tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297637912024-03-14T02:23:17.468-04:00Delenda est CarthagoObligatory Disclaimer: If what I write doesn't describe you, then I'm not talking about you.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.comBlogger1312125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-3405064837039656212023-08-11T18:08:00.000-04:002023-08-11T18:08:25.756-04:00No Country for New Marriages<p>I watched the 1993 movie <i><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107822/">The Piano</a></i>, at the behest of my mother as it happened. She wanted to know what I thought about it.</p>
<p>It's ridiculous. [Spoilers follow.]</p>
<p>First things first. The economy made no sense at all. The film opens as Holly Hunter (I will be using actors' names throughtout as I can't be bothered to remember character names unless they're in a multi-installment franchise) arrives at a remote New Zealand settlement to begin a contracted marriage (she was "sold by her father") to homesteader Sam Neill. By "remote", I mean that the settlement is not on a natural harbor (e.g. Plymoth) or inland waterway (e.g. the James River), but inland from a beach on the ocean. A fair interpretation is that this beach is the settlment's only access to the outside world, yet not only does beach have no supporting structures, nor at the time of arrival any other vessels, but there isn't even a <i>path</i> from beach to the settlement. After being dropped on beach by rowboat (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waka_(canoe)"><i>waka taua</i></a> I think is what the filmakers were going for; a fair interpretation is that she was most immediately coming from another settlement rather than her native Scotland), she and her considerable stock of belongings (including eventually the eponymous piano) must be hand-ported through the forest up a hill to get to her new home. This homesstead's visible food production hardly looks like it would support Sam Neill, let alone a family of three (Hunter has a ten-year-old daughter, more about whom in a second), still less the gaggle of Maori odd-jobbers who mostly laze about telling dirty jokes. Not that I'm judging, but . . . how do these people eat?</p>
<p>Sam Neill, in negotiation with his best friend Harvey Keitel over a piece of land (more on this in a second) says he has no money. So, how did he afford whatever he allegedly "paid" to marry Holly Hunter? How did he afford the manufactured goods he is later shown trying to barter with the Maori? The movie might have offered some explanation for these anomalies, but I can just hear Ryan George answering with, "So the movie can happen!" during the pitch meeting.</p>
<p>Holly Hunter only ever wears hoop skirts (the mechanics of which are emphasized, about which more in a second), notwithstanding that most of the settlement's ground surface is mud. She does <i>no useful work</i> anywhere in the movie that I could see.</p>
<p>Then you have Neill's best friend Harvey Keitel, whose homestead has <i>zero</i> visible food production and who also does no useful work during the course of the movie. At the end of the movie, Keitel apparently has the wherewithal to take Hunter (more on this relationship in a second) back to what I gather is town life, so a fair interpretation is that he has other resources. But then, what was he doing out there? And <i>what did he eat?</i></p>
<p>As a segway, a moment on the movie's spiritual economy. The settlement is large enough to support a community theater, but there is apparently no church, nor are there any religious observances shown. I get that New Zealand's settlement was not as religiously based as America's, but it was still settled by nominal Anglicans and Presbyterians. (Fun fact from Wikipedia: 19th century Maoris, having converted to Christianity, attended church at higher rates than Englishmen at the time.) The movie offers no context for this omission either, but it would have been a good place to explain why the settlement's menfolk apparently have no tools other than violence to kepp their women away from predatory neighbors, even their best friends.</p>
<p>Which brings me to the movie's primary narrative. In summary: Holly Hunter, having consented to an arranged marriage and then denying her new husband its associated covenant duties, throws herself at the neighbor who extorted sexual favors from her by bartering the beach-stranded piano from her husband and then offering it back to her one key at a time.</p>
<p>That's it. That's the movie in a single sentence.</p>
<p>On the one hand, women make bad decisions. It's a meta-theme of this blog, and the reason pimping exists as a skill set. But <i>this</i> movie didn't sell it. Harvey Keitel wasn't handsome enough, wasn't rich enough, wasn't dominant enough. His negotiation with Holly Hunter was needy beta supplication. He doesn't even ride to her rescue when Sam Neill sends him her severed finger as a warning. So why does Holly want to be with him? Holly doesn't say. Literally, she doesn't say anything -- the conceit of the film is that she is a mute. That's hard for an actor to pull off, but also relieves her of having to explain her motivations.</p>
<p>This failure of plausibility extends even to minor plot points. For instance, Anna Paquin (the daughter) is depicted as fiercely loyal to her mother from the get-go, yet she betrays her mother's adultery to her step-father. Why? (Ryan: "So the movie can happen!") It would have been simple to have a couple of scenes where the daughter bonds with her step-father to support a scenario where her loyalties become divided, but no, nothing like that. There is a scene that, in retrospect, could be construed as the daughter learning that adultery might be <i>bad</i> (remember, there is no religion in the movie), but this scene was mostly played for giggles.</p>
<p>Since this is a movie review, I should admit that the movie was well acted, especially considering what the cast had to work with. Holly Hunter and Anna Paquin plausibly earned their Oscars on the merits -- 1993 was a strong year for movies, but not especially a strong year for female leads. That said . . . taking her clothes off probably put her over the top.</p>
<p>An aside in the genre of writing about the decline in the quality of movie sex. As other writers have explored, there isn't nearly as much in mainstream American movies as there used to be. There is still some in foreign and independent films, but it strikes me as low in quality. If I had been asked to list the hottest actresses of the '80s and '90s, Holly Hunter would not have been on the list. But I was struck by the fact that her 1993 appearance was easily top 10% of anything I've seen lately.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-37692162963789464642023-07-29T16:44:00.001-04:002023-07-29T22:43:58.020-04:00Contra Rehabilitated Feminism<p>Following <a href="https://ace.mu.nu/archives/405515.php">a link from Ace</a>: <a href="https://www.frontpagemag.com/christian-patriot-conservative-feminist/">"Christian, Patriot, Conservative, Feminist"</a>, by Danusha V. Goska (if that's her real name . . .).</p>
<p>So, first of all, no. I get that not everybody is a conservative about everything, but if you identify as feminist, and specifically if you advocate for female clergy (as she does), then at a minimum there is a huge-ass carve-out in your conservatism.</p>
<p>Her article contains this paragraph:</p>
<blockquote><p>Oh, and by the way, as a former leftist, I can let you in on a little secret. Misogyny is alive and well on the left. Some-not-all leftist men feel personally inadequate. They conduct a perpetual, spiteful war with authority. When a woman speaks or acts with authority, they feel especially intimidated. They attempt to buttress their shaky manhood by lashing out against women in ugly ways. <a href="https://qz.com/613270/brazen-sexism-is-pushing-women-out-of-americas-atheism-movement">Misogyny</a> is a <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/markoppenheimer/will-misogyny-bring-down-the-atheist-movement">major, and so far ineradicable feature</a> of the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277539518303443">New Atheist Movement</a>, <a href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Michael_Shermer_and_sexual_harassment_allegations">several</a> of whose <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/david-silverman-atheist-fired-sexual-misconduct">celebrity leaders</a> have been <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/09/06/americas-leading-atheist-accused-of-sexual-misconduct-speaks-out/#:~:text=It%20has%20been%20almost%20five,of%20financial%20and%20sexual%20misconduct.">credibly accused</a> of <a href="https://religionnews.com/2023/02/01/american-atheists-board-members-exit-dogged-by-misconduct-allegations/">sexual</a> harassment and assault. On the other hand, Some-not-all right-wing men feel confident in their manhood. These self-confident men can enjoy, rather than feel threatened by, smart, strong women.</p></blockquote>
<p>I tried to copy all the original links into the blockquote above, and I confess to not having read them all, but basically they tell the story that <a href="https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/30/new-atheism-the-godlessness-that-failed/">Scott Alexander tells</a> (from the opposite perspective) of the capture/cannibalization of New Atheism by Social Justice. What Scott doesn't say is that feminism had a leading role in the early days of this process, at least according to the links above and in particular <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/markoppenheimer/will-misogyny-bring-down-the-atheist-movement">this 2014 Buzzfeed piece</a> that covered the state of the conflict up to that time.</p>
