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.

Jun 25 2023

An Early-Sunday-Morning Thought

     A huge portion of the popular reaction against “public” schools arises from clashes over values: i.e., moral and ethical principles for living that undergird all other decisions. All education of any kind must be founded upon some set of values, because literally everything involved in human life is founded thus. It’s literally impossible to teach without reference to some set of moral-ethical principles.

     It started when state education bureaucrats decided to force “hygiene” into the high-school classroom. The rationale was, of course, venereal disease, how it’s transmitted, how to avoid contracting it, and what to do if you do. It didn’t take long for “hygiene” to morph into the broader subject of “sex education,” and for the “education” to permeate ever lower grades. Today “sex education” curricula embrace the ever-expanding realm of “alternative lifestyles,” because after all, it’s vital for fifth-graders to have comprehensive knowledge of polyamory, homosexuality, bisexuality, bestiality, S&M, pedophilia, paraphilia, “puppy” and “pony” play, et cetera ad nauseam infinitam.

     These “subjects” cannot be “taught” without reference to moral and ethical principles. And many parents are horrified at the principles that accompany them.

     Before we can make sense of the development, we must address another subject of even greater importance: the secularization of American life. Today, even though about three-quarters of Americans describe themselves as Christians of some denomination, the application of Christian principles to daily life is at an all-time low. The Ten Commandments still receive lip service, but little more – and to mention them, or to make any reference to the teachings of Christ in a “public” school classroom, is to invite discipline, dismissal, and lawsuits both civil and criminal.

     But one cannot remove the dominant set of principles from an educational system and leave a vacuum. Another set will flow in within an eyeblink. This is what has occurred.

     “Public” schooling, once rationalized as an Americanization mechanism for the children of immigrant families, has become the transmission medium for the principles of the dominant religious creed of our time: hedonism. Its doctrines are reinforced by the messages from the entertainment media. And American parents, inhibited by social pressures and heavily burdened by economic factors, often find themselves unable to counter it.

     Yes, I mean the above exactly as it seems: “public” schools now practice religious indoctrination, though in a form that pretends to be “objective” and “nonjudgmental.” They promulgate a creed our great-grandparents would not recognize. Which calls to mind this passage from Isabel Paterson’s masterwork The God of the Machine:

     There can be no greater stretch of arbitrary power than is required to seize children from their parents, teach them whatever the authorities decree they shall be taught, and expropriate from the parents the funds to pay for the procedure. If this principle really is not understood, let any parent holding a positive religious faith consider how it would seem to him if his children were taken by force and taught an opposite creed. Would he not recognize tyranny naked?

     Indeed. Keep this in mind as the educrats strive to forbid homeschooling de facto through the imposition of curricular requirements and regulations.

Jun 24 2023

Mask Droppings

     (Alternately, “Leftist Droppings”)

     This article is highly informative:

     Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and a group of 14 other attorneys general penned a letter to Target CEO Brian Cornell this week expressing concern about the store’s removal of some of its Pride products.

     Target lit a media firestorm last month when it announced it pulled an unspecified number of products from its shelves after the company faced “confrontational behavior” at its stores as well as threats of violence on its customer hotline.

     While Ellison and AGs from California, New York, Maryland and more offered support for Target’s intention to keep its workers safe, they questioned if Target gave in to threats.

     “While we understand the basis for this action, we are also concerned it sends a message that those who engage in hateful and disruptive conduct can cause even large corporations to succumb to their bullying,” the AGs wrote, “and that they have the power to determine when LGBTQIA+ consumers will feel comfortable in Target stores or anywhere in society.”

     Of course, neither Target’s workers nor its (remaining) customers are in any danger. They have no objective reason to feel “unsafe,” regardless of their sexual and political alignments. That’s not the point. The point is to keep the LGBTQ “pride” pressure at the maximum.

