A LIMITED DEFENSE OF HERMAN CAIN

I see on Memeorandum that the Herman Cain brouhaha is in full, frothing flower:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

Before I comment on Cain's response or the merits of the actual accusations, it seems reasonable to define the term "sexual harassment". Because legal definitions vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, I'm going with a generic summary of several standards I've read today. Here are the common elements:

1. Employee is pressured to submit to unwanted sexual attention/advances as a condition of continued employment ("You *do* want to keep your job, don't you honey?")

2. Decisions regarding pay, benefits, promotions, etc. are conditioned upon submission to unwanted sexual attention/advances.

3. Unwanted sexual attention/advances/comments are of sufficient severity/frequency that they create a hostile working environment.

That's the test Cain's accusers would have to meet. So far, we don't have many specifics, so no one knows whether actual sexual harassment occurred or not. Three things about this story strike me:

1. So far, we have anonymous accusations made by two women who (if Politico is to be believed) were paid not to discuss the matter further.

One can't help recalling the NY Times' frequent use of anonymous j'accusations from unidentified Defense Department employees who demanded anonymity because talking to the media violated the conditions of their employment. This is a weighty point against the accusers. Why should anyone believe two women who (by their own admission, if we believe the Politico) took what amounts to a bribe ... and then, having voluntarily accepted hush money, violated a freely given promise not to discuss the matter further?

Because most sexual conduct occurs in private, most accusations of sexual misconduct revolve around the credibility of the accuser. Having already shown themselves to be quite willing to take hush money and then violate the condition they agreed to as a condition of accepting such money doesn't exactly smack of integrity, does it? Which leads me to #2:

2. Because sexual conduct usually occurs in private (and because Politico is still sitting on all the juicy details - not to mention the identities of his accusers - out of a notably one-sided "sensitivity" to the seriousness of the charges), no one - whether on the liberal or rethug side - has any real basis for judging the merits of these claims. First of all, we don't know whether Cain's alleged conduct met any of the conditions specified above. Merely making unwanted sexual advances does not constitute sexual harassment. One could argue that any time a man makes sexual advances toward a woman (and she doesn't leap into his bed) he risks not just rejection but possible accusations of harassment.... all of which are good reasons for management not to proposition the help. But it's worth noting that the law stipulates that unwanted sexual conduct has to be severe and repeated often enough that it creates a hostile working environment.

For all we know, it may have been. Or not. Either way, we don't know enough yet.

3. Trying to dismiss these allegations by playing the race card, bringing up Bill Clinton's serial misbehavior, or referring to high tech lynchings (subtle, that...) are off topic distractions. I have to say that the responses of Cain's campaign staff leave something to be desired here.

Either there's enough here to convince people that Cain is more likely than not to have done what he was accused of (and if he did, that's something voters should know) or there's not enough evidence that he did and that's as much as we'll ever know about the matter. In all likelihood, we'll never know for sure.

Which leaves us pretty much where we seem to be today - with some of Cain's supporters loudly maintaining that there's nothing to see here and some of his detractors pronouncing him guilty without so much as a trial by media. And the rest of us playing wait and see.

Which may be the point of all this. I don't have much brief for premature declarations of either innocence or guilt. We just don't know enough yet. And perhaps we never will.

Arthurian Halloween

Today I will tell you an Arthurian story appropriate to the date.  One of the characteristic features of medieval writings about King Arthur is that they are often built around the liturgical year.  It isn't just that the passage of time is marked by whether they are holding the feast of Easter or Pentecost, but the feasts often have some appropriate function in the story.  This tale is an example of what I mean.  Some appropriate music:



Sir Guingamor fell in love with a fairy lady, and the two had a son whose name was Sir Brangamor.  Sir Brangamor's body turns up in a swan-shaped boat with written instructions to avenge his death -- but failing to mention his name, or on whom vengeance should be taken.  The letter does mention a secret shame that had befallen Sir Gawain's brother Guerrehes, however, so Sir Gawain goes looking for him.

