Today is my twentieth wedding anniversary. My mother and father were wed forty-nine years, so potentially this is not even the halfway mark; although one never knows what Fate has in store. My wife has been around for all the best parts of my life, but also all of the hardest parts. Life has plenty of those, but the good parts can be good indeed.
Our wedding album looks different to me now. At the time I remember being annoyed by all the pictures for which they made us pose, and later I used to find the book fun to look at to remember the pleasure of the day. This year I am suddenly struck by how many of the attendees are no longer with us. Dad is gone and my uncle; my wife's mother and father and sister; my sister is still alive, but the boyfriend she brought to the wedding is gone. If we were to reassemble the wedding party it would be rather hollow, although children in the photos -- and others who have come along since -- are now young adults.
My best man was an Evangelical Marine, and the other two groomsmen were a Quaker who converted to Judaism after he learned his family had changed their names to hide their Jewishness when they immigrated, and a Scottish-American who had converted to Islam to escape alcoholism (this was before 9/11, remember). It was a dry wedding, as rural Georgia on a Sunday was required to be.
Oddly enough my Best Man and my wife's Matron of Honor are the only two of the wedding party we don't still talk with at least occasionally. Somehow the ones who seemed closest at the time are the ones who fell off.
The Havamal says to praise the day at evening, a weapon when proved, ice when crossed, and ale when it has been drunk. By that standard I can only say that the first twenty years were worthy. For twenty years, in hard times and in good ones, it was well.
Hot woke-on-woke action
The irresistible force of women who have suffered for years from grinding injustice in sports programs meets the immoveable mountain of the right of people who are lots stronger and faster because they are men but have the right to identify as women you bigot.
Wow, doxxing actually can be prosecuted
Remember the young fellow who doxxed Lindsay Graham and others in fury over the Kavanaugh hearings? To my amazement, he has been tried and sentenced to four years in prison. A promising career in burglary and hacking has been cut short.
Gee, I don't know
Why Do Conservatives Hate Oberlin So Much? You have to admire the chutzpah of Salon's publishing an article with this title that makes no attempt whatever to look at or think about the college's behavior leading to the recent award of $33MM in damages for defamation.
China Sets the Example
Not a good example, again, except as an example of commitment to a bad idea: if you're going to build concentration camps, why not go all the way?
By the way, China doesn't call its camps "concentration camps." It calls them "Thought Transformation Camps."
The tribunal found that "the Commission of Crimes Against Humanity against the Falun Gong and Uyghurs has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt," with the "torture of Falun Gong and Uyghurs" in addition to "forced organ harvesting," but stopped short of concluding that genocide had taken place. The tribunal left that open for further investigation: "There can be no doubt that there is a duty on those who have the power to institute investigations for, and proceedings at, international courts or at the UN to test whether Genocide has been committed."Ask the Uyghurs how many of them are free to leave if they decide to go home.
By the way, China doesn't call its camps "concentration camps." It calls them "Thought Transformation Camps."
Illinois Sets the Example
Not a good example, mind, but the example.
The legislator's snooty answer tells me that she thinks she's the reasonable one, and that the peons should be grateful that she's considering allowing them to keep their property under any terms at all.
An Illinois state lawmaker, during a town hall over a proposed ban on semiautomatic weapons, responded to a gun owner's questions about the bill by threatening to change the bill to call for outright confiscation of previously legally-obtained firearms, according to a video posted by the Illinois State Rifle Association.A fine for what? Having obeyed existing law?
The discussion was about Senate Bill 107, which would ban future purchases of semiautomatic guns and require those who keep previously purchased semiautomatics to pay a fine and register the weapon.
The legislator's snooty answer tells me that she thinks she's the reasonable one, and that the peons should be grateful that she's considering allowing them to keep their property under any terms at all.
Concentration Camps
There is some debate about whether what is going on at the border is properly described as "concentration camps." This will be an unedifying debate.
