bind wounds, and set things to rights. The tales I’ve sited there are merely entertainments, with a mild “if only” spirit animating them. (Before you ask, there’s also no convenient planetoid full of uranium ore passing through.)

     Louis Redmond can’t save you.
     Christine D’Alessandro can’t save you.
     Todd and Jeanne Iverson can’t save you.
     Stephen Graham Sumner can’t save you.
     And sure as death and taxes, I can’t save you.

     You must save yourselves.

***

     This is a time of “Sauve qui peut” immediacy. Villains hold the levers of power. They are extending their grip into ever lower and smaller political units. The mechanisms intended to make their power transitory have been corrupted beyond recall. A spirit of resistance to tyranny sufficient to thwart them is not in evidence.

     But we’re not supposed to talk about it. We’ve been given all sorts of reasons. Those who are profiting by it have plenty of them. Much of it is a thin covering for the fear that talking about it will somehow make it “more real.” But it’s plenty real enough already. It started claiming lives and fortunes several years ago and has accelerated since then. Count yourself fortunate if it hasn’t gotten around to you…yet.

***

     I can almost hear you muttering “Why is he ladling this crap over us? Aren’t Mondays bad enough?” Apologies. I write about what’ s uppermost in my thoughts. If you need someone (other than me, that is) to blame for it, blame this dude:

     Coleman Hughes has a YouTube channel which presents his hour-plus interviews on a variety of social topics. One episode was a discussion with Charles Murray on intelligence and the social consequences of different average IQs of the different races.

     Hughes repeatedly said that it would poison the social climate if we came out and acknowledged that blacks are less intelligent than whites.

     Oh dear. To concede an established fact would “poison the social climate!” We surely can’t have that. I wonder what it would do to the “social climate” to admit that American blacks are also substantially more aggressive and less law-abiding than American whites. That’s purely unthinkable, isn’t it?

     Despite his youth – he was born in 1996 – Coleman Hughes is apparently a respected commentator. (“Respected by whom?” you ask. Well, Sam Harris likes him.) If he deems himself qualified to speak of the “social climate” and what the admission of a well-verified fact would do to it, I have a few questions for him:

  1. On what basis have you reached that conclusion?
  2. Are there any other facts that must not be publicized?
  3. Are you then endorsing systematic lying as a social policy?
  4. Must we pretend solely for “racial harmony,” or for other purposes?

     Don’t expect answers. Hughes is black. He’s “done a corner,” as our British cousins would say, in racism and race preferences. Has he ever addressed black racism toward whites and Asians? Or is that another of those matters that would “poison the social climate?”

***

     Word gets around. How many times must I say it? If a particular fact is vital to people’s well-being, they will learn that fact sooner or later. Attempts to suppress it will only underscore its importance.

     Geez, look at this mess. Look at all this pessimism. Rather than lament for a thousand words, perhaps I should have jumped straight to my conclusion. I had hoped that foreshadowing it with that cartoon up top would do the job. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter.

     You know it.
     I know it.
     This is not fine.

     But do have a nice day.

Jul 02 2023

More cleaning

Dad was a bit of a hoarder. Part of that was from growing up dirt poor. Part of that was when you’re living out in the country you don’t really throw anything away if it still has some use to it. Chains, rope, tools, all of them are kept and stored away because when you need them you had better have them, and they’re expensive to replace.

On the other hand, there’s stuff like this.

Those of us who are a certain age may know exactly what that is. The kids I mentored have no clue. I believe its last useful period of existence was in the early 90’s, as the computer that employed that device was turned into a word processor that I use to type up my high school papers, on a monitor that was simple green text on a black screen.

There was an entire box of them. There could be several reasons that Dad kept that box. One, he was the person who set up the first internet network on Kaneohe MCBH while he was in the service, so they could be mementos. Two, he just forgot that they were there. Doubtful, but possible. Three, dad never threw anything away that might still be useful and God knows he could run across another IBM 88I at some point and need to run a backup on the DOS. He didn’t keep the old computer as a souvenir, so he didn’t have a real purpose to keep the disks.

I have a little bit of my Dad’s hoarding gene. It’s been muted somewhat by the constant moves that the military demanded. Every move we threw away more stuff, and donated more goods, and pared down what we had as the houses we could afford got smaller and smaller, thanks to an unreal housing market and various other reasons. I think I’ve cut my personal library down five different times, until every book I own is either on a Kindle or can fit into a 3×4 foot bookshelf.

I, unlike my Dad, understand that the chances of running across a computer with a 5 inch floppy disk drive are so low as to be nearly impossible, and the data on that disk has probably degraded as it sat in a red case for forty years. I tossed all the disks into the trash.

I kept the case. It could be useful. I am my father’s son, after all.

Jul 02 2023

Cash And Stubborn Humankind

     Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce. – James Garfield

     “Control the coinage and the courts — let the rabble have the rest.” – Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV

     There’s a monitory article at Maura Dowling’s place this morning about the World Economic Foundation’s promotion of a “cashless future.” It’s a subject over which a lot of worry sweat has been shed. If it were possible for the States of the world to enforce “cashlessness,” I think I’d worry more. However, as matters – and Mankind – stand, I think we have less to worry about on that score than on several others.

     The anti-cash forces aim at a state of affairs in which all commerce is trackable by central banks. That, of course, would give governments total visibility into who buys what, from whom, where, and at what price. Whether a government could exploit that visibility to impose absolute control over all commerce is the question. The frightening quote at the head of this essay is on point…but is it correct?

     I’ve written a great deal about money and currency. The four essays beginning with this one provide a good overview of the subject for the layman. The central point is the definition of money: a medium of exchange and a store of value. But one should not look at the definition in a state of torpor. One must ask what it implies for the dynamic of money.

     The willingness to treat a specific commodity, be it gold coins or prettily engraved pieces of paper, as a medium of exchange and a store of value varies from person to person. Some people deal exclusively in those prettily engraved pieces of paper. They won’t take a check or a credit card for their wares; they want those slips of paper that say “Federal Reserve Note” at the top. But some disdain the Federal Reserve Note in favor of a check, a credit card payment, an Electronic Funds Transfer, a gold or silver coin, or a hunk of cheese. Their reasons vary widely.