     The above shows us three important things about the Left:

  1. Agenda: Forcing LGBTQ “pride” crap upon normal Americans.
  2. Priority: Worth involving high law enforcement officials and veiled threats.
  3. Method: Redefining normal Americans’ reactions to “pride” marketing as bullying.

     The agenda is plain enough: thrusts by the LGBTQ promoters, particularly the promotion of transgenderism, are very much in the Left’s interest. The priority takes a moment to discern; state attorneys-general are far more significant players in public affairs than most suppose, as the law enforcers of their states answer to them. The method, as it so often is, is the redefining of entirely legitimate consumer behavior – i.e., the choice not to shop at Target – as “bullying,” a prosecutable offense in most states. While it’s rather difficult to prosecute persons whose identities are unknown, that’s a mere detail. The attack rhetoric of the attorneys-general is what matters.

     There’s a ball-under-the-shirt aspect to this. Those attorneys-general aren’t aiming at prosecuting consumers for not shopping at Target, an absurd undertaking. Their concern is Target’s response to the loss of consumer traffic. They want the LGBTQ “pride” campaign “out loud and proud,” represented conspicuously in as many retail establishments as possible. Forcing arrant abnormality on normal people requires a massive full-court press.

     Normalizing abnormality is the whole point. It’s been so effective an entering wedge that the Left has come to depend on it. Homosexuality, S&M, transgenderism, pedophilia, paraphilia, and all the other “alternative lifestyles” are confined to small minorities of the American populace. They’re most definitely not normal. Moreover, when they act out publicly, they offend and frighten the normal majority. This is especially so among parents with minor children.

     I doubt those left-wing attorneys-general can do anything to reverse the boycotts. Consumers have too many alternatives from which to choose. Wise marketing executives have already noticed the reactions against the “pride” campaigns. Few of them are so strongly Left-aligned that they’ll enlist their companies in the cause, only to see what’s happened to Anheuser-Busch and Target happen to them. So what do those attorneys-general expect from their marshaled expressions of “concern?”

     This is a development that deserves ongoing attention.

Jun 23 2023

This is only a shock for the Left

Because those of us who actually pay attention knew in 2020 that Hunter Biden was daddy’s bag man, both in Ukraine and China.

HUNTER BIDEN: I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father

Those of us who chose to actually look at what was going on knew that Hunter Biden was collecting cash for his father in China. The stripper-banging crackhead son of a corrupt pedophile was flying on AIR FORCE TWO in order to get the cash from the ChiComs in the Biden pay-to-play deal. Remember, ten percent for the Big Guy!

Although he was probably capable of doing so, Hunter Biden wasn’t smoking $50,000 of crack cocaine a month while on the board of Burisma. No, that money was going home to daddy.

As a side note, part of the reason I’m so ambivalent about the Russia-Ukraine conflict is that I see two corrupt oligarchies going at each other. Ukraine has been the US government’s money-laundering country for a decade if not more. Biden’s son wasn’t the only politician’s kid to bring home millions of dollars from the Kraine. Pelosi’s kid. Romney’s kid. Who knows how many more were getting filthy rich from the laundered US taxpayer dollars. We’ll never know.

Back to the deadbead dad dopefiend. We all know he’ll never face punishment on this earth for his crimes, and there are so many that offend God that we can’t count them all. We know that Drooling Joe the Chinese Hand Puppet will never face any consequences, because even if DeSantis or Trump wins in 2024 they can’t clear out all the rot in the Fascist Bureau of Intimidation or the Department of Injustice fast enough to get Drooling Joe persecuted for his corruption. The only satisfaction we can have is the knowledge that Drooling Joe and his dirtbag son will reap their eternal reward in Hell.

The Christian in me says that should be enough. The man in me wants to pull the lever on the gallows after their trials.

Jun 23 2023

On the Mend

Me, that is. On the fence about America.

While alternately working to improve my mobility, and swearing and putting ice on my poor tortured limbs, I’ve been getting caught up on some blog posts, particularly on Substack.