<p>For instance, I know I read about "ElevatorGate" when it happened, probably at <a href="https://voxday.net/2011/07/06/atheists-in-gamma-he/">VoxDay</a>, but from Buzzfeed:</p>
<blockquote><p>On June 20, 2011, [Rebecca] Watson posted to her Skepchick site an eight-minute video titled “About Mythbusters, Robot Eyes, Feminism, and Jokes.” . . . Around the four-minute mark, she turns serious, discussing a talk she had recently given at an atheists’ conference in Dublin in which she decried “blatant misogyny” in freethought. The audience seemed supportive, she says, but that night, after leaving the hotel bar, something had happened. “A man got on the elevator with me and said, ‘Don’t take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting and would like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?’” Watson felt deflated, as if her speech had meant nothing. “Just a word to the wise here, guys: Don’t do that … I was a single woman, in a foreign country, at 4 a.m., in a hotel elevator with you — just you — and don’t invite me back to your hotel room, right after I have finished talking about how it creeps me out and makes me uncomfortable when men sexualize me in that manner.”</p>
<p>PZ Myers reposted Watson’s video in early July, and soon thereafter, in Myers’ comments section, Richard Dawkins posted a satirical letter, addressed to a generic Muslim woman. “Dear Muslima,” Dawkins began, “Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and … yawn … don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you … But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.” Then Dawkins gets personal: “Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep’chick,’ and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee … And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about!”</p></blockquote>
<p>But I'm pretty sure this is the first I had heard of Michael Shermer:</p>
<blockquote><p>“I ran into Shermer in the hallway," [Alison] Smith said recently, speaking publicly for the first time about what happened that night. They began talking, and he invited her to a Scotch and cigar party at the Caesars Palace hotel. “He was talking about future articles we could write, and he mentioned this party and asked if I could come, and I said yes.” At the party, they began downing drinks. “At some point,” Smith said, “I realized he wasn’t drinking them; he was hiding them underneath the table and pretending to drink them. I was drunk. After that, it all gets kind of blurry. I started to walk back to my hotel room, and he followed me and caught up with me.”</p>
<p>On their way from Caesars to the Flamingo, where they were both staying, she chatted briefly with a friend on her mobile phone, she told me. They got to the Flamingo. “He offered to walk me back to my room, but walked me to his instead. I don’t have a clear memory of what happened after that. I know we had sex.” She remembers calling a friend from an elevator after leaving his room. “I was in the elevator, but didn’t know what hotel.”</p></blockquote>
<p>There is a facet to the practice of corporate (meaning, as a body) Christianity that has sometimes been perceived by its usually-now-former practitioners -- I apologize for all these weasel-words, but I do in fact believe that the Christian ethic of chastity is more complicated than this caricature, I'm just saying that it would be foolish to deny that people have experienced it this way -- as kind of longhouse moralizing about sex. I'm not an atheist and have no standing to speak on their behalf, but let me pretend to be one for a couple of paragraphs. Atheism -- of the New Atheism, conference-going variety -- offers me two specific things with psycho-social cash value:</p>
<p><ul><li>Another topic I can <a href="https://www.theringer.com/movies/2023/7/25/23806816/barbie-movie-guy-stereotypes-jokes">nerd-out about</a>; and</li><li>the opportunity to screw without guilt.</li></ul></p>
<p>So . . . <i>who let these scolds into our tent? Sure the labels have changed -- Christians are now Feminists -- but it's the same d@mned thing! It's just another excuse to sex-shame men (<a href="https://rumble.com/v1jv25t-aella-on-sex-work-camming-onlyfans-liberty-and-gathering-research..html">and some women!</a>) into folding our hands politely and following rules that aren't in our interest!</i></p>
<p></PretendAthiestRant> Not saying I agree. Just saying I understand the point.</p>
<p>The parallels aren't always lost on feminists, either. On <a href="https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/links-for-december-2022">Scott's recommendation</a> (I guess), I've been reading the online comic strip <a href="https://sinfest.xyz/">Sinfest</a>, mostly backwards; I've finished as far back as 2017. It's written from a Second Wave Feminist perspective, though contra Scott, that didn't really change in 2019. What <i>did</i> change was that establishment culture went all-in on tr@nnies, and Second Wavers couldn't help noticing that the Christian Right were their only remaining tactical allies. So yes, from 2020 the strip is much more Right-friendly than it had been.</p>
<p>Reading it from before 2019, I noticed, first, that Second Wave Feminism, just like all other waves, is toxic. I could go on about Sinfest's particular brand of misandric toxicity, but read it yourself. My point here is that, among the very small number of male characters given a positive representation is a Christian Fundamentalist cleric. This isn't my reading -- Sinfest <i>specifically</i> identifies him by that label. (Sinfest also gives him a clerical collar, which of course no Fundamentalist would be caught wearing, but it's useful as an artistic device.) And note that this is pre-2019, before the strip makes its Rightward turn.</p>
<p>There is something admirable about Sinfest's consistency. There is something admirable about the consistency of those New Atheists who mounted a doomed defense of <i>their thing</i>. But consistency is a minority taste. Most feminists/atheists fell over themselves to embrace Islam, notwithstanding that its <i>present</i> record on the issues they pretend to care about is vastly worse than Christian civilization has ever been.</p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-16895783656718026592023-07-10T01:07:00.000-04:002023-07-10T01:07:13.473-04:00Bleg on SFFA: Whatever happened to Title VI?<p>Back in the 1980s, when I first began to acquaint myself with mainstream conservative writings of prior decades, e.g. <i>God and Man at Yale</i> (1951), <i>Up From Liberalism</i> (1959), and others that I don't recall and am too lazy to research, their expressed view of the 14th Amendment was that it required equal application of the <i>existing</i> laws but didn't require the laws themselves to be race neutral*. This view was in at least legal (though perhaps not moral) defense of segregated education, and in particular against the arguments put forward by the plaintiffs in <i>Brown vs. Board</i> that the 14th Amendment did indeed require race neutrality. The SCOTUS decision in that case (citation needed) didn't explicitly endorse race neutrality but rather concluded that segregation inevitably led to unequal outcomes. (The reasoning here was worse than I'm making it sound and required accepting some ridiculous propositions and shady low-N studies involving children and dolls.)</p>
<p>This was prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which specifically did require that both public education (Title IV) and any program receiving federal funds (Title VI) be administered without regard to race. By the late 1980s when I discovered it, conservative writing was now advocating for race neutrality. This was well into the affirmative action regime, of course, and the writers at <i>Commentary</i> magazine had noticed that Jews in particular were being hard hit by its "reverse discrimination" (as it was usually called).</p>
<p>What strikes me as needing an explanation is that in these late battles against and provisional victory over affirmative action, There have been almost no references to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I haven't seen it in the excerpts from the <i>SFFA</i> decision nor in the commentary around it. Why not? Is this no longer good law? Was it repealed or modified to allow racial discrimination to achieve diversity? The Civil Rights Act of 1991 allowed the EEOC to bring disparate impact lawsuits against employers but that doesn't sound like it applied here.</p>
<p>I would appreciate comments explaining this to me.</p>
<p>* As used here, "neutrality" means "race blind". I spell this out because I have read news articles that are incoherent until you realize that they use the word "neutrality" to mean "not having a disparate impact".Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-90493771895132361192023-02-19T11:55:00.001-05:002023-02-28T09:55:16.143-05:00Deepfake Econ<p>
A while back, after reading
<a href="https://www.unz.com/isteve/the-northman/">Steve's review</a> of
<i>The Northman</i>, I did a Brave image search on the actress Anya Taylor-Joy
to see if I recognized her from anything else.
</p>
<p>. . . and was treated to a <i>buttload of pr0n!</i></p>
<p>
<i>Eeesh</i>, I thought. Is Anya Taylor-Joy a crossover star and somehow this
hasn't attracted much commentary? But no, not according to anything I could
find.
</p>
<p>
More recently, I found something similar for the actress
<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0288976/">Emilia Fox</a>. (That's a link
to her IMDB profile, not to Brave results. Do Your Own Research, pervball.) In
this case, the images were less deepfakes and more bad Photoshop, but still.
</p>
<p>
This kind of thing is somewhat anomalous. For instance, image searches on
Scarlett Johansson or Valerie Kaprisky* show only official gala pictures.** So
why pr0n for some actresses and not others?