     It is those persons, their preferences, and their reasons for them, that undergird any monetary system. Persons like them, operating in times past, gave birth to money. Persons operating in the present – individuals just like you and me – sustain the monetary system of our time. From day to day and instant to instant, we decide what money is and will be.

     If a nation were to decide to eliminate cash – to establish some digital currency as the “legal tender” of the realm – it would face the severe problem of suppressing all commerce conducted in any other medium. Is that even possible?

     In a micro-country with absolute control over its borders, it might be possible, albeit with the most extreme exertions on the part of the State. In a country of many millions? I can’t see it. In these United States? I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s impossible. The amount of surveillance and police power required for enforcement would be beyond even a nation as totalitarian as the old Soviet Union – and the masters of that experiment in oppression gave it their very best shot.

     Communist societies have repeatedly found it necessary to tolerate their utter antithesis – the black market – lest they collapse from their own ineptitude. But the essence of Communism is rigid State control of all production and exchange: precisely the goal of the anti-cash movement. In practice, the Soviet System and a no-cash America would be indistinguishable. Our federal government would have no better chance of enforcing its dictates than did the Soviet nomenklatura.

     Before the emergence of a generally accepted cash medium, people bartered: they traded good for good, good for service, or service for service. As bartering multiplies, the barterers would “keep accounts:” paper records of who had purchased what and had tendered what as the purchase price. There would be arguments of the “a pair of shoes is worth more than a chicken” variety, which would lead to accruals of small debts. Reputable individuals would emerge as trusted recordkeepers: the first “banks” or “public accountants,” depending on your perspective. Over time, various commodities would be found useful as media of exchange: seed grain, potable alcohols, tobacco, rifle cartridges, fabrics, and eventually the durable, ductile metals. Gradually, the more widely accepted, more durable, and more divisible commodities would displace those that are less so. That’s the process that establishes a money.

     A broadly comparable process would arise in an America that had eliminated its paper currency. Indeed, it might well be in an embryonic stage even now. What could the federal government do to prevent it?

     People are stubborn. They dislike being controlled. (Yea verily, even those who fancy themselves as controllers. Cf. this piece.) As the evil outline of a cashless society emerges, the natural human impulse to rebel against overbearing authority would arise. It would express itself in ways similar to those of the USSR, perhaps even more ingenious.

     The architects of the no-cash / fully digitized and controlled world economy are dreamers. Evil dreamers, of course; did you think Satan had no dreamers in his legions? No matter how passionate they are about imposing themselves on all of us, what they desire is unattainable. Their own machinations would defeat them.

     Get ahead of the machine. Stockpile six months’ worth of your necessities and arrange for safe, dry storage thereof. Buy gold, silver, and copper. And ammo, of course. You can’t have too much ammo, unless you’re on fire. And remember Heinlein’s Maxim:

     Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors – and miss.

Jul 02 2023

New Substack for Me

I’ve been reading this woman’s work, and it’s been enlightening. In this post, Elizabeth Nickson reviews the substance of a book detailing just how it was that the Left managed to take over state-level elections.

I’ve been broadening my reading on Substack. There are quite a few bloggers who are taking advantage of the opportunity to both regularly post, and to get paid for it. For most, the growth is slow-going. But, it’s better than most other platforms out there.

The post was of special interest to me, as I now live in one of the states (Ohio) affected by this all-out push to monopolize government. I’m probably going to buy the kindle version of the book. I have a feeling the states affected – as well as others – may need people to be familiar with their tactics, and able to counter them.

Jul 02 2023

“Vee Vill Make Zee Rulez Und You Will Follow Zem!”

     The madness swirling around us can seem too multifarious to summarize, yet every now and then we get a genuinely iconic incident — and it needn’t be something that involves laws, interest groups, or governments:

     Dear Amy: Four months before my daughter’s wedding, she told me that her uncle (my brother, “Dave”) would make her feel unsafe if he was a guest. She asked me not to invite him.
     My daughter is very politically progressive, as are many of her friends, and although she and Dave have always had a good relationship (I thought), he is a conservative voter and has supported candidates we all abhor.
     Dave has always been very nice, so my daughter’s request surprised me.
     I wrote Dave a very nice note, telling him that we would not be comfortable with him at the wedding and that he would not be invited.
     Dave did not respond and did not attend.
     Afterward, I sent him a card and pictures from the wedding, all in an effort to make him feel like he was not being totally left out.
     I have not heard from Dave since then. When my siblings found out what I had done they were angry with me.
     That is just one problem.
     Another problem is that Dave has not sent my daughter and son-in-law a wedding gift.
     In the past, Dave has given family members wedding checks in excess of $1,000.
     She says she was counting on receiving the same type of gift.
     My husband says I should drop it – but I can’t. Dave’s behavior is upsetting and embarrassing to me.
     How can I get my brother to recognize and change his petty behavior?
     Please don’t tell me that I’m the one who started this by not inviting my brother to the wedding. After all, he’s a grown man, while my daughter is young and just starting out.

     Other writers have already ridiculed the attitude expressed in this “complaint.” I won’t bother. Rather, I’d like my Gentle Readers to ponder what it says about the arrogance of the Left. Plainly, the “progressive” correspondent above has decided that she will do the rule-making, whereas her excluded brother Dave must do the rule-following. Is this not a perfect miniature of the Left’s sociopolitical stance?

     “Rules for thee, not for me” has always been the attitude of self-proclaimed superiors. We see it everywhere today. “Our speech is violence; their violence is speech” is merely one example. “Unsafe” always applies to persons in the Right; never shall that characterization pertain to anyone in the Left. And of course we have many cases of prominent Leftists proclaiming that we must sacrifice our freedom, safety, and prosperity for their causes, while they insulate themselves from the implications of their pronouncements and the consequences of their policies.

     Black-letter law? Forget it. If the Constitution of the United States can be endlessly reinterpreted as a “living document,” then why not any other statute? Haven’t we seen that already? Offenses against federal gun laws are never prosecuted against Leftist figures, their families, or their allies. Tax code violations? Does the name Al Sharpton ring any bells? And what’s this about our “carbon footprints?” The people shrieking about that fly around the world in private jets to lecture us about it.