One such post, referred by Western Rifle Shooters, was this. There’s a part 2, as well.

If you have children/grandchildren who haven’t a clue about Actual History – as opposed to that promoted by The Woke and Dictatorial – check this out. While I’m on the subject, is there anyone who can recommend a general modern US History book that we can hand the kids? Something that is factual, backed up by contemporary reports, and not conspiracy-minded (not that the conspiracies didn’t exist, but, for newbs to the non-Woke truth, it needs to be soft-pedaled).

Wander around Visayas Outpost; there is a lot in that Substack worth reading.

I’d like to spend some more time on this post, but I had my first post-healing PT appointment, and I’m pooped. I’m going to take a quick nap, before I head out to get my – and my dog’s – nails done.

Almost forgot! I made my first trip as a driver since the accident. It went fine, and I’ll be working on getting out more often over the next few weeks.

Jun 23 2023

Digressions

     It strikes me that today, after the fulminations of the previous few days, it’s time for something a bit less…well, less like the past few days! So this will be a ramble of sorts, and as divorced from the most recent national news as I can make it.

***

     Among the things I watch for vigilantly are any signs that someone is trying to exploit my good nature, or that of the C.S.O. Beth is an unusually generous sort – she’d have to be, to endure me for several decades – which makes her susceptible to being used by persons of weaker ethics.

     This morning, my almost-retired wife will get into her buggy at 6:15 AM EDT, drive approximately twenty miles, and perform unpaid babysitting duties for the entire day. The focus of those duties is a three-year-old boy with the energy level typical of such creatures. Beth will come home exhausted and seriously undernourished. I’ll have to feed and nurse her through what remains of the evening.

     Yes, of course the kid is a relative! Her grandson, in fact. But that doesn’t quite justify asking a seventy year old woman still convalescing from cancer surgery to travel a considerable distance to provide free labor. Especially since the boy’s mother and father significantly out-earn what Beth and I were making when we were both working full time.

***

     Every now and then I get a phone call from the sort of parasite that preys on indie writers. Yesterday was such a day. The usual appeal is “we love your book, now here’s what we can do for you.” In the sonic background is a “boiler room” full of minimum-wage types making the same fraudulent appeal to other writers.

     When I first got such calls, I merely said “not interested” and disconnected. After a while they became a source of amusement. These days, I make an effort to keep the minimum-wage type on the line for as long as possible. I ask all sorts of detailed questions, answers to which would be difficult to prescript, to plumb both the ingenuity and the endurance of the caller. As it keeps such persons from harassing other writers for at least a little while, I consider it my contribution to the well-being of the indie community.

     Yesterday’s caller set a record: 34 minutes on the phone with me. I quizzed her about her organization, what it does for writers, how long it’s been doing it, what other writers it’s served, what benefits they’ve derived, how long she has been doing this sort of work, how she stumbled upon my book, how it compared to the other books in its series, what she thought were its high points, how the style resembles various works by such luminaries as David Foster Wallace, Arthur C. Clarke, Agatha Christie, Anne Rice, Frank McCourt, Joyce Carol Oates…

     When I realized that the poor lady had hung in there for a world-record interval, I said, as sadly as I could through the giggles, “I’m sorry, I have to perform open-heart surgery now,” and disconnected as she keened out a despairing “But wait…!”

     What’s that? You think I was cruel? An underappreciated indie writer has to get his jollies where he can, you know. Besides, consider what the caller’s paymasters were trying to do to me. Oh, did I mention the origin point of the call? Kolkata, India. Think about it.

***

     While we’re on the subject of indie writers: Yes, you’re correct. I haven’t released a new novel since late 2021. Call it a sabbatical, if you like. That’s kinder than what I call it.

