Are we irreparably divided? When deeply divergent cultural assumptions lie at the root, we could very well be heading for disunion. The only question is, will it be “soft” (peaceful) or “hard” (violent)? Terry Teachout, drama critic of the Wall Street Journal and the critic-at-large of Commentary, comes down on the side of disunion, but it’ll be a “soft” one to him. I’m not so certain, but I hope he’s right if we are to have one.
Terry Teachout
At work are two radically different notions of human nature. On one side lies the near perfectibility of us and our socio-economic-political arrangements. Indeed, a fixed nature is far from their imaginations. This leads to an endlessly meddlesome state. Space is left open in their intellectual firmament for all kinds of socialism: aggressive and velvet glove. In this social scheme, at the top of the governing pyramid is situated people like them, people whose status stems from paper credentials like college degrees and certifications. Today, this crowd increasingly comes with these ontological beliefs in tow.
Obama’s “pajama boy” from the 2010 publicity campaign to pass Obamacare.Steelworkers on a shift change in Braddock, Pa., 2008. (photo: Damon Winter/The New York Times)
On the other side of the cultural divide, we find those more traditionally inclined and the belief that human flourishing requires self-reliance and virtue. Yet, human nature is punctuated with a dark side. Therefore, all-powerful directorates will be populated with agents of a flawed nature like the rest of us. Spending 17-19 years in classrooms won’t change our basic makeup. Lord Acton’s famous quip about the possession of great power accessing our darker side is very relevant here.
Well, some of you might minimize the disagreement as only a difference of opinion. You’d be wrong to trivialize the estrangement. It’s fundamental to the difference between gun confiscation and a Second Amendment, abortion as infanticide and limiting it to the first trimester, free college and personal responsibility for your career path, environmental totalitarianism and environmental prudence, economic growth and the “new normal” of stagnation, religious liberty and state invasions of the pulpit, education freedom and the government classroom monopoly as a lefty finishing school, identity favoritism and equal opportunity, etc. Hardly trivial, this is existential.
In October 2015, Houston’s progressive mayor, Annise Parker, ordered the city’s district attorney to subpoena the sermons of selected pastors whom she suspected of using the pulpit for political purposes.
How did we get to this impasse? I think that the growth of government and its dependencies has seriously eroded the basis for our civilization. But also state-love has seeped into the subconscious of our media-saturated metropolitan areas. It began as a pervasive ethos in our faculty lounges. From there, it was evangelized to succeeding generations. I know of its prevalence as a 30-year teaching veteran in our public schools.
Unexamined lefty assumptions in our citified blue dots have provoked the chasm. Don’t be a bit surprised when you learn that people outside the blue dots have noticed. They have, and are justifiably horrified.
Rush Limbaugh yesterday let out the “S” word: secession (see below).
Over the past few years, I have been ruminating on the topic of secession, and worried that we are essentially two different peoples heading toward it. The differences are so profound that for one to rule the public square, the other is suppressed. Our politics have become a matter of conquest as we have become so deeply divided. It’s natural for the conquered to seek separation.
How different are we? Metropolitan areas are enthralled by a relatively recent nanny-state zealotry. Everywhere else, tradition and self-reliance has a stronger grip on imaginations. It’s the difference between pleasure-seeking materialists and your local church, if you want avatars to encapsulate the two sides.
Mayor Muriel Bowser looks out over a Black Lives Matter sign that was painted on a street, during nationwide protests in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 5, 2020. (Khalid Naji-Allah Executive Office of the Mayor/Handout via REUTERS)
We see it more and more, and all around us. During the Trump presidency, Democrat/Lefty strongholds engaged in John C. Calhoun-style nullification of federal immigration law, which Calhoun was an 1830’s harbinger over a federal tariff.
Now, it’s the traditionalists’ turn. Licentious electoral systems in blue states, and metropolitan cores in red-leaning states, have imposed an executive branch with lefty evangelical zeal on the vast stretches outside the blue dots and the coasts. In 1860, George Templeton Strong put it succinctly when he said, “Get prepared for a hurricane!”
The simple fact is that the urban cores and urban-core dominated states has adopted an aggressive leftism in recent years. They have moved extreme left while the rest of the country has remained more true to our founding beliefs and traditions. This could be a secession sparked by a militant collectivism in like manner as the adoption of a grand theory in defense of race-based chattel slavery in the South in the middle of the 19th century would incite the first go-around. In opposition, the abolitionists were the inheritors of an emancipation that is traced back through Christianity to classical times.