     The remarkable thing about it all is how uniform and unreflective that attitude is among Leftists. The contradictions penetrate very few heads. Of course those at the top know what they’re doing; how could they not? But what defect of the mind accounts for the slavish dedication and adulation they get from their followers? Do they really think that after the revolution they’ll all be made commissars?

     We theophages have a saying: “God is not mocked.” Sometimes it’s phrased a bit differently: “God sees the truth, but waits.” The completion of this argument requires no great penetration or intellect, but it can try one’s patience all the way to its stops. Tom Petty was more right than he knew.

Jul 01 2023

True, or Fake?

It’s the only explanation that I’ve seen that makes any kind of sense for the ‘bungling’ of the crash.

Jul 01 2023

Failure of Trust is the Core Issue

The ZMan posted this, and I think he has hit the essential point – trust is not there between the American people and their government.

The American citizens have lost trust that their government will act in their best interests. That’s reasonable, as the entrenched Deep State and their allies (NGOs, elected officials, the media) do NOT have our interests in mind when they make decisions.

It’s similar to the effect of infidelity on a marriage. The outward appearance may continue, there may not be an immediate divorce, but the marriage is fractured irredeemably.

“But, that was YEARS ago! And, it was only ONCE!”, the offending spouse might reply.

Yep. But it fractured that trust. The injury party might decide to put aside their justified grievance, for the sake of the kids and relative stability. But they will never have that innocent complete trust in their spouse.

Trust. Once lost, seldom regained. Anyone who has been betrayed by a friend or loved one knows that the repaired relationship has a weak point – when it came down to the crunch, that person wasn’t there for you. That’s why infidelity is often the breaking point for a marriage, even though many times, the parties limp along for years.

Breaking trust kills the bond.

That’s what the Privileged Elite Class doesn’t get. As far as they are concerned, they just have to talk sweet to us, and we’ll be right back in their thrall. Perhaps buy them the equivalent of flowers and candy (not from THEIR bank account, but from OURS).

Won’t that solve that little tiff? Hey, why are you making such a big deal about this?

Many in America have disengaged. They’ve reached the point where they aren’t YET willing to break up the union. But, they are only in it for expediency’s sake. They are using that temporary period to make sure they aren’t penniless in the future split.

You’d think the Privileged Elite Class would take the hint from the surge in preps, home food gardens, survival tools, alternative energy purchases (not for the sake of Green, but meant to keep them alive WHEN the power is cut to the Dissidents), and side hustles that fall under the radar of the IRS.

It’s like the Little Woman stockpiling cash taken from household and other discretionary money she has access to. She’s updating her passport, her resume, her credit access, and arranging emergency shelter, should it be needed. She’s confided only in a few selected people – mostly her family. She is prepared for a quick exit.

And, so are we.

Jul 01 2023

Day Off

     I’ve been neglecting my fiction duties lately, so I’ve decided to put today to that use rather than blathering interminably about stuff that’s beyond my control anyway. To my American readers: Enjoy your pre-Independence Day weekend. To my Canadian readers: Happy Canada Day! To all others: Be well, keep the faith, and soldier on. I expect to be back tomorrow.

Jun 30 2023

Some Afternoon Music

     I can’t imagine how anyone could remain downhearted or depressed when listening to this classic Nitty Gritty Dirt Band track:

     Be of good cheer, my dear Gentle Readers. We shall prevail!

Jun 30 2023

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

First, the Good:

  • I’m definitely seeing improvement in my arm mobility. PT is hard work, and the day after, I’m often wiped out. But, I’m seeing steady progress.
  • I also had some time to talk to my PT assistant. He’s a very sharp young man, making plans to pay down his student loans, and is also planning to move to Hawaii. When I expressed concern about the cost of living, he told me that he’d already bought a 4-acre lot. Not enough to make a fortune, but certainly enough to be self-sufficient for food, which was his goal. He’s planning to utilize the sun to power his home, and to build for passive energy. He seems to have a level head on his shoulders, and I wish him well – at least, after I complete my recovery.
  • At present, all the family is healthy and in good spirits. And, my husband is making a trip south to clear out a storage locker, get rid of what’s not needed (and, he has a better sense of what that is, now that he’s faced with the work of moving it here), and bring back the rest. I’m not in good enough shape to travel long distances just yet, so I’m working at home, on cleaning and organizing, getting the house ready for the delivery of our family room furniture (a recliner love seat and a separate recliner for me – with the controls on a cord, so I can use either hand, should I have trouble with a limb again). I am SO looking forward to the delivery!
  • We’ve been organizing the home upgrades and repairs, which – thankfully – we now have the extra cash to pay for. One that I finally agreed to was a stair chairlift for the basement. By the time it’s installed, I shouldn’t need it, but my husband would find it easier, and we have other, equally aging family who would benefit. Plus, it would make getting the laundry upstairs much easier.

The Bad:

  • Despite the good news from the Supreme Court, the Left seems resolute about driving their enemies into penury, jail, and/or complete removal from public life. Gotta hope Trump has a trick up his sleeve in The Case of the “Secret Files” (sounds like a Perry Mason title, doesn’t it?).
  • Don’t expect the next election to save you. Never underestimate just how vicious the Left will be when the likelihood of power slipping out of their hands draws near.
  • The J6 holdouts on plea-bargaining still remain in jail, even though most have not been convicted (which does appear likely with a DC jury, as we have seen). If you have a few extra bucks, toss it their way. No one should experience the pressure they, and their families, are going through.
  • The Left is charging ahead with plans to declare victory in the next election, no matter how the citizens vote. Consider wearing red in the next elections, and take a selfie for social media after you vote. Let’s mob the Left with a sea of red.

The Ugly:

  • Violence continues with the Left striking out with nary a protest by the cops. Churches and pro-life centers are vandalized, but the only ones getting arrested are those Christians that peacefully protest.
  • If you haven’t laid in alternative means of heating/cooling your house, get on it. Electricity shortages are virtually guaranteed the next time the Green Grid hits high demand. We have gas, a kerosene heater, updated insulation, draft ‘dodgers’, extra blankets, and a house that is NOT open plan – we have the ability to shut off part of the house, to conserve on our energy needs. We’ve also laid in some power packs, and will be looking at solar for our planned greenhouse.
  • Same with stocking up. The latest critical shortage is cancer treatment drugs. I bought CRUNCHY peanut butter last week, for the first time in over 6 months – it’s just not been available. With the UPS in Europe threatening a strike, I’m reminded that, for many, starvation is possible once their stored food is gone. Priorities: water, soap, first aid supplies, necessary medications, emergency communication tools, some way of lighting your home and the path when you are out, and, of course, food (protein is relatively cheap right now – tuna, canned meat, and the ubiquitous peanut butter). Add other suggestions in the comments.
  • Don’t forget to keep some cash on hand. It could be the difference between being able to bug out or not. IF the digital system holds out, a reloadable debit card could also have value.