</p>
<p>Possibilities:</p>
<ul>
<li>
<p>
Perhaps the actresses have licensed their images for this purpose? Maybe
it pays well enough that not-quite- or not-yet-famous actresses find the
offer attractive when they don't actually have to do any work. Maybe
there's no such thing as bad publicity. But I would think that cooperating
with this business would be damaging if it were revealed.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Perhaps already-famous actresses pay to have the images removed. I appears
from the URLs that there are only a handful of sites that traffic in this
stuff. Still, I would think that the production of these images has got to
be a legal gray area at best, and shaking down actresses looks enough like
blackmail that someone should have been prosecuted by now.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
The choice of actresses is driven by The Algorithm. But if so, it must be
based on something other than fame <i>per se</i>. For instance, perhaps
deepfake production focuses on actresses who do <i>not</i> already have a
large corpus of nude movie scenes. But honestly, this is where the
research gets a little harder to justify to anyone purusing my browser
history.
</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Any other ideas?</p>
<p>
* Note that Φ may not have kept up especially well with who the "hot"
actresses are over the last few decades.
</p>
<p>UPDATE: Looks like I was scooped. Apparently celebrities are <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/16/tech/nonconsensual-deepfake-porn/index.html">not authorizing</a> these images.</p>
<p>
** Which is not to say they don't exist, only that they don't show up on the
first page of search results for the actresses name alone.
</p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-18242983605860704522022-12-17T15:55:00.000-05:002022-12-17T15:55:39.046-05:00Library Grooming (It's not just Drag Queen Story Hour)<p>The beautiful and entertaining YooToober Shoe0nHead, in the context of the Balenciaga business, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0GeDNP_2mw">adds another entry</a> to her long-running rear-guard, heroic, and ultimately doomed effort to police the boundaries of Alphabetitude from the "P"s. You know who you are.</p>
<p>Shoe's contention that thus extending the Alphabet represents an inauthentic infiltration requires a constrained knowledge of history (which should be forgiven; is she even old enough to drink), even the history during <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2017/11/roy-moore-and-brooke-shields.html">my</a> <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2013/01/bidirectional-history.html">own</a> lifetime. In her autobiography <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Last-Closet-Moira-Greyland/dp/9527065208"><i>The Last Closet</i></a>, Moira Greyland gives chapter-and-verse of how our post-1970s characterization of modal LGBTQ behavior as being between adult peers ignores how the sexualization of children was always part of its agenda. It may have been expedient to suppress this history during the push for gay marriage, but we are watching the withdrawal of that suppression in real time.</p>
<p>The other night, it idly occurred to me that while I had seen many references to it, at the time and over the years, I had never seen the 1985 Michael J. Fox movie <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090142/"><i>Teen Wolf</i></a>. So I went looking for it on <a href="https://www.kanopy.com/en/">Kanopy</a>. Kanopy is a movie streaming service usually made available for free through local public libraries. (Full disclosure: I subscribe to exactly none of the paid movie streaming services and have <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2018/01/i-hate-cable-company.html">not resubscribed</a> to cable).</p>
<p>As it happens, Kanopy doesn't currently stream <i>Teen Wolf</i>, but it's algorithm was happy to offer me alternatives:</p>
<p><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK6VLxF4pK6oJY8vfvT2L8rUma5IdhyeH07gRohC71_cVrLpHqUAJyo9TZdBOWdpRydorNpbRdrNxi5G2X7wnsfftnuhHieQQ2Fc_lcqzAbfco9vRj8s3S-0V8247ELwSCdBkdIhT-sHgkW7s1gCEbjJNBjNaT0k9By1-N9NscmVkWM0WGzaQ/s1340/Screenshot_Kanopy.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" height="600" data-original-height="1340" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK6VLxF4pK6oJY8vfvT2L8rUma5IdhyeH07gRohC71_cVrLpHqUAJyo9TZdBOWdpRydorNpbRdrNxi5G2X7wnsfftnuhHieQQ2Fc_lcqzAbfco9vRj8s3S-0V8247ELwSCdBkdIhT-sHgkW7s1gCEbjJNBjNaT0k9By1-N9NscmVkWM0WGzaQ/s600/Screenshot_Kanopy.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>If it's not obvious from their cover art, <i>every single one of these movies is LGBTQ-themed</i>. Let that sink in for a second. The movie recommendation algorithm of a movie streaming service offered, without any age filtering, through your public library, upon receiving a request for <i>Teen Wolf</i>, decides to ignore the "wolf" part of the request and interpret "teen" to mean that the viewer must want to watch half-naked young boys sexually cavort with each other in thinly-veiled p***-bait. So, yes, your children are being groomed, and by no less than taxpayer-funded organs of culture.</p>
<p>To be fair, our library also offers a second streaming service, <a href="https://www.hoopladigital.com/my/hoopla">Hoopla</a>, that apparently doesn't have this problem:</p>
<p><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDG5a5DDAHPXm-WNxqgXQfXGFcTTry_5zA4hDXjRzrc9MJbarW964rfQCcwaA9eEVda1aax30qh_o3F3MgA11uaWG3ymegsLbqwpcZOVNZldNFuU8dpQRWEB5vSY_gYgBw7iiGaADABpj7xsljsznN4ixDvKvuWSPoftnPa_VBvqQbXnO_GME/s880/Screenshot_Hoopla.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" height="600" data-original-height="880" data-original-width="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiDG5a5DDAHPXm-WNxqgXQfXGFcTTry_5zA4hDXjRzrc9MJbarW964rfQCcwaA9eEVda1aax30qh_o3F3MgA11uaWG3ymegsLbqwpcZOVNZldNFuU8dpQRWEB5vSY_gYgBw7iiGaADABpj7xsljsznN4ixDvKvuWSPoftnPa_VBvqQbXnO_GME/s600/Screenshot_Hoopla.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>Granted, I didn't search read the description for every movie, but the cover art suggests the first page of results leans heavily into wolfishness, while I could only find one LGBTQ-themed recommendation on the second page. So, Hoopla is less gay.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-8795120256752082762022-12-17T14:01:00.000-05:002022-12-17T14:01:04.372-05:00The Shadowban Files<p>I never had a lot of interaction on Twitter. Someone would like one of my tweets or, briefly, follow my channel until they figured out my tweets under the #diversity hashtag were actually counter-narrative (weirdly, this wasn't immediately obvious to them) maybe once a week. But even this limited traffic <i>stopped cold</i> on June 23, 2017 when Steve Sailer <a href="https://twitter.com/phi_delenda/status/878229438579822594">liked one of my retweets</a> (which may or may not be related; Steve had liked my tweets before with no apparent effect). I gamely continued posting regularly to Twitter through 2019, and sporadically in 2020, before realizing there wasn't any point anymore to howling into the void; that, and deciding that as the <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2021/03/the-dark-night-of-fascism-usaf-edition.html">counter-extremism push</a> accelerated in 2021, the ride wasn't worth the risk.</p>
<p>One interesting follower I picked up about a month before my engagement dropped was <a href="https://twitter.com/InfyFoundation">Infosys Foundation USA</a>, "Supporting greater access and inclusion in Computer Science education." I always thought that was weird. They're obviously not fellow-travelers, but also not obviously tracking every right-leaning blogger on the internet. So I don't know.</p>
<p>But now that St. Musk has <a href="https://reclaimthenet.org/fbi-flagged-jokes-and-satirical-accounts-to-twitter-for-censorship/">opened a portal</a> to its inner workings, I am middling curious as to the exact circumstances under which my apparent shadowbanning at Twitter was ordered. As I understand it, its internal emails have only been released to select journalists, not the internet at large, but if anyone can tell me how I could look this up, I would appreciate it.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-70619616471272882972021-09-04T13:59:00.005-04:002021-09-04T17:02:42.181-04:00More "Afghan Allies": Who were they again?<p>So, now there's this:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MShubBiw57E/YTPew4Nu9-I/AAAAAAAABrs/ehRuDqB17hYAX4I4RCSAF62Y4KdiemchACLcBGAsYHQ/s815/AfghanLinguistsWanted%2B-%2BCopy.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="694" data-original-width="815" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MShubBiw57E/YTPew4Nu9-I/AAAAAAAABrs/ehRuDqB17hYAX4I4RCSAF62Y4KdiemchACLcBGAsYHQ/s400/AfghanLinguistsWanted%2B-%2BCopy.jpg"/></a></div>
<blockquote><p>The Air Force recognizes the immediate need at OCONUS and CONUS locations for language capabilities in Afghan primary languages . . . . The Language Volunteer Self-Assessment is an opportunity for DAF Airmen and Guardians* to self-identify as proficient in theses specific regional languages. Although not guaranteed, please be aware that once self-identified, you may be recruited for available opportunities to use the indentified language skills in support of various organizations outside your primary mission.</p></blockquote>
<p>A couple of obvious questions that should be asked (and of course never will be answered):</p>
<p>1. If the armed services had spare Afghan linguist capacity sitting around unused, why weren't <i>they</i> deployed in the AOR instead of having us incur untold liability for thousands of local interpreters?</p>
<p>2. Seeing as how the nominal primary beneficiaries of the evacuation we just conducted were said local interpreters, it would seem we should have ample linguist capacity among the 122K we just took in. So why are we are trying to draft service members into what is now just social work?</p>