Modern urban bohemiansBlue collar Americans
I am worried. The fundamentals are present for a repeat. Indeed, if wiser heads don’t stop the leftward lurch, “Get prepared for a hurricane!”
While listening to Amazon Music this morning, the playlist presented “I Need You Christmas” by the Jonas Brothers. The song is beautifully performed, and reminded me of all that we are missing as our life has been meaninglessly deformed by the mini-totalitarians in positions of power.
The lockdowns and mitigations have nearly expunged church, most of of our interactions with other people, and removed celebration and spontaneous enjoyment of friendship from our lives. Children are banned from the park and school. They are left to spend most of their lives behind walls and in front of a computer screen. Ours is a deformed existence and not a natural and reasonable response to the spread of illness. This song reminded me of what we are missing, and ought not to.
Christmas should be a time of joy, faith, family, and friends. To be honest, the song makes me melancholy. Still, it’s a wonderful song and beautifully performed. Pease enjoy. And merry Christmas . . . if you can.
If you have a hankerin’, go watch “The Plot Against the President” (trailer below) on Amazon Prime by Amanda Milius, daughter of legendary script writer, producer, and director John Milius. It lays out the scheme by Obama’s courtiers, and Obama himself, to undermine Trump from the moment he won the nomination to the failed impeachment on February 5, 2020. Trump had no traditional “honeymoon”, and neither is Biden deserving of one. There should be a peaceful transfer of power, but it doesn’t have to be a cooperative one.
The post-2016 Democrats were despicable in their embrace of reverse racism, a racial spoils system, turning a blind eye to rioters, and socialism here, there, and everywhere. Their behavior was disgraceful in almost all matters political. Biden’s people should be prohibited from executive branch offices till noon, January 20. A couple of briefings for Biden alone may be alright. Then, he can take the info back to his minions that are holed up in the Office of the President-elect.
Congressional Republicans, keep the heat on from day one. Senators, if you have the majority, take a few scalps, particularly those that belong to Democrats from the California snake pit. Protect Durham and anyone who might be appointed to investigate the Biden family’s influence peddling.
Is this merely a matter of “vengeance”? No. Consider it, to borrow from the romantic texts between the Strzok and Page love birds, an “insurance policy”. It’s insurance to keep the Democrats from turning America into Venezuela.
Will Biden be hampered from doing the people’s business? And what business is that? Going after your livelihood and your $45,000 SUV in your garage? Greasing the skids for the prosecution of police departments and individual officers? More lockdowns to make your kids dumber and dumber? Going after your suburban neighborhood because it is too middle class and too nice? Waking up to learn that tax-the-rich became tax-the-paycheck? More insults to Israel and fist bumps with the mullahs? Your children finding that their college application didn’t check the right genitalia and skin color boxes? Lefty ideology being taught to your kids as “equity”? DMV-style healthcare replacing your doctor? Making it more difficult for you to get a gun as they open the jails, budgetarily strangle your police, and refuse to prosecute the guy breaking into your home and car?
Considering all that the Biden regime plans to offer, gridlock sounds good to me. At least, we’ll be spared the woke and neo-socialist claptrap.
Hugh Hewitt’s radio program is a treasure. I savor his demeanor and interviews of all stripes of opinion-makers. However, his take on the two most important issues of today – the election and pandemic – drives me up the wall. He’s certainly not alone in his display of tunnel vision on these two matters.
Friday, while interviewing Steve Kornacki, NBC’s resident expert on polling, they both strayed into superficial comparisons of the 2020 election with previous ones. Right off the bat, it must be admitted that this election was like no other and hardly analogous. It’s the first election in my memory that a huge bulk, if not the majority, of the ballots cannot be assigned to particular living, breathing, and eligible voters with much certainty. Ballots were shot-gunned to buildings throughout the country, were taken inside, and nobody can legitimately vouch for each ballot’s treatment after that. It’s the exact opposite of the level of security when voting in-person. This election was strange, really strange. How is a comparison with previous elections even possible?
Kornacki blithely tries to do just that with Hewitt in tow. Kornacki cited the increasing urbanization of Georgia and the demographic dominance of the counties within the orbit of greater Atlanta, counties that Hillary won by 30% and Biden wins by 40%, to help explain Biden’s razor thin victory in the state. I’m not convinced the fact has much relevance. Demographic changes don’t occur at the speed of flipping a light switch, even though they are gradually happening in real time. Four years isn’t long enough for that factor to account for a change of 10%.