Stay safe, enjoy the holiday, and come back ready to Work to Restore our Country!

Jun 30 2023

The Totalitarians And The State Of Fear

     My acquaintance with the works of the late Michael Crichton isn’t deep. However, I have read what many consider to be his best novel, State of Fear, and was greatly impressed by his insight into the desires and methods of contemporary power-seekers.

     A fearful populace, that shrinks from terrors real and imagined, is the most fertile sort for the would-be totalitarian. And don’t kid yourself: there are always aspiring totalitarians among us. They may be harmless enough in appearance. You may be incapable of imagining them doing harm to an insect. But given a sufficient population, they will be there.

     I’ll pause here for a striking snippet from the recent movie American Sniper:

     If I may further exploit the analogy, totalitarians are friendly to wolves. Indeed, they seek to hire as many as they can, to enforce their will. But the typical wolf, whether he’s aware of it or not, is a bully and a coward. Sheepdogs – those who are ready, willing, and able to respond adequately to a threat to others – being inherently un-cowardly, are a threat to them.

     Among the tragic truths about our species is the paucity of sheepdogs. My estimate, based solely on my own acquaintance with Mankind, is that it’s less than 1%. Still more tragic is the recognition that the totalitarians of our kind have targeted them for extinction.

     One recently revealed sheepdog is being shamefully abused by a notoriously abusive “justice” system. Darleen Click has a few thoughts about this:

     The wolves, sheep and sheepdog social metaphor is an old one…. We can nit-pick the metaphor all day long, but the framework of the narrative is sound. The percentage of human beings who run towards the fire is very small. Most people have a really hard time grasping evil in the world and when confronted directly by it, avert their eyes.

     […]

     The question now should be why the Alvin Braggs and Merrick Garlands are out to shoot the sheepdog. Why do they want more of this?

     Because sheepdogs allow the sheep to go about their daily, peaceful and productive lives. It allows them to feel safe from being the victims of random or targeted violence. It allows them the space, too, to be concerned with more than just their lives.

     And the Ruling Left cannot have that. A population in constant, irrational fear is easier to control. Totalitarians find macro-power not enough. They want micropower — the power to direct your life down to what you eat, cook, how you’ll wash your clothes, where you live and even your leisure time is to be regulated.

     Dead-center bull’s-eye.

     A State of Fear requires that sheepdogs be eliminated, penned up, or inhibited from acting on their protective impulses. The wolves who serve the totalitarians must have no fear of being called to account. If ordinary people are confident that there are others who will act when action in support of justice is necessary, the wolves cannot ride roughshod. Their fear of the sheepdogs will keep them at bay.

     Daniel Penny is a sheepdog. Kyle Rittenhouse was a sheepdog-in-embryo. George Zimmerman aspired to sheepdoggery; when the moment arrived, he found what he needed. Note how brutally the media have treated all three of these men. It’s a huge giveaway, especially when “supplemented” by the orations of such as Al Sharpton.

     Time was, the sheepdog was the sort of American who sought a career in the military or the police. With the recent degradation of those professions, many sheepdogs no longer find them attractive. The legal and media environment of our time is not favorable to the protective actions that come naturally to the sheepdog. They’d prefer to put him in a dress and high heels.

     If one of your sons strikes you as a budding sheepdog, watch over him. Others will notice what you have noticed, and they might not approve as you do. Nurture his protective impulses. Teach him the virtues, especially the virtues of courage and justice. And for the love of God, keep him away from the “public” schools. They’ll drain away his courage and teach him never to “get involved,” for they too are in service to the totalitarians and their State of Fear.

     Tangentially related to this subject is this striking piece from Lincoln Brown. As our personhood diminishes in others’ eyes, predation tends to increase and protection tends to diminish. Please read it all, and combine its thesis with that of this recent essay. And do please have a nice day.

Jun 29 2023

Some Music For A Summer Afternoon

     Have an old favorite from a group that far too many dismissed as “pretentious” and “unoriginal:”

Jun 29 2023

They Call It Anarchy, But It’s Actually Hell

     Heard the name of Gonzalo Lira lately? If you have, it’s probably because the Zelensky regime in Ukraine has thrown him into prison him for writing stuff Zelensky doesn’t like. But at one time, Lira was better known for this essay, which embeds this critical observation:

     When the backbone of a country starts thinking that laws and rules are not worth following, it’s just a hop, skip and a jump to anarchy.

     Now, I’m normally inclined to catechize such an abuse of the word anarchy, especially when the writer is intelligent and erudite enough to know better. However, Lira’s observation above is so important and so penetrating that I’ll give him a pass for it. He was right then, he’s right today, and present trends continuing he’ll be venerated as a prophet tomorrow.

     Gonzalo Lira was talking about the ancient phenomenon of moral hazard. And when I say “ancient,” I mean it in the fullest possible extent. A moral hazard arises whenever and wherever it’s possible for Smith to do something he knows is wrong – though possibly “legal” – to gain something thereby, and to get away with it.

     The “something Smith knows is wrong” must be a malum in se rather than a mere legal prohibition. (Ignore the fog the jurists have wrapped around that term.) The “something” he can gain by succumbing can be of any kind and of any size. The heart of the thing is that Smith knows that to do so would violate the moral standard to which he supposedly adheres.

     Another hoary old term for the phenomenon is temptation. You don’t hear that one very much. Even we theophages used it more back when than we do today.

     I’ve written about moral hazard myself. You might want to review some of those pieces before continuing on.

     We’re all tempted at some time in our lives. Human life would have to be unimaginably simpler than it is for that not to be the case. The opportunities for getting away with it, for some value of “it,” have multiplied to the point that many of us are tempted continuously. The tempters often include our friends and loved ones: people who have our happiness and well-being at heart.

