Archive for Mind Games

How it’s done: a towfer

Steve Tetreault reports that the New national monument blocks rail route to Yucca.

Besides preserving desert valleys and buffering a massive piece of modern sculpture, a new federal conservation area in rural Nevada carries another impact: It blocks a priority shipping route to Yucca Mountain.

So, first, is the ‘national monument’ route which doesn’t require any Congressional or public approval to implement then you block off a chunk of land to assert power and control for PC purposes and then choose that land so as to obstruct another problem.

Rather than turn Yucca Mountain into a nuclear reprocessing facility and energy resource, the effort is to kill it to cause constipation in the entire nuclear energy sector. That, in turn, makes the non-polluting energy source more expensive and that then helps the PC energy sources become more competitive as well as eliminating a vital resource for those most in need. 

Leave a Comment

Character assasination

After the mob has moved on, we learn Nobel scientist Tim Hunt isn’t a sexist monster says Mary Katherine Ham.

Sir Tim Hunt, a scientist rather renowned for his skills, as his title suggests, in the United Kingdom before he spoke to a room full of scientists in Seoul, South Korea at the World Conference of Science Journalists in June. During a short speech or toast, Hunt made comments about women in science that perfectly fit into the left-leaning cultural critique of the scientific community as plagued by institutional sexism fueling underrepresentation of women.

A leaked report from an EU official’s investigation into the incident suggests there was much more to his comments and they bear out Hunt’s version of events and that he prefaced them by self-deprecatingly calling himself a “chauvinist monster” and rounded them out with a commendation of women scientists

The outrage industry made a stand, claimed a reputation, and moved on. End of Discussion. Someone should write a book about it.

The problem with such a smear is the same as the problem with climate change and many other issues: people accept the charges with no questions and do not consider the implications, sources, or evidence. Then they become attached to their alternate reality in such a way they must defend it at any cost. The result is tragic on all fronts.

Leave a Comment

Government burning man

Ed Morrissey notes an example of government wielding its power in an extortion attempt to provide for the luxury of its bureaucrats. BLM: Say, maybe our demand that Burning Man supply us with on-demand ice cream was a little much.

For almost thirty years organizers have staged the Burning Man festival, starting off on the beaches of San Francisco and then out to the desert in northern Nevada. It’s akin to the Woodstock festival, focusing on both art and music where “radical self expression” meets “radical self-reliance” to form an intentional but temporary community. The use of the desert emphasizes the self-reliance, but it also requires Burning Man to get permits from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Organizers wanted to move the festival to a larger area thanks to its growing popularity, and BLM said, sure — as long as Burning Man builds them a compound for BLM staffers with washers, dryers, and an endless supply of food (via The Hill).

Burning Man doesn’t sound like my cup of tea, but neither does strong-arming citizens for the use of public land as an excuse to pamper a bunch of public servants. Perhaps this part of radical self-reliance will rub off on BLM officials — and maybe it will prove instructive for those who see government as a solution to everything, especially land management.

When you go out to get in touch with nature, notice who has the best equipment, the newest trucks and toys, the fanciest gear. It is the same group that is always crying about a shortage of funds and charging you exorbitant fees to use public lands. And woe be unto you if you don’t toe the line!

Leave a Comment

Just what is science, anyway?

Matt Ridley worries about The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science. Scandals and politics and ideology all wreak havoc.

None of this would matter if it was just scientific inquiry, though that rarely comes cheap in itself. The big difference is that these scientists who insist that we take their word for it, and who get cross if we don’t, are also asking us to make huge, expensive and risky changes to the world economy and to people’s livelihoods. They want us to spend a fortune getting emissions down as soon as possible. And they want us to do that even if it hurts poor people today, because, they say, their grandchildren (who, as Nigel Lawson points out, in The Facts, and their models assume, are going to be very wealthy) matter more.

Yet they are not prepared to debate the science behind their concern. That seems wrong to me.

On the bright side, there is debate based on intellectual integrity and reality. It just isn’t in the usual and normal – old school – methods the establishment still holds dear such as ‘scientific’ journals. The topic is also polluted by a propaganda machine pushed by the MSM and activist groups. Getting through the noise is perhaps a tougher challenge than it has been in the past but that may be that now we can just see the noise a bit better. 

Leave a Comment

The red Pope?

Two comments regarding the Pope’s latest encyclical provide a bit of understanding about weakness and humanity.

Warner Todd Huston thinks that It is Now Indisputable That Pope Francis is a Risible Communist.