     There’s such a thing as storyteller burnout. I might not be there yet, but I got a foretaste of it after finishing The Discovery Phase. The characters I’d grown to love seemed tired. I had all sorts of ideas for them, but they didn’t want to come out and play. Worse, my beloved Onteora County, perhaps the most absurd fictional locale ever conceived, had begun to seem over-exploited. I had to step back for a bit, think seriously about possible changes of direction.

     I’m still struggling over it all. The intended novel for which this was a teaser has been fighting me. I’m having trouble contriving a credible path to the critical tragedy and resolution. I’ll manage it eventually, I suppose. However, several other projects are hanging fire while I grind my teeth over it.

     If you’ve been waiting for fresh fiction from me, consider this a status report.

***

     There’s a downside to everything. Loyalty is no exception.

     If there’s an artisan you call upon for everything in his field of endeavor, he can come to feel that he owns you. If you’ve done a lot of business with him over a long spell of years, then beware should he find out that you’ve patronized one of his competitors.

     There’s a general contractor with whom I’ve done business for more than thirty years. He’s a good fellow, he treats me well, and he and his people are generally reliable. Indeed, I’ve come to rely on him even for things nominally outside his sphere. When there’s a problem with the house that I can’t fix myself, “call Tony” is my immediate reaction. That pleases him.

     Tony installed the roof on the Fortress back in 1995. It’s been showing its age recently, and recently I decided that the dump needed a new one. It was partly an impulse decision, and partly the discovery that one of my ceiling light fixtures had (ulp) filled with water. As it happened, a major national renovations company was doing work nearby, so I asked their representative to stop by for an inspection and an estimate.

     The estimate was a lot more than I was prepared to hear. Apparently the cost of roofing has…well…gone through the roof in recent years. But the product I was pitched was dazzling: a space-age roof, new down to the plywood, with special anti-leak, anti-fungus, anti-mold, and anti-vermin properties, and special protections around the chimney and other protrusions. Moreover, it came with new soffets, improved ventilation for the attic, new gutters and leaders, and a lifetime zero-cost guarantee. It went well beyond what Tony had done for me thirty years ago.

     I signed the purchase order. I had a premonition that I hadn’t thought the matter through adequately…that there would be unpleasant consequences. However, the company’s performance not only fulfilled all its representative’s promises in every detail, it exceeded all my expectations.

     But Tony wasn’t happy when he found out about it. “Why the hell didn’t you call me?” was his reaction. And I had no answer. None that would please him, at any rate.

     There may be some benefit in not being so loyal to a service vendor that it evokes such a reaction.

***

     That’s all I have for the moment. It seems I did manage not to vent about anything political for a change. I hope my Gentle Readers are not too disappointed. Anyway, it’s time for Mass, so to close, here are Ellie, Joel, and a giraffe from Sony’s best-ever video game, The Last of Us:

     And do have a nice day.

Jun 22 2023

You cannot fool Mother Nature

No matter how hard you try. Now, anyone who knows me knows that I hate hippies. But you can disapprove of someone and still acknowledge some good things, such as the whole natural foods movement. I’m a huge believer in eating as naturally as you can. Processed foods are the devil. And no matter how many times someone makes a zero-calorie sweetener, it will always be worse for you than plain old sugar.

A byproduct of sucralose, a chemical found in the popular zero-calorie sweetener Splenda, has been shown to cause damage to DNA, raise the risk of cancer and cause leaks in the gut lining, according to a new study from North Carolina State University.

Splenda is used as a sugar substitute in thousands of foods, beverages, desserts and candies. The product contains 1.10% sucralose. The sucralose ingredient is manufactured by Tate & Lyle in the U.K. and the Splenda brand is owned by Heartland Food Products Group in Indianapolis, Indiana.

The study, published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, found that a metabolite of sucralose, called sucralose-6-acetate, is “genotoxic.” 

Quite honestly if it doesn’t come from nature, it’s not going to be good for you. And even if it DID come from nature there might be a chance it’ll kill you. But un-natural sweeteners are some of the worst. Your body can’t really handle them, and many of them still produce an insulin response even though there’s no sugar. It’s just bad news all around.