<p>* "Guardians" being members of the new Space Force.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-804533209656744212021-09-01T17:59:00.002-04:002021-09-01T17:59:40.207-04:00"Afghan Allies": Coming to a small town near you . . .<p>2010: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210831233835/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/world/asia/21rogue.html">Gunfight Kills 2 Americans Who Trained Afghan Army</a></p>
<blockquote><p>KABUL, Afghanistan A seemingly routine training practice in marksmanship went fatally wrong on Tuesday when an Afghan Army sergeant turned his weapon on an American trainer and a gunfight began. When it was over, the sergeant, two American trainers and an Afghan soldier who had been standing nearby lay dead.</p></blockquote>
<p>2012: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200806140411/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203897404578078764072956792">Troops Shot After Taliban Leader's Call</a></p>
<blockquote><p>KABUL—Two U.S. Special Operations troops were killed by a man in Afghan police uniform on Thursday, a day after Taliban leader Mullah Omar called on more Afghan soldiers and policemen to kill Americans.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20151215042552/http://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/7573-two-nato-soldiers-killed-in-afghan-insider-attack">Two NATO soldiers killed in Afghan ‘insider attack’</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Kabul: Gunmen wearing Afghan military uniforms shot dead two NATO soldiers on a base in the country´s south on Wednesday, the coalition said, in the latest insider attack on foreign troops. So-called "green-on-blue" attacks -- when Afghan soldiers or police turn their guns on international troops -- have been a major problem during NATO´s long years fighting alongside Afghan forces. Wednesday´s attack in the volatile province of Helmand is the first such incident since April, highlighting long-simmering tensions between Afghan and foreign forces.</p></blockquote>
<p>2013: <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-afghanistan-army-idUKBRE99J06T20131020">Afghan special forces commander defects with guns to insurgents</a></p>
<blockquote><p>KUNAR, Afghanistan (Reuters) - An Afghan army special forces commander has defected to an insurgent group allied with the Taliban in a Humvee truck packed with his team’s guns and high-tech equipment, officials in the eastern Kunar province said on Sunday. Monsif Khan, who raided the supplies of his 20-man team in Kunar’s capital Asadabad over the Eid al-Adha religious holiday, is the first special forces commander to switch sides, joining the Hezb-e-Islami organisation.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210810212117/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/10472518/Afghanistan-plans-to-reintroduce-public-stoning-as-punishment-for-adultery.html">Afghanistan 'plans to reintroduce public stoning as punishmentn for adultery'</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/afghan-teen-fatally-stabs-us-soldier-in-the-neck-military-officials-say">Afghan teen fatally stabs US soldier in the neck, military officials say</a></p>
<p>2014: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20161223173217/http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/afghanistan-hangs-five-extramarital-sex-after-gang-rape-n221866">Afghanistan Hangs Five for 'Extramarital Sex' After Gang Rape</a></p>
<p>2015: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210831152910/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html">U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies</a></p>
<p>2016: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210829220722/https://www.yahoo.com/news/taliban-honey-trap-boys-kill-afghan-police-034032649.html">Taliban use 'honey trap' boys to kill Afghan police</a></p>
<blockquote><p>The Taliban are using child sex slaves to mount crippling insider attacks on police in southern Afghanistan, exploiting the pervasive practice of "bacha bazi" -- paedophilic boy play -- to infiltrate security ranks, multiple officials and survivors of such assaults told AFP. The ancient custom is prevalent across Afghanistan, but nowhere does it seem as entrenched as in the province of Uruzgan, where "bacha bereesh" -- or boys without beards -- widely become objects of lustful attraction for powerful police commanders.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/10/19/us-troop-killed-another-injured-in-insider-attack-in-afghanistan.html">US Troop Killed, Another Injured in Insider Attack in Afghanistan</a></p>
<blockquote><p>A U.S. service member was killed and another was injured in an insider attack on Wednesday in Kabul, according to NATO. A U.S. civilian was also killed and two more American civilians were wounded in the incident in the capital of Afghanistan, according to a release Wednesday from NATO's Operation Resolute Support mission in the country. The unidentified assailant was killed, the release states. The individual was wearing an Afghan army uniform when he opened fire on the coalition forces around 11 a.m. local time, the website al-Jazeera reported.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210506204725/https://www.yahoo.com/news/bacha-bazi-afghan-subculture-child-sex-slaves-065341302.html">Bacha bazi: Afghan subculture of child sex slaves</a></p>
<blockquote><p>The ancient custom, banned under the Taliban's 1996-2001 rule, has seen a resurgence in recent years. It is said to be widespread across southern and eastern Afghanistan's rural Pashtun heartland, and with ethnic Tajiks across the northern countryside.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210413212534/https://sg.news.yahoo.com/hopeless-afghan-struggle-save-boy-sex-slaves-062614093.html">Hopeless Afghan struggle to save boy sex slaves</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Quivering with quiet rage, Shirin holds a photo of his teenage brother-in-law, who now lives as the plaything of policemen, just one victim of a hidden epidemic of kidnappings of young boys for institutionalised sexual slavery in Afghanistan.</p></blockquote>
<p>2017: <a href="https://nationalinterest.org/feature/americas-enduring-bacha-bazi-problem-afghanistan-23557">America's Enduring Bacha Bazi Problem in Afghanistan</a></p>
<p>2018: <a href="https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/06/09/killing-of-utah-mayor-in-afghanistan-was-planned-according-to-army-investigation/">Killing of Utah mayor in Afghanistan was planned, according to Army investigation</a></p>
<blockquote><p>OGDEN, Utah — An Afghan commando who fatally shot a Utah mayor serving in the National Guard in 2018 had planned the killing for weeks, according to an Army investigative report. U.S. Intelligence screeners failed to act swiftly enough on signs of the radicalization of the commando who was being trained by Maj. Brent Taylor, according to the report that was obtained through a public records request by the Standard-Examiner newspaper in Ogden, Utah. Taylor, 39, had taken a yearlong leave of absence as mayor of North Ogden for his deployment to Afghanistan. The killing occurred while Brent Taylor and the trainees were on a weekly training hike, the report said. They were making a final turn back to camp when Sgt. Asfar Khan of the Afghan special forces Taylor was helping train fired two to three shots, hitting Taylor in the back of the head, officials said.</p></blockquote>
<p>2019: <a href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/09/24/three-us-troops-wounded-apparent-insider-attack-afghanistan.html">Three US Troops Wounded in Apparent Insider Attack in Afghanistan</a></p>
<blockquote><p>WASHINGTON -- Three American troops were wounded Monday when an Afghan police officer opened fire at their convoy in southern Afghanistan's Kandahar province, a defense official said.</p></blockquote>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-22480801213035690902021-08-21T16:34:00.002-04:002021-08-21T16:47:52.555-04:00Afghanistan Hot Takes II: Φ's Thoughts<p>The Afghanistan mission was a spin factory*. As has been amply documented, the entire narrative of our presence there was an edifice of lies. In 2011, I had a front row seat in the maintenance of these lies; indeed, I had a small hand in constructing them. These lies continued to the very end, e.g. this <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210812072606/https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2021/08/12/kabul-could-fall-to-the-taliban-within-90-days-us-intelligence-warns/">hilarious headline</a> from 12 August.</p>
<p>If we actually had a culture of accountability, Congress would have already scheduled hearings. Every general, CIA weenie, and deputy-assistant-undersecretary-for-stoopid would be called to account for whatever combination of incompetence and duplicity led to 20 years of effort coming acropper this dramatically.</p>
<p>Obviously we don't have that culture. We have the opposite culture, and it runs straight through the armed services to every level of command. We have done nothing for the last year but #blacklivesmatter and <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2021/03/the-dark-night-of-fascism-usaf-edition.html">searching under the bed</a> for "extremists". But this is only a change in degree; the military has been colonized by cultural Marxists since the 1980s. They gained power in 1991 with respect to feminism in the wake of Tailhook, and more power yet in 2004. Their dominance is now complete. Literally every level of command swears allegiance to the Big Lie, and all the smaller lies, including those about Afghanistan, flow from that. We are now seeing the consequences.</p>
<p>We were not the Good Guys in Afghanistan. We propped up a puppet government of thieves and pederasts, who however much may have been willing to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/russia-says-afghan-president-fled-with-cars-helicopter-full-cash-ria-2021-08-16/">take our money</a>, never merited that support. It was an unfortunate accident that we ever came to cross purposes with the Taliban, who are infinitely more deserving of more respect than our supposed "allies".</p>