From now on, Pope Francis should be utterly dismissed as an important leader of the world. His latest global warming “encyclical” has proven he subscribes to a risible, anti-western and anti-capitalist theology and is less a Catholic than a communist.

In this message–which lays out this terrible pope’s absurd ideas on his new religion of global warming–says that we need to stop buying things and turn the world back several thousand years to a time when life was brutal, uncomfortable, and short. He is essentially calling for an end to capitalism in this rambling paper.

Pope Francis goes on to claim that wealthy countries need to stop being wealthy and give away everything to the supposedly poorer nations but he doesn’t spend a second coming to term with why they are poor. He just assumes that rich nations are greedy and evil and must stop being so wealthy. This is quite a communistic theme.

On a bit less heated level is Dr. Tim Ball wondering Is The Catholic Church Burned By The Sun Again?.

The distorted headline provides context for disturbing evidence that the Vatican does not know its science, any more than it did 400 years earlier. Their position is a matter of faith not facts, evidence, or science. With great irony, lack of knowledge about the sun is central again. Item 23 of the Encyclical provides all the information we need to show they don’t understand the science and, therefore, cannot understand how it is misused.

the position of the Vatican set out in the Encyclical is a matter of faith, not science. It appears that they are getting burned again, which sadly suggests they didn’t learn from history.

The matter is that of false witness as described in Exodus 20:16. If you cannot accurately testify to the nature of God’s work, including the progress of man away from poverty and in stewardship of the planet, there is indeed reason to question your motives and ability to serve as a reliable witness.

Leave a Comment

Marking the decent

Victor Davis Hanson on Building the New Dark-Age Mind. “America’s descent into the Dark Ages will not end well. It never has in the past.”

Current popular culture is not empirically grounded, but operates on the premise that truth is socially constructed by race, class, and gender concerns. … Science, logic, probability, evidence — all these cornerstones of the Enlightenment — now mean little in comparison to the race, class, and gender of those who offer narratives deemed socially useful.

Eric Holder called the nation “cowards” for not holding a national conversation on race. But Holder did not wish a freewheeling discussion about the break-up of the black family, the epidemic of violence and drug use, the cult of the macho male, the baleful role of anti-police rhetoric and rap music — in addition to current racism, a sluggish economy, and the wages of past apartheid. Instead, the ground rules of racial discussion were again to be anti-Enlightenment to the core. One must not cite the extraordinary disproportionate crime rate of inner-city black males, or the lack of inspired black leadership at the national level. One most certainly does not suggest that other minority groups either do not promote leaders like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson or do not seem to have a need for national collective spokespeople at all.

In our current Dark Age, logic is ignored in lieu of ideology.

Scary stuff: Toss the Western Civilization we inherited and go for tribal Africa as a model. 

Leave a Comment

The little red book

Whether it’s Hitler’s Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx, or The Little Red Book, the name commonly known in the West for the pocket-size edition of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung, there is a guide for the social movements and it purpose is often other than elucidation. Scott Johnson takes on an example in a look at The deep secrets of racial profiling about Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.

Alexander’s book represents the state of the art in the assault on law enforcement in the name of racial disparities.

the book comes in a scholarly wrapping. It footnotes assertions of facts and data with citations to sources in the traditional style of legal scholarship, but the footnotes frequently fail to support the text. Moreover, and more to the point, basic scholarship that contradicts her theses goes missing. Following David Harris’s tack in Profiles In Injustice, Alexander’s scholarship is a pretense.

Alexander’s book is not itself a work of scholarship. it is a polemic. It is, more accurately, a work of obfuscation in the service of political propaganda. As propaganda, it is an unsavory piece of work at that.

Ideology blinds and that wants social acceptance. Little red books are after that ‘pat on the back’ and, all too often, seem to get it. The expense in civility is often huge.

Leave a Comment

Politicizing prosecution

Several cases have surface recently that raise questions about the motivation behind the search for criminal misconduct. Scott Horton describes The Thin Gruel of the Hastert Prosecution — “We should all be concerned about Dennis Hastert’s strange indictment“.

The fundamental problem in the Hastert case is simple: what, exactly, is the crime? As presented, the crime consists of a series of structured withdrawals supposedly designed to avoid a reporting duty, about which Hastert misled federal agents when they questioned him. This is not only extraordinarily thin gruel, it is also ripe for abuse. Keep in mind that the prostitution scandal that was manipulated by a Bush-era prosecutor to end the career of Eliot Spitzer was also triggered by similar bank payment reports.