***

     The celebrated Mockarena of Chicks on the Right cites a case of moral hazard this very morning:

     MOST airlines allow those in wheelchairs to get pre-boarded ahead of everyone else. This makes sense.
     But because the scummiest travelers on earth have figured out how to game that system, they’re now MAKING UP needing wheelchair assistance just to board earlier. The way they got found out? Well, because 20 people requested wheelchair assistance to board one flight, and miraculously, only 3 of those people needed assistance OFF THE FREAKING PLANE.
     As the mom of a son with severe quadriplegia, and as someone who saw PLENTY of instances of non-wheelchair-users parking in wheelchair-van-only handicap spaces, THIS ABSOLUTELY SENDS ME INTO A FURY.
     Unfortunately, when it comes to air travel, there’s next to nothing that airlines can do to prevent this.

     Couldn’t be much clearer, could it? Those “wheelchair users” are gaming the system to secure an advantage for themselves, at the (potential) expense of others who genuinely need the available pre-boarding provision. Under the prevailing circumstances, the airlines can do nothing about it, so the exploiters will certainly “get away with it.”

     In any particular case, it’s possible that no traveler who genuinely needs the provision will be harmed by this deception. But it’s certain that in some cases, some such travelers will be harmed. The longer it continues, the more persons of weak conscience will be tempted by it. And of course, that guarantees that more travelers will adopt it. Ironically, the advantage will diminish in proportion to the number of travelers who yield to the temptation…but don’t expect that to retard the trend.

     This is but one observable datum in an intensifying stream of moral hazards. In aggregate they’re destroying the basis for all human interaction:

     There is no need in human life so great as that men should trust one another and should trust their government, should believe in promises, and should keep promises in order that future promises may be believed in and in order that confident cooperation may be possible. Good faith — personal, national, and international — is the first prerequisite of decent living, of the steady going on of industry, of governmental financial strength, and of international peace. — Benjamin M. Anderson, Economics and the Public Welfare: A Financial and Economic History of the United States, 1914 — 1946

     I’ve written a lot about trust, here and elsewhere. Not a lot of people are paying attention. Yet it’s the invisible cement that holds our society together. Once it’s gone, re-establishing it will take decades if not centuries. I doubt I’ll be wearing the flesh by then.

***

     In this recent essay, essay, I wrote:

     For centuries, sin has been operationally defined through Church teachings, and the indoctrination of the young in those teachings. Anyone raised with the old Baltimore Catechism might remember a sense that “anything not mandatory is forbidden” that it inculcated in its victims. The lists of prescriptions and proscriptions seemed endless…as did the absolute and utter necessity of weekly Confession. After all, with so very many things required or forbidden, it was guaranteed that one would slip now and then. One didn’t want to trip and fall in front of a bus when not in a state of grace.

     But the foundation for the concept of sin was neglected more often than not. The student who dared to ask his teacher-nun “Why is this a sin?” usually did so trembling. “God has forbidden it!” was the nun’s usual reply. As those nuns were equipped with fearsome instruments of correction – does anyone else remember those Bolo paddles? – we hesitated to incur their wrath.

     But questions that begin with “Why?” are the most important variety of all. The question “Why is this a sin?” is the key. Without it, the door to comprehension – our gift of rational awareness – cannot be unlocked. And the comprehension of sin as a violation of our human nature and its innate requirements is what We the Indoctrinated were denied.

     This was the great failure of Catholic education during my tender years: we needed explanations we seldom got. But then, the Baltimore Catechism forbade so many things that explanations would have made it a book ten or twenty times as long. The nuns who taught us tended not to be patient with “why?” questions. Easier to use those Bolo paddles.

     Owing to the deterioration of moral education, the deterioration of the institutions that once conducted it, and the corruption of our legal and political environment, moral hazards are ubiquitous today, as are those who succumb to the temptation they present. Many of those hazards are potentially profitable. There are people who’ve made their exploitation into industries. Hardly a day goes by when I don’t get a couple or three telephone calls from such persons. Perhaps you could say the same.

***

     There is no Last Graf. I have no recommendations for changes to anything except one’s personal conscience – and I doubt that many of my Gentle Readers need that to be strengthened. But that’s where the only defense can be found against the further deterioration of our society into an anteroom to Hell. Therefore I’ll make just one little plea. I won’t even use boldface, italics, or large font for it.

     If you know it’s wrong, don’t do it. Please.

Jun 28 2023

Breathing is REALLY Difficult Along the Canadian Border

I’ve been inside most of the day, except for walking the dog. I just stepped outside long enough check the mailbox, which is on my porch.

There’s a haze in the air.In the morni;g, I originally took it to be fog. I expect that asthmatics and the elderly will be having extreme difficulties this week.

This is NOT “climate change”. From the timing of the fires, it appears that at least some of them were deliberately set – likely by climate “activists”.

It is Eco-Terrorism. Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Left to charge them with such a crime.

Jun 28 2023

Assertions Are Not Evidence

     I have a grueling day before me, so I must dash off a quickie and bid my Gentle Readers a good day. However, we do have a newsworthy story before us.

     Concerning the death of accused teen-sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, Justice Department Inspector-general Michael Horowitz has issued a “report.” It does nothing to substantiate the “official” story that Epstein hanged himself. It cannot, for a simple reason:

There is no conclusive evidence.

     Moreover, I think if he were cross-examined, Michael Horowitz would be compelled to admit this.

     Like many documents intended to evade or soften damning admissions, Horowitz’s “report” is thousands of pages long and delves into total irrelevancies without reason. It mentions that “staff allowed Epstein to hoard extra blankets, linens, bedding and clothing, even though he had tried to hang himself earlier.” You say Epstein tried to hang himself earlier? Is there video? No – just as there is no video of his death, despite the requirement for both live and video monitors.

     The report cites the guards on duty as having been asleep, or surfing the Internet. But when Epstein died, were they physically present at his cell? Were they even nearby? Apparently not. So there is no eyewitness to testify to the event, who could be cross-examined for veracity.

     And there is this: the event is now four years in the past. Four years is a long time. Much that might have been discoverable then can no longer be known with certainty. Even the data about hoarded blankets and guards’ absence or misbehavior could be challenged at this point.

