Oct 27 2022

Desperation On The Anti-Free-Speech Front

     This conference has raised something of a row:

     There’s mounting faculty opposition to an invitation-only, no-media-allowed academic freedom conference scheduled for next week at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business. The conference, headlined by libertarian tech billionaire Peter Thiel and organized by the business school’s Classical Liberalism Initiative, has been criticized as pre-emptively limiting dissent in the name of open discourse.

     Critics also fault the conference for platforming such speakers as Amy Wax, Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania, who is known for making racist remarks—including to and about students.

     “While we respect the rights of free speech and academic freedom, both are meant to encourage debate and discussion that can test those assertions,” more than 30 Stanford professors from a variety of fields said in a statement asking Stanford to distance itself from the conference. “The organizers have in fact gone out of their way to create a hermetically-sealed event, safe from any and all meaningful debate, filled with self-affirmation and self-congratulation, an event where racism is given shelter and immunity.”

     Safe from “meaningful debate,” you say? Were no anti-free-speech scholars – i.e., scholars on the Left – invited to this colloquy?

     Conference organizers told [The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education] that they’d invited numerous progressives to participate, Perrino also said, but over time “more conservatives said yes, and very few of the big-name progressives said yes. The political polarization and tribalism is dispiriting.”

     Abbot said that organizers invited several dozen progressives who’d previously expressed a “negative view” of academic freedom, who ultimately declined.

     Marinovic said that “we invited many academics who have argued for some kind of restrictions on academic speech to present and debate their views, and all of them declined.”

     Hm. So if anti-free-speech and anti-academic-freedom types were invited but declined, where’s the beef?

     David Palumbo-Liu, Louise Hewlett Nixon Professor at Stanford and professor of comparative literature, who’s publicly opposed the conference, said he wasn’t asked to participate, but that a few of his colleagues had been asked and “objected to the lopsidedness of the program. The organizers placed them on panels where it was clear they were there only as tokens.”

     Livestreaming the conference doesn’t change much at all, Palumbo-Liu added.

     “This in no way solves the problem of the inability of those not present being able to substantially question or interact with speakers. That is, it does not reflect a change of thinking whatsoever, nor does it cover up the original intent of the conference.”

     “The original intent of the conference” — ? Which, according to the organizers, is to discuss free speech and academic freedom. While my own positions on those things are fixed. I have no doubt that there will be some attendees who differ with me. Academia is like that today. Perhaps Professor Palumbo-Liu differs with me. Does he contend that his viewpoint won’t be represented?

     From the above, I’d infer that what he fears is that his viewpoint will be defeated in open debate. But let’s be generous. Perhaps his real objection is that media representatives won’t be present. But why would the presence of the media be beneficial to an academic conference?

     In my salad days, I attended a number of such conferences. Not one was attended by any representative of the media. Moreover, as the event will be livestreamed, the media will be able to see, hear, record, and comment on any or all of it. No, they won’t be able to interrogate the attendees, but when was that privilege ever guaranteed to the media by any academic institution?

     I think we must look further. I think we must consider the possibility that without a horde of Left-wing disruptors to interfere with the proceedings, the academics present might enjoy a civil atmosphere, in which evidence and reason will prevail. That’s become anathema to persons who champion the position that those who disagree with them have no right to speak. And so, with the conference being closed to non-invitees, academia’s Barbara Foleys won’t be able to silence or intimidate their ideological opponents, as they believe is their “right.”

     As for Amy Wax and her supposedly racist remarks:

     “Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness. Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime.” — Amy Wax and Larry Alexander

     I think I agree: that’s way too incendiary to allow anyone to say it today! 😉

Oct 27 2022

The Further Desiccation Of The Desiccated Remains

     The late, great Clarence Carson wrote the following in 1964:

     [W]e are told that there is no need to fear the concentration of power in government so long as that power is checked by the electoral process. We are urged to believe that so long as we can express our disagreement in words, we have our full rights to disagree. Now both freedom of speech and the electoral process are important to liberty, but alone they are only the desiccated remains of liberty. However vigorously we may argue against foreign aid, our substance is still drained away in never-to-be-repaid loans. Quite often, there is not even a candidate to vote for who holds views remotely like my own. To vent one’s spleen against the graduated income tax may be healthy for the psyche, but one must still yield up his freedom of choice as to how his money will be spent when he pays it to the government. The voice of electors in government is not even proportioned to the tax contribution of individuals; thus, those who contribute more lose rather than gain by the “democratic process.” A majority of voters may decide that property cannot be used in such and such ways, but the liberty of the individual is diminished just as much as in that regard as if a dictator had decreed it. Those who believe in the redistribution of wealth should be free to redistribute their own, but they are undoubtedly limiting the freedom of others when they vote to redistribute theirs.

     That was one of the critical paragraphs in his essay “To Agree To Disagree,” the Sunday punch in his magnificent The American Tradition. Moreover, it was an exact statement of the left-liberal position about “democracy:” “As long as you can speak your mind and vote your preference, you’re free!”

     Well, we all know what’s come about since then: Innumerable silencings and “cancelings” of those who speak their minds against the preference of the Left, plus a new, highly effective set of mechanisms for corrupting elections. I doubt I need to present a Bill of Particulars to my Gentle Readers, who are at least as well informed about such things as I. Why, we even have a “commentator,” who represents himself as a conservative, arguing that for majorities to vote for Republicans two weeks hence is “how democracies die.”

     So America is only a “democracy” if the Democrat Party retains power. This really deserves the “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up” categorization. But it’s right there, in black and white – and Max Boot is not the only opinion-monger saying it:

     I have no great regard for the Republican Party. Its egregious under- and non-performance during its times of dominance makes it difficult to expect any substantial changes to the direction of the nation should it gain control once again. Some smart people have argued that it will never again function as a restraint on government and a protector of freedom without first being completely torn down and rebuilt. Today, its principal appeal to the electorate is that “We’re not Democrats.”

     But perhaps we must settle for such representatives until a better champion can arise from…wherever. Ejecting the totalitarian Democrats from power seems justification enough. Besides, it would make Boot, Dowd, the groomers at the Lincoln Project, and the viragoes of MSNBC cry. Speaking solely for myself, I’d enjoy a little Schadenfreude, especially after what I just paid for heating oil

***

     Don’t imagine that this is an entirely new initiative from the Left. It most certainly isn’t:

     All the parties agree to the facts of the incident at Northwestern University on the night of April 13, 1985. Adolfo Calero, a leader of the contras, was scheduled to speak at Harris Hall. Outside and inside the building, demonstrators were shouting and chanting their protests at Calero’s very presence on campus.