Another case is described by Armstrong Williams suggesting that a South Dakota ‘voter fraud’ case deserves more attention.

The 43-year-old Sioux Falls physician was accused by State Attorney General Marty Jackley of having committed what is commonly referred to as “voter fraud.” Specifically, she had been indicted for having turned in nominating petitions that include the names of people whose signatures she did not personally witness.

That she did so is not in dispute; how the doctor has been treated very much is. According to ballot access activist Paul Jacob, Mr. Jackley’s “threatened penalty is the most severe any American has ever faced on a petition-related charge,” while “the transgressions alleged against Dr. Bosworth are arguably the least sinister” the activist has ever seen brought to trial.

Then there’s the Oregon case where the allegation is that the prosecution colluded with an LGBT group in going after a $135k discrimination claim. The Orange County disqualification of all of its lawyers in the district attorney’s office in a capital murder case is another problem in this vein.

These prosecutions are only the active half. The other half can be seen in Baltimore, New York, and other places where Police are inhibited in their efforts to tackle crime by political demands. Then there is the judicial front such as in the suit to stop the mainlining illegal immigrants. The war is on many fronts in may different ways.

Leave a Comment

And the fools rush in

Robert Merry describes The cheap currency of judging historical figures by today’s standards.

New York Times columnist Gail Collins is on a tear. Her sense of civic rectitude oozes from her prose. Her characteristic breezy haughtiness is on full display. The moral imperative that has caught her fancy and led to two columns in as many months: Getting that angular-faced Andrew Jackson off the $20 bill and replacing him with a woman, preferably an African-American or American Indian.

One might wonder why, in a world beset by ISIS, rampaging debt, growing inequality and venal soccer officials, anyone would even care whose faces grace the U.S. currency, whether it be Ms. Collins or myself.

But the currency of any nation reflects its heritage, and the heritage of any nation deserves respect. Indeed, a nation that attacks its own heritage with excessive abandon is likely heading for decline. And the American heritage is under assault these days from many quarters.

So, sure, Ms. Collins is free to malign Jackson in her simplistic way and bring forth any number of historical women, however obscure, whose money visage would tickle her feminist sensibilities and Gloria Steinem‘s. But she ought to step back sufficiently to give an honest portrayal of the man she wants off the twenty. Her country’s heritage is worthy of at least that.

A foolish idea backed by ignorance seems to be in vogue. Whether the face on a twenty dollar bill or the trashing of the police while watching the crime rates skyrocket, it does seem the fools rush in. The consequences are often tragic.

Leave a Comment

Manufacturing data: climate alarmists

Fist up is John Cook on Manufacturing doubt about climate consensus.

Scientists have observed distinctive greenhouse patterns such as winters warming faster than summers and a cooling upper
atmosphere. This consilience of evidence has resulted in overwhelming agreement among experts — 97 per cent of climate scientists
agree that humans are causing global warming. But where does the 97 per cent figure come from?

Then there’s Ross McKitrick answering the question that the Claim that 97% of scientists support climate alarm cannot be supported.

In my column I pointed out that people who invoke the 97 per cent consensus often leave vague what is actually being agreed upon.
John Cook does this too: Note that his wording is consistent with a range of interpretations, including that greenhouse gases
definitely cause only a tiny bit of global warming.

He cannot claim that 97 per cent of scientists believe greenhouse gases cause a lot of warming and that this is a big problem, since the surveys either didn’t ask this, or did but didn’t find 97 per cent support.

Who is it that is going psych by putting up the issue of denial as an item of interest? Who is carefully defining terms and issues? Who is alleging “cherry picking” without specification or rebuttal?

Yes behavior is an important factor to consider. But rather than label that behavior in derisive terms (e.g. “denier”), look for choices of words and manner of reasoning. There is a good comparison here.

Leave a Comment

More on the nature of man and the implications of different beliefs

Dennis Prager starts with underlying beliefs about the nature of man in looking at the Differences Between Left and Right: Part I.

Left-of-center doctrines hold that people are basically good. On the other side, conservative doctrines hold that man is born morally flawed — not necessarily born evil, but surely not born good. … To those who argue that we all have goodness within us, two responses: First, no religion or ideology denies that we have goodness within us; the problem is with denying that we have badness within us. Second, it is often very challenging to express that goodness. Human goodness is like gold. It needs to be mined — and like gold mining, mining for our goodness can be very difficult.