Sir Guerrehes does not wish to speak of this -- remember that in an honor and shame culture, shame is only really significant if it becomes public!  Eventually, though, he admits to his brother (in private) a story about a red city he encountered in a wilderness.  He went in through the window, and found a wounded knight there being tended by a lady.  The wounded knight was furious at his arrival, and called for another knight to fight him.  The 'other knight' proved to be two feet tall -- not a dwarf, but a man perfectly formed, just small.  This little knight beat Guerrehes soundly, and made him promise to return in one year either to fight again, or to submit to being beheaded, or to submit to being enslaved as a weaver in the castle.

Guerrehes doesn't understand what this has to do with the mysterious dead body, so they go and look at it.  Guerrehes does not know the victim, but when he touches the spearhead that is lodged in the body, it falls out, and is perfect and bright.  He has it affixed to the stoutest spear he owns, and agrees to take on the quest of vengeance.

Now we get to the liturgical part.  All this happens right before Easter.  At the Easter feast, Guerrehes is asked by Arthur to sit near him.  Guerrehes is in such a foul mood that Sir Cei notices, and asks Arthur for a boon.  Arthur grants it, and Cei says he wants the story of why Guerrehes is so unhappy.  Guerrehes is angry, but has to confess his shame to Arthur and the whole court.  In one sense he is now fully shamed, because his shame is public -- but in another sense he is free of it, because he does not have to hide it any longer.  He takes horse and weapons, and goes off to quest for the vengeance he has (now quite publicly) sworn to perform.

It turns out that when he goes back to the red city, he is able to kill the little knight without difficulty.  Then the lord of the castle -- the formerly wounded knight -- called for his own weapons to fight Guerrehes.  The two take horses and arms, and Guerrehes selects the spear with the bright spearhead from the corpse.  He and the lord of the castle run together, and the spear penetrates and kills the lord of the castle just where it had penetrated the corpse.

Now the lady who had been tending the lord of the castle came to him, and thanked him for setting her free. She had been enslaved by that man after he killed her lover -- the knight Brangamor, as you will have guessed.  So they return to Arthur's castle at Caerleon, and the swan-shaped ship.

The lady explains to Arthur that Brangamor had to die in this world because he was part mortal, but now he will be able to live in the Otherworld with his queen and with his mother.  The ship is loaded with the corpse and its wrappings, and the lady goes aboard it, and it sails off to disappear.

This occurs on Halloween, the day when the fairy mounds are said to be open.

You can read the original story in William Roach's edition of the Old French Arthurian poems that follow Chretien de Troyes -- you may be able to find this through an academic library, if you have one nearby.  There is an easy English translation is available in John Matthews' The Book of Arthur, although it omits the fact that the final part of the story occurs on Halloween.

The Lowlands of Holland

On the night that I was married
And on my marriage bed
Up came a bold sea captain
And he stood at my bed head
Saying, "Arise, arise, young wedded man
And come along with me
To the low, low lands of Holland
To fight the enemy. 

Now Holland is a lovely land
And on it grows fine grain
Sure it is a place of residence
For a soldier to remain
Where the sugar cane is plentiful
And the tea grows on the tree
I never had but the one __
Now he's far away from me.

Said the mother to the daughter
Give off your sore lament
Oh there's men enough in Galway
For to be your heart's content"
"If there's men enough in Galway
Alas there are none for me
Since these high winds and stormy seas
Have come between my love and me."

I will wear no shoes around my feet
Nor combs pull in my hair
No handkerchief around my neck
For to save my beauty fair
And never will I marry
Until the day I die
Since the low, low lands of Holland
Have come between my love and I.

It's easier to understand if you remember that William of Orange came from the lowlands of Holland.  The Clancy Brothers also sang a little bit 'particular to Armagh, in the Christmastime,' which held:  "Up the long ladder and down the short rope, to hell with King Billy and God bless the Pope!"  And now you know enough, as Tolkien might have said, to go along with.

Ah, we're near the end of fine October.  The best month of the year, unless it be May; and almost gone to winter.  How many more will I see?  Or you either, friend.

The Sith Lords

We are approaching the hours of Halloween.  Let me let you in on a secret, in case you didn't know it.  Do you know what a Sith Lord is?  An American is likely to think that he does.



But perhaps you aren't quite right.