Brittanica defines them as such:
I gather that no one is being confined, except by their own choice to remain and not leave. Nor is it because of 'identification with a particular ethnic or political group,' as people from all over are showing up right now: not just Latin America but African migrants are appearing in large numbers at the southern border. The only thing that's putting you in such a camp is being a foreigner with no legal right to enter America, insisting on entering anyway, and then insisting on remaining even after you are caught. The only reason there are camps at all is that so many people are insisting on that -- hundreds of thousands of people, probably more than a million this year alone.
We are going to need a better answer than we've got, but it isn't going to be "suspend the laws, admit everyone, and pay whatever it costs." It's impossible even to estimate what it would cost, but the people proposing we pay whatever it is are also proposing free college, universal health care, Green New Deals, maybe a universal basic income... the promises are endless, but our resources are not, especially given that our political system can't even pass an ordinary budget half the time. You want Medicare for All? First show me how you're going to pay for the Medicare we have.
Brittanica defines them as such:
Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order. Persons are placed in such camps often on the basis of identification with a particular ethnic or political group rather than as individuals and without benefit either of indictment or fair trial.On that model, arguably FDR's Japanese internment camps were American concentration camps; but so, then, were the reservations onto which the Native Americans were forced. However, the current camps are not, because anyone who wants to leave can go whenever they want to go -- provided they go home, to their own country, rather than coming into ours.
I gather that no one is being confined, except by their own choice to remain and not leave. Nor is it because of 'identification with a particular ethnic or political group,' as people from all over are showing up right now: not just Latin America but African migrants are appearing in large numbers at the southern border. The only thing that's putting you in such a camp is being a foreigner with no legal right to enter America, insisting on entering anyway, and then insisting on remaining even after you are caught. The only reason there are camps at all is that so many people are insisting on that -- hundreds of thousands of people, probably more than a million this year alone.
We are going to need a better answer than we've got, but it isn't going to be "suspend the laws, admit everyone, and pay whatever it costs." It's impossible even to estimate what it would cost, but the people proposing we pay whatever it is are also proposing free college, universal health care, Green New Deals, maybe a universal basic income... the promises are endless, but our resources are not, especially given that our political system can't even pass an ordinary budget half the time. You want Medicare for All? First show me how you're going to pay for the Medicare we have.
What If No One Told You That You Were Free?
Today is "Juneteenth," a celebration I hadn't heard of until recently -- but it's apparently as old as 1865 in places.
Thought of that way, it's a universal story rather than a particular one. I'll bet we all have things like that.
Laura Smalley, who was freed from a plantation near Bellville, Texas, remembered in a 1941 interview that her former master had gone to fight in the Civil War and came home without telling his slaves what had happened.I wonder what we might be free of, that we just haven't been told about yet? You don't have to do that anymore: maybe it's carrying a grudge against a family member, or drinking too much, or whatever else. You can stop. You are free. Just nobody told you.
“Old master didn’t tell, you know, they was free,” Smalley said . “I think now they say they worked them, six months after that. Six months. And turn them loose on the 19th of June. That’s why, you know, we celebrate that day.”
It was June 19, 1865 when Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger and his Union troops arrived at Galveston with news that the war had ended and that the enslaved were now free.
Thought of that way, it's a universal story rather than a particular one. I'll bet we all have things like that.
Privateering We Will Go
Ranger Up has a new line of Ts celebrating the privateers that helped the US win its freedom from England.
Here's an appropriate tune, although from the other side.
Here's an appropriate tune, although from the other side.
Shocked, Shocked to Find That Gambling is Involved
A feud between tribe nations in the American southeast is going on right now. Senator Richard Burr writes:
The South has nevertheless in my lifetime increasingly endorsed state-run gambling, especially lotteries, because they produce revenue that can be used for purposes like education. I don't tend to object, given that all of this revenue is freely given rather than (like taxes) extorted at gunpoint. Still, if more casinos are something that would be good for Southern states to have, why not legalize casinos outright and then tax them? I can understand why the Catawba Tribe would want a tax-free casino, but why should the rest of the citizenry go along with it?