This so important to understanding the left-right divide because so many fundamental left-right differences emanate from this divide.

Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good.

One of they key understandings in looking at this is that the belief starts at home. The belief that all people are basically good means a belief that the self is intrinsically good as well. That mean’s one motives must be good ones and the impulse to control the behaviors and thoughts of others must also have ‘good’ motivations. That also leads to the idea that ‘since I an basically good then those who don’t agree with me must be bad.’

The striving to overcome one’s own evil tendencies leads to introspection of one’s motivations and to skepticism about one’s conclusions. That is one reason why science and reason has flourished in a Christian environment as science requires taking a close look at reality and weighing one’s observations against a greater whole.

Leave a Comment

What you are up against: climate alarmists and sociology

Matt Manos gets into Why It’s So Hard to Convince Warmists from the perspective of a sociologist. Note that he doesn’t get into the bigotry of the warmists in derisive labels for all who disagree and that he sticks to specific ideas and hypotheses that can be discussed and evaluated.

Penetrating rational ignorance is tough because the position warmists have taken isn’t based on logic. Their position is actually based on an appeal to authority. To question the rationally ignorant warmist is to question the field of science as a whole (to be a science denier) or to question the leadership of their favorite bellwether personalities. This will cause the rationally ignorant warmist to become defensive and try to stand up for their favorite bellwether. The rationally ignorant will also point to their favorite bellwethers and say, “Who am I to doubt all these intelligent people?” It’s intellectually offshoring. It’s lazy. It’s human nature.

 … If you really want to win the debate on global warming, change the opinions of the bellwethers. Change the economic incentives for the global warming scientific paper mill. Otherwise you’re stuck debating only the people who are unable to change their minds because it would cost them personally to do so. Rare is the person intellectually honest enough to bite the hand that feeds or is willing to violate social norms to speak the truth.

Behind this is the basic dilemma: how do people whose interest is in talking about measure and logic get a debate where feeling, emotion, and ideology are the primary factors defining conclusions? Many suggest that the Bellwethers undertake their position for reasons of influence and control. Climate change is a tool for them. The only way to change their views is to remove the potential for warmist alarmism as a path towards control and power. That would require removing the underlying governmental regulatory mechanisms that use weather and climate to rationalize new regulation. 

What that comes down to is the argument for a limited government as a government that does not have the power to tack on a little here and there is not so susceptible to those seeking power and control via corruption and regulatory misuse. 

Leave a Comment

Observing tactics: free speech tropes

Ken White has this one: How To Spot And Critique Censorship Tropes In The Media’s Coverage Of Free Speech Controversies.

American journalists and pundits rely upon vigorous free speech, but are not reliable supporters of it. They both instruct and reflect their fickle audience.

it’s harder to detect the subtle pro-censorship assumptions and rhetorical devices that permeate media coverage of free speech controversies. In discussing our First Amendment rights, the media routinely begs the question — it adopts stock phrases and concepts that presume that censorship is desirable or constitutional, and then tries to pass the result off as neutral analysis. This promotes civic ignorance and empowers deliberate censors.

Fortunately, this ain’t rocket science. Americans can train themselves to detect and question the media’s pro-censorship tropes. I’ve collected some of the most pervasive and familiar ones. This post is designed as a resource, and I’ll add to it as people point out more examples and more tropes.

When you see the media using these tropes, ask yourself: what normative message is the author advancing, and does it have any basis in law?

Nine “tropes” are listed and described. The key lesson is to not swallow what you are given without some thought as to its presentation, its support, and a proper amount of skepticism.

Leave a Comment

The war within and a legacy fifty years on

The Ferguson protesters are getting a bit upset because they have not received promised payments. The history of such a paid army working in such a manner is not new. Scott Johnson introduces Bryan Burrough’s Days of Rage: America’s Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence.

The book covers the period 1969-1985 in telling the story of six homegrown radical groups that conducted terrorist campaigns against the United States. Their operations in total included thousands of bombings of skyscrapers, federal buildings and businesses from coast to coast. … The operations of the radical groups also included scores of bank robberies and assassinations of police officers. … Did I say mention that the book is exciting? It is of the can’t-put-it-down variety. It features daring jailbreaks and more close escapes than The Fugitive as well as more thrilling car chases than Popeye Doyle’s in The French Connection.