     About 10 minutes before Calero was to speak, Barbara Foley, an assistant professor of English and American culture, walked up to the microphone on the stage and said: “This monster that they’re bringing here tonight is not a human being. . . . He had no respect for the free speech, much less the right to live, of the people that he slaughtered . . . with the backing of the CIA. He has no right to speak tonight, and we are not going to let him speak. He should feel lucky to get out of here alive.”

     When Calero arrived, someone — not Foley — threw red paint on him, and the roars of rage directed at him were so overpowering that he was unable to give his talk.

     That took place thirty-five years ago – and it wasn’t a singular event even then. Remember that Leftist guru Herbert Marcuse prescribed it in 1965:

     Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: … it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word. The traditional criterion of clear and present danger seems no longer adequate to a stage where the whole society is in the situation of the theater audience when somebody cries: ‘fire’. It is a situation in which the total catastrophe could be triggered off any moment, not only by a technical error, but also by a rational miscalculation of risks, or by a rash speech of one of the leaders. In past and different circumstances, the speeches of the Fascist and Nazi leaders were the immediate prologue to the massacre. The distance between the propaganda and the action, between the organization and its release on the people had become too short. But the spreading of the word could have been stopped before it was too late: if democratic tolerance had been withdrawn when the future leaders started their campaign, mankind would have had a chance of avoiding Auschwitz and a World War.

     The whole post-fascist period is one of clear and present danger. Consequently, true pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal state of affairs.

     I added the emphasis. I submit that no further evidence is required.

***

     I’ve said all the above many times. Indeed, the quoted passages have appeared many times both here and at Liberty’s Torch V1.0. But matters have come to such a head that lancing the boil is no longer merely a stroke in defense of freedom. Today, it’s a matter of national survival.

     Many people have advocated a “fight fire with fire” approach to the Left’s tactics: “They silence our speakers? We’ll silence theirs. They cheat to win elections? Then we’ll cheat too.” I understand the frustration involved, but I can’t endorse the use of the Left’s tactics in the Right’s causes. Nietzsche’s statement about being careful not to become one of the monsters you fight has never been more apposite.

     But what then? “Vote harder!” — ? Absurd. “Build your own Twitter?” Perhaps that won’t be required. One way or another, we can’t simply wait for a savior.

     Keep thinking. Someone must have an idea more promising than igniting a Second Civil War.

Oct 27 2022

Fall Guys

     No, there are no words nor punctuation marks missing from the title.

     If it were a recognized industry listed on the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ, the “Get Your Fall Guys Here” industry would be one of the fastest growing in America. Everyone wants someone or something to blame for his mistakes. No one in politics stands squarely before the cameras and says candidly, “I was wrong.” That goes for everyone in the public eye at any level.

     Today, we have this spectacle from Pennsylvania as a demonstration:

     The John Fetterman campaign had tried to set the expectations for the debate yesterday rather low. But now that the debate is over, and Fetterman proved to be as incoherent as any honest person suspected and Dasha Burns pointed out, the campaign is looking for someone to blame.

     Initially, Team Fetterman tried praising their candidate for his performance. Here’s what his campaign manager tweeted just after the debate.

     So proud of @JohnFetterman who stood up tonight to do something incredibly hard under the best of circumstances, but did it only 5 months into his recovery. What we saw was a brave fighter going to bat for every Pennsylvanian who’s been knocked down and tried to get back up.

     — Brendan McPhillips (@BrendanMcP) October 26, 2022

     And his communications director talked to reporters afterward, but you can see where the seeds of excuse and complaint are being planted.

     “We are thrilled with John’s performance. He did remarkably well tonight – especially when you consider that he’s still recovering from a stroke and was working off of delayed captions filled with errors,” Fetterman communications director Joe Calvello told reporters.”

“John won countless exchanges, counter-punched aggressively, and pushed back on Oz’s cruelty and attacks,” Calvello said.”

     But the Fetterman team specifically asked for the technological support their candidate received. They had ample opportunities to ensure its proper operation. They marched their cortically damaged candidate onto the stage knowing that he wasn’t fit to speak in public…as their earlier statements designed to lower expectations make plain:

     “The captioning process may also lead to time delays and errors in the exchanges between the moderators and the candidates,” the Fetterman campaign cautioned. “In fact, because the captions are going to be typed out by human beings in real time, on live TV, some amount of human error in the transcription is inevitable, which may cause temporary miscommunications at times. It is impossible to control and unavoidable.”

     Pointing to Fetterman’s past debate performances, his campaign argued that “this isn’t John’s format. Look no further than the debates from the primary earlier this year.”

     It seems to me that the real function of the closed-captioning equipment they insisted Fetterman be provided was to serve as the fall guy for Fetterman’s anticipated poor performance…which proved to be even poorer than the most pessimistic observers expected.

     The best sort of fall guy is the one who can’t defend himself from the accusations aimed at him. Technology fits the description rather well, doesn’t it?

     It’s been said, and truly, that the typical case of a “computer error” really contains at least two human errors, one of which will be the error of blaming the fault on the computer. In this case, it’s not an error but a pre-planned tactic. We should expect to see it emulated by campaigns to come.

Oct 26 2022

Spurred By “A New Time For Choosing”

Some of you may recall I reposted about my recollection of the 1980s update to that 1964 Reagan Speech in August of this year.

Much thanks to Fran for alerting me about this new interest.

Since Dan Bongino saw fit to bring this new reminder to our attention, I saw fit to bring to his attention my recollection of the update. My note to Mr. Bongino explains why I think it is important. I surely hope my friends here agree.

To: https://bongino.locals.com/contact

In support of your efforts “Dan Bongino Showcases Jim Caviezel Mic Drop Moment Quoting Reagan’s “Time to Choose” Speech,” I beg you to read this decade old post.
https://pascalfervor.blogspot.com/2013/02/ronald-reagans-political-model.html

Mr. Reagan updated his 1964 speech some time during his first term while in office. It has since been memory holed by the Establishment. Why?

Because in it he predicted the rise of what came to be called the TEA Party Movement. In my opinion, the combination of Reagan’s prediction and the 2009-10 anger with Obama and the lackluster GOP terrified the establishment. The greatest threat ever of losing control of the opposition to Leviathan had to be derailed. The IRS’ Lois Learner did all she could to keep [sic] to destroy them from both economic angle [sic] and regulatory angles. So the Establishment ordered both the Dems and GOPe to let that illegal interference go unchecked.