Recently, a Native American tribe with deep historic ties to North Carolina announced its intent to purchase land across state lines for an “economic development” that could include a new casino. In order to put up a casino, the legislature would have to pass a measure allowing gambling on the site, but the legislation has already been introduced by the tribe’s political allies.I really don't understand this casinos-on-reservations thing. Georgia has had several fights about this recently as well. There's no incentive to the state to permit it, since such casinos are exempt from both state and Federal taxes. Many Southerners object to gambling casinos in spite of the South's long tradition of poker-playing as, unlike poker, casinos are structurally unfair due to the house edge. Often Evangelicals regard gambling of any sort as morally corrupting, and ruinous to poor families.
The tribe is the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, and the land in question is in Sevierville, Tennessee.
Yet here in North Carolina, the Cherokee are doing everything in their power to prevent the Catawba Tribe from acquiring land near Kings Mountain for “economic development” (also known as a casino). The episode is only the latest example of the Cherokee’s willingness to disenfranchise other tribes in order to protect their own lucrative gaming monopoly.
The South has nevertheless in my lifetime increasingly endorsed state-run gambling, especially lotteries, because they produce revenue that can be used for purposes like education. I don't tend to object, given that all of this revenue is freely given rather than (like taxes) extorted at gunpoint. Still, if more casinos are something that would be good for Southern states to have, why not legalize casinos outright and then tax them? I can understand why the Catawba Tribe would want a tax-free casino, but why should the rest of the citizenry go along with it?
Aristotle's Ethics: The Good
A couple of weeks ago I posted about Hillsdale College's free online course on Aristotle's Ethics, taught by Larry P. Arnn. Since our host seems to know a bit about Aristotle (ahem), I thought I would bring discussion questions here. The focus of the course is appropriately the Nicomachean Ethics, but there are readings in other works as well.
I don't plan to just rehash the lessons. Instead, I will take thoughts and questions the lesson sparked in me, develop them a bit, and bring them here for discussion. I am going through one lesson each week. If time allows, I will then post one discussion topic here each week. I will also include a link to the lesson at Hillsdale’s website.
There is a key point in the first lesson that I think will bear on all of the lessons. In the third chapter of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle plainly states that we can't be equally precise in all things (e.g., physics vs. history vs. justice). He acknowledges that topics such as the beautiful, justice, and goodness involve great disagreement and depend on convention, and in fact can include inconsistencies, as some things considered good can result in harm. Therefore, "one ought to be content ... to point out the truth roughly and in outline," and in general when speaking and reasoning about things that are true for the most part, to reach conclusions that are also true for the most part. This seems quite reasonable to me.
One last point before we get started is that my goal in these 10 lessons is to understand Aristotle’s ideas. As such, I don’t plan to spend much time trying to pick them apart. I learn by trying to apply, so my discussion topics will focus more on trying to apply or extend Aristotle's ideas than on whether or not I agree with Aristotle. Once I feel like I have a reasonable understanding, I might then try to pick some of his ideas apart, but I want to understand first. You, on the other hand, should feel free to attack his ideas right away. That's your business.
I'll get to the first lesson, "The Good," under the fold.
I don't plan to just rehash the lessons. Instead, I will take thoughts and questions the lesson sparked in me, develop them a bit, and bring them here for discussion. I am going through one lesson each week. If time allows, I will then post one discussion topic here each week. I will also include a link to the lesson at Hillsdale’s website.
There is a key point in the first lesson that I think will bear on all of the lessons. In the third chapter of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle plainly states that we can't be equally precise in all things (e.g., physics vs. history vs. justice). He acknowledges that topics such as the beautiful, justice, and goodness involve great disagreement and depend on convention, and in fact can include inconsistencies, as some things considered good can result in harm. Therefore, "one ought to be content ... to point out the truth roughly and in outline," and in general when speaking and reasoning about things that are true for the most part, to reach conclusions that are also true for the most part. This seems quite reasonable to me.
One last point before we get started is that my goal in these 10 lessons is to understand Aristotle’s ideas. As such, I don’t plan to spend much time trying to pick them apart. I learn by trying to apply, so my discussion topics will focus more on trying to apply or extend Aristotle's ideas than on whether or not I agree with Aristotle. Once I feel like I have a reasonable understanding, I might then try to pick some of his ideas apart, but I want to understand first. You, on the other hand, should feel free to attack his ideas right away. That's your business.