     I’m inclined to dismiss the Horowitz report for those reasons among others. The IG’s “report” might announce its “conclusions” in the firmest of tones…yet it amounts to nothing more than a reaffirmation of the official line. Its principal effect is to insulate virtually everyone involved – everyone who might have had a hand in killing Epstein, or coercing him into killing himself – against further scrutiny. As Horowitz remains a federal employee, that renders his “conclusions” nothing more than the statements of a federal employee unsupported by adequate evidence.

     Perhaps Jeffrey Epstein did commit suicide. We cannot know for certain. None of what has been presented as evidence leads conclusively to that verdict. The possibility, however dubious it seems, exists, just as does the possibility that he was coerced or “helped” to die, or was murdered outright. And that is the way the matter stands, and will be forevermore.

Jun 27 2023

Music As Prayer

     “He who sings prays twice.” – Catholic maxim

     I was in the middle of the Rosary when I was seized by a powerful desire to hear this piece: Jennifer Warnes’s rendition of Leonard Cohen’s “Song of Bernadette:”

     (Yes, I finished five decades before succumbing.)

Jun 27 2023

The Great Retreat

     What follows will be rather lengthy, I fear. So if you have other obligations that mustn’t be postponed for too long, please see to them before embroiling yourself in this piece. Among other things, it will embed quite a lot of citations from other, better known writers. As I know this displeases some readers, consider yourself forewarned.

***

     As an opener, have a citation from a great novel of some years ago. I hope the ghost of the late Poul Anderson, one of science fiction’s foremost luminaries, will not be displeased by this snippet:

     “I’m Kyra Davis, space pilot for Fireball,” she blurted, “and I—”
     “Nay, nothing further of your mission,” he interrupted. “The tone was mild but decisive. “That is for the lord Rinndalir.”
     She gathered her wits, studied him a moment, and murmured, “Are you so firmly under his orders? I thought Lunarians were a free-wheeling breed.”
     His answer was free of resentment, almost philosophical: “In some respects that is true, granting countless individual variations and complexities. But we cannot afford anarchism. As a spacer, you know how survival depends on discipline, the maintenance and protection of life support systems, instant cooperation in emergencies.”
     “Oh yes, obviously. Within those parameters, though—in Fireball we generally have our jobs to do.” Kyra paused. She hadn’t ever thought in quite these terms before. Had the chase jolted things she always taken for granted loose in her mind? “To a certain extent, I suppose you could say we are our careers. We’re free to change jobs, teams, whatever, any time there’s a demand for our services elsewhere and we want to go. But we seldom work entirely on our own. In the nature of things, we can’t. Pilots like me are among the few exceptions. It’s different for you. Apart from your survival obligations, isn’t the Lunarian ideal to do everything, and be everything for yourself?”
     And thus the declaration of independence half a century ago. Much more brought it on than a tax revolt. A civilization had grown up here—bewilderingly fast, its evolution driven not only by unearthly conditions but unearthly genes—that was incompatible with any on the mother planet.
     “The attitude serves for much of creativity and many minor enterprises,” Arren replied. “For anything more ambitious, organization is required. Furthermore, questions of personal security, arbitration, justice, the rights of the community, are universal. Let me propose that different cultures find different instrumentalities to cope with them, and that these are viable no longer than they have the allegiance of the people. The typical Earthdweller gives his to his government; the World Federation derives its legitimacy indirectly. You give yours to Fireball Enterprises. I give mine to the lord Rinndalir. Should he perish, I would think who else of his rank pleases me best and would accept me.”

     [From Harvest of Stars]

     Anderson, a fierce proponent of freedom, made several excursions into such questions in his fiction. I’ve cited this one more than once:

     “You wanted to re-establish the centralized state, didn’t you? Did you ever stop to think that maybe feudalism is what suits Man? Some one place to call our own, and belong to, and be part of; a community with traditions and honor; a chance for the individual to make decisions that count; a bulwark for liberty against the central overlords, who’ll always want more and more power; a thousand different ways to live. We’ve always built supercountries, here on Earth, and we’ve always knocked them apart again. I think maybe the whole idea is wrong. And maybe this time we’ll try something better. Why not a world of little states, too well rooted to dissolve in a nation, too small to do much harm—slowly rising above petty jealousies and spite, but keeping their identities—a thousand separate approaches to our problems. Maybe then we can solve a few of them…for ourselves!”

     However debatable the long-term stability of a quasi-feudal political order may be, it’s an inspiring vision…and it just might be the one most relevant to what’s happening to America as we watch.

***

     Among the great moral insights, this one stands very high:

Right and wrong are independent of governments.

     When a man makes a moral-ethical choice, the State, however conceived, is nowhere to be found. Indeed, the State’s whole purpose is to confuse questions of right and wrong, as if the intervention of a third party of dubious nature could fog such things sufficiently to make black seem white. And indeed, the cases of successful “foggings” are innumerable, despite quite forceful proclamations that those who succumbed to them should have known better.

     Yet we keep creating and submitting to States. We repeatedly pledge our allegiance to someone or something. Sometimes the pledge is formalized, one way or another. Whether it speaks to an overarching principle of social organization, or a need deeply embedded in human nature, is fundamentally irrelevant. It happens.

     But allegiances once pledged can be withdrawn. States, being jealous entities, tend to take such events badly. They consider a pledge of allegiance to be irrevocable. They treat defectors as traitors, and often move against them in the harshest possible ways. What simpler explanation could there be for the Civil War / War Between the States / Late Unpleasantness?

     “Do you know who is behind this militia and resisting martial law? We intend to move to make an example of them quickly. This has gone way beyond criminal, it’s treasonous. Surely most of the people on the station there are still loyal to their country!”
     “Nobody ever told us there was any martial law to resist. But loyalty and to whom we owe it is what the town meeting was all about – whether to stay in the USNA or leave. Folks are discussing what they should do with each other all over the station. We agreed we’ll all have a vote later today, to decide if we want to be our own nation. The way all my friends and neighbors were talking last night, the vote doesn’t look very good for you. I expect Jon, the head of security, will be holding a press conference or something later today and making it official. They could surprise me,” Ed admitted, “but I think the most part of them will to go for it.”
     “This is ridiculous,” [President] Hadley told him. “We settled this back in the Civil War. Nobody leaves the Union. Look what happened when they tried.”

