Author: White Whale

Selling cigarettes is something you issue a citation for (or, according to the person making the recording, breaking up a fight), not something you use a choke hold for.  And aren’t chokeholds something from the fucking 70’s?  It is KNOWN that unless they are used carefully, they kill people.  You can cut off oxygen too long, collapse the wind pipe, or–as appears to have happened in this case–trigger a heart attack.  That’s why cops have been carrying tasers for 20 years.

Police, when they take the job, understand they are granted both power AND responsibility.  This is no different in principle than a surgeon fucking up a heart surgery.  They are paid to do it right, and there need to be consequences when they do it wrong.

An issue that is becoming increasingly obvious with cameras everywhere is that some cops seem to view all resistance to their authority as a pissing contest which they refuse to lose.  This guy was mouthing off at them, but likely because they have hassled him many times.  They arrested him basically because he wasn’t sufficiently obsequious.  I worked for a police department in college, and repeatedly saw “Arrested for Resisting Arrest”.  I was never able to work out the logic of that.  A more accurate phrasing might be “pissed me off.”  I would suspect that some cops make this particular arrest much, much more than others.  The others are the ones to be trusted, in all likelihood.

This is very different from the Michael Brown case. There were plenty of cops, and Garner did not offer resistance.  Even when they were taking him down he didn’t try to hit anyone.

In my view it is BLACK people who need to start asking: what the HELL have all these people allegedly crusading on our behalf actually DONE for us?

Nobody is looking out for blacks in this country, least of all their supposed leaders, and supposed advocates.  That is why failure continues to be widespread, and unchanging.

We don’t need to have ghettos.  We don’t need to have areas of concentrated poverty.

Much of this will require fixes in monetary policy–a full solution certainly will–but much can be done even within political policy.  Charter schools and vouchers are the most obvious place to start.  They WORK, which is why Democrats oppose them.  What happens to their constituency, when they no longer need look to the government for assistance?  This is why ending schools which were generating MUCH better results, particularly for minorities, was one of the first things De Blasio did.

Here’s a link: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/education/2014/03/bill_de_blasio_vs_charter_schools_a_feud_in_new_york_city_has_broad_national.html

De Blasio also finds himself in a pretty lonely situation: By going after the charters, he is attacking one of the most promising urban school reform strategies available to Democratic mayors across the country these days, and he’s doing it without offering a clear alternative. 

Among the 870 Success Academy seats blocked was a modest 194-student expansion for Success Academy students in Harlem to move into a new middle school. That triggered days of searing presscoverage pointing out that those 194 students, all low-income minorities, were coming from a school, Success Academy 4, that killed it on the new state test scores, with 80 percent of the students passing the math test, and 59 percent the English test. The co-located middle school the mayor is protecting and where many of those 194 charter students would end up: P.S. 149, where 5 percent of students passed the math test, and 11 percent the English test. 

Wasn’t de Blasio supposed to be the champion of improving education for have-not children, his critics asked? 

They have a reproduction of the 1911 Boy Scout Handbook.  Seeing this brought a wave of nostalgia through me.

There was a time when being a Boy Scout was an honorable thing, when young boys were brought up to value integrity, preparedness, alertness, diligence, and practical knowledge.  This was a widespread and pervasive ideal.

It seems to me we are not only primed for, but seeing, a strong cultural resurgence of the basic Liberal ideals which informed American politics for most of history.  Self reliance, kindness, honesty: all of these work to produce an informed, active, responsible public.

Ponder for a moment the obvious success of the Art of Shaving stores across the country (I travel, and am seeing them everywhere).  Could one not readily correlate this with the Republican wave in the most recent election?

Life is uncertain, but it is much more uncertain when the basic ideal which have made us successful are daily attacked and denigrated–directly, or through being ignored.

I think we have reached a tipping point where there is too much confusion, where the desire to do right, to tolerate things we don’t like, has passed into anger, and an open willingness to call for returns to old ideas.

Goodness, as I define it, is being able to live happily on your own, and to be happy for others in their own successes, to take pleasure in them.  It is the opposite of Schadenfreude. It is the opposite of self righteous anger on behalf of people who have not even asked you to help them.  It is the opposite of intentional divisiveness, bitterness, anger, vitriol.

What we might term the Golden Age of the Boy Scout no doubt covered up much that was bad.  It did not make enough room for including women as cultural equals (or superiors).  It did not make room for inclusion of blacks, who I suspect may have been banned outright in some areas.

Boy Scout culture converted easily to militarism.  I personally think it was vital that we battled both the Nazi Fascists and the Communist Fascists.  Anti-Communism was vital throughout the second half of the 20th Century, and remains important.  Our colleges are filled with people who would end our freedoms if they could, returning us to earlier ages of cruelty and barbarity, as seen in Cuba.