I'll get to the first lesson, "The Good," under the fold.
Cruel luck, hard times
I always knew my maternal grandfather (born 1886) had a shockingly hard childhood after he and his elder sister were orphaned in Chicago in the early 1890s, both parents dying within a month of each other. My sister, who has bitten by the genealogy bug, figured out a while back that they had a maternal grandfather in California, and she always wondered why the family didn't hear what had happened and somehow take them in. Instead, my grandfather ended up being hired out to do farm labor for other families while he was still quite young. His sister went to an orphanage. I knew that my grandfather, whom I never met, was a singularly hardened man in adult life. He died when I was still quite young, so estranged from my mother (who predeceased him by a few years) that he didn't attend her funeral.
My sister has dug up an 1891 article from an San Diego newspaper that explains a little:
Mother, father, distant would-be rescuing grandfather, all dead within a month. What those children must have thought! These events cast long shadows in my family.
My sister has dug up an 1891 article from an San Diego newspaper that explains a little:
Asa White [my maternal grandfather's maternal grandfather], a well-to-do rancher living near Otay [California], died suddenly about one o'clock yesterday morning at the residence of his friend, John B. Palmer, at 1157 State street.
Mr. White had written for his daughter [my grandfather's mother] and son-in-law in Chicago to come to California. They were preparing to do so, when his daughter was run over by an omnibus in that city, from the effects of which she died. The husband then intended to bring the two children and come on, but was taken ill and died within twenty days after his wife's death. There being no relatives in Chicago, friends put the two children, a girl of seven and a boy of five years [my grandfather], on the train, and they came through, safely arriving [in San Diego] at 8 o'clock Monday night. They were met at the train by their grandfather, Mr. White, and taken to the residence of Mr. Palmer, an old friend, where the three were to pass the night and get an early start in the morning for home, where the children would find a home in the loving arms of tender hearted grandma. During the night Mr. Palmer heard a strange sound emanating from the room occupied by Mr. White, and entering, found him speechless and gasping, and he breathed but twice after Mr. Palmer's entrance. Dr. Magee was summoned, but of course could do nothing. The body was removed to undertaking parlors, where the post mortem and inquest was held at 10 o'clock. The verdict was death from heart disease. Mrs. White was notified, and is grief stricken over the sudden death of her aged partner, Mr. White being almost 70 years of age. They have another daughter married to one of the cooks at the Commado hotel. The funeral will take place on Thursday.Who knows what happened then? What became of "tender hearted grandma," widow of the aged well-to-do rancher? She was a second wife, no blood relation to the orphaned children. Somehow the children ended up back in Kansas without a dime, where distant relatives or friends made some effort to provide for them. I don't know whether that happened right away, but it can't have been much more than a few years later, because by the age of 12 or so my grandfather was already a hired farm hand in Kansas and my grandmother was in an orphanage. We've never found out what became of her.
Mother, father, distant would-be rescuing grandfather, all dead within a month. What those children must have thought! These events cast long shadows in my family.
A Song of Faraway Wars
The wars were getting bigger, three hundred years ago.
War has great days, when a man can change his station in an hour. We think of the 'gentling' Shakespeare mentions, but it was well true through the Spanish wars of reconquest in the Middle Ages. If you wanted to be a knight, and weren't born to it, you could still yet become one on the frontier. If you wanted to be free, or to marry the beloved other your families refused, you could do it on the frontier. You just had to be ready to fight. So too at periods in England's history, and in our own. You could make your own way, on the frontier.
More famously, recently, this title "Over the Hills and Faraway" belongs to a Led Zeppelin song.
It's not quite the same idea at all. And yet...
War has great days, when a man can change his station in an hour. We think of the 'gentling' Shakespeare mentions, but it was well true through the Spanish wars of reconquest in the Middle Ages. If you wanted to be a knight, and weren't born to it, you could still yet become one on the frontier. If you wanted to be free, or to marry the beloved other your families refused, you could do it on the frontier. You just had to be ready to fight. So too at periods in England's history, and in our own. You could make your own way, on the frontier.