How can anyone brusquely brush off the possibility of a once-in-a-lifetime loosey-goosey election system accounting for the surge in Biden support? Kornacki and Hewitt might be suffering from glaucoma.
Hewitt would probably respond by saying that there’s no evidence of substantial fraud . . . but fraud is beside the point. He sees most issues as a lawyer would, which he is, in clinging to his conclusion that there isn’t sufficient evidence to throw aspersions on the result. He’s right if all matters must meet the standards of jurisprudence, but that’s a rarified environment involving unique standards. For real people living in the real word, we can’t conduct our lives by measuring all that we do to “beyond a reasonable doubt”. We must act on what is likely to be true.
Evidentiary norms of the courtroom are ill-suited for policy making, decisions about your child’s education, and assessing an election system that incorporated what would have been considered fraud just two years before. The system hid voting behind walls – addresses – and counting procedures that poured ballots into huge anonymous piles like a rain drop landing in a pond. The system legitimized fraud and made it next to impossible to uncover the misbehavior in “sufficient” quantities.
Indeed, this Rube Goldberg election system was a disgrace. Party activists, greased with wads of lefty billionaire cash, became the principle means for distributing the ballots as they scurried to deliver and gather absentee ballot applications from their favorite constituencies, and became the principle means for their collection in legal and “questionable” ballot harvesting operations. Vote-by-mail essentially codified scandalous conduct.
The election was a system with few, if any, authenticity checks. You can’t expect underpaid and overworked poll workers to instantly become forensic handwriting experts. This election became a race to garner the biggest pile of paper, not necessarily voters, because the system was set up to place a premium on paper, not bodies. Under these conditions, paper is made easier to pile than bodies.
Mail-in ballots being prepared for counting. (AP Photo/Don Ryan, File)
Simply put, you can’t correlate each piece of paper with a live body. A leap of faith is required to overcome that problem. Hewitt and Kornacki are unknowingly mired in something akin to a religious act.
And then there’s Hewitt’s stand on the pandemic. He announced that Gov. Newsom “is doing his best” and implored public officials like LA’s Mayor Garcetti to cordially ask the population “to endure just 3 more months of restrictions”. Au contraire, Newsom and Garcetti are deserving of condemnation not compliments and supplications to be nicer.
We’re in the midst of the much-anticipated second surge and many in power act as if they haven’t learned a darn thing. We now know that the truly vulnerable are a narrow slice of the population: the aged with serious health problems. Outside of that demographic sliver, almost all people would probably find influenza a more dangerous threat. And yet, we are told that nearly everyone’s entire way of life must be upended to protect this very small number of people, or protect ourselves from a threat that is no more dangerous than the seasonal flu. The hidden truth is, we can easily protect the vulnerable without making everyone else’s life a living hell.
If we do get it, we have proven therapeutics with vaccines on the way. We won’t die, unless we have the health issues that would imperil some of us every flu season. We had good reason to know this fact at the start but powerful officials got caught up in a hysteria that was incited by grossly inflated death rates. Remember those? But Garcetti, Cuomo in New York, and Whitmer in Michigan still act as if the embarrassingly faulty fatality numbers in March came from the burning bush on Mt. Horeb. They behave as if a spike in “positive” cases equates with a spike in deaths. Few things are further from the truth.
Jay Bhattacharya
Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford in his presentation in Hillsdale College’s October issue of “Imprimis” clears the medical fog of war. Most importantly, he addresses the confusion that paralyzes Whitmer’s and Newsom’s mind on that notorious death rate. The number that corrupts their brains muddles “cases” with “infections”. The former is a much smaller number than the latter, with the former producing a much higher death rate if used as the formula’s denominator. “Infections” is a bigger number because it refers to people with the virus or having had it. “Cases” are just the number of people with the virus that show up at a medical facility. Seroprevalence tests – an analysis of the presence of virus markers in the form of antibodies and proteins – in Santa Clara County, Ca., and replicated in 82 studies around the world, showed 50 times more infections over cases. Thus, the death rate properly calculated must drop behind the decimal point and not in front of it. Bottom line: the virus’s lethality was and is greatly overstated.
Targeted mask-wearing, quarantining and assisting the vulnerable, and an opening of life for 95% of our people should be the order of the day. Above all, get the kids back in school. Increases in positive cases should no longer paralyze us into ruination. If you get it, see your doctor, stay home, and drink plenty of fluids. Sound familiar?