Now, though, I am with Rand Paul that enough is enough.  Let us combat direct threats to our nation, but not try and guess 15 moves ahead as to who might threaten us.  We need, as one example, to let Iran know their civilization will end if they attack us with a nuclear weapon.  North Korea will cease to exist, as a socialist paradise or anything else.

Beyond that, though, I would support large increases in National Guard participation, and a substantial draw down of our standing military.  We do not need to patrol the worlds oceans for free any more, even though we need to retain strike capabilities.

Ideals remain ideals even within conditions of change.  The whole world was racist in 1776, and less than a 100 years later some 600,000 Americans died trying, in no small measure, to redefine them as human beings just like white people, with equal sufferings, equal wishings, equal rights. 200 years later it is self evident to nearly everyone that racism as an institutional creed is anti-Liberal and wrong.

People can change, and institutions can change, without altering their guiding ideals.  You do not attack ideals: you attack ideas, and the behavior they support.

This is my foundational objection to Leftism: it does not in fact contain ANY ideals. It is a purely destructive cultural process.  I have argued this at length.

And I want to be clear that I make no foundational distinction between the soft version, which I call Sybaritic Leftism, and hard Leftism, which I call Cultural Sadeism.  The first LEADS to the second, perhaps slowly, perhaps quickly, because it rejects IN PRINCIPLE all ideals other than leveling, other than bringing the high low.  All socialisms are bad for this reason.

It is a perfectly acceptable ideal to want the poor fed, clothed and housed.  But this is not the ACTUAL ideal of socialists.  Everywhere this awful creed is implemented standards of living go down in aggregate, chronic unemployment becomes endemic, and anger builds.

Now, obviously there are continuums.  I speak to the principle of egalitarianism as a primary goal.  Slaves are equal, but they do not thereby become happier or more enlightened.

No society can be better than the aggregate average of the individuals in it. That a society as a whole can be a target of moral improvement is the great lie that leftists tell over and over, in no small measure, I would argue, because by invoked the General, they exempt themselves in the particular from cultivating virtue.  France’s Msr. Hollande hates poor people.  John Kerry doesn’t like paying taxes. Neither does Al Sharpton.

And returning to an article by the strongly Left-leaning Guardian, the Danes seem to be living on credit cards: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/27/scandinavian-miracle-brutal-truth-denmark-norway-sweden

Why do the Danes score so highly on international happiness surveys? Well, they do have high levels of trust and social cohesion, and do very nicely from industrial pork products, but according to the OECD they also work fewer hours per year than most of the rest of the world. As a result, productivity is worryingly sluggish. How can they afford all those expensively foraged meals and hand-knitted woollens? Simple, the Danes also have the highest level of private debt in the world (four times as much as the Italians, to put it into context; enough to warrant a warning from the IMF), while more than half of them admit to using the black market to obtain goods and services.

Perhaps the Danes’ dirtiest secret is that, according to a 2012 report from the Worldwide Fund for Nature, they have the fourth largest per capita ecological footprint in the world. Even ahead of the US. Those offshore windmills may look impressive as you land at Kastrup, but Denmark burns an awful lot of coal. Worth bearing that in mind the next time a Dane wags her finger at your patio heater.

Most seriously of all, economic equality – which many believe is the foundation of societal success – is decreasing. According to a report in Politiken this month, the proportion of people below the poverty line has doubled over the last decade.Denmark is becoming a nation divided, essentially, between the places which have a branch of Sticks’n’Sushi (Copenhagen) and the rest. Denmark’s provinces have become a social dumping ground for non-western immigrants, the elderly, the unemployed and the unemployable who live alongside Denmark’s 22m intensively farmed pigs, raised 10 to a pen and pumped full of antibiotics (the pigs, that is). 

My point: problems have solutions, and humankind has been on this Earth long enough to know what works and what doesn’t.  As I have said Conservatives can certainly be anti-Progress.  But they can also be anti-Regress, and we have reached the point where that is their primary mission.  Whatever benefits may have accrued from asserting the rights and importance of women and minorities have been achieved.  They are our (middle aged white men, in my case) equals (or superiors: my world view has no need to assert equality as a necessary given, in either direction) legally and socially, to the extent they work to do so.

But Boy Scout virtues continue to be relevant.  They are the path to creating and sustaining freedom, and freedom is in my view the sine qua non of human advancement.  Everyone who claims otherwise is peddling a lie, normally in pursuit of a totalitarianism which they seek because of their own moral inferiority, their own inability to grow as people, to learn to process anger, grief, and LIFE itself, in all its ugliness and beauty and ordinariness. 