<p>Many servicemembers are grappling with the meaning of their time in that country, the wounds they suffered, the deaths of friends they witnessed. This is understandable. Many of them can say, as any Russian, British, or Alexandrian soldier said before them, that, in the moment, they supported their teammates and saved each others' lives. That may not sound like much, but for a soldier it must be enough.</p>
<p>I can say none of it. My tour saved no one's life, and I supported nothing worth supporting. My presence there was pointless (as <a href="https://nationalsecurityspeakers.com/major-general-jay-hood/">MG Hood</a> told me to my face on my first day). I may speak more truth than average, but only because my stakes are lower: every possible injury to my self-worth has long since been inflicted. Don't cry for me. Cry for those who are just now realizing the truth.</p>
<p>We now enter the battle of narratives. The Left and its organs will say what it wills, and those that would believe are surely beyond reason. My concern is for the battle on the Right. As my <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2021/08/afghanistan-hot-takes-i.html">earlier post</a> indicated, there is much good analysis. There is also some <a href="https://victorygirlsblog.com/taliban-commando-unit-mocks-iwo-jima-photo/">dumbassery</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>So here’s my dream: let our SEALs, Rangers, Marines, and any members of our toughest units shred these goat fuckers to smithereens.</p></blockquote>
<p>For pete's sake, why? What purpose would it serve? It wouldn't bring back the non-Taliban government, not that we should even want that. It would not aid the repatriation of our citizens, who in any case seem as of this writing mostly unmolested by the Taliban and appear to be free to remain in Afghanistan or depart as they will. It might serve as a temporary salve to our wounded egos, but that would only be a distraction from what we should really be after: a full accounting for two decades of lies and waste.</p>
<p>I read that <a href="https://www.theblaze.com/news/glenn-beck-audience-22-million-rescue-christians-afghanistan">Glenn Beck</a> has raised $22M to "rescue Christians" from that country. It comes as something of a surprise to find out that there are $22M worth of Christians <i>in</i> Afghanistan, but reading the story closely, I'm not seeing that Beck's proposed airlift will be limited to Christians, nor how he would verify Christian identity if it were, nor what safe haven has agreed to take them. My suspicion generally is that although the initial rush to NKAIA** was in fear of the Taliban, the hordes lining up now are there for the same reason we have a southern border crisis: they sense free entry to the United States, the land of <a href="https://fraudscrookscriminals.com/2021/08/20/guest-post-the-invasion-of-america-continues-warning-to-west-virginia/">endless welfare payments</a>.</p>
<p>My primary concern is an attempted retread of the Vietnam narrative: "Our mission was betrayed by the politicians!" I've been thinking about that narrative a lot: it was the story I grew up on in the 1980s. I'll admit to having something of a reappraisal in light of the past week, but for now, the Vietnam narrative looks far more defensible than it does when applied to Afghanistan.</p>
<p>For all we might quibble about the details in his speech, former VP Biden told a <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210816210913/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/us/politics/biden-taliban-afghanistan-speech.html">singular truth</a> on Monday:</p>
<blockquote><p>We went to Afghanistan almost 20 years ago with clear goals: get those who attacked us on Sept. 11, 2001, and make sure Al Qaeda could not use Afghanistan as a base from which to attack us again. We did that. We severely degraded Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We never gave up the hunt for Osama bin Laden and we got him.</p>
<p>That was a decade ago. Our mission in Afghanistan was never supposed to have been nation-building. It was never supposed to be creating a unified, centralized democracy. Our only vital national interest in Afghanistan remains today what it has always been: preventing a terrorist attack on American homeland.</p>
<p>. . . So what’s happened? Afghanistan political leaders gave up and fled the country. The Afghan military collapsed, sometimes without trying to fight. If anything, the developments of the past week reinforced that ending U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan now was the right decision. American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves.</p></blockquote>
<p>President Trump deserves credit (and Biden appears to give him credit, if that is what it was) for negotiating our withdrawal -- up to a point. The fact is that Trump, as Bush and 0bama before him, set the withdrawal date <i>after</i> his term expired. Biden, to his credit, is the one to see this through, assuming; as of this writing, we have only increased our troop levels, but the circumstances make it difficult to imagine a continued long-term presence. Perhaps the withdrawal was bungled -- that too should be part of the full accounting -- but better it be done badly than not done at all.</p>
<p>* Not original with me; I know I read "spin factory" somewhere this past week, although as of this writing I can't find it.</p>
<p>** As it was called when I was there.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-39361773979862588952021-08-21T12:10:00.000-04:002021-08-21T12:10:31.291-04:00Afghanistan Hot Takes I<p>First some links.</p>
<p><a href="https://mailchi.mp/thetransom/the-transom-august-16-2021">Ben Domenech</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>In a responsible military situation, the entire brass would be out on their asses after a level of mismanagement this dire. The insulation from consequences is absurd. Whatever happened to resigning in failure? Nowadays people are only expected to resign in protest - that is, for other people’s mistakes, but never for their own. Is it time for a BRAC for generals?</p>
<p>Whoever Biden doesn’t fire, their performance Biden believes is acceptable. If this is acceptable, how can the American people possibly trust the NSA, CIA, or the Pentagon? Even their most recent predictions were completely off. Once again, intel community and expert class totally failed us, predicting this would take months and the Afghan army would fight - now they're "revising" their predictions on terrorist formation according to Milley today. Why should we believe anything they say?</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.steynonline.com/11598/the-scale-of-humiliation">Mark Steyn</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Indeed, what difference would it make if [the U.S.] closed down its military? Obviously, it would present a few mid-life challenges for its corrupt Pentagon bureaucracy, since that many generals on the market for defense lobbyist gigs and board directorships all at once would likely depress the going rate. But, other than that, a military that accounts for 40 per cent of the planet's military spending can't perform either of the functions for which one has an army: it can't defeat overseas enemies, and it's not permitted to defend the country, as we see on the Rio Grande. So what's the point?</p>
<p>. . . America is not "too big to fail": It's failing by almost every metric right now. The world-record brokey-brokey-brokeness manifested by the current spending bills is only possible because the US dollar is the global currency. When that ends, we're Weimar with smartphones.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://scragged.com/articles/twenty-years-of-nothing">"Hobbes"</a> at <i>Scragged</i>:</p>
<blockquote><p>[Any] decent administration would summarily sack the Pentagon leadership that executed such a disastrous "plan", if it even deserves that word. Once again, neither are even being discussed, thus demonstrating what we've been quickly coming to fear - our entire institutional infrastructure is utterly corrupt and rotten down as far as we can see. The serving soldiers at the bottom may well be the lions they've always been, but they're led by jackasses if not something worse.</p>
<p>If we ever again are blessed with a reformist administration that actually loves this country, a Day 1 job must be the immediate sacking and forcible retirement of every single military officer of three or more stars or the equivalent, and a deep-dive investigation into the rest of the military leadership with an emphasis on successful field-command experience, with desk-jockey and political years being a powerful negative.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="https://thefederalist.com/2021/08/16/the-afghanistan-failure-proves-americas-regime-isnt-fit-to-lead/">J.D. Vance</a> for <a href="https://jdvance.com/">Senate!</a></p>
<blockquote><p>But this is not merely the consequence of seven months of disastrous Biden policy, it is the failure of the entire American regime. Every major institution in our country revealed itself as a farce.</p>
<p>Let’s start with U.S. generals. Over 20 years, we have spent $1 trillion and lost nearly 3,000 Americans. Our leaders told the American people that Afghanistan was slowly becoming a more peaceful, stable country. In June, Mark Milley, our nation’s highest-ranking military officer, warned of “white rage” in the U.S. military. In July, he assured our nation that Afghan security forces had the “capacity to sufficiently fight and defend their country."</p>
<p>In reality, it turned out that the Afghan national army couldn’t withstand four weeks of Taliban assault. Why was Milley focused on fake problems like white rage as he failed to do the job we pay him for? And why won’t Milley face an ounce of consequence for so clearly failing at the job he was given?</p></blockquote>