More famously, recently, this title "Over the Hills and Faraway" belongs to a Led Zeppelin song.
It's not quite the same idea at all. And yet...
Natural Law and the State Department
Natural law has a strange place in the American system. The Declaration of Independence is framed in terms of natural law, but the American Constitution really is not: it's formally capable of endorsing any sort of governance for any sort of reason, provided the Article V processes are followed. America has become less and less attached to traditional natural law conceptions over its long life, outright hostile to them in some cases, and in any case its constitutional vision of liberty very much does not entail pursuing the virtue of citizens. Our constitutional liberties are about being left alone, not encouraged in virtue by the state.
This appointment is surprising, then: the US Department of State has elected to appoint a trained philosopher to pursue natural law ends in our foreign policy. The New Republic is critical, seeing in it nothing more than an attempt to oppose gay rights; but really, they should be much more worried than they are. Natural law theory sets up a structure of the good in human life that is far more completely opposed to the progressive vision than they imagine.
But conservatives ought to be careful, too. Changing the mission of the state from 'leaving you alone to find your own good' to 'encouraging you in virtue' is the sort of sea change that could -- if the vision of the good is captured by progressives, and swayed away from the natural law roots -- empower the state in many ways we should oppose.
I'll leave it to you to work through the arguments. The discussion is open, as always.
This appointment is surprising, then: the US Department of State has elected to appoint a trained philosopher to pursue natural law ends in our foreign policy. The New Republic is critical, seeing in it nothing more than an attempt to oppose gay rights; but really, they should be much more worried than they are. Natural law theory sets up a structure of the good in human life that is far more completely opposed to the progressive vision than they imagine.
But conservatives ought to be careful, too. Changing the mission of the state from 'leaving you alone to find your own good' to 'encouraging you in virtue' is the sort of sea change that could -- if the vision of the good is captured by progressives, and swayed away from the natural law roots -- empower the state in many ways we should oppose.
I'll leave it to you to work through the arguments. The discussion is open, as always.
Statistical Lies
Drudge has two great stories today that turn on the same deceptive use of statistics.
Annual Global Index Rates U.S. 128th Most Peaceful Nation on Earth
Is it safer to travel abroad than to stay at home if you live in the 54% of American counties with zero murders a year? That changes the picture a bit, doesn't it?
Is the United States the 128th most dangerous country if you live in that majority of counties (which make up the VAST majority of land area)? No, it's one of the safest nations on earth, exactly in line with the nicest places you could find.
So how scared should you be about being murdered? Well, it depends; but if you're worried, you should really be worried chiefly about immigration. Otherwise, it's the easiest thing in the world to move out of the 2% of counties that cause 51% of the problem.
Annual Global Index Rates U.S. 128th Most Peaceful Nation on Earth
Of nine global regions, Europe emerged as the most peaceful, followed by North America and the Asia-Pacific region. The Middle East and Africa rated as the two least peaceful regions.It's More Dangerous to Live in America than Travel Abroad
And there is a growing trouble spot much closer to home for Americans.
“Central America and the Caribbean had the largest deterioration, especially in safety and security due to widespread crime and political instability,” the research said.
After traffic accidents, the second-most-common cause of death was homicides. But to put the 132 Americans who died this way in 2018 into perspective, Chicago alone had 561 homicides that year.So the truth is that the United States has a near-zero homicide rate, if you except certain neighborhoods in certain cities. However, if you read the whole nation as a unit, it looks like the USA has homicide rates very similar to Central America -- which is exactly what you'd expect, since the instability in those countries is pouring over our border and into our cities.
Is it safer to travel abroad than to stay at home if you live in the 54% of American counties with zero murders a year? That changes the picture a bit, doesn't it?
Is the United States the 128th most dangerous country if you live in that majority of counties (which make up the VAST majority of land area)? No, it's one of the safest nations on earth, exactly in line with the nicest places you could find.
So how scared should you be about being murdered? Well, it depends; but if you're worried, you should really be worried chiefly about immigration. Otherwise, it's the easiest thing in the world to move out of the 2% of counties that cause 51% of the problem.