If you’re a boomer, you might remember some of this. Eastwood’s San Francisco cops movies are floating in it. The movies of the seventies take up the themes as a background reality. As is usual with the Left, persistence is a primary tactic and this is seen again in trying to foment race violence and diminution of the police. The hope seems to be that history will be cleansed and not provide any lesson for this generation’s efforts to stem the warfare inside.

Leave a Comment

Gotcha! – but really bad as a source of information

Austin Bay on how Media Gotcha Distorts National Security Challenges:

The worst gotchas are framed to elicit a simplistic answer that reinforces or advances a political narrative. To do this, the talking head must either drastically simplify the past (a relatively benign act) or erase the inconvenient past (a deceitful act).

False premises shape the gotchas I’m deploring. Decision-makers in the past cannot know what we know now. These gotchas usually imply that an alternative decision would have produced a more benign alternative history. They may also presume a shared “enlightened crowd” viewpoint of current knowledge — which may indicate political or social bias.

That’s only about the latest attempt to reinforce the Bush hate syndrome and bring new candidates around to the Leftist view via intimidation

Leave a Comment

Minimum wage and all the usual ‘arguments’ behavior

Mark Perry brings in his comments about Don Boudreaux on the ‘manifest idiocy’ of Robert Reich’s minimum wage video. It is a case study on the nature of debate on many of today’s hot button issues.

In a series of posts, George Mason economist Don Boudreaux has done a great public service by conducting a systematic, step-by-step takedown of Reich’s economic asininity, because in Don’s words, “Nearly every sentence out of Reich’s mouth in the video is flawed.” Demonstrating his total “economic bad-assery” in regard to regularly dismantling every aspect of economic nitwitery about the minimum wage, here’s a summary of Don’s takedowns of Reich’s “manifestly idiotic” video:

First to note. Of course, you might think that with the focus on Robert Reich that it was an ad hominem rant. The thing to note, though, is that the commentary is not about the person but rather his behavior, what Reich actually said. It is the assertions and debate points that are ridiculed and not the person.

Add the minimum wage fantasies to a long list supported by a lack of touch with reality and reason.

Leave a Comment

Betrayal 40 years on and again

The path leads from Scott Johnson’s note about a PBS American Experience series broadcast and then to Seth Lipskey: 40 years after Saigon’s fall, US still hasn’t learned lessons of Vietnam.

there are those of us who were invested in Vietnam and who hunger for a new telling of the history of how we betrayed an ally in pursuit of a peace pact with a determined foe.

Particularly now, when we are once again in negotiations with, in Iran, a hostile regime that is maneuvering against, in Israel, a beleaguered American ally.

No one belittles America’s sacrifice in Vietnam. It was enormous.

We gave 58,000 lives and billions in treasure. And we won the war militarily.

Then we gave it up and let it all go — 40 years ago this week.

The truth surfaces but the muck on the surface is so deep that it is yet difficult for it to see the sunshine. History is repeating and the suffering and destruction seem to make no difference to many who carry forward on what they wish and imagine rather than on what is.

Leave a Comment

More on that ‘aggressor’ idea: re Vietnam

Sol Sanders is Remembering the fall of Vietnam from the perspective of one who was witness from the end of WWII. He says “Hopes for freedom died 40 years ago.”

These two currents — dedicated, efficient, merciless Stalinists with their calls on the Soviet Union and its propaganda and infiltration in the West — and the incompetent, feuding and often far too fallible non-Communists continued the Vietnamese struggle. That contest seemed to have been finally decided once and for all with the fall of the Saigon regime, the 40th anniversary of which we marked on April 30.

However painful the specter of Americans being hauled off the roof of the Saigon embassy as North Vietnamese tanks crashed through the Presidential Palace gates, the United States was ready to shrug and turn to other issues. Nor were officials in Washington ready to admit the cutoff in American military aid had produced the catastrophe. But alas, for the Vietnamese, it marked yet another milestone in that continuing struggle between an alien totalitarianism — morphing as Lenin had prophesied in his more pessimistic moments into traditional Asian despotism — and the universal search for freedom.

As with more than 1.5 million other Vietnamese refugees, “Tony” and his family made it to America. But he did not live to see the democratic Vietnam to which he had devoted his life. The continuing travesty in Vietnam today mocks those hopes. Nor do the new self-serving American rationalizations — in which some of our most aspiring politicians indulge — mask that the old fight still goes on if under different auspices.