The two issues are linked on account of the virus-panic being used to mutilate our elections, in addition to butchering our entire way of life. Hewitt wallows in misconceptions about the 2020 election and the virus. The school closings and lockdowns are destroying the path to meaningful lives. Our third world-style election system gave us a person of mental incontinence who will be left to populate the executive branch, and the courts, with delusionary leftists. We are going to be in for a rough ride, and the disfigurement of rational treatment of the two events is no good service.
Solar panel array in Irwindale, California. (photo: Ringo Chiu/Zuma)
Here I am with another piece on the ongoing and grotesque burlesque show in my native state of California. This one is about the inevitability of oppressive central planning that grips the progressive mind in the state. There seems to be this fetish for the power to control everything and everyone to get to the ruling claque’s rapturous end state. They need a cataclysm to stampede the state’s hoi polloi into their arms. For them, nothing better fits the bill than their fixation on “climate change” and the companion thought that the Golden State and, if they capture DC, the US will lead the way to the nirvana of Sierra Club policy papers.
I was reading Kevin Williamson’s fairly balanced essay in National Review’s October issue, “The Heart of California’s Darkness”, and it dawned on me that the political power-hunger in the heart of every California progressive (or liberal, or leftist, or whatever) is, in some ways, more complete than anything that came out of the old Soviet Union. The USSR was a contraption that couldn’t run because it combined two incompatible things: complete equality in all things material and a prosperous life filled with conveniences. The former undercut the latter, and down it came after about 80 years. The crazies that run Sacramento are after something more sweeping.
Frankly, they don’t care so much about conveniences as they do about their religious-like adherence to an arbitrary sense of environmentalist purity best articulated by the immature utterances of people like 17-year-old Greta Thunberg and her ideological soulmate, Ocasio-Cortez. They won’t even make allowance for the desire for comfort in life. One of the greatest additions to comfort, alongside the automobile and balloon housing construction (makes the ‘burbs possible), was air conditioning. All of them are on the hit list for eventual elimination.
Ocasio-Cortez and Thunberg
The only problem is that the peasants would be seeking their pitch forks if the zealots shocked them with a huge and immediate dose of their vision. So, the fanatics seek to slowly strangulate our conveniences under think layers of regulations and edicts emanating from a politburo of the ruling party’s elders and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
The Party has supportive cadres in affiliated institutions such as publicly-funded universities to help them invent new schemes to herd the masses in the desired direction. One such contributor in the achievement of the Party’s goal is comrade Severin Borenstein of UC Berkeley’s Energy Institute at the Haas Business School. He’s an enthusiast for tying electricity rates to the time of day when their most needed. If you don’t find ways to cut back on air conditioning, you’re deserving of bankruptcy in the fevered imaginations of people like Severin.
Severin Borenstein
And this comes at a time when the air is fouled by earlier escapades into environmentalist utopia that turned the forests into a blanket of matchsticks. So, if his wish comes to pass, you, my fair resident of the state, will have the privilege of coming home to a hot and stuffy house to sweat and bake in. That’s what you get for not desiring to live in a cramped and over-priced hovel in the narrow band of real estate hugging the coast. The abject inhumanity at the heart of the worldview is what’s so appalling.
The fact is, California’s version of Lenin’s vanguard elite is trying to shoehorn reality into an unreality. It won’t work any more than the Five-Year Plans of Lenin and his descendants. See, the sun and wind don’t cooperate so you must be made to cooperate. According to the California Energy Commission (another Party affiliate), energy capacity has indeed increased in the past 20 years as the activists in power shifted to renewables. But not so fast. “Capacity” – which could be another one of those statistical fairy tales – must not be confused with “generation”. Generation of electricity has been flat, even declining slightly in the face of population growth. Accepting energy from hydrocarbons from inside or outside the state to make up the difference between demand and supply gives the ruling class the willies, and nuclear power conjures visions of old monster movies. What you end up with is blackouts and/or personal bankruptcy – not exactly an open-arms invitation to move to the state.
This is no way to live. Not surprisingly, 800 businesses have jumped ship in one year from 2018 to 2019 to join thousands of others in the diaspora. California is not the future, so long as its goofy vision is quarantined within its borders. That’s an open question given the fact that California acolytes of central planning are auditioning for national promotions in the new Biden administration.
If left alone, California will suffer the same fate as the Soviet Union. One can only hope . . . and pray. The death of the hot mess is the only thing that’ll keep the rest of us safe and secure. Now that’s real herd immunity.