Please, try to unearth it. I cannot be the only person who heard it. There must be tens of thousands whose memory can be stirred. If you still cannot find it, then just read it aloud saying it is spurious, and only a partial memory, but it is interesting. You cannot help but notice that it sure sounds like him.  And it won’t take long to discover that I am no writer of fiction. I sometimes wish I were.

It is long past time that American Patriots know that Mr Reagan knew they would be out there. It will bolster their morale, something the establishment has worked hard to destroy as you know too well.

I am now more certain than ever that this update is feared by the Establshment. I know it exists — my imagination just doesn’t go in such directions. Hence it must have been deliberately buried, and kept that way by very powerful forces. So I will renew my efforts to make it better known. I surely hope Mr. Bongino has more courage and is less compromised than some others I’ve tried and failed to get to do something with it.

Oct 26 2022

Establishment Politicians Want You Not To Read This

     Courtesy of the esteemed Mike Hendrix, we have this highly significant story from Big Country Expat:

     Now here in the Untied Staatz, we still pretend that elections matter. In truth, the only elections that actually -do- matter are the local ones…school board (need to fire ALL of them fuckers nationwide IMO, Jes’ Sayin’) Selectmen, the usual. Hell Sherriff is the most important elections at the local level that we have still. The others are all pretty much make-work. In fact most shit that needs fixing usually gets done on the local level via co-operation of the affected parties. Quite a few years ago, can’t remember which town it was, but in the Midwest, there was a town with a pothole issue.

     Bad problems. The local Board of Selectmen or Council or whatever they called themselves said there was no money in the budget for it. That’d it’d take til the next year before they could do anything, meanwhile the populous was having tire and rim damage on the regular. The only ones happy with the situation was the local Tire King.

     So, the locals got sick of waiting around. They went to Ye Olde Local Asphalt Company, and got with the owner, who did a deal to fill some of the potholes in exchange for some labor and some landscaping done by another Local Landscaping Company, who provided materials, while the locals provided the labor. Asphalt guy got his yard redone, the potholes got filled, the local Boy Scouts provided labor and got a Merit Badge out of it, and everyone was happy.

     Sounds good, doesn’t it? The locals shoved local government and its barely-disguised demand for more money to the curb, spat on their hands, and simply got the job done. Who wouldn’t applaud a result like that? But wait: there’s more!

     Not so much. The Township levied fines and a bunch of ‘other bullshit’ to include threatening the business licenses of the two companies. And by the way, did I forget to mention the Chairman of the Town Council was the owner of the local Tire King? Yeeeeeah. They even said that the patches were ‘substandard’ and needed to be removed.

     Shit stopped cold when the death threats started getting reely reelz. The Sherriff stepped in and said it wasn’t going to fly… Last word I heard was the Tire King went out of biddness due to a total and utter boycott, nevermind the local yoots who took to vandalizing the building with a certain enthusiasm on the regular…as well as the owner’s house. His family moved shortly after as well, as they were effectively shunned by all the locals after, as well they should be.

     That’s right, Gentle Reader. It took “throwing the kitchen sink” at those thieves – all the way up to death threats – to force them to their knees. Politicians, no matter what their level of elevation, never, ever surrender power or authority voluntarily. They must be bent by force or the credible threat of force.

     And why should that come as a surprise? It’s a working postulate of power dynamics that he who seeks power over others wants that above all other things. Why would such a person surrender any fraction of his power merely because it was take from his hands, however gently? Why wouldn’t we expect him to use whatever means are at his disposal to snatch it back and punish the hoi polloi for their act of lese majeste?

     Strangely, I wrote about exactly this sort of scenario, in a hypothetical context, more than seven years ago:

     Things are seriously looking up for Smith’s neighborhood. However, there remain some irritating problems. One such, potholes in the streets, rises to the top of the list.

     Smith visits a local driveway-paving company for advice. The proprietors are happy to talk about their business, which tends to be seasonal, occasioning certain difficulties in cash flow management. When Smith raises the pothole problem, they disparage the efforts of the town highway department, which appears uninterested in providing long-lasting repairs, and assert that they could do a better job if trusted with it.

     Smith’s next stops are at the homes of residents on a badly potholed street. He asks them, “Would you be willing to pay for good-quality repairs?” When enough of them have agreed, he arranges a meeting with the driveway-paving business. A deal is eventually struck that defines the scope of the job, the price per pothole, and the degree of responsiveness expected of the company. The pavers are happy to discount their services for the sake of an “off-season” income where there was none before. Even so, it’s not cheap, but by dividing the cost among themselves, the residents find it bearable and worthwhile.

     Smith’s own street is a particular problem, as only he is willing to bear any share of the cost for repairs. He decides to hold onto the idea until enough of his immediate neighbors find the potholes as annoying as he.

***

     Not everything is well. Local politicians and bureaucrats are not pleased. Smith’s neighborhood is making them look bad. They can’t abide the constant comparisons between “Smithville” and surrounding locales that continue to depend upon “official” institutions. Yet the incentives public employees face prove too strong to overcome; they know their jobs are safe, and that they’ll get paid regardless of how slowly or shoddily they perform. Wasn’t the effective lack of accountability a big part of the reason they agreed to work for a government?

     So the politicians and school board members strike back in the way they know best, the way that’s proved most effective in the past: at the residents’ wallets. Taxes and fees escalate sharply. The police and town officials attempt to intrude into Smithville’s private arrangements, demanding payoffs before they’ll go away. Smithville’s residents begin to question the wisdom of Smith’s work.

     So Smith calls in the press: reporters from the local weekly, the regional daily, and the local cable-television channel. All of them find the contrast between Smithville and surrounding demesnes striking and suggestive. As are reporters everywhere, they’re particularly interested in the politicos’ attempts to bludgeon Smithville’s residents back into conformance with government control. Nothing excites a reporter’s enthusiasm for a story like a whiff of corruption. Coverage of the contest becomes intense…and the residents of Smithville find themselves regarded as heroic champions of “the little guy.”

     There’s no way of knowing how things will eventuate, but Smithville has an asset the politicians can’t match: the degree to which they’ve come together in a common cause for their own local interests. Whether the hand of government is heavy enough to offset that advantage is unclear.

     The similarities are remarkable, eh what?

***

     The depoliticization of as much of American life as possible is the paramount imperative of our time. I hardly need to catalogue all the various governmental arrogations of previously private activities that have occurred these past decades. In keeping with the known dynamics of the Washington Monument Defense, for governments to deliberately under-perform at the responsibilities private citizens value most is the tactic we see most often. The only countermeasure is to rip those responsibilities out of government’s hands by force. Nothing else has ever worked or ever will.