The rationalizations continue. The same aggression is on display in the Crimea and the Ukraine. The same response wherein the U.S. gets ‘tired’ of standing up to such aggression is playing out in Iraq and Afghanistan and the mid-east. The academics have coined the term micro-aggression. That might be the right term for the “dedicated, efficient, merciless” efforts that include re-defining terms such as torture and promulgating deceit and dishonesty about goals and ambitions. The sad part is that so many succumb to this micro-aggression despite the lessons of history that show its end as a significant magnitude of human suffering.

Leave a Comment

Rationalizing fear driven politics

Sheldon Richman describes how the draft set the environment for many age eligible boys in I Avoided Fighting in Vietnam and Have No Regrets. He thinks “If anything, avoiding that war was a moral duty” but bases that particular conclusion on a lie.

I don’t understand that view at all. Vietnam doesn’t deserve to be called a generation’s great challenge. It was a criminal war of aggression waged against innocent people by American politicians and bureaucrats without an trace of honor or decency. Millions of Indochinese people were murdered. Nearly 60,000 Americans died. The blood stains on America will never be washed off.

The U.S. was there because of a treaty obligation. The aggressor was the entity trying to invade South Vietnam and fomenting insurgency by infiltration and propaganda. This entity used very cruel and harsh methods on its opposition and it wasn’t the U.S. The lie was carefully built and pummeled into the minds of the gullible trying to rationalize their fears. The success of those efforts lead to the abandonment of South Vietnam after military victory and to the suffering of very many as the aggressors showed their true colors in victory.

The very sad part of this is that the lie is still held high and is leading to a repeat of the abandonment of promises and paid for gains for civilization and peace resulting in the suffering of populations. 

No regrets? Only in ignorance and denial or something even worse.

Leave a Comment

Standards. morality,and ‘poor pitiful me’ attitudes

Derryck Green thinks that What’s Been Allowed to Happen in Baltimore is a Moral and Cultural Abomination and explains why.

where does this kind of damaging mindset of victimization and perpetual grievance come from? Leftism. Leftism in all its forms has done a tremendous disservice to blacks, having poisoned their minds and hearts, leaving them perpetually angry and racially paranoid. Though I still lay the blame on Obama, Holder and company- all Leftists, by the way- all of this anti-social behavior is the culmination of what the Left has done to blacks since the 1960’s. White progressives have made perpetual children of blacks, whose temper tantrums- which continues to be the only way blacks are able to articulate their frustrations- must be endured as proof of a still racist county absolving itself of its past racial sins and other injustices.

And the resentment this creates and nourishes among mainstream America might be too large to overcome.

That black people continue to humiliate themselves like this is disgusting and I’m sick of it. White people are too frightened to tell the truth about bad black behavior for fear of verbal and physical reprisals. Blacks are too afraid to speak out against criminal behavior that lends itself to black stereotypes because of racial empathy and racial solidarity.

But, those blacks that choose not to condemn these lawless actions- largely a product of the black underclass, but increasingly adopted and justified by blacks in the middle class- that sit silently on the sidelines out of fear and/or racial solidarity and empathy are, in my opinion, traitors to their race and their country. Their silence condones this behavior. Their lack of justifiable outrage for unjustifiable black lawlessness in cities across America sends a clear message that the jungle behavior that destroys our nation’s cities is an appropriate way to air one’s grievances, real or imagined. Black silence in the face of vandalism and continuing anarchic riots betrays everything their cultural ancestors achieved. Silent blacks are guilty of undermining the achievements of abolitionists and freed slaves, of undermining blacks who fought against insurmountable odds to prove to former slave owners and other whites who were suspect of black humanity that blacks were every bit as dignified as they were; of damaging the legacy of blacks who successfully fought their way into the American mainstream though legalized discrimination fought back. America isn’t perfect, but black silence is complicit in unnecessarily betraying a country that has given blacks every material benefit and social opportunity their forebears could only dream of.

Blacks will never- never– get ahead, or be taken seriously, as long as we endorse this kind of behavior- our silent complicity telling beleaguered onlookers that this kind of conduct is acceptable and must be endured.

More than $100 million has been put into Sandytown in Baltimore in recent years. It did not show much on terms of results before the current brouhaha and the mobs have proceeded to destroy what little they had. The path is, and has been for a long time, in the direction of destruction and anarchy rather than civil growth and order. As in the DIY homes refurbish and renew shows, the demolition part is easy and can be fun. It is the construction, the design, the repair of flaws, and the finish work that is tough and requires developed skills. It seems that too many cities are continually in the demolition phase and very seldom rise to repair and refurbish of the fundamental and foundational aspects of a functioning city.

Leave a Comment