DETROIT, MI – NOVEMBER 04: A crowd chants “stop the count,” and pounds on the glass windows and doors to the entrance of the Central Counting Board in the TCF Center after partisan election challengers were removed on November 4, 2020 in Detroit, Michigan. (Photo by Elaine Cromie/Getty Images)
Biden got 11 million votes – or maybe 15 million – more than Obama in 2008. Trump got 23% more than McCain. And Washington Post columnist Philip Bump brands the 2020 turnout (in “Actually, it makes perfect sense that Biden would get more votes than Obama”) as “not ahistorical”. Amazingly, he then goes on to explain why it was “ahistorical”. What’s up? In 2020, the country was showered with pieces of paper (mailed ballots) that may or may not have been reflective of warm bodies or active brains. It certainly is responsible to ask whether each one of those pieces of paper represents a thinking human being or warm body when ballots were thrown to the wind like Deutsch marks in the hyper-inflationary Germany of 1923 ($1 = 4,210,500,000,000 German marks). Bump presents some sound reasoning and then falls off the cart. In fact, our election system is a joke that became a belly laugh in 2020.
Bump partially attributes the larger turnout to population growth. But that speculation doesn’t pass the smell test. The hordes in the US grew by about 31 million from 2008 to 2020, but those new bodies may not translate into more voters since they increasingly represent demographics that historically don’t vote . . . unless Tammany Hall never went away. The young and immigrants dominate the additions to the vote-eligible legions. The story is more than a myth that new immigrants were met at the docks with a job, a promise to get the oldest daughter married, and a ballot. The young and immigrants with their offspring are too busy with other things on their minds. Voting doesn’t quite catch up on the list of priorities with hooking up or working hard to get established in the new country. Unless, of course, the get-out-the-vote (gotv) campaign consists of cajoling, enticements, or harassment, or worse. Free will gets overwhelmed by the pressure from the political machine.
Thomas Nast cartoon showing Tammany Hall political boss Richard Croker’s tentacles firmly fastened on New York City Hall.
Machines still exist, by the way. Some states and most big cities function as Maduro regimes (of Venezuela fame).
And what to make of that free will? Free will turns into mush after constant pestering, or the election system comes to you in the mail to facilitate “social” voting, the opposite of the secret ballot. Ballots go to buildings and who knows what’s happening behind those walls. Group voting, one person voting for many, peer pressure? It’s highly questionable whether each piece of paper is correlated to the free will of an individual person legally entitled to vote, let alone one above room temperature. It’s hard to say how legitimate the election is when we pull crazy stunts like this. A person can be forgiven for thinking that we systematically and legally promoted fraud and then called it voter enthusiasm, like Bump.
Our intrepid Washington Post columnist is probably correct when he cites higher enthusiasm in this election, as is true of every presidential election cycle. He then tried to pinpoint Trump as the catalyst. In his mind, the greater attention this time around was really a referendum on Trump. The election was a hate-Trump or love-Trump excursion, Biden being the beneficiary of a larger hate-Trump mob.
Could be, but my olfactory glands are once again aroused. This smells too much like east coast, beltway confirmation bias, or wishful thinking, at work. Bump so strongly wishes it to be true that he massages his reasoning to make it true. I can’t say for sure that Bump is a partisan but a person can be forgiven for reaching the conclusion if the writer subject is cloistered in a mass of homogeneous minds to such an extent that he uses the data to validate the suffocating group mind of his surroundings.
By his own reckoning, and Gallup polling, 2020 was no more of an attention-grabbing hullabaloo than 2008. And this, in addition to the increase in non-voting demographics, is supposed to explain the popularity of a candidate with the charisma of a grilled cheese sandwich and the mental acuity of an early stage Alzheimer’s patient? Philip, I’m sorry, this dog won’t hunt.
Gallup has a credibility problem anyway. These people weren’t any more capable of measuring the Trump vote than the others. As it turned out, contra their predictions, 45,000 additional Trump votes in a few states would have Trump crowing before the press of another “landslide” in the face of their glowering stares. Their faulty estimation of the state of the electorate raises serious questions about their ability in measuring something as abstruse as the emotional state – like “enthusiasm” – of that very same public. Citing them isn’t much different than resorting to tarot cards.
The predictions of the polls are reminiscent of the difference between a WAG and SWAG in the realm of probabilities. Both are wild a** guesses, but the latter adds numbers.