Unreliable Professionals
I'm a regular user of VPN (Virtual Private Network) software, even on my home connection. One of the things I like about it is that occasionally I learn new things. For example, logging into the news tonight, I found out that I must be connected via Ireland because I saw a bunch of stories I'd never have otherwise seen.
Ireland just voted in abortion recently, as you may recall, scandalized by a case in which a mother died of sepsis. They didn't vote in unrestricted abortion, however: they were reacting to the particular case and were trying to prevent future similar cases. So abortion can occur for medical reasons, not for any reason.
Now they've got their first full-blown scandal, as a doctor signed off on an unjustified termination. The family is outraged, as autopsy tests on the aborted child show it did not have the alleged medical condition.
Ireland just voted in abortion recently, as you may recall, scandalized by a case in which a mother died of sepsis. They didn't vote in unrestricted abortion, however: they were reacting to the particular case and were trying to prevent future similar cases. So abortion can occur for medical reasons, not for any reason.
Now they've got their first full-blown scandal, as a doctor signed off on an unjustified termination. The family is outraged, as autopsy tests on the aborted child show it did not have the alleged medical condition.
TóbÃn also stated that the family were shocked “by allegations that the medical professionals signing off on the abortions have a commercial interest in the companies that produced the fatally insufficient test”.The unreliability of medical professionals is a real problem. Our own opiate scandal turns on government funding for expensive drugs that end up being sold on the black market, after they are prescribed to people who make their living collecting prescriptions. Doctors are trusted not to be part of this, but they are. And thus the government ends up paying for a massive public health crisis twice: once to cause it, and again to try and fix it.
“This week, the bereaved family were shocked to hear that the State Claims Agency will indemnify the private company that carried out the fatally insufficient tests,” he said.
“They are furious with the Taoiseach for stating in the Dáil that this is a confidential issue.
"They believe he is seeking to sweep this illegal abortion under the carpet. Will the Government change the law, institute guidelines and carry out a fully independent investigation?"
Pro-Life Views Unconstitutional
Kirsten Gillibrand thinks it's OK for Americans to hold such views, so long as they are never allowed to serve as judges. (She also thinks that 'Separation of Church and State' is a Constitutional requirement, which is a widely held but inaccurate view.)
UPDATE: Or maybe it's porn. I can remember when liberals were pro-porn, but apparently that's changed.
UPDATE: Or maybe it's porn. I can remember when liberals were pro-porn, but apparently that's changed.
"Fully Automated Luxury Communism"
I assumed this was a satire piece playing off AOC's call for a right to luxury apartments, until I saw it was published in the NYT. Of course then it is not; at least, not intentionally.
So we have to go beyond capitalism. Many will find this suggestion unwholesome. To them, the claim that capitalism will or should end is like saying a triangle doesn’t have three sides or that the law of gravity no longer applies while an apple falls from a tree. But for a better world, where everyone has the means to a good life on a habitable planet, it is an imperative.So, for a better world, the law of gravity mustn't apply and triangles will have other than three sides? Was that what you meant to write down?
Tribes
The in-group/out-group orientation varies strongly among American ethnicities and political groups. Skim down this brief article to find interesting charts. The wokeness of white liberals resembles that of strong conservatives only in an intense response to the sight of someone being taken advantage of because of his ethnicity. "Very strong" white conservatives light up on this score, but are as indifferent as white moderates or mild conservatives to the routine conscious empathy exercises often characterized as woke privilege-checking. They ignore that sort of thing unless they see active injustice, which registers weakly with moderates but stirs up strong conservatives and (even more) liberals.
White liberals are the only group who consciously identify more strongly with their out-groups than their in-groups. Otherwise the differences in in-group preference among other races and non-liberal whites are minor.
There are no charts here attempting to distinguish among political groups within any ethnicities but white.
White liberals are the only group who consciously identify more strongly with their out-groups than their in-groups. Otherwise the differences in in-group preference among other races and non-liberal whites are minor.
There are no charts here attempting to distinguish among political groups within any ethnicities but white.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)