In his manuscript, The Secret Commonwealth of Elves, Fauns and Fairies, Reverend Robert Kirk, minister of the Parish of Aberfoyle, Stirling, Scotland, wrote in 1691:

These Siths or Fairies they call Sleagh Maith or the Good People...are said to be of middle nature between Man and Angel, as were Daemons thought to be of old; of intelligent fluidous Spirits, and light changeable bodies (lyke those called Astral) somewhat of the nature of a condensed cloud, and best seen in twilight. These bodies be so pliable through the sublety of Spirits that agitate them, that they can make them appear or disappear at pleasure.

The word "Sith" is a variation of "Sidhe," immortals living in the fairy mounds.  I say in the fairy mounds, but the word "Sidhe" is distinct from the fae, whose names are liked with the old Latin "fate," and associated with the goddesses of that kind.  They are distinct also from elves, which is of Norse extraction, alfar, meaning "white."  These elves appear to be the honored dead, encountered by us in a shining form.

No, the fae are alien, associated with the order of the universe, and the Sith a subset of these.

The American usage -- "Sith" -- tracks to that ancient Celtic use.  No surprise:  John Williams used one of the poems of Taliesin, translated into Sanskrit, as the background track for a song on the Phantom Menace CD.

So here you have been given a hint as to what the Sith are.  But do you understand what they really are?

Playing Together

Anne Applebaum has an interesting point about the importance of play.

Thirty years ago, this wasn’t the case. A worker in a Detroit car factory earned about the same as, say, a small-town dentist, and although they might have different taste in films or furniture, their purchasing power wasn’t radically different. Their children would have been able to play together without feeling as if they came from different planets.

Now they couldn’t.

Her concept is that this is a good measure of the degree to which the middle class feels united -- that is, the degree to which it really is a class.  She wants to make a point, much like Mickey Kaus does, that Americans care more about social equality than about political or economic equality.  They argue that a very few super-rich (or a very few terribly poor) do not upset the sense of overall social equality, but that the American democratic concept won't work if a large part of the public feels separate from the rest.  

There's a certain irony in this critique coming from the Left, which for many years worked very hard to instill just such a distinction in the minds of the American people.  For a long time the phrase "the working class" was intended by Left-leaning thinkers to convince us to break the Middle Class into two parts, the upper-middle and middle-middle (which would remain "Middle Class") and the lower-middle (which would become "Working Class").  Insofar as they could achieve this, they could convince the "working class" that they had a class interest in Democratic politics, labor unions, and so forth.  Insofar as the lower-middle class remained convince that it was 'Middle Class like everybody else,' those voters would continue to try to better their lot through economics rather than politics.

Nevertheless, the economic collapse of the last few years has achieved what the phrase could not achieve; and if the Left is late to the party of celebrating the general unity of American life, that doesn't mean that they are wrong on the point.  There is a great social stability that arises because the vast middle -- say 80% of us -- think of ourselves as belonging to the same class.  We don't all vote the same way even so, but there is a sense in which we're all more or less the same.  In a democratic society, that's a virtue; so if we hope to remain a democratic society, it's important.

I wonder, though, if there isn't a broader point to be made about playing together.  Robert Putnam wrote a book called Bowling Alone that argues that American adults aren't playing together any more.  The bowling league was once a feature of middle-class life, along with things like the Elk Lodge (a type of society so popular that they were satirized in The Flintstones); now, people almost always bowl alone.  It isn't because bowling is less popular:  bowling is more popular than ever.  It's the community that has collapsed.

I think he has a good point in general, though his research is suspiciously tendentious.  His state-by-state rankings are interesting, as all the Southern states are in the negative territory, and are clustered at the bottom of the list.  The earliest is Virginia, at 33rd; of the bottom ten, only West Virginia and Nevada are from outside the South.  

Does air-conditioning -- or the bitterly hot summers, in general -- cut down on the degree to which we play together?  That might explain the general trend; but it doesn't answer the question of whether our communities are worse.  On the other hand, I notice his sample questions speak of "civic and social" organizations but not "church groups."  Leaving that out is going to eliminate one of the major sources of Southern community, which would also tend to bias the list.

Leaving aside that problem, though, it's an interesting question.  Does the nation that plays together stay together?  If so, is part of the answer to the economic crisis -- or at least, the political crisis attending the economic crisis -- to form more softball or bowling leagues?  To make sure our children play together?  It seems unlikely on its face, and yet I find I can't dismiss the idea.  There is something powerful in play, for men and women as well as for children.