Today, our discredited cultural elites tell us to shut up and accept the codger as our new god-in-waiting. Just one year before, they were wringing their hands over the voting public’s decision to install Trump. How could that be, they wondered? Their answer was to throw aspersions on the 2016 election. They ran with the orchestrated lie of a Trump-Putin cabal, and threw in, for good measure, broad complaints about the American election system. Now that’s something I can buy, and I’m not speaking of the Russia charade. Our system is a mess. We are morally disqualified from being members of UN election observer teams.
Pippa Norris of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government in January 2019 writing for AP, while most likely wringing her hands over an election system that produced Trump, hit upon some truth before there was a 2020 imbroglio. She wrote a telling piece, “American elections ranked worst among Western democracies. Here’s why.” Portions of her analysis have as much a ring of truth in 2020 as it did for 2016. She cites her own Electoral Integrity Project, an operation that she directs, and the 2014 report of the bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration. Both make some good points.
In her AP article, she heaped abuse on our election system, and rightly so. She particularly mentioned the fractured nature of our election system with many voting regimes scattered among the 50 states and thousands of election boards, all varying in their degrees of efficiency and integrity. In her reckoning, partisanship is allowed to play a huge role in writing the laws and administering the distribution and counting of the pieces of paper in each one of the enclaves, and I agree.
TOPSHOT – Mail-in ballots in their envelopes await processing at the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorders’ mail-in ballot processing center at the Pomona Fairplex in Pomona, California, October 28, 2020. (Photo by Robyn Beck / AFP) (Photo by ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images)
That might explain why Montana’s vote is more valid than the ones coming out of urban one-party states. These single-party fiefdoms don’t have competitive opposition to keep them honest. Graft becomes honest graft in the memorable words of George Washington Plunkitt. In other words, electoral fraud becomes easy, legal, or hidden without the presence of a powerful opposition riding herd on the rulers. Little of this will come to light because little is open to effective scrutiny.
It’s especially true in vote-by-mail schemes. Once a mail-in ballot is removed from the envelope and added to the stack, and the privacy envelope with the signature is tossed to the wind, what integrity check is there? The vote gets certified and real skullduggery will be relegated to the mists of urban myth, popular only among the losers.
Lisa Benson
Norris goes off the rails into fantasy when she points to proportional representation gambits and heightening “convenience” as ways to improve the system. The proportional approach splits party representation by the percentage of the vote. It’s most commonly associated with parliamentary systems, which is less problematic when there just two parties, and a disaster when there are many. Splinter parties become kingmakers and coalition governments teeter into instability. Israel in the past year and a half had 3 elections and is probably heading to their fourth. The suggestion piles instability on top of our current mess of chaotic vote regimes and vote procedures that turn election season into a farcical sitcom.
Examining absentee ballots.
As for “convenience”, there’s nothing more convenient than vote-by-mail, and there’s nothing that does more to conjure an absence of faith in the results. The whole artifice abolishes the secret ballot, which ensures that the marks on the piece of paper reflect the conscience of a single person acting independently, while eliminating the close supervision that is only possible from in-person voting. With no secrecy guaranteeing that the vote reflects the will of an individual person and no supervision in the act of voting, what can go wrong, eh? Plenty.
One question that escapes serious consideration is this one: Should every eligible voter vote? The message is rammed home that everyone “should” vote. It’s as if the only expectation for the voter is to mechanically mark the piece of paper, not to bring anything more to the act. I beg to differ. Voting should be left to those who’ve given the matters in question the requisite effort and thought to understand the matters before them. The mentally incontinent and indifferent should be at the top of the list of people who should be shamed from voting – not banned through a poll test, but shamed.
Instead, there’s a concerted effort to bring out the mentally incontinent and indifferent by making the act of voting “convenient”. One thing that this election teaches us is that convenience can only come at the expense of deteriorating credibility. If an election lacks trustworthiness, but is imposed on the population nonetheless, we’ll have all the makings for grave upheaval thereafter.
Our choices are clear regardless of any partisan result. Vote-by-mail should end, with it only justified in very limited and carefully tailored circumstances. Election day should be a holiday to get the 95% of the electorate to appear at the precinct in person. If you have to wait in line, the experience will remind you that the day is set aside for you to vote. Early voting, in-person only, should be limited to a week before election day. Precise national standards should be in place for national elections and a slew of stricter guidelines for all others. DOJ should man-up for swift investigations and prosecutions of violators, with similar requirements at the state level.
Our present system is a farce. We should be rightly viewed as a laughingstock by the rest of the world. Who are we to pass judgment on any poor country’s election system when we have this mess visited upon us very 2 to 4 years? Ours is a third world election system, American style. Maduro has a similar one, Venezuela style.