     [Mackey Chandler, April]

     People often cite the Civil War when the question of secession is raised. But that conflict only settled which of the two powers in it was the stronger. It had nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of secession from the Union, regardless of what anyone thinks were the “underlying issues:”

     In the 1860’s, Americans fought to abolish slavery once and for all. At least, that’s usually thought of as the cause of the War Between the States; and it was a just cause, except that the problem of freeing the slaves was already well on the way toward a peaceful solution. But the real issue was the matter of states’ rights versus federal domination. Among other things, this involved the tariff question, which had long been a bone of contention between the industrial states and the agricultural states. The latter had for many years been fighting against high tariffs because they violated the principle of no special privileges for anyone.
     The southern states wanted free ports; the federal government insisted on uniform tariffs at all ports – and the election of 1860 meant higher tariffs.
     Northerners fought to preserve the American revolution by preserving the Union. Southerners fought to preserve the revolution by defending the rights of the states.
     During the War Between the States, European troops moved into Mexico – thus proving that the Northerners were right. But the drifting away from the constitutional balance of power which has been going on ever since may yet prove that the Southerners were right.

     [Henry Grady Weaver, The Mainspring of Human Progress]

     States make war to assert what they deem their sovereign prerogatives; individuals take up arms to assert their rights. The gulf between the two is unbridgeable. It’s manifesting all around us today.

***

     There’s a great and terrible paradox built into every notion of political authority: it is essentially unenforceable. More often than not, people obey the dictates of the State that looms over them for reasons other than the probability, whatever it may be, of detection and punishment. Many people quietly ignore “laws” that appear to conflict with their objectives or their personal ethic, and “get away with it:”

     “You have or have not violated legislative compulsion programs,” stated the Sirian; and that was the most prolonged session of all. Try as he would, Forrester could not seem to get across the idea of a personal ethic—of laws that one did not violate, because they were morally right, and of laws that everyone violated if they possibly could, because they were morally irrelevant.

     In a way, that constitutes a partial withdrawal of allegiance from the State. Even should the great majority of its subject commit such a covert withdrawal of allegiance, the State will stand. States only respond to open challenges to their prerogatives.

     But a time may come – and today is beginning to look like such a time – that a great many subjects of a State will openly withdraw their allegiance, though they may do so for a variety of reasons. Should a sufficient percentage of a State’s subjects openly withdraw their allegiance, that State will fall. In the very nature of things, no State can marshal enough power to enforce its will against a sufficiently large rebellion. How large that rebellion must be to topple the State depends on many factors, but there is no question that a threshold exists.

     But what follows the fall of a State – what should follow such an event – must be contemplated in the light of that seeming proclivity of Man to form and submit to political authorities. The insights of Poul Anderson cited above are applicable.

***

     It’s time for an observation from another great, pro-freedom writer:

     One female (most were men, but women made up for it in silliness) had a long list she wanted made permanent laws—about private matters. No more plural marriage of any sort. No divorces. No “fornication”—had to look that one up. No drinks stronger than 4% beer. Church services only on Saturdays and all else to stop that day. (Air and temperature and pressure engineering, lady? Phones and capsules?) A long list of drugs to be prohibited and a shorter list dispensed only by licensed physicians. (What is a “licensed physician”? Healer I go to has a sign reading “practical doctor”—makes book on side, which is why I go to him. Look, lady, aren’t any medical schools in Luna!) (Then, I mean.) She even wanted to make gambling illegal. If a Loonie couldn’t roll double or nothing, he would go to a shop that would, even if dice were loaded.
     Thing that got me was not her list of things she hated, since she was obviously crazy as a Cyborg, but fact that always somebody agreed with her prohibitions. Must be a yearning deep in human heart to stop other people from doing as they please. Rules, laws—always for other fellow. A murky part of us, something we had before we came down out of trees, and failed to shuck when we stood up. Because not one of those people said: “Please pass this so that I won’t be able to do something I know I should stop.” Nyet, tovarishchee, was always something they hated to see neighbors doing. Stop them “for their own good”—not because speaker claimed to be harmed by it.

     [Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress

     (This is among the reasons that anarchic societies that are geographically well insulated from governmental systems eventually birth States, but that’s a topic for later.)

     When the “sufficient degree of rebellion” is reached and a State falls, the “variety of reasons” for people’s withdrawal of allegiance from the State will persist into what follows. Each separate reason can function as a nucleus of condensation, sufficient to pull a group together around the “need for enforcement.” The pull is especially strong when it’s coupled to geography, or to religious, cultural, or linguistic commonality.

     Thus anarchy gives way to proto-States: satrapies usually centered on an individual seen as strong enough and / or well-respected enough to hold things together in a particular locale. Sometimes the period of anarchy is infinitesimal. Consider that the American Revolution was followed almost instantaneously by the assertion of a federal structure, defined by the Articles of Confederation. Most of the newly freed states ignored the provisions of the Articles. The state governments were uniformly weak, such that they could be ignored in the great majority of cases. Yet there were local figures, whether county magistrates, or town mayors, or great families, around whom the colonists rallied. Though in the usual case they possessed no more enforcement power than you or I, they could keep a tolerable degree of order simply by the respect others felt for them. There was “anarchy” in a technical sense, yet there was order…and freedom.

     Those who believed, for their variety of reasons, that a federal government with broader powers was “necessary,” found the situation intolerable. Benjamin Franklin’s acerbic observation was a warning to the Constitutional Conventioneers that if they desired that the people consider their efforts important and worthy of respect, they had better not dawdle. But that’s a story for another day.

***

     I could summarize the above in a single sentence: When big things come apart, smaller, more coherent things will become more visible. In such a scenario, individual freedom under “bossmen” such as those alluded to in No Truce With Kings, or under the “Selenarchs” of Harvest of Stars, could be far better defended than it is in America today. Yet an Andersonian “world of little states” would not be beyond perturbation, especially given the existence of very large States whose masters have exhibited great voracity.

     Sometimes in a constellation of little states, a wealthy and greatly respected family, such as the Borgias or the Medicis of Medieval Italy, will arise with the power to impose itself on lesser satrapies. Such power, once felt, is seldom restrained for long. And so the march back toward consolidation and bigness resumes.