The thing is, sugar is ADDICTIVE. Try going without it cold turkey and see how you feel. The wife and I have pretty much cut sugar out of our diet to the point where when she adds carrots and red onions to a soup, we can taste the sweetness. We still enjoy sweets, but not in the quantities that we enjoyed as young pups. I tend towards dark chocolate, less sugar and more flavor.

So yeah, I hate hippies but I love natural food. I think processed carbohydrates are killing Americans. And if more people ate grass fed beef, the world would be a better place.

Jun 22 2023

Too Brilliant Not To Steal: Banana Republic Bingo!

     I just filched this from WRSA:

     I’d enjoy a game. Trouble is, all the boxes are filled already. 😢

Jun 22 2023

On Pulling Triggers

     These statements by baseball great Curt Schilling have just come to my attention:

     “We’re up against a side and a force that doesn’t play by the rules – refuses to play by the rules,” he said, adding of conservatives: “We get excited, and we get emotional; that’s it. They break the law; they do the things they need to do to ensure their agenda is driven forward – and we’re watching them gut our nation from the inside out, and I don’t know where the rubber’s gonna meet the road.”

[…]

     “[The American revolutionaries] sacrificed everything to come out from under a tyrannical government and, then, eventually, at some point, there was a man at Concord who decided he was gonna pull the trigger.”

[…]

     “And I feel like we’re getting back to a point where somebody’s gonna have to pull a trigger, because everything we hold dear – everything this country was founded on – is being just dragged through the mud and mocked and made fun of,” he said. “This country was founded on Godly principles – no matter how offensive that is to the left, it’s true.”

     Those statements are from an interview of Schilling by Jesse Watters. Watters gave Schilling a chance to walk back the “pull a trigger” rhetoric:

     “I’m going to assume you mean ‘pull’ the trigger metaphorically?” Jesse Watters asked.

     “Absolutely, well, no,” Schilling replied. “I mean, it doesn’t matter if I say metaphorically because they’re going to run with that quote no matter how I put it. I could have phrased it in any possible way saying, Stand up and fight and blah blah blah and I would be inciting a riot while Maxine Waters says, Get in their face and beat the hell out of them, publicly.”

     Every word is Gospel truth. A conservative cannot say anything that the Left won’t screech and rave about. Moreover, Leftists characterize their own rampages of violence and destruction as peaceful protests.

     They’ve killed and brutalized.
     They’ve tried to assassinate Republican legislators.
     They’ve destroyed billions of dollars’ worth of property.
     They’ve marshaled thugs to invade and shut down free-speech rallies.
     They routinely intimidate and threaten conservative figures scheduled to give talks.

          But let Curt Schilling talk about the years of the American Revolution and the similarities to our time! Let Sarah Palin post crosshairs on a map to indicate Republican electoral opportunities – remember the Gabby Gifford shooting? Suddenly Leftist politicians and their allies in the media scream that the Right is one huge gaggle of terrorists just slavering to commit mass murder!

     In this connection, an arrogant sort who thinks himself wise commented insultingly on this recent piece to the effect that the “musket time” question at the end is “irresponsible.” I consigned it to the trash, as you’d expect. He was back this morning with this:

     So just out of curiosity why is it you decided not to publish my post? Is it because you only want posts that agree with your silly armed rebellion against the government? What a small man you are…

     I wonder where his line in the sand might lie…or whether he has one. There are persons who’d watch men with badges rape their wives and daughters, shrug, and say, “You can’t fight City Hall.” Perhaps he’s one such. At any rate, people’s opinions will vary, as will their manners.

     Yes, I’m one who feels it’s literally time for a whole lot of trigger-pulling. Therefore I’m heartened by Schilling’s forthrightness, even though he probably was speaking metaphorically. He may be only an admired sports figure, but a lot of people listen to him. Perhaps the Left will now take note of how close to disaster they’ve come. The next step might be into the abyss.