     Today the Usurper Regime is doing its damnedest to strip Americans of their Constitutionally protected rights. Our First Amendment rights. Our Second Amendment rights. Our Fourth Amendment rights to our bodily integrity. Our Fifth Amendment rights to due process. Our Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy and public trial. And the stripping will continue until the Usurpers – all the way down to town councils and school boards – are punished so harshly that they run screaming, tails between their legs, to whatever safe harbor may exist for unsuccessful tyrants rebuffed by their intended victims.

     Voting against the tyrants is not adequate punishment. Remember who counts the votes.

Oct 26 2022

A New Time For Choosing

     Jim Caviezel, of The Passion of the Christ and Person of Interest, has sounded the clarion:

     I can’t add a single syllable to that.

Oct 26 2022

What Should We Expect On November 8?

     If the hate-filled legions of the Left are willing to do this to a pre-election canvasser:

     A volunteer for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) was brutally attacked while canvassing for the campaign in Hialeah, Florida, leaving him with a broken jaw and internal bleeding.

     According to the senator, who is facing off against Democrat Rep. Val Demings (D-FL) in roughly two weeks, four individuals attacked the canvasser, allegedly telling him that Republicans were not allowed in their neighborhood. The man, who will also require facial reconstruction surgery, was wearing a shirt supporting Rubio and hat supporting Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).

     “Last night one of our canvassers wearing my T-shirt and a DeSantis hat was brutally attacked by 4 animals who told him Republicans weren’t allowed in their neighborhood in #Hialeah #Florida He suffered internal bleeding, a broken jaw & will need facial reconstructive surgery,” Rubio said, providing pictures of the man, who can be seen with a black eye and blood running down his face:

     …what do you suppose they’ll be willing to do to win the midterm elections?

     I’ve been worried mainly about vote fraud. I don’t think that’s the one and only threat to fear. The Usurpers, their “elder statesmen,” and their media handmaidens have already accused the Right of plotting to “steal the elections:”

     Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recently released a video where she claimed that “right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election.”

     “I know we’re all focused on the 2022 midterm elections and they are incredibly important but we also have to look ahead because you know what? Our opponents are certainly are. Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election, and they’re not making a secret of it,” she said.

     “The right-wing controlled Supreme Court may be poised to rule on giving state legislatures…the power to overturn presidential elections. Just think: if that happens, the 2024 presidential election could be decided not by the popular vote, or even by the anachronistic electoral college, but by state legislatures, many of them Republican-controlled,” Clinton added.

     By the Projection Rule:


What The Left Accuses The Right Of Doing
Is What The Left Is Doing Or Planning.

     …we should expect violence at polling places, specifically to inhibit voting in Republican-leaning districts. That would certainly include the “drop boxes” that were instrumental in stealing the 2020 elections. And if the riots of 2020 are an indicator, we should not expect the police to do anything constructive about it. Indeed, they might well protect the Left’s thugs.

     No, it’s not something I enjoy contemplating. But things are looking grim, Gentle Reader. The Republic is already tottering. One more solid push and it could well fall.

     If you’re known to be in the Right politically, exercise the best possible, most continuous situational awareness henceforward. And before all else, be armed. Niccolo Machiavelli may have harbored too great an admiration for Lorenzo de Medici, but he was no fool.

Oct 25 2022

The faith that they share with Berkeley Square

You know That Sign? You know, the one that says “Love is Love,” “No Human is Illegal,” “We Believe in Science,” and “Get Your Pumpkin Spice Latte Today.” Okay, I may have got just a little bit carried away there.

That Sign is all over our neighborhood, and without a sense of history, I’d be in despair that our country is being hollowed out from within by the people who think virtue is a matter of affirming the proper opinions. But thanks to Kipling and “Tomlinson,” I can think of our block as the modern version of Berkeley Square, and remember that the foolish are always with us.

You see, when Tomlinson died he had a little trouble explaining why he should get into Heaven.

The Wind that blows between the Worlds, it cut him like a knife,
And Tomlinson took up the tale and spoke of his good in life.
“O this I have read in a book,” he said, “and that was told to me,
“And this I have thought that another man thought of a Prince in Muscovy.”
The good souls flocked like homing doves and bade him clear the path,
And Peter twirled the jangling Keys in weariness and wrath.
“Ye have read, ye have heard, ye have thought,” he said, “and the tale is yet to run:
“By the worth of the body that once ye had, give answer—what ha’ ye done?”
Then Tomlinson looked back and forth, and little good it bore,
For the darkness stayed at his shoulder-blade and Heaven’s Gate before:—
“O this I have felt, and this I have guessed, and this I heard men say,
“And this they wrote that another man wrote of a carl in Norroway.”
“Ye have read, ye have felt, ye have guessed, good lack! Ye have hampered Heaven’s Gate;
“There’s little room between the stars in idleness to prate!
“For none may reach by hired speech of neighbour, priest, and kin
“Through borrowed deed to God’s good meed that lies so fair within;
“Get hence, get hence to the Lord of Wrong, for thy doom has yet to run,
“And . . . the faith that ye share with Berkeley Square uphold you, Tomlinson!”

But it gets worse. Faced with the horror of the Abyss, Tomlinson begs for shelter in Hell.

The Wind that blows between the Worlds, it cut him like a knife,
And Tomlinson took up the tale and spoke of his sins in life:—
“Once I ha’ laughed at the power of Love and twice at the grip of the Grave,
“And thrice I ha’ patted my God on the head that men might call me brave.”
The Devil he blew on a brandered soul and laid it aside to cool:—
“Do ye think I would waste my good pit-coal on the hide of a brain-sick fool?
“I see no worth in the hobnail mirth or the jolthead jest ye did
“That I should waken my gentlemen that are sleeping three on a grid.”
Then Tomlinson looked back and forth, and there was little grace,
For Hell-Gate filled the houseless soul with the Fear of Naked Space.
“Nay, this I ha’ heard,” quo’ Tomlinson, “and this was noised abroad,
“And this I ha’ got from a Belgian book on the word of a dead French lord.”
—”Ye ha’ heard, ye ha’ read, ye ha’ got, good lack! and the tale begins afresh—
“Have ye sinned one sin for the pride o’ the eye or the sinful lust of the flesh?”

Finally the Devil sends Tomlinson back to the world and tells him to live this time.