     Yet for a while, we would be largely free once more. I’d prefer complete anarchy, regardless of the connotations of the word:

     I shan’t attempt to deceive or misdirect you: I’m horrified by politics and all its fruits. I consider the use of coercive force against innocent men the greatest of all the evils we know. But I try, most sincerely, to be realistic about the world around us. In that world, peopled by men such as ourselves, anarchism—the complete abjuration and avoidance of the State—is unstable. In time, it will always give way to politics. Hammer it to the earth as many times as you may, you will never succeed in killing it permanently. The State will rise again.

     …but in this universe – and don’t bother trying to emigrate to another! – everything is unstable. We must take what we can get, when we can get it, and give thanks. If America is about to begin a Great Retreat from superstate status, as I begin to think likely, perhaps we can have a few decades to enjoy the freedom that will temporarily follow:

     “I have a faint desire to take the pistol from my desk and shoot you both. I have a nervous feeling that you’re about to embark on a crusade to awaken Syndic Territory to its perils. You think the fate of civilization hinges on you. You’re right, of course. The fate of civilization hinges on every one of us at any given moment. We are all components in the two-billion-body problem. Somehow for a century we’ve achieved in Syndic Territory for almost everybody the civil liberties, peace of mind and living standards that were enjoyed by the middle classes before 1914—plus longer life, better health, a more generous morality, increased command over nature; minus the servant problem and certain superstitions. A handful of wonderfully pleasant decades. When you look back over history you wonder who in his right mind could ask for more. And you wonder who would dare to presume to tamper with it.”

     [C.M. Kornbluth, The Syndic ]

     Our forebears had that for about a century and a quarter, if the Late Unpleasantness may be discounted. Perhaps we, or our posterity, can have it again for a while.

     Peace, freedom, and the love of God be with you all.

Jun 26 2023

Some Thoughts On Technology

     Even though I was once an engineer, I’m something of a dinosaur when it comes to acquiring and using new gadgets. I’m not a Luddite, but I’m far from a “first adopter.” My experiences as a user of relatively new technology have been decidedly mixed.

     Most people are unaware of the full range of behavior built into a lot of new stuff. Something as seemingly innocuous as the “always on” characteristic built into a lot of new devices has consequences that don’t occur to many owners. For example, I have two large TVs that have “always on” characteristics. The designers did that deliberately to make start-up faster, and to facilitate certain functions of their remote controls. Together, those “always on” TVs were costing me about $80 per month in electrical charges…until I put them on power bars with independent switches, and made a habit of flipping those switches to Off when I’m not using them. (It was that or pull plugs out of sockets, and that’s just “too much like work.”)

     Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has just discovered another “feature” of an “always on” TV:

     “Last night in my DC residence, the television turned on by itself, and the screen showed someone’s laptop trying to connect to the TV,” MTG posted on Twitter.

     “Just for the record: I’m very happy. I’m also very healthy and eat well and exercise a lot. I don’t smoke and never have. I don’t take any medications. I am not vaccinated. So I’m not concerned about blood clots, heart conditions, strokes, or anything else,” she wrote.

     “Nor do I have anything to hide. I just love my country and the people and know how much they’ve been screwed over by the corrupt people in our government, and I’m not willing to be quiet about it or willing to go along with it,” she wrote.

     Combine “always on” with embedded camera, microphone, and WiFi capability, and this “feature” jumps out of the box to bedevil anyone who’s jealous of his privacy. Indeed, WiFi might not be necessary. There are ways to encode digital packets onto the AC power line that runs from your TV to the wall. The only guaranteed method of isolating your TV is to disconnect it from its power source completely.

     Perhaps not a great many of us need concern ourselves with government snoops. However, there are plenty of private snoops in the world, too. Many of them take up sidelines in blackmail. Are you quite, quite sure that nothing you do might be profitable for someone like that to know?

     The “smart home,” its user-settable devices all WiFied together, is a control freak’s paradise. There are a lot of them out there, Gentle Reader. Some of them hail from the “environmental” section of the open-air loony bin. Any of those might decide that you’ve used up your monthly quota of electrons. And there’s always the looming threat of government intrusion, on whatever grounds you care to imagine.

     Until quite recently, I, like many other Americans, was in the habit of leaving my computers powered up all the time. In part, that was because of Dell Computers’ problems with unreliable power buttons. Apparently it’s the least reliable gadget in a Dell box. But since Sharyl Attkisson’s experience at being spied upon remotely – which included the actual erasure of some of the files on her work computer – I’ve been turning my machines off at night by flipping the power switch on their standby power supplies. I’m beginning to think I should disconnect them from the house router when I’m not actively using the Internet, too.

     The power savings are certainly nice, here on Long Island where a typical middle-class family sees charges of $400 to $500 per month. But even more gratifying is the elimination of that “somebody’s watching me” feeling so many of us have suffered in recent years. “Rockwell” may have been been prescient, if only a little ahead of his time:

     How about you, Gentle Reader? Can you think of any reason some inquisitive sort might want to spy on you, or give some of your “smart” devices a little goose from afar? Give it a few CPU cycles. There might be more such reasons than you’re ready to admit. Make a list and keep it near you.

Jun 26 2023

Critics Circle…And Pounce

     Despite my general disdain for the professional critic [“Those who criticize the most are the ones who create nothing.” – Helmut Schoeck] I must admit to a soft spot for acerbic reviewers with a creative flair for the English language. The following, taken from this review of a Guns ‘n’ Roses performance, tickled me especially:

     [E]ven when they’re locked into a powerful, charged union – on, say, “Estranged” or “Reckless Life” – [Axl] Rose makes the whole thing sound like a Muppet Show pastiche of hard rock. It’s his voice: a creature that, were you to take it to a vet, would come home in a cardboard box. Mumbling vague approximations of English words as if chronically constipated (if you’ve hit the goat curry hard enough, you’ll feel his intestinal pain), he flips between a lower register that resembles a clogged lawnmower and a higher one that sounds like Barry Gibb suffering the mother of all wedgies.

     The sarcastic review has long been the special province of British drama reviewers. It’s pleasant to see that the art, perhaps the only form of esthetic expression that genuinely belongs to critics, has moved into this highly appropriate venue. A nice way to start your Monday.

Load more