Jun 22 2023

Powerful Or Powerless?

     Anyone who follows the storms of political commentary will be aware that the Left is angry that the Supreme Court of the United States is currently moderately conservative. (I make it roughly 5.33 conservatives to 3.67 left-liberals, as Chief Justice John Roberts has proved that he cannot be trusted.) This morning, John Hinderaker comments to that effect:

     Why is the Court suddenly controversial? Obviously because it is, at the moment, in the hands of relatively conservative justices. Democrats revere the Court when it is ruling their way. When they lose a few cases, they stir up bogus “ethics” controversies. Not because they have any merit, or because any knowledgeable person takes them seriously, but so that they can generate endless headlines in Democratic Party news outlets about the “controversial” Court that supposedly is dogged by ethics charges. This will undermine the Court’s stature in the eyes of the uninformed, and perhaps cause justices to take a more liberal turn in order to turn off the heat.

     This is spot-on, as usual. I find even more thought-provoking this story from Bloomberg:

     The Supreme Court, in the midst of a run of decisions that have stress-tested the core principles of US democracy, has rarely been so aggressive in using its powers — or been viewed with more skepticism by Americans.

     There’s that word “democracy” again. While I generally approve of the presidency of Andrew Jackson, I sorely wish he hadn’t popularized the notion that our nation is a “democracy.” It is not, has never been, and was not intended to be any such thing. But I digress. My focus this morning is on the notion that the Supreme Court is “powerful.”

     When civics education was deemed important, among the things children were taught is that the judicial branch is considered the “least dangerous” of the three branches of the federal government, and that it was made so by the Framers’ intent. The courts, all the way to SCOTUS, have no enforcement power. They issue opinions; that’s all. Enforcement lies in the hands of the executive branch, which possesses the armed men and the funding with which to act. Therefore all the actual power lies in the executive – beyond the reach of the courts.

     The executive branch has declined to enforce SCOTUS’s opinions on several; memorable occasions. The first and best known was in the McCulloch v. Maryland case, where SCOTUS ruled that Congress had an “implied power” with which President Jackson disagreed: i.e., the power to establish a national bank. This is the case which gave rise to the (apocryphal) Jackson statement “John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!” And indeed, Chief Justice Marshall could do nothing of the sort.

     The “power” of the federal courts lies in their ability to sway opinions: those of the other branches of the federal government, and of Americans generally. As influence over opinion sometimes does translate into influence over action, in the scheme of things this is not inconsiderable. However, it only exists when respect for the courts is high. As Hinderaker notes above, the Left is working furiously to degrade that respect.

     Unfortunately, judges, including Supreme Court Justices, are as sensitive to what the media say as any elected politician. Just as they can influence the opinions and actions of others, they can be counter-influenced by a campaign of criticism and calumny against them. When the media are aligned against them, the pressure is strong. When the Left’s activists are permitted to besiege them, their families, and their homes, it nears a critical level.

     It’s not that long ago that two Supreme Court Justices were savagely attacked by Democrat legislators and media columnists over the Dobbs decision, which returned authority over the legality of abortion to the state governments. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home was besieged by Leftist activists for several days – and no enforcement power was deployed against them, despite the illegality of the act. SCOTUS had issued its opinion, and a strong one at that…but the Left was determined that it should not prevail. The counter-influencing emboldened several Democrat governors to defy Republican-controlled legislatures’ enactments limiting abortion in their states.

     I’ve said it before: what matters isn’t the law, but whether the law is enforced, to what extent, and against what or whom. Indeed, enforcement holds all the trumps even when the law points in the opposite direction. If you doubt that, ponder what’s currently being done in the cases of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump.

     And so Porretto’s Carbohydrate Aphorism rears its ugly head yet again:

Keep thine eye fixed upon the doughnut, lest thou pass unaware through the hole.