“Ye are neither spirit nor spirk,” he said; “ye are neither book nor brute—
“Go, get ye back to the flesh again for the sake of Man’s repute.
“I’m all o’er-sib to Adam’s breed that I should mock your pain,
“But look that ye win to a worthier sin ere ye come back again.
“Get hence, the hearse is at your door—the grim black stallions wait—
“They bear your clay to place to-day. Speed, lest ye come too late!
“Go back to Earth with lip unsealed—go back with open eye,
“And carry my word to the Sons of Men or ever ye come to die:
“That the sin they do by two and two they must pay for one by one,
“And . . . the God you took from a printed book be with you, Tomlinson!”

Oct 25 2022

Some Observations at a Walmart

I’ve been working at a Walmart, manning a table set up for people to get information about Medicare and ACA Marketplace plans. a certain percentage sign up for a new plan in the process.

I’m located near the Produce/Deli/Bakery Depts. As a result, I get to see the daily availability of many fresh foods.

The stands are packed high with basic food items. Many are more expensive this year, yet there are still bargains. Compared to Socialist countries, we live in a Food Paradise. MULTIPLE varieties of most fruits and vegetables, they look fresh and healthy, and, other than an occasional sale item, the bins are heaped high. The only empty sections are those waiting for the overworked workers to refill them from the stored produce in the back.

Many foreigners would be gobsmacked by the abundance, and the lack of ration coupons needed to buy things. There are no people lined up for scarce items, and pushing, shoving, fearful that their family will go hungry. The abnormal situation, for America, was during the shipping/trucking caused shortages of the early Biden administration. That time period chilled many, and led to more gardening, increased preparation efforts, and the massive growth of the canning industry.

The mood has swung from near-panic, to a more relaxed acceptance of the need to build up home supplies of necessities. Most of us have become smarter shoppers, who are on the lookout for bargains, and willing to shift food purchases to the price swings.

In my family/friend circles, paying down debt is a priority. If they are typical, expect this to be a lean Christmas for retailers. I know I’m marking down possible purchases early, and making use of online shopping for useful gifts. My goal is to complete all Christmas prep by the end of November.

I’m trying to stay out of Chicken Little Mode. While the inflation will take a huge bite out of my budget, it may also allow my investments to improve. Hey, I can HOPE.

Oct 24 2022

Another Killer Day

I was supposed to get my dog’s stitches removed.

Shortly before I left for the appointment, I noticed that what had looked like a scab was torn loose, and was an open wound beneath. It turned out to be necrosis – the skin had died, necessitating removal, cleaning, and pulling the edges together to close the wound. Fortunately, like me, the no-longer young dog has some loose skin.

I just arrived home now – 3-1/2 hours later, over $600 poorer.

But, the dog does look more comfortable, and is sitting up – which he hasn’t felt well enough to do very much for several days. The vet says that he should be in better shape very quickly, and visibly improve every day from here out.

I need to head to bed. This is all exhausting.

Oct 24 2022

The Death Cult Doesn’t Hide Anymore

I say that because I, like Fran, have tried for more than 3 decades to get anyone with greater influence than we have to blow the whistle. The last person I expected to get on the bandwagon is Bill Whittle. For all the fine work he has done to express conservative values, he has always been careful not to upset establishment Republicans. For instance, I never ever caught him saying the slightest critical word about John McCain. In fact I even got blasted by him when I warned about the danger that man posed to our more conservative candidates when McCain locked the 2008 GOP Presidential candidacy.

But today, no doubt thanks to the influence of Alphonzo Rachel with whom Bill has co-hosted “The Virtue Signal” and other podcasts, we have this:

“I think it is becoming clearer and clearer to everybody…. Democrats who don’t want to be part of the Death Cult are switching to Republican.” — Bill Whittle @6:55 ‘… but we don’t see any Republicans who want to be part of the Death Cult and switching over to the Left.”

Zo sets that record straight right after that by pointing out how Roe V Wade would have never been established but for Republican votes on SCOTUS. And that the fight against, headed by GOP’s real conservatives, have had their efforts obstructed by the GOPe.

I applaud Zo for his stance. I commend Bill for his giving Zo his platform. I hope Bill is indeed now committed to totally exposing the Death Cult. I can’t speak for Fran, but it’s been a sad and lonely crusade for me.

Oct 24 2022

This Was Supposed To Be A Day Off…

     …and it will return to that status after I get this off my chest.

     I just paid $5.18 per gallon for a tankful of home heating oil. That’s roughly $1.00 per gallon more than the gasoline that fuels my car.

     New York winters aren’t the worst in the country by a long way, but they’re usually cold, often snowy, and when they’re not snowy they tend to be wet. Those are not conditions anyone wants to face in an unheated house. For the moment, oil is available for purchase…but the word is that oil rationing could begin at any moment. The New England states are already rationing it.

     You know who brought this about. You also know why.

     If we can’t eject these bastards electorally, there will be mass death. If we refuse to fight, thousands of Americans will freeze to death or die of diseases exacerbated by the cold. If we rise up, thousands will die in combat: Usurpers, their hangers-on, and patriots who’ve put their lives on the line because they’ve had enough. There’ll be mass death one way or another. All that will remain to us is to choose who will die and by what method.

     Compared to that, nothing else matters.

     Comments to this post are closed. Have a nice day.

Oct 24 2022

Day Off

     I’m coming off a rather rugged weekend, and other obligations are demanding my attention, so I’ll be taking today off from the site. Back tomorrow, I hope.

Oct 23 2022

Looking Forward

     For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. – 2 Timothy 4:6-7

     “You came to see a race today. To see someone win. It happened to be me. But I want you to do more than just watch a race. I want you to take part in it. I want to compare faith to running in a race. It’s hard. It requires concentration of will, energy of soul. You experience elation when the winner breaks the tape – especially if you’ve got a bet on him. But how long does that last? You go home. Maybe your dinner’s burnt. Maybe you haven’t got a job. So who am I to say, “Believe, have faith,” in the face of life’s realities? I would like to give you something more permanent, but I can only point the way. I have no formula for winning the race. Everyone runs in her own way, or his own way.” – Ian Charleson as Eric Liddell, in Chariots of Fire

Freccia: You’re a pretty smart fella.
Moore: Ah, not that smart.
Freccia: [If] you’re not that smart, how’d you figure it out?
Moore: I tried to imagine a fella smarter than myself. Then I tried to think, “What would he do?”

     [Heist]

     If there is no more than this, if I were to lose her, all memory of her and all the rest of my life upon the instant, still I have had all that anyone could ask. I have had love. I have had meaning. I have had my commission. I have been tested, and I did not fail.
     The last of his regrets dropped away like palpable weights.
     Andrea will be all right. Devin will see to it.
     Devin will be all right. Natalie will see to it.
     Forgive me, Rachel. Being what I was, I could never give you all that you needed. It wasn’t to be.
     Thank You, God. Thank You for all of it. All the failure, all the pain, all the triumph and all the joy. I have been truly blessed.