Let’s drive this hopelessly into the realm of abstraction.  Let us say that your current Happiness Quotient is 1.  Let us say that if you lose your job and decline in status, it will go down; and if you get promoted and advance your career, it will NOT go up permanently.  Most successes have short shelf lives.  It will stay at 1, perhaps advance to a 1.1 or 1.2 once you get a corner office.

If you work your ass off and get your dream job, and your dream S.O. (S is Significant), then you advance perhaps to 1.5, with the same risks of decline if status or relationship change negatively.

Posit, however, that you invest money and time directly on the “happiness process”.  Let us say that you are a 1, but with work and time advance to a 2 that is NOT TIED directly to external validation.  Let us say that you learn to keep the 2 even if you wind up living in a yurt in a rural county next to a pig farm.

Is this not smarter than pursuing happiness indirectly?  I think it is.

Being a modest, unassuming soul, I plan to write a book entitled “Saving the world”, or perhaps “How we do it (survive)”.  One core point I want to make is that consumerism, conspicuous consumption, greed, excess: none of these are NEEDED for human happiness.  There are groups who want to use FORCE to make us live lives which require less material stuff.

But why can we not reach such states voluntarily?  As one example, I proposed perhaps 4-5 years ago that it would be INTERESTING if the primary determinant of house status was not size, but how cleverly it was constructed, how cleverly it was built, how well it blended with its setting.

And to that end I proposed many things.  Paints that change color.  Pipes running through the house showing if it is raining or not.  Smoke in tubes that gets disturbed when wind is present.

And of course all SORTS of possibilities exist in the external structure of such houses, which are very small inside.

If it is true that people who witnessed the shooting were threatened, then that means that dozens, perhaps hundreds, of people knew DAMN WELL that Brown was guilty, that he brought the shooting on himself; and that they instead acted as if he were innocent.

This is disgusting.

People like this DeAndre Joshua are the hope of the black community.  It is an abundance of people willing to do the right thing, even though unpopular, which makes white America work.  If this is true, this kid showed both a lot of courage and a lot of integrity.

People like that are worth being proud of.  They do the black community proud.

And the people who shot him, if we are understanding this story correctly, are the BANE of black America.  They are the ones who drag it down, make it hellish, make it impossible to get ahead.  They should be fought at every corner, across every front, every hill and every valley until this useless rage is removed and replaced with common sense and common decency.

Don’t hold your breath though.

Response to article by black man essentially saying that blacks are always (uniquely) being picked on, doubting that Brown was guilty, and we whites really just don’t understand black people, mostly because we are stupid and don’t listen. He starts and ends by calling all dissenters bigots.

One gets the impression that ONLY blacks have experiences with unfairness, with being judged prejudicially, with dealing with stupid, abusive people.  Only blacks have to deal with foreclosures and lost jobs, bad credit scores and banks that won’t lend to them.  Only blacks have bosses who demand too much of them, or won’t hire you because they don’t like you.  Only blacks deal with poverty.  Only blacks get arrested and put in jail.  Only blacks get shot unnecessarily by cops.

This is bullshit.  Life is hard for nearly everyone, and it is often unfair.  We do not make it more fair in general by redistributing rights from one group to another.  To quote William Boetker, you cannot raise anyone up by tearing someone else down.  What blacks need to do is copy white (and Asian, even more so) cultural models to succeed.

They are not doing this.  Why is anyone’s guess, but one thing is obvious is that a whole INDUSTRY–and by industry I mean a for-profit business enterprise–exists almost entirely to tell them that nothing is under their direct control, their personal decisions don’t matter, and that whatever they do and say, it is OK.

This is a form of abuse.  It is a form of cruelty.  As I have said often, it is the mother who coddles her 600 pound son who finds it just too hard to get out of bed and function.

The idea of people going hungry and homeless is repugnant to me, but it needs to stated and emphasized that the FIRST LINE of defense against poverty is a JOB, and TWO PARENTS.  It is not the government.

Democrats more or less literally toss little candy treats from their election parade floats and claim that thereby they “support” black people, and that opposing them is opposing black progress, justice, and the American Way.  These floats start at one black tie cocktail party, and end at another.  They might stop in high end ghettos and drop their g’s, and try to pretend to be “Barry on the Block”, but they don’t stay long.  No campaign donations there.

EVERYTHING they do makes jobs more scarce.  It makes them pay less, because in a down economy, there is downward pressure on wages, just as there is SUBSTANTIAL upward pressure in good times. [Minimum wages laws, obviously, when set above prevailing market wages, create downward pressure on employment outright.]