     Yes, I know it’s unpleasant, but so is the weight gain that follows.

Jun 22 2023

The Hunter Biden Saga

     Yes, it’s been going on for quite a while now. Many are asking whether it’s genuinely important or one of the Establishment’s diversions. I’m no longer sure. But of this I am certain: developments are telling us in the plainest possible manner that the American ideal of classlessness has been overthrown. There is now an American aristocracy, and it appears to be as hereditary as the monarchies of medieval Europe.

     Lawyer and activist Kash Patel deposeth and sayeth:

     This underscores the sweetheart-of-all-sweethearts deal Justice has made with Hunter Biden. As a former Justice Department employee, Patel would have a closer view of such things than an outsider like myself. But I will add this: were Hunter Biden’s name and lineage removed from the chronicle of his misdeeds, would we not be justified in terming their perpetrator a career criminal?

     When your prosecutors are the persons most determined to see to it that you “get off,” you’re well protected from legal hazard. Why, you might even say you’re privileged. And once again I am moved to cite a piece of fiction, though not one of mine:

     “Mr. Brooks has been removed as your court-appointed attorney. He was unable and unwilling to continue to represent you. My name is Dennis Howard. I’ve reviewed all the recordings of your conversations with Mr. Brooks.”
     “Then you are aware I didn’t accept him as my attorney. You may assume I regard you the same. Just the fact that there are recordings shows how farcical this whole matter is.”
     “I hear your objection, but the fact is I am charged with developing your defense if not directly representing you in court. I’ll be doing that even over your objections.”
[…]
     “Well if you are preparing a defense, they must at least have a judge who is going to hear my case,” Irwin deduced.
     “Not exactly,” Howard hedged. “They are still having trouble finding someone who will sit for the case, and I’m more in a caretaker position collecting the evidence piling up and keeping it organized so when you do have new official counsel appointed I can assist him in discovery without any delay for him to become familiar with the case.”
     “Then who do you work for?” Irwin asked, puzzled.
     “I’m on detached duty from the Federal prosecutor’s office,” Howard revealed.
     Irwin started laughing and proceeded to completely lose control, hooting, and snorting.
     Howard just let him go, grim-faced, seeing it was pointless to try to interrupt his fit until he ran down on his own.
     “Detached? That is priceless,” Irwin finally said, wiping the tears from his eyes. “You couldn’t make this stuff up. My defense is being assembled by the prosecution? What could possibly go wrong?”

     [Mackey Chandler, All in Good Time ]

     Compare, contrast…and laugh until the tears come, for they surely will.

Jun 21 2023

They Will Not Let Us Be

     Every day brings fresh proof:

     Violence broke out again in Glendale, CA, after Antifa showed up to a school board meeting at which parents were protesting the school’s promotion of “pride month” and gender ideology.

     Videos showed police on the scene in riot gear as well as temporary barriers being set up. Things escalated from there, with multiple fights breaking out and arrests being made.

     Please read it all.

     What is the connection between the “Pride” agenda – an open attempt to indoctrinate children with transgenderism and sexual fluidity against the will of their parents – and Antifa? The only connection I can see between them is their hatred of normality. Yet they appear to have allied.

     Of course, Antifa is the paramilitary arm of the Left’s coalition. Their appearances to date have been attempts to disrupt appearances by conservative figures and gatherings in support of such things as freedom of speech. The implication of the above incident is that any and every effort to defend American norms will be violently attacked.

     To the best of my knowledge, the Glendale school board has not said anything about the Antifa attack: nothing for, but nothing against. In such a situation, to stay silent is to consent to the disruption – to declare it implicitly in support of the policy the parents oppose. If parents’ right to speak to school boards in opposition to some policy can be attacked by Antifa, with the unspoken approval of the board, then not only are the schools irremediably lost to us, nothing is exempt.

     If you have children in the public schools, get them out at once.

Load more