OWS Learns More of Life's Long Words

I'm starting to think this OWS thing is going to be incredibly productive after all. Now that their carbon-guzzling generators have been confiscated as fire hazards, the organizers have decided to replace them with green generators powered by bicycles. As the enthusiastic supporters at FireDogLake put it, get your exercise, stay green, and make sure the protesters have the iPhones and laptops that are essential to any successful anti-authoritarian movement.

The next step will be the slowly dawning realization of how much manpower it takes to produce as much electricity as everyone needs and wants. How will they ration the power? Who will be in charge of prioritizing between iPods and heat as the weather deteriorates? What will be done about the freeloaders who won't take their shifts on the bikes? How many bikes is this going to take, and who will manufacture and pay for them? And by the way, did anyone here study some electrical engineering in school?

It's like a seminar that goes on and on. I suspect the occupiers are getting more useful instruction in a few weeks than they picked up in the four-year parties that left them jobless and $100,000 in debt.

There's also a certain consistency in the message: "We need you to send us more money."

“They are becoming the government we’re trying to protest"

Experiments in self-rule right here within our borders. The OWS kitchen staff are "angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for 'professional homeless' people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters."

For three days beginning tomorrow, the cooks will serve only brown rice and other spartan grub instead of the usual menu of organic chicken and vegetables, spaghetti bolognese, and roasted beet and sheep’s-milk-cheese salad.

A security volunteer added that the cooks felt “overworked and underappreciated.”

. . . They will also provide directions to local soup kitchens for the vagrants, criminals and other freeloaders who have been descending on Zuccotti Park in increasing numbers every day.

. . . Many of those being fed “are professional homeless people. They know what they’re doing,” said the guard at the food-storage area.

On top of that, there's a new percussion tax. "The drummers claim that the finance working group even levied a percussion tax of sorts, taking up to half of the $150-300 a day that the drum circle was receiving in tips."

Megan McArdle has an interesting take on anarchy and its discontents here:

But as many of us discovered back in college, ultimately, you cannot run any sustained movements along the lines of perfectly inclusive democracy. It's not just that the people who won't cooperate tend to ruin everything for everyone else, though this is a huge problem -- if you make it a policy not to exclude or punish anyone for any reason, you're going to attract a small-but-catastrophic number of sociopaths who are immune to your only tool of social control, which is shaming.

But there's another problem, one that anecdotally seems to be growing at Occupy Wall Street: without authority, you spend virtually all your waking hours negotiating trivia.

"We're All for Equality... So Long As We Get Preferential Treatment", OWS Edition

File under, "Sometimes the real world is far more amusing that my darkest fantasies":

The Richmond tea party is demanding a refund of about $10,000 from the city, claiming it unfairly charged them for rallies while allowing the Occupy protesters to use the same space for several weeks for free.

The political organization is sending the city an invoice for the charges incurred for three rallies held in Kanawha Plaza over the past three years. The Occupy protesters have been camped in the plaza since Oct. 15.

Richmond Tea Party spokeswoman Colleen Owens says it's not fair that her group had to pay fees for permits, portable toilets, police presence and emergency personnel. The group also had to purchase a $1 million insurance policy.

So the Tea Party played by the rules and were labeled violent threats to civilization. OWS refuses to play by the rules, but for some unknown reason we're not only supposed to forgive them for actually behaving in ways the Tea Party was only accused of, but pick up the tab for their antics as well?

... like many of his mayoral colleagues nationwide, Mr. Reed openly expressed frustration with the protesters’ methods.

“The attitude I have seen here is not consistent with any civil rights protests I have seen in Atlanta,” Mr. Reed said in an interview, “and certainly not consistent with the most respected forms of civil disobedience.”

From the comments, another instance of preferential treatment accorded to OWS on the taxpayer's nickel:

Interesting here in Reno the Occupy organizers just received a 90 day permit, free of the usual fees, as approved by the City Council, to occupy a local park. I am assuming this will include porta-potties and/or access to restroom facilities, etc. I was at first skeptical of a protest seeking a permit but maybe this is a more reasonable model for cities to take? Why not embrace and support our citizens rights to freedom of speech and assembly?