Allies of Nicolas Maduro’s party made a clean sweep of the Sunday election after the opposition boycotted, July 2017.
Rev. Al Sharpton speaks, center, flanked by La Raza President Janet Murguia, right, and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, speaks to reporters about the Voting Rights Act, outside the West Wing of the White House in Washington, Monday, July 29, 2013, after a meeting with President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
If you have any doubts about the fact that Big Tech is seeded throughout their organizational pyramids with leftists, look at what happened to Eli and Shelby Steele’s film, “What Killed Michael Brown?”, on Amazon’s website (see the trailer below).
Shelby Steele. director and writer of “What Killed Michael Brown?”, being interviewed by Fox radio.
The film was initially cancelled. Why? The censors at Amazon rolled out drivel like the film wasn’t “eligible for publishing”, “doesn’t meet Prime Video’s content quality expectations”, and Amazon “will not be accepting resubmission of this title and this decision may not be appealed”. That’s a gobbledygook word salad, with the last phrase an attempt at commercial assassination.
For the incorrigibly naïve ready to believe Bezos’s underlings, go to Amazon Prime and take a look at the boat loads of stuff that shouldn’t be “eligible for publishing”. Who are these people trying to kid? The Steeles, pure and simple, challenge the Black Lives Matter dogma. That’s it! The Steeles’ take on race is too jarring to the straitjacketed minds in our chattering classes of legacy media, the academy, corporate boardrooms, Big Tech and its minions, and the Democratic Party. These socio-economic satraps are different legs of a monocultural centipede that can’t handle an opposing posture. If you have $19.99 to spare, buy it and watch it. You’ll quickly discover that “quality” was a PR word to hide an organizational attack on a different, well-founded point of view. Big Tech is working really hard to get a step on Orwell’s Ministry of Truth.
From left: Amazon Devices chief David Limp, SVP of corporate affairs Jay Carney, and CEO Jeff Bezos. (GeekWire Photo / Todd Bishop)
Later, after an outcry, Amazon relented. If for no other reason, stick your thumb in their eye by purchasing the film on Prime. You’ll also be rewarded by the “quality” and a well-reasoned outlook on the issue of race in America. You’ll quickly come to see that Amazon’s ploy was a lie.
Now, to the film. The Steele perspective on race is analogous to a kind of digestive tract that goes from real historical oppression, to later white guilt/penance, to government coddling to assuage the guilt, to crippling dependency, and to the evolution of a mutually beneficial relationship between the providers and recipients of the largesse. At this last stage of digestion, we have a full-blown race hustling industry ready to treat incidents as if they were a resource – like yesteryear’s Carnegie Steel exploiting Minnesota’s Iron Range – but leaving the cultural landscape in black neighborhoods horribly scarred.
This race-hustling industry has made a new career path in race-hustling. As in most things, the new career is founded on a few presumptions. It begins with the busybody reflex in the progressive mindset: life and people would be better only if they – the self-anointed “expert” – had power to direct their lives. Where did that lead? It led to the War on Poverty and the wholesale demolition of black property ownership and, most terrifyingly, the loss of the full humanness that naturally accrues to all of us. Blacks were put into a special category reserved for people incapable of personal responsibility. A near complete annihilation of their civil society with its faith and family spilled out of this good-intentioned crusade.
And a new market in the penance for “white guilt” arose as white liberals sought exoneration and forgiveness and race-hustlers offer it for a price: wealth and power. In economics, no market can survive without mutual benefit, and indeed Al Sharpton and Democratic Party hegemons get wealth and power and whites earn remission after bending a knee before Black Lives Matter. It matures into a forever thing, a perpetual motion machine built around grievance and shallow identities.
Shelby Steele blows the cover on this hideous marionette show. See “What Killed Michael Brown?”. It might compensate for the deep disappointment after watching Mitt Romney join a horde of Black Lives Matter enthusiasts in the wake of another one of those resourceful incidents, George Floyd.
Photo: MICHELLE BOORSTEIN / THE WASHINGTON POST / GETTY
AEI scholar and contributor Frederick Hess in his piece “The oddest sort of progressivism” lays bare the wacky idea of wiping clean $1.6 trillion in student loan debt.