<p>For a <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pentagon-leaders-praised-afghan-army-collapse">bit of history</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>"The Afghan army is increasingly effective," Gen. James Mattis told Congress in July 2010 at his confirmation hearing when he was nominated for commander of U.S. Central Command. He added that the Afghan military – alongside U.S. forces – were "the worst nightmare for the Taliban."</p>
<p>In December of that year, then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters that Afghan troops were "responsible for security in Kabul," "performing well" and would "continue to improve."</p>
<p>Cut to 2012, and Gen. John Allen, then the Commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, told the House Armed Services Committee, "We remain on track to ensure that Afghanistan will no longer be a safe haven for Al Qaida and will no longer be terrorized by the Taliban."</p>
<p>Allen went on to say that "as the potential unifying influence in Afghanistan, the Afghan forces are better than we thought they were, and they're better than they thought they were when tried in combat."</p>
<p>In November 2014, Gen. John Campbell told NPR, when asked if Afghan forces could fight with assistance, that "whenever the [Afghan security forces] get involved with the Taliban, the Taliban cannot hold ground, they can't hold terrain."</p>
<p>"I'm telling you what I've seen," Campbell continued, "the change from a couple of years ago to today. They do have the capability to protect themselves. They are the strongest institution in Afghanistan."</p>
<p>That same month, Lt. Gen. Joseph Anderson touted the success and capability of the Afghan military.</p>
<p>"The Afghan National Security forces are winning, and this is a hugely capable fighting force who have been holding their ground against the enemy," he said during a press briefing.</p></blockquote>
<p>It's not all just hindsight. <a href="https://archive.fo/qRS6Q">Here is WaPo</a> in 2019 on the "Afghanistan Papers".</p>
<p>I will follow this up with my own thoughts in a subsequent post.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-30363390651339560792021-08-18T16:12:00.000-04:002021-08-18T16:12:47.906-04:00Raise you hand if you trust a commander?<p>Regarding the <a href="https://www.stripes.com/veterans/2021-06-23/House-to-introduce-bill-merging-two-high-profile-measures-to-combat-military-sexual-assault-1778884.html">"Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act"</a>, which would "remove the decision to prosecute serious crimes in the military from the chain of command", CJCS Milley said this:</p>
<blockquote><p>It is my professional opinion that removing commanders from prosecution decisions, process and accountability may have an adverse effect on readiness, mission accomplishment, good order and discipline, justice, unit cohesion, trust and loyalty between commanders and those they lead.</p></blockquote>
<p>Which is pretty much the extent of every defense I've seen recounted in the media. If anyone has written a book, essay, or academic paper explaining <i>why</i> any of these things depend on a commander's prosecution power, I haven't seen it.</p>
<p>I suppose I could construct an argument for "mission accomplishment" that went something like this: combat operations won't stop for us to adjudicate every intra-unit conflict by standards of individual justice. Commanders must have the latitude to subordinate every other consideration, including due process and victims' rights, to defeating the enemy.</p>
<p>But I've never seen that argument spelled out, and in any case I have seen no evidence that any commander would actually do this. Not once in 30 years have I heard a commander, in explaining "his" policy on sexual assault and harassment, say: "I intend to be judicious. I will take into account full context, be proportional in my response, and apply a balancing test." Commanders only ever say one thing: <i>zero tolerance</i>. I can't cite an AFI, but I'm pretty sure no deviation from ZT would be honored by higher echelons of command even if one level <i>did</i> try to articulate it.</p>
<p>The the claim for "trust" is laughable. I personally haven't <i>trusted</i> a commander since 2003, and after what we've just seen in Afghanistan, I wouldn't recommend that anyone would take a commander's word for so much as the spelling of his own name. Can today's recruit survive so much as Basic Training, let alone a deployment, without learning complete cynicism about the lot of them and their integrity and competence?</p>
<p>So if the stated reasons are nonsense, then what's the hidden reason? The question bears answering. The uniformed "leadership" of the "armed" "services" has been more unified on this issue in the teeth of Congressional and now Presidential pressure than I would have thought possible.</p>
<p>My best guess (because it's the only consideration that ever matters nowadays) is that centralizing this power would make it obvious that NAMs generally and blacks particularly are vastly overrepresentative among perpetrators of these kinds of offenses, that the brass knows this, and that they desperately want to hide it.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-65034146148829574382021-08-15T19:01:00.003-04:002021-08-15T19:01:58.173-04:00The Fat Lady Sings<p>As we <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2011/01/waiting-on-fat-lady.html">knew</a> she would.</p>
<p>I don't claim to be a seer -- even I am suprised at the <a href="https://news.trust.org/item/20210815135048-v4mg6/">speed of the Afghan government's collapse</a> this weekend. But for any readers interested in reviewing my 2011 impressions, you can start <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2011/01/">here</a> and work your way forward (and one month backward, if you are interested in the training I received prior to departure).Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-47743923063894198172021-08-12T15:53:00.000-04:002021-08-12T15:53:41.777-04:00Sliding Down the Slippery Slope<p>In an article worth a full reading, <a href="https://nathanwinograd.substack.com/p/in-a-race-to-the-bottom-critical">Nathan Winograd</a> gives chapter-and-verse on the lengthy BLM/CRT support for, not just bestiality/"zoophilia", but all manner of animal abuse (at least when committed by BIPOCs). He writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>In addition to trying to normalize bestiality by controlling the language we use to discuss it, [North Dakota State University professor Anastassiya] Andrianova, like [Duke University professor Kathy] Rudy before her, is trying to coopt the social movement for marriage equality, even though the latter represents a difference of kind, not degree. Andrianova and Rudy, as well as [Ph.D. candidate Jess] Ison, conflate criticism of bestiality with homophobia and patriarchy, with Ison claiming in <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/1793624356/">The Zoo Closet: On Whether Bestiality is a Queer Liberation Ethic</a>, that “fears about bestiality arose from controlling both women’s sex and same-sex relations” and Andrianova complaining that laws against bestiality were passed at the same time and for the same reasons as those proscribing “non-procreative sex” between consenting adult humans.</p>
<p>Given that “the vast majority of discussions around bestiality existed [historically] in the twinned realms of moral theology and juridical practices” that had their roots in “the book of Leviticus,” Rudy further <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/hypatia/article/abs/lgbtqz/85A2B98B6708318C7C7DAAE40D15D4C9">wonders why,</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Humans can kill animals, force them to breed with each other, eat them… hunt them, nail them down and cut them open for science, and for the most part, the humans who perform those acts can be thought of as normal, functioning members of society. Yet having sex with animals remains an almost unspeakable anathema.</p></blockquote>
<p>. . . But offering countervailing arguments about when and why animals go into heat or their level of sentience does not feel commensurate with what is being advocated. It puts me at a loss. Responding with incredulity and denouncing the claims without the restraint of civility seems more appropriate, but doing so runs the risk of embracing a logical fallacy, such as an appeal to force or ad hominem. Responding dispassionately and measuredly, however, risks reducing the rape of animals to an academic exercise that (falsely) suggests reasonable people can differ. They cannot and it pains me that anyone would need to be convinced of this.</p>
<p>Quite simply, there is no atrocity against animals that CRT/queer theory professors will not defend. And not only do they embrace abuse, they do so by disparaging gay people and people of color, turning the fight for equality into the promotion of disparity and the struggle for the right to live with dignity into an appeal to depravity. </p></blockquote>
<p>Indeed, without pre-existing theological commitments, I too would view the issue as an academic exercise. And in the politics of the day, the conflict between the interests of zoophiles/pedophiles on the one hand and animals/children on the other will be decided in the same way that the conflict between interests of pregnant women and their unwanted fetuses has been resolved: only one side of these conflicts can vote Democrat.</p>