     [The Sledgehammer Concerto]

     Aristotle told us that we cultivate the virtues by practicing them. In this regard the virtue of perseverance is particularly challenging, for a simple reason: One must practice it continuously, at all our waking moments, all the days of our lives. (No time off for bad behavior. 😁) We get no pass for weariness, disappointments, or distractions. There is no formula, as Ian Charleson’s Eric Liddell character tells his listeners.

     But completing the race is all that’s required for eternal bliss.

***

     Every man’s faith is tested. It’s built into the thing, for as Pope Benedict XVI has told us, faith is inseparable from doubt. Anyone who adopts a faith must expect to be afflicted by doubt at least some of the time. Many persons seek to inflict doubts upon us who believe.

     To persevere in faith is the critical test of the virtue of perseverance.

     Temporal perseverance is coupled to the virtue of hope: the conviction that by persevering, we might yet win through to a better state of affairs. The specifics, of course, will vary among us. The point is that we each need a goal: something to which we can look forward if we persevere in our efforts…and maybe get a break or two along the way.

     But life ends. Our time is short. What then? The Christian faith incorporates an infinitely attractive “what then” for those who persevere, and an infinitely horrifying alternative for those who do not. That’s what the Christian looks forward to. It’s the ultimate reason for the theological virtue of hope.

     This reaves the prospect of death of its horror, and not just because something infinitely better could follow. Alongside that, it puts a limit to the period through which we must persevere. We won’t be tested throughout eternity; only for the span of a human life, seldom as long as a century. The race will have a definite end.

     To complete the race is to win it. No one who crosses the finish line on his feet will be excluded from the winner’s circle.

***

     That’s all for this morning: just a few thoughts on a particularly challenging virtue and the tests the Christian faces in striving to cultivate it. They struck me as appropriate to our time, in which many of us – perhaps most – are being tested in ways we did not foresee and about which we can do little. Temporal tests are also tests of the spirit: to maintain hope in the face of persistent difficulties, aware that all trials must end.

     They will end, you know. You can outlast them. No matter how difficult the present, it lasts only for an instant. An interval so short it’s gone before you can finish pronouncing its name.

     May God bless and keep you all.

Oct 22 2022

Conservatism And The Present Age

     Among the things that are absolutely essential to progress – regardless of what sort of progress we’re talking about — the recognition and correction of mistakes is paramount. Human knowledge is like a single vector in a disordered field. To arrive at it involves eliminating all the alternatives to that one true magnitude and direction. There’s a reason century after century of pedagogues have said that we learn best from our mistakes.

     American conservatives are no longer of a unified mind. The unwillingness of many to recognize and admit to conservatism’s historical mistakes is a great part of the reason. Perhaps the greatest of those mistakes has been a concentration on opposition, as if conservatism should be defined by whatever its enemies are pushing. We’ve learned these past decades that is not enough merely to oppose the Left’s agenda. Conservatives and the organizations they create must adopt positions that promote specific ends as well. Some of the ends best fitted to the preferences of American conservatives are absolutely antithetical to a number of policy postures traditionally seen as conservative.

     As I’ve said here and elsewhere, for many years the mindset of the typical American conservative has been oppositional: to hold on to those values, policies, and institutions we perceive as being under attack by the Left. The etymology of the word conservative is perfectly aligned with that posture. I have no doubt that this is among the strongest reasons so many young Americans have resisted embracing the label or its foremost spokesmen.

     John Davidson’s recent essay at The Federalist suggests an approach divergent from what the majority of conservatives value. He opens with a bit of “shock and awe:” First, renounce the word conservative!

     Given the state of America in 2022, conservatives should stop calling themselves conservatives.

     Why? Because the conservative project has largely failed, and it is time for a new approach. Conservatives have long defined their politics in terms of what they wish to conserve or preserve — individual rights, family values, religious freedom, and so on. Conservatives, we are told, want to preserve the rich traditions and civilizational achievements of the past, pass them on to the next generation, and defend them from the left. In America, conservatives and classical liberals alike rightly believe an ascendent left wants to dismantle our constitutional system and transform America into a woke dystopia. The task of conservatives, going back many decades now, has been to stop them.

     So far, so good, other than the jarring notion that our label has to go. People dislike being told to change their appellations; it sounds like betrayal. Un-conservative! But let’s pass on:

     In an earlier era, this made sense. There was much to conserve. But any honest appraisal of our situation today renders such a definition absurd. After all, what have conservatives succeeded in conserving? In just my lifetime, they have lost much: marriage as it has been understood for thousands of years, the First Amendment, any semblance of control over our borders, a fundamental distinction between men and women, and, especially of late, the basic rule of law.

     Calling oneself a conservative in today’s political climate would be like saying one is a conservative because one wants to preserve the medieval European traditions of arranged marriage and trial by combat. Whatever the merits of those practices, you cannot preserve or defend something that is dead. Perhaps you can retain a memory of it or knowledge of it. But that is not what conservatism was purportedly about. It was about maintaining traditions and preserving Western civilization as a living and vibrant thing.

     This is where Davidson veers off the track of reason. His invocation of “medieval European traditions” is the first signpost to his intended course. What’s the relevance to the values American conservatives cherish and seek to re-elevate to primacy? None whatsoever…but let’s pass on a wee bit further. After what seems to me a digression into irrelevancy about technological innovations and their sociocultural effects, Davidson shows his hand in the most blatant fashion:

     While it might be necessary, as [Compact essayist Jon Askonas] argues, to enact a serious program of technological development to build a future that supports human flourishing, it is also the case that to do so on a scale sufficient to save our country will require political power — and the willingness to use it.

     So what kind of politics should conservatives today, as inheritors of a failed movement, adopt? For starters, they should stop thinking of themselves as conservatives (much less as Republicans) and start thinking of themselves as radicals, restorationists, and counterrevolutionaries. Indeed, that is what they are, whether they embrace those labels or not.

     Ahem.