This would be true, of course, in conditions of fixed labor supply.  If you add 5 million people to the labor pool, it pushes yet farther out any possible improvement in at least low skilled jobs, and increases poverty.  It is no accident, or an unforeseeable outcome that black incomes have plunged under Obama.

It is significant and no accident that Democrat approval ratings have plunged among the working class, which is historically the people who voted Democrat, because they “looked out for the little guy”.  I heard my grandfather say this often.  It may have been true at one time–particularly when people like FDR looked out for the WHITE “little guy”, giving many contracts to unions who refused to hire blacks, but that has long ceased to be the case.  They merely appeal rhetorically to every constituency who might be counted on to vote for something free (to them, and apparently, since that is money that was diverted from alternative, structurally better uses.)

As one recent book title put it: Please stop helping us.

And I will add one more thing: no blacks alive today were victims of slavery.  No blacks endured/survived/transcended slavery.  By my reckoning we only have one large group that has, within living memory, endured slavery: the survivors of Nazi work camps.  We could add to that, I suppose, the many Vietnamese who survived Communist work camps.

The slavery meme is propaganda.  I had said that many people find in fear a grounding principle, but I could add to that many others find in rage and hate equally vivifying principles.

I see a MLK, Jr. movie is on the way, to reconnect people with struggles that were DONE almost entirely by 1970, some 44 years ago.  We just had “7 Years a Slave”, and Django, and who knows what else.

ALL of this detracts from a core reality: black people are capable of doing work THEY ARE NOT DOING.  I see no point in beating around the bush.  I see no reason to assume less of them, to consider them inferior, or to give than an on-going pass from adult responsibility simply because as a group they HISTORICALLY perhaps endured more than most whites (life on the frontier was no joke, though).

What they endure now, the conditions in their neighborhoods, are their own.  Most poor people in this country are white.  Nobody sheds any tears over them, nor should they.  They make decisions consistent with poverty, in some places, generation after generation. That is their prerogative.  

And I felt this isolation, this terror, this profound, unspeakable trepidation about the future of our very complex civilization, in the face of all the forces tearing us apart; I felt this is not just my particular malady.

Have we entered the realm of family as voluntary association?  In some respects this is an evolution of the concept of individualism, but it is also a reflection of the determined assaults by cultural nihilists upon all the non-coercive, non-violent, voluntary forces which bring us together, which keep us together.  Values like honor and loyalty and impartial kindness, and REASON.

Do sanity and connection not feel for many of us like increasingly endangered islands?  In that movie, they found a family of sorts, comradery, love.  But were they not unanchored, in constant danger and motion?

We feel zombies among us.  I see zombie parades all over the country.  Why do people want to be zombies?  What is the attraction?  Does it not allow them to greet and identify and engage with something in their lives that makes them feel unimportant, disengaged, separated?

Does it not allow them to contact forces of rage and violence which they cannot otherwise give voice to?  The need to “cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice.”

Why not take “the poison, from the poisoned stream”?

I have, for many years.  It’s so easy.  It’s much easier than greeting head on horror, confusion, loneliness, doubt, and a sense of futility.

But I don’t quit.  For the duration of my life I will offer my soul, sacrifice my being, shake like a leaf, watch horror flow through me like a black river, and work for something better that I can communicate and teach.

There is no other game in town.  Failure greets all of us at some time, on some level, but sometimes the task is simply keeping the torch lit, and carrying it as long as you can.

And one can easily psychologize my posts from yesterday. Without saying ANYTHING about the truth value of what I posted, one can ask why I sought all that out. It was there two days ago, and a week ago and a year ago.

And the answer lies in this vacillation I am increasingly feeling between relaxed well being, and the fear that the other shoe is getting ready to drop.  Back and forth, back and forth.  One can start with fear and then justify it.  There are plenty of ways to do this, from global warming/ecological devastation, to preoccupation with an Islamic Nuke/EMP.  It’s all there for you to use, if you so choose.  All of them will allow you to direct your life along that path of that fear.  They can give meaning to you, if you choose to use it that way, but not deep meaning, as I would understand it.

What happens if you realize Global Warming is bullshit?  Or that Iran has no intention of sacrificing itself in its crusade for vengeance on the world?  What happens if sustained peace and prosperity break out?

On some level, to find peace one must accept death, daily death, a daily reckoning, a daily dance with life which you remember will never come again in exactly the same way, and accept. You accept the passing of what just was and will never be again. You accept in that act the value of the present moment.

Living well and dying well cannot be separated, in my view.  Mourning cannot be separated from joy, freedom from constraint.

I am not saying anything new, but I feel it perhaps more than I normally do.