<p>As it happens, I do have pre-existing theological commitments, and they do come straight from Leviticus (and every other part of the Bible, while we're at it). As he makes clear, Winograd is happy to abandon Leviticus as a source of moral instruction, understanding it correctly as inconvenient to his and the Left's other political commitments. He is now having to grapple how thin his remaining defenses actually are now that the Left is coming for Fido. His remaining choices are to either go on about "sentience" or point-and-sputter. The future does not bode well for Fido.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-34333507442992083212021-07-29T15:43:00.000-04:002021-07-29T15:43:08.396-04:00Participation Trophies For All!<p>Does anyone remember Kerri Strug?</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe class="BLOG_video_class" allowfullscreen="" youtube-src-id="cqUjo_rOxYc" width="400" height="322" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cqUjo_rOxYc"></iframe></div>
<p>A quick search for <a href="https://search.brave.com/search?q=simone+biles+kerri+strug">"Kerri Strug Simone Biles"</a> shows that a whole lot of people remember her, of which <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210729000257/https://www.nbcnews.com/know-your-value/feature/simone-biles-showing-us-what-exemplary-feminist-leadership-really-looks-ncna1275351">this writer</a> is fairly representative:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GNtEMZ2CZyU/YQL6_Fn5-KI/AAAAAAAABrA/YUp6eDmt8-Yn5bZWcBRuEEro-eadqut3ACLcBGAsYHQ/s967/SimoneBilesKerriStrug%2B-%2BCopy.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="258" data-original-width="967" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GNtEMZ2CZyU/YQL6_Fn5-KI/AAAAAAAABrA/YUp6eDmt8-Yn5bZWcBRuEEro-eadqut3ACLcBGAsYHQ/s400/SimoneBilesKerriStrug%2B-%2BCopy.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>The culture of celebrating failure is hardly new. As I thought of Simone Biles' bailing on her teammates to "focus on her mental health", Kerri Strug was the obvious contrast, but I also remembered the <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Hainan_Island_incident">"Hainan Island Incident"</a>, in which an American spy plane, crippled in a collision with a Chinese fighter, decided to . . . land on the target of its surveillance.</p>
<p>On the one hand, I don't want to sound judgmental. On the contrary, I <i>totally</i> understand how the aircrew, looking around at their full complement of sensitive intelligence-gathering apparatus and information, deciding they saw nothing worth dying for. That was roughly <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2011/01/all-in-when-its-better-to-have-only.html">my attitude towards ISAF</a>.</p>
<p>But this was just embarassing:</p>
<blockquote><p>The crew of the EP-3 was released on April 11, 2001, and returned to their base at Whidbey Island via Honolulu, Hawaii, where they were subject to two days of intense debriefings, followed by a heroes' welcome.[18] The pilot, Lt. Shane Osborn, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for "heroism and extraordinary achievement" in flight.</p></blockquote>
<p>Likewise in the case of Miss Biles. There needs to me some space between the realization that not everyone, even on whom we place a lot of hope and expectation, will rise to meet extraordinary challenge or undertake extraordinary self-sacrifice, and pretending that the failure to so rise and undertake is somehow itself heroic. We should be able to recognize that Biles and Osborn <i>choked</i>, as the saying goes, as would you and I under similar circumstances. No judgment. But no praise either.<p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-7925824892243022812021-07-27T12:54:00.001-04:002021-07-27T12:54:37.511-04:00Who was doing What on January 6?<p>While reading <a href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/07/26/yes-air-force-recruit-ties-hate-group-out-militarys-extremism-problem-isnt-fixed.html">this article</a> about how government persecution of dissidents hasn't gone far and fast enough, I was struck by the headline picture:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sjoeuopcYgM/YQA1c_bAxdI/AAAAAAAABq4/Lyyeou0jWHImtJtuc8ZQXAtpYnwUs4qXgCLcBGAsYHQ/s624/Jan6protest%2B.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="416" data-original-width="624" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-sjoeuopcYgM/YQA1c_bAxdI/AAAAAAAABq4/Lyyeou0jWHImtJtuc8ZQXAtpYnwUs4qXgCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/Jan6protest%2B.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>I'm pretty sure I've seen this picture in the DSM a lot over the last 6 months without having paid it much attention -- candidly, the whole episode was embarrassing. But pausing to look at it, I'm having trouble figuring out what exactly is going on. Judging from their dress, it looks like the people on the right of the barricade are Team Capitol Police and the people on the left are Team Protestors. But then, it also looks appears TCP are trying to pull <i>down</i> the barricade while TP are trying vainly to hold it up. But maybe someone can explain the exact context.</p>
<p>And while you are at it, can anyone tell me if and where old episodes of Shawn McCaffrey's "The Weekly Sweat" podcasts are still online? DuckDucking has yielded nothing.</p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-85106023714066400962021-07-20T16:40:00.000-04:002021-07-20T16:40:21.373-04:00Criminality Distributions<p>Via <a href="https://www.unz.com/isteve/33-of-adult-male-african-americans-have-felony-convictions/">iSteve</a>, <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13524-017-0611-1">"The Growth, Scope, and Spatial Distribution of People with Felony Records in the United States"</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>"We estimate that 3 % of the total U.S. adult population and 15 % of the African American adult male population has ever been to prison; people with felony convictions account for 8 % of all adults and 33 % of the African American adult male population."</p></blockquote>
<p>Note that given these numbers, and assuming blacks constitute 12% of the U.S. population, the non-black felony conviction rate is 4.6% (arrived at by this formula:(.08 - .33*.12)/(1 - .12)); Likewise, the non-black incarceration rate is 1.4%.</p>
<p>This implies that blacks are 7.2x overrepresented among felony convicts and 11x overrepresented among prisoners.</p>
<p>These data can be explained by a model in which anti-social behavior is normally distributed, with the black mean higher than the non-black mean and a higher threshold for incarceration than felony conviction. We are all familiar with the bell curve:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--0EzGIrRpV0/YPcGG1qnt0I/AAAAAAAABqc/vRTCT9dsG-ICDtw_iKIiBYoQGW7lNquwgCLcBGAsYHQ/s613/StandardNormalRatios.png" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="320" data-original-height="378" data-original-width="613" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--0EzGIrRpV0/YPcGG1qnt0I/AAAAAAAABqc/vRTCT9dsG-ICDtw_iKIiBYoQGW7lNquwgCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/StandardNormalRatios.png"/></a></div>
<p>A few words of explanation: Shown are two normal distributions, each with variance one. The "Group A" mean is zero, as shown on the x-axis; the "Group B" mean is one standard deviation above the Group A mean. The left Y-axis is the probability distribution function (PDF) value. It is meaningless in itself; obtaining percentages requires integration (i.e. the area under the curve). On the right axis is the value of the ratio of the percentages of the two distributions lying above the threshold indicated on the x-axis. For fellow stats geeks, the ratio is (1 - F<sub>B</sub>(x))/(1 - F<sub>A</sub>(x)), where F(x) is the cumulative density function (CDF) corresponding to each PDF.</p>
<p>For instance, Exactly 50% of the Group A distribution falls above zero, while 84% of the group B distribution does; their ratio is .84/.5 = 1.7. 16% of the Group A distribution falls above 1, while 50% of the Group B distribution does; their ratio is 3.1. 2% of the Group A distribution falls above 2, while 16 % of the Group B distribution does; their ratio is 7. These ratios continue to climb as shown.</p>
<p>The ratios given by the study can be accounted for by a model of anti-social behavior where the black mean of anti-social behavior is 1.3 standard deviations of the non-black distribution above the non-black mean, whereas the non-black standard deviation is .87 of that of the non-black standard deviation:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--q4bRoMcAL8/YPcQHMAGIVI/AAAAAAAABqk/4m2Dcn7AjAI4bcheqeguJOYzXpcRJIaHgCLcBGAsYHQ/s620/BlackWhiteCriminalityRatios.png" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="320" data-original-height="361" data-original-width="620" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--q4bRoMcAL8/YPcQHMAGIVI/AAAAAAAABqk/4m2Dcn7AjAI4bcheqeguJOYzXpcRJIaHgCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/BlackWhiteCriminalityRatios.png"/></a></div>
<p>That the black criminality distribution is narrower than the non-black distribution should not surprise us; the non-black population is by definition more heterogeneous, including Hispanics with higher rates of criminality than the white majority and Asians with lower rates. A more rigrous model would attempt to break these out separately. In the meantime, one of the implications of the narrower black distribution is that at sufficiently high thresholds we see from the graph that the ratio begins (just barely) to level off; however, this is an artifact of combining disparate populations into a non-black category.</p>
<p>This model is useful for predicting outcomes as reported in this <a href="https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/courts/2021/07/12/arrests-drop-black-youths-overrepresented-delinquency-charges-franklin-county-ohio/7795414002/">Columbus Dispatch</a> article about racial disparities in the juvenile system:</p>
<blockquote><p>Delinquency filings in county Juvenile Court fell from 6,247 in 2010 to 2,457 in 2020, a 61% drop. The number of youths admitted to the county's juvenile detention center fell from 2,196 in 2010 to 602 in 2020, a 73% decline. . . .</p>
<p>In 2020, Black teens in Franklin County were two-and-a-half times more likely to be charged with a delinquency offense than white teens — in a county where less than 25% of the population is Black. . . .</p>