Chiefly, the idea is pushed most heartily by the people most likely to benefit: the people who staff the 200 progressive organizations – not the purported constituents – who last week petitioned Biden to do it “on day one” with a stroke of his pen. The whole thing is a ploy to transfer wealth from those who didn’t go to college and those who worked their way through cheaper schools to grad school graduates at pricey private schools and those who pursued grievance instruction in identity politics departments. Simply put, the equation goes something like this: money will flow from skilled tradesman and those working their way through school to those who’ll earn about $1 million more in lifetime income and rioters demolishing monuments and blowing up our cities. The former could be excused for thinking themselves to be chumps and suckers as the latter laugh all the way to the bank. This kind of thing turns the shiftless and conniving aristocrats in 18th-century Versailles into paragons of virtue.
People in the skilled trades. Many of these people worked their way through community college or trade school and have little accrued student loan debt, if any. Plus, they are more employable and better able to repay their much smaller loans than those who spent 4 years, in addition to a couple of years of grad school, for their Social Science or law school degree.
The biggest chunk, some 40% of the debt, was accrued for grad study “by doctors, lawyers, and other professionals in pursuit of lucrative credentials” according to Hess. Add to that, the gambit does nothing to address the colleges’ complicity in the skyrocketing tuitions that drive much of the debt. Easy student loans mean more breathing room for college administrations to hike rates and offer instructional silliness. What do you get for the higher price? Certainly not a better education. The grievance industrial complex is too well entrenched in many Humanities, Social Science, and identity politics departments. Many students will matriculate their way through and come out only equipped for political activism, while facing a student loan bill that neither their activism nor barista job can afford.
Here’s an idea: put the colleges on the hook for their graduates’ inability to repay. I can’t think of a better way to use Harvard’s $42 billion endowment. The taxpayers shouldn’t be saddled with a debt that was stimulated by administrative flights of fancy in the absence of accountability. Make them as answerable as we are in meeting our mortgage. As such, all of us will be further advantaged by no longer having to submit to the half-witted sermons of grievance politics graduates. That industry could very well dry up as schools quickly realize that “… Studies” degree programs are drawing down the school’s bank account.
Let’s ignore the crony capitalist pleas of the self-interested and, instead, make the schools responsible for the quality of their instruction and the occupational fate of their students. Now that’s an idea I can support. How about you?
Mail-in ballots in Chicago, Ill., waiting for postal delivery for the November 3 election.
One way to perpetuate the politically useful cause of combatting racism is to proclaim its existence in such a manner as to make the charge unable to be disproven by announcing it to be abstract or systematic. Leaving aside the patent illogic of it all, our political practitioners of irrationality have hit upon something. The form of something, take our election system for instance, is just as important as the content of it. It’s just that the woke crowd’s preferred use of “system” is pure nonsense.
Break the election system into two parts: the distribution and the processing of the ballots. First, the distribution. Thanks to COVID-hysteria, across the country we went on a binge of early voting, voting by mail, ballot harvesting, and essentially eliminating the measures to ensure ballot integrity and validity. In other words, we legalized what in another era used to be called fraud or cheating. Slipping ballots in early used to be one tactic to game an election. Another was to grab a handful of ballots and hand them to God knows who to do God knows what, like in our own time mailing the things to addresses across the universe. In another time, it was considered the fraudulent abuse of the absentee ballot procedure. This set the stage for the party of one-party fiefdoms and urban political machines – Remember Missouri’s Pendergast ring or Gotham’s Tammany Hall? – to legally do overtly what they used to do covertly.
I’m reminded of Robert Caro’s The Means of Ascent, the second volume of his series on the life of the 36th President of the United States, Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ). Of particular note is LBJ’s successful and dubious elevation to Texas senator in 1948. Much that he did to steal the election from Gov. Coke Stevenson was legalized for today by the “crisis too good to waste”. Late registrations, new ballots mysteriously showing up, the whole mail-in shebang of today making it possible for one person to manufacture unknown multiples of votes, ballot harvesters hunting down warm bodies who can be cajoled to vote – and vote the “right” way – and legally diluted verification measures turned past crimes into permissible election procedures.
No wonder there’s little evidence of widespread fraud. Much of what fell under criminal fraud became, all of a sudden, statutorily permissible, or at least, with a wink and a nod, excusable. There was little fraud because fraud was legitimized by the pandemic.
You don’t need to resort to nefarious activities in processing, or counting, the ballots to manufacture the desired result. The whole system of distribution was fenagled to make a predetermined end more likely.
So, you will hunt in vain for old-style fraud like stuffing the ballot boxes because we’ve made it easy to do the same thing under cover of law in the distribution of the pieces of paper. Try and do the same thing with larceny, murder, and rape and see how far you get. This election was systematically a sham, period.