***

     About now, we could use a few quotes:

     Every revolutionary ends by becoming either an oppressor or a heretic. – Albert Camus

     Revolutions have never lightened the burden of tyranny; they have only shifted it to another shoulder. – George Bernard Shaw

     Revolutions, as long and bitter experience reveals, are apt to take their color from the regime they overthrow. – Richard Tawney

     Politics, as hopeful men practice it in the world, consists mainly of the delusion that a change in form is a change in substance. The American colonists, when they got rid of the Potsdam tyrant, believed fondly that they were getting rid of oppressive taxes forever and setting up complete liberty. They found almost instantly that taxes were higher than ever, and before many years they were writhing under the Alien and Sedition Acts. – H. L. Mencken

     Those who have seized power, even for the noblest of motives soon persuade themselves that there are good reasons for not relinquishing it. This is particularly likely to happen if they believe themselves to represent some immensely important cause. They will feel that their opponents are ignorant and perverse; before long they will come to hate them…The important thing is to keep their power, not to use it as a means to an eventual paradise. And so what were means become ends, and the original ends are forgotten except on Sundays. – Bertrand Russell

     The historical record aligns exceedingly well with the seemingly cynical views of the men quoted above. The final observation, from Bertrand Russell, is especially penetrating. It’s a point I’ve made many times here and elsewhere: Those who seek power value it above all other things. Moreover, their single-minded dedication to the pursuit of power virtually guarantees that they will rise to the top of any organization whose captaincy they seek, including a “conservative” one. Friedrich Hayek described the dynamic involved in 1944.

     Once power-seekers have seized the levers of power, they will not relinquish them voluntarily. It will take a force greater than whatever they command to rip them from their grasp.

***

     Davidson nods briefly to the hazard involved. He considers it a risk that we must court if we are to advance on our objectives. It’s the “win first, make adjustments later” school of analysis:

     To those who worry that power corrupts, and that once the right seizes power it too will be corrupted, they certainly have a point. If conservatives manage to save the country and rebuild our institutions, will they ever relinquish power and go the way of Cincinnatus? It is a fair question, and we should attend to it with care after we have won the war.

     Clearly, Davidson doesn’t agree with me about the magnitude of the risk he contemplates. Cincinnatus was a historical anomaly. So was George Washington, whose troops offered to install him as America’s king once the British had surrendered. If there are others like those two paragons, I’m unaware of them.

     My question is whether there’s a viable alternative to Davidson’s proposed course that doesn’t involve the risk of a new, even more oppressive government. Americans would be no happier with a totalitarian conservative regime than they are with the present one. Conservative mistakes of past centuries included the enforcement of a great many rules of conduct that would badly chafe Americans, especially young ones. Asserting that those rules would be “good for us” is no defense; people have a need to make – and learn from – their own mistakes.

     Isn’t that what freedom is about?

Oct 21 2022

A Quick Observation

     From Western Rifle Shooters, and much appreciated!

Oct 21 2022

A Different Perspective on Current Events

I’ve never actually heard this analysis before, applied to today’s nations. But, it does make a lot of sense.

The Red States are like Sparta. Strong tradition of their citizens entering the military, but the military is land-based, and generally only fights defensive wars, not imperialist ones.

The Blue States are like Athens. They mostly HIRE their military from the underclasses or immigrants. They are air and sea-based, and quick to fight wars where there is money or land to be gained.

I’d suggest you read the whole thing. Someone in politics needs to be talking about this. We’ve mostly been approaching the planning of our military budget as though we were Athens. We need to shore up our defensive posture, beginning with hardening our utilities and other infrastructure.

Oct 21 2022

The Muffling

     Does anyone here remember a mediocre horror movie from a few years back titled The Howling? It was a werewolf movie, notable mainly for having Dee Wallace as its leading lady, which was a role infrequently offered to her. Well, after watching that movie – no, it wasn’t my idea – my initial reaction was that the main problem from being surrounded by werewolves would be the noise level. All that howling, and at the most inopportune times!

     A high noise level incites a reaction: the desire to muffle the noise. When the noise is audible, we have obvious countermeasures. When the noise is semantic, things are a bit dicier. And these days, semantic noise is everywhere.

     It’s about politics, of course. Slogans. Campaign promises that promise exactly nothing. Denigrations of opponents that reduce to about the same, always matched to counter-denigrations. Tendentious descriptions of others’ pasts and proclivities. All in the name of winning a BLEEP!ing election.

     As a writer, that sort of noise doesn’t just annoy me. It offends me. It strikes me as abuse of both the English language and of the intelligence and attention span of American voters. And as we are never truly free of political campaigning any more, it’s become a continuous phenomenon.

     Muffling such noise is a considerable challenge. You can turn off the television. You can turn off the radio. You can refuse to read or listen to the news. You can run inside and lock the door when you see an excessively garrulous neighbor approaching. Even so, the noise pervades our environment. You can find it in the supermarket, the clothes store, the auto showrooms…everywhere.

     Politically-focused noise isn’t a primary phenomenon, of course. It’s an effect of the total politicization of life in the Land of The Formerly Free. My fear is that it’s beginning to induce psychoses in the more vulnerable segments of our populace.

     Sure, call me crazy. You wouldn’t be the first. But haven’t you seen something similar among the Cause People in your district? Don’t they seem a bit…off? Glassy-eyed, reduced to typeset phrases of ambiguous meaning (if any), unable to alter their routines or their rhythms regardless of the circumstances?

     I sometimes feel a bit guilty for prattling about political subjects so much. I’m certainly not reducing the ambient noise level by doing so. Which is why I force myself to “break character” every now and then with something funny, or a bit of music. It’s possible that the departures from pattern help to keep me as sane as I am…however sane that is.

     Anyway, it’s time for a bit of music. Pascal has filled the “Classical” niche with his post of the “flash mob” performance of Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy.” That’s the final movement of the Ninth Symphony, for those who can’t quite remember the source. I’ll handle the pop / rock duties with this catchy and strangely evocative song from Level 42. Don’t blame me if it gets you humming. At least that will help muffle the noise!

It just occurred to me
I must be blind
Why do I try so hard to keep my cool
When I’m about to lose my mind
There was a vision
Flashing by
Of a summers’ day I spent with you
Of a child who never learnt how to cry

When those around me
Fall in despair
I call upon my common sense
‘Cause someone has to care
A sudden decision
I can’t explain
Though I’ve often tried to change the rules
The game remains the same

For love
I’ve played the part so many times
It fits me like a glove
But I’m the victim
In the bitter end
I know you need me to be strong
l just don’t know how much longer I can pretend

You always need me to be
A good man in a storm

It sometimes scares me
The further we go
Just how much we understand
And just how much we know
So whatever happened
In our hearts
While making perfect sense of life
We still remain so far apart

You always want me to be
A good man in a storm

Trying to fit the social norm
And be a good man in a storm
Trying hard since I was born
To be a good man in a storm

Trying to fit the social norm
And be a good man in a storm
Trying hard since I was born
To be a good man in a storm

Oct 21 2022

A Blast From…The Present?