This commenter nailed it:

Why does teh MSM always give left wing protesters a pass on destruction of public property and violence?

Imagine the treatment the Tea Party would have gotten if they had acted like this.

Protest is a right.

Abusing the law and everyone else's rights is narcissism.

If inequality is something we should be fighting against, shouldn't OWS refuse special privileges denied to other dissenters? I kid... I kid.

Getting the House in Order

We've spoken of Greece.  The United States, though, is no Greece.  We'll do what's right to get things in order on our own.  So, what's it going to take to put things right with our budget?

[I]n order to prevent the debt situation from expanding, and depending upon which economist you trust concerning the multiplier effect, federal spending must be reduced to somewhere between $2,085 trillion on the high end and $1.344 trillion on the low end. And here are the current big-ticket items: 

$761 billion - Social Security
$468 billion - Medicare
$269 billion - Medicaid
$598 billion - Unemployment/Welfare
$679 billion - Department of Defense + Foreign Wars

That comes to $2,694 billions, which is roughly $2.7 trillion.  We need to get that down to at least $2.085 trillion, and probably much lower.

If we entirely eliminate welfare and unemployment, Medicare and Medicaid, we'd be down to $1.44 trillion, which is within the right range.  Some cuts to defense will be possible once the wars end, although we do need to replenish the machinery and stores we have used up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, it's doable, right?  Well, one little thing got left out.

One major difference between Social Security and pensions is that the federal government has not set aside any money, or created a “revenue source” (aka a new tax) to fund those pensions.

Last year that was $268 billion, and that's before the Boomers retire.  So, figure a good $400 billion in extra cuts are needed here.  Well, maybe we can trim Social Security a bit... say by half... or Social Security by a quarter, and the pensions by half... hm.

It's past time that we started to hear serious consideration of these issues in public.

Ye Shall Hear of War and Rumors of...

...an end of 'peace and prosperity.'

Chancellor Merkel's remarks were well-chosen.  The newspaper got the message loud and clear -- Germany warns of war if Euro fails -- but the phrasing was beautifully diplomatic.  All she technically said was that "nobody should take for granted another fifty years of peace and prosperity."  Who could object to such a sensible remark?  It would be remarkable in human history if one could take such a thing for granted.  Besides, she isn't threatening war, she's merely remarking on the possible end of the conjunction of peace and prosperity.

One must wonder, though, how well Greece will take to her suggestion that their government needs to be under "permanent supervision" from outside powers.  That is asking Greece to lay down, without a war, what mighty Persia was never able to compel from them.

Of course, these aren't the Greeks who fought at Marathon.  Perhaps they will be willing to part with their sovereignty in exchange for German coin.  It would be easy to do.  It would be the easiest thing in the world.

Missing the Point

There's a subtle weakness in this argument.

How Axe is like Schlitz Beer

Apparently Axe body spray discovered the perils of marketing to the wrong segment.  It worked at first, then...

The problem was, the ads had worked too well in persuading the Insecure Novices and Enthusiastic Novices to buy the product. Geeks and dorks everywhere were now buying Axe by the caseload, and it was hurting the brand's image. Eventually (in the United States, at least), to most high-school and college-age males, Axe had essentially become the brand for pathetic losers and, not surprisingly, sales took a huge hit.  

Then Axe faced another big problem. Insecure high-school students had been so convincingly persuaded that Axe would make them sexually appealing that they began completely dousing themselves in it.... It got to the point where the students were reeking so heavily of it that it was becoming a distraction at school.

This is akin to the marketing problem affecting Schlitz beer.  It's become so associated with losers that few people will admit to using it; and, of course, the people who use it tend to reek of it heavily.  

On the upside, both for Axe and Schlitz, both products are very likely to be available at your local store.  Somebody is still forking over cash for the stuff.  As long as that continues, hey!  You're in business.

Economics and Firearms

Is it worse to use violent metaphors, or to use them badly?

"The Last Bullet.... [but] The Cartridge is Almost Empty."

So it's a squib?  Better not to use it, then.  Otherwise, this will happen:

The Gangster Government

Er, another one.