     All the yammering about “conspiracy theories” and “denialism” that emanates from the Left has triggered a memory of a half-humorous, ultimately serious piece I wrote long ago. It first appeared back at the old Palace of Reason, on May 14, 2004. I reproduce it here for your consideration.

***

Bytes Of Contempt

When your Curmudgeon was a much younger man, he dabbled in a pastime not many have tried: deliberately concocting and spreading rumors in the hope that, in the sweet rushing fullness of time, someone else would repeat them to him breathlessly as “the latest news.”

Never fear, gentle readers; he’s better now. But he got pretty good at it, back when, and some of the lessons have remained with him to this day.

The first rule of rumor-mongering is that a rumor must be a Twilight-Zone item. That is, it must be sufficiently distant from ordinary news to catch the imagination, but not so deep into the realm of fantasy that people’s natural resistance to the ridiculous would thwart its dissemination. “Elvis was seen at a shopping mall in Nashville” has legs enough to travel; “Elvis was seen on the USS Los Angeles, loading the torpedo tubes with confetti while sharing a joint with Jackie O” does not.

The second rule of rumor-mongering is to respect the “telephone effect.” As a rumor is relayed from one party to the next, it gains luridness and loses plausibility. So the originator can’t make the initial rumor too lurid, nor can one stray too far from the known and acceptable, if he wants it widely spread.

The third rule of rumor-mongering is to avoid entangling rumors. If a rumor is already making the rounds about Elvis, don’t try to start a new one. The two will entangle, which tends to retard the propagation of both. Your new rumor should be about someone or something well apart from Elvis; say, hallucinogenics in the water supply or a new bacon-and-jelly-doughnuts diet that will greatly improve your sex life.

The fourth rule of rumor-mongering is to respect the bounds of the common culture. A good rumor must be embedded in the cultural matrix most persons share. That’s a wide space; at any moment, it contains about 107 discrete facts and assertions of fact. But it most emphatically does not include St. Anselm’s theories about original sin, nor the “Stockholm showdown” between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr over quantum indeterminacy, nor the homosexual liaison between French Symbolist poets Paul Verlaine and Artur Rimbaud.

The fifth, and last, rule of rumor-mongering is never, when originating or propagating a rumor, to tell your “targets” that you believe it utterly. This is a bit like the kids’ game “Hot Potato.” To pass a rumor along in a dark tone of voice, with a bare hint of a suggestion that, as absurd as it sounds, it just might be true, marks one as a sophisticate and a connoisseur of dirt; to state a rumor baldly as an article of faith marks one as a credulous idiot, and stops the transmission of the rumor besides.

Let’s talk about the Nicholas Berg torture-murder for a moment, shall we?

Ever since he posted his article on the murder, your Curmudgeon has been barraged with rumors about that tragic young man. Here’s a sample from the mailbag:

  • Nick Berg was an Israeli spy.
  • Nick Berg was a Special Forces commando whose orders were to infiltrate the Iraqi cell of al-Qaeda.
  • Nick Berg was betrayed to al-Qaeda by Iraqi security forces.
  • Nick Berg was betrayed to al-Qaeda by American security forces.
  • Nick Berg was betrayed to al-Qaeda by his father Michael Berg, who opposes Operation Iraqi Freedom and the ongoing American presence in Iraq, and who secretly hated his son for holding divergent views.
  • Nick Berg was affiliated with al-Qaeda through Zacarias Moussaoui, the “twentieth hijacker” of the Black Tuesday atrocities.
  • Nick Berg was an al-Qaeda member who volunteered to be killed, in the hopes that it would galvanize resistance to the American restructuring of Iraq.
  • The murdered man was not Nick Berg; Nick Berg is a fictitious persona sleazed together by the Bush Administration to promote the hatred of Islam and to foment “nuke ’em all” sentiment in the United States.
  • The videotaped murder never took place; Nick Berg is alive, well, and living under an assumed name in Fairlawn, New Jersey.

Please! Did the folks who concocted these rumors discard all respect for the rules of rumor-mongering, or, as seems more likely, were they complete amateurs at the game, with no mentor of greater experience to guide their efforts?

It is noteworthy that all the above rumors appear designed to discredit American efforts in Iraq, to dampen the rage swelling over Nick Berg’s murder, or both. In a way, that’s reassuring. If the enemies of Iraqi liberation are that clumsy about their rumor design, they’re unlikely to have much impact on the decisions that will determine the future of Iraq. On the other hand, it’s hard to decide what the proliferation of all these rumors means about the credulity of politically engaged Americans. Someone is spreading them and suggesting that they might be true, and it ain’t your humble Curmudgeon.

The videotaped torture-murder of Nick Berg and its global distribution as snuff-porn was bad enough, without allowing that young man’s name to be encrusted with so much fatuity.

To paraphrase Rene Belloc from Raiders Of the Lost Ark, we are merely passing through history. Nick Berg is history: a victim of the Islam-powered viciousness that besets the world in our time. His death must not be reduced to chunks of contempt-soaked ridicule, randomly distributed through the world’s data streams. He should be remembered accurately and in the appropriate context, as a young man of energy who went to a dangerous place to do a difficult job, fell into the hands of the worst men in the world, and paid a horrible price for his generosity.

After all, that’s what the murdering savages who made the decapitation video want you to think. Why deny them what they want?

Oct 20 2022

Serving Up a Coda and Salve for the Two Earlier Pieces

Joy. For me it’s the whole piece. I think the feeling is encapsulated in the tossing-up at the fade-out closing.

Fran mentioned that awful vision from That Hideous Strength, a novelized form of Lewis’ dark warning, Abolition of Man, in which he informs of the Fabians’ pedagogical goal of producing men without hearts. Men who deride feelings such as nostalgia.

Nostalgia. Nostalgia is found in the above coda to arguably the best symphony of the classical period if not of all time. I never fail to feel tears arising when I watch this. (When I read Fran’s “Teaser Time,” I felt the same way.) Will we ever again dare witness a flash mob like this one? Certainly not without looking over our shoulders. Don’t you dearly miss those times?

Simplicity. The little girl who triggered it all when placing the coin in the bassist’s hat — perhaps a prop — stood transfixed in place throughout. A lovely prop. In retrospect there is nothing simple about the site I now find suspect. It seems they want us angry and prevent us from informing others on their site of what they seem to be up to.

Salve. So I offer you this lovely flash mob coda to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony with its wonderful spectator reactions as both a coda to the three linked pieces about horrific things, and as a salve to remind you that in your humanity there is the warmth that can still enjoy events from the past such as this one.

Load more