This is an interesting piece, one relevant to the argument against social contract theory as a source of political legitimacy. It has to do with a prison gang in southern California.

The Mexican Mafia is a fairly small prison gang (perhaps 150-300 made members) and it has significant operational control only within prisons in Southern California yet the Mexican Mafia is extremely powerful. In fact, the MM taxes hundreds of often larger Southern California street gangs at rates of 10-30% of revenues. 

How does that work?  It's essentially a protection racket, at first, but has reached the point that it is regulating drive-by shootings outside of the prison (whose numbers have declined since the MM asserted its control) and providing services to gangsters. 

They certainly appear to enjoy the consent of the governed -- that is, the drug-dealing community -- more than has the de facto government of California!  So the question becomes, is this a legitimate government of a sort? Don't answer too quickly:  if we decided that it were the movement becomes an insurrection rather than simple crime, and the decks are cleared for a robust response by our own system.  

That might be healthier than the bleed-over of paramilitary tactics into our police forces:  we could employ peace officers where there is peace, and treat insurrections as insurrections.  There's something to be said for keeping your mental categories accurate to the reality of the world you face.

Dyson on the Mind

Who is in charge here?

The European: That brings us back to the indeterminacy and complexity of the human mind. Can computers ever replace that?
Dyson: It could be. In, say, the 15th century, there was the archaic view that the human mind exists on one side of the spectrum and the mind of God on the other side, with nothing in between except maybe a few angels. But that is a very strange idea, since every other hierarchy in nature consists of many different layers. It think it is much more likely that there are others layers of mind, although they might not look like a desktop computer. People are already walking around—effectively participating in a vast distributed computation—doing what their iPhones tell them. And we’re generally quite happy with that domination. 

The European: I am still skeptical whether a computer can be more than an extension to the human mind.  It is hard to see how computers could emerge as creative and imaginative entities in the near future.
Dyson: We have to wait and see. But I am not sure whether computers are just tools. When you look at your iPhone to get directions, are you asking the phone where to go or is the phone telling you where to go?

The question becomes more interesting if you consider the degree to which subconscious decisions seem to inform our activities.  Let's say a subconscious decision gets made by your brain:  We shall have a cupcake.  A few seconds later, you find yourself typing into your iPhone to ask where a bakery is nearby.  The machine tells you, and off you go to buy and eat the cupcake.  You probably have the sense that you did something consciously, but in fact your subconscious is conspiring with Google Maps to have you do something you shouldn't really be doing.

We have always been subject to a certain amount of manipulation from the meat; now there is a kind of pincer movement between the meat and the metal.  The development of conscious virtue will not be easier -- but all the more important -- in such an environment.

Probability

Answer this question:

Linda, 31, is a philosophy major who went to Berkeley. She is deeply concerned with social justice and discrimination and participated in antinuclear demonstrations. Which alternative is more likely: a) She is a bank teller; or b) She is a bank teller and an activist in the feminist movement?

Discussion below the fold.

Grim Encounters "Occupy" Protester

He called out from his occupation -- actually, apparently they applied for a permit through Christmas or so -- to tell me that he liked my boots.  He said they were "hardcore."  Well, damn right they are:  I had to pull them on this morning to catch two escaped horses.

Horses, like men, follow those who lead from the front -- especially if they seem likely to produce a reward at the journey's end.  When your faithful dog is herding them along, though, there's always a chance they may decide to outpace you a bit on the trip, so steel-toed boots are not a bad idea.

Little Avalon, now a thousand pounds, pulled down her gate this morning with such ease that she didn't garner a scratch from it.  She's going to be an interesting one. Fearless and curious, that young lady.

Tourdion

Speaking of Iraq...

...I keep waiting to hear something from our friend Bill, who surely has some thoughts on all this.  He said he wanted to be there when they turned out the lights, and with good luck, it seems he might be!

Instead, all we get are jokes about Scottish cattle.  (In the comments to which, Bill has already given his comeback line:  "Joke?  *What* joke?")

The Show at Freeman Field, 1945

There was more than one, actually.  You may enjoy watching this video, complete with Big Band music, of  airshows featuring captured Nazi aircraft at Freeman Field in Indiana.

The other big show that year was the Freeman Field Mutiny, a precursor of the Civil Rights Movement.