<p>In Franklin County, the detention numbers are particularly stark. Black juveniles represented 84% of the youths admitted to the county detention center in 2020. That number has grown worse since 2010, when Blacks accounted for 71% of the juveniles detained.</p>
<p>On average, the daily population in the county detention center in 2020 included 47 Blacks and four whites. And the median length of stay in detention — where youths are held before their cases are resolved — was 12 days for Black juveniles and three days for white juveniles. . . .</p>
<p>The 65 Black juveniles who were given an out-of-home placement in 2020 represented a 70% drop from 2014. But the 13 whites youths placed out-of-home last year represented an 89% drop during the same period. . . .</p>
<p>Based on raw numbers, Balis said, Franklin County's Juvenile Court is to be commended for the drop in out-of-home placements for Black teens. The number of such placements stood at 215 in 2014.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.city-data.com/county/Franklin_County-OH.html">Here</a> is the demographic information for Franklin County, Ohio, of which 22.9% is black and 62% is white. As is common in mainstream reporting, the article combines multiple measures; I count "delinquency filings", "charged and detained", "charged", "admitted to county detention", "detained", "daily population", and "out-of-home placement". I kind of get that journalists want to mix up their formulations for stylistic reasons, but it means that I can only guess which terms are supposed to be equivalent. But youths are "charged", where the article claims is a 2.5x black/white rate ratio, far more often than they are "detained", where there is a (47/.229)/(4/.62) = 32x black/white rate ratio, assuming that the ratios of the juvenile population is the same as the overall population, which assumption is almost certainly incorrect, but is the best data we have.</p>
<p>However, it is apparent that Franklin County raised the thresholds at which juveniles are both charged and detained. So it should not suprise us to see that of the two measures for which black numbers are provided in the same context for two different years, we see that the percent black of detentions climbed from 71% to 84% between 2010 and 2020, implying an increase in the black/non-black rate ratio from 8x to 18x, and the black/white ratio of out-of-home placements climbed from 1.8x (i.e. 215//(13/(1-.89)) = 215/118) in 2014 to 5x (65/13); given their percentages of the population, this implies an increase in the black/white <i>rate</i> ratio from 5x to 14x.</p>
<p>That said, these numbers don't necessarily fit the parameters developed from the nationwide conviction and incarceration data shared earlier. For instance, as you can see from the graph, the black/non-black anti-social behavior ratio of 5x occurs right around the median of the black distribution, and obviously somewhat less than half of all black youths in Franklin County received out-of-home placements in 2014. But otherwise we should expect the black/white and black/non-black rate ratios to be at least this high, and higher still as the threshold for punishment increases.</p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-6209543660192492792021-07-01T12:03:00.000-04:002021-07-01T12:03:18.321-04:00What is "Report for America"?<p><a href="https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2021/06/27/therapists-ohio-nepali-refugees-bhutan-trauma-ptsd-ethnic-cleansing-columbus/5321348001/">This article</a> about the ethnic Nepalese from Bhutan, who (reading between the lines a bit) made themselves odious to their host country, weren't admitted back to Nepal, and therefore washed up in Ohio because Reasons, is pretty standard for the genre:</p>
<blockquote><p>The rising anti-refugee and anti-immigrant sentiments during former President Donald Trump’s administration exacerbated the emotional strain that new Americans experienced, according to Rochelle Frounfelker, a postdoctoral fellow at McGill University’s Department of Psychiatry in Montreal, Canada.</p>
<p>“Having someone at the grocery store come up to them and say they should go back to where they came from affects people on a daily basis,” said Frounfelker, adding that the discriminatory rhetoric coming from politicians could be a stressor for refugees, especially given their experience of being prosecuted in their home country.</p></blockquote>
<p>And so on and so forth. But at the end, I noticed this bit about the authress:</p>
<blockquote><p>Yilun Cheng is a Report for America corps member and covers immigration issues for The Dispatch. Your donation to match our RFA grant helps keep her writing stories like this one. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation at https://bit.ly/3fNsGaZ</p></blockquote>
<p>Does anyone have any insight into RFA's role in local media? Is it seeding ideologically vetted reporters at local papers?</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-40847179904730390272021-06-26T20:37:00.000-04:002021-06-26T20:37:24.770-04:00Whatever Happened to Welfare Reform?<p>From <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/child-tax-credit/">Whitehouse.gov</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>The Child Tax Credit in the American Rescue Plan provides the largest Child Tax Credit ever and historic relief to the most working families ever – and most families will automatically receive monthly payments without having to take any action.</b>For those with children, the American Rescue Plan increased the Child Tax Credit from $2,000 per child to $3,000 per child for children over the age of six and from $2,000 to $3,600 for children under the age of six, and raised the age limit from 16 to 17. All working families will get the full credit if they make up to $150,000 for a couple or $112,500 for a family with a single parent (also called Head of Household).</p></blockquote>
<p>So . . . it's not actually a credit on taxes paid. It's just a government welfare program whose eligibility extends through the upper middle class.</p>
<p>Which reminds me: whatever happened to bastardy (a.k.a. "illegitimacy", a.k.a. "non-marital births")? This was an issue that was a very big deal, especially on the "neoconservative" Right, back in the 1980s and 1990s. The realization that the perverse incentives created by AFDC were driving an increase in un-wed motherhood animated first the "War on Poverty" of the 1960s and then <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act">Welfare Reform</a> of the 1990s. But I haven't heard much commentary about it in a long time.</p>
<p>A quick glance at the stats show that <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Legitimacy_(family_law)">illegitimacy</a> rates stabilized for blacks at 70+% around 2004, and for whites at 30% around 2009. But weirdly, those same stats pretty much dry up around 2014. Does the government even track it anymore?</p>
<p>Back in the 1990s (IIRC), elements of the Left strove to drive a wedge between opposition to abortion and opposition to illegitimacy. Their argument went thus: if you want to reduce abortion, then stop stigmatizing illegitimacy, such stigmatization being a motivation for young women to abort embarrassing babies. I remember this line of reasoning having some effect at the time, but I missed the formal surrender by the Right on the issue.</p>
<p>The pace at which yesterday's perversity has become today's "New Normal" has accelerated over the last few years, but the disappearance of bastardy from our political dialog seems to antedate the Current Year. Any thoughts?</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-30408528046216318202021-04-10T18:30:00.000-04:002021-04-10T18:30:10.034-04:00Light in the Dark Belt<p>A few years ago, our family switched from using the <i><a href="https://www.odb.org/">Our Daily Bread</a></i> devotion guide to the Lutheran <i><a href="https://www1.cph.org/portals/default.aspx">Portals of Prayer</a></i> devotion guide for our evening family devotions. Long-time readers may remember at least <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2011/04/clueless-evangelicals.html">one post</a> where I expressed disappointment with <i>ODB</i>; that was surely not the only time. We have generally found <i>PoP</i> to be more scripture-focused, with fewer tortured metaphors.</p>
<p>So it was with some initial consternation that I discovered that <i>PoP</i> seemed to go all-in on black history month last February. <i>Haven't we been celebrating blackness non-stop for the last nine months!?!</i> The devotions drew substantial inspiration from from the life of <a href="http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1373">Rosa J. Young</a>, a teacher and school-founder from the <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Black_Belt_(U.S._region)">"Black Belt"</a> of Alabama who, on the advice of <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Booker_T._Washington">Booker T. Washington</a>, sought Lutheran assistance for her school when the <a href="https://infogalactic.com/info/Boll_weevil">boll weevil</a> devastated Southern sharecropping in the 1910s. She eventually became an evangelist for the Lutheran mission work in Alabama. The devotion guide got around to mentioning that she had written an autobiography, <i><a href="https://www.cph.org/p-26240-light-in-the-dark-belt.aspx">Light in the Dark Belt</a></i>, originally published in 1930 and revised in 1950. I obtained the 1950 edition.</p>
<p>I was pleasantly surprised. Rosa Young's writing opens a window to an entirely different era of race relations. In an era when all manner of black social dysfunction is blamed on the phantom of "white supremacy", it is gratifying to hear a black person, writing when white supremacy was actually A Thing, not waste a moment blaming it for the misfortuntes of her people, but rather recognizing that the responsibility for their lives lay principally with themselves. When Rosa began her school, she humbly sought the assistance of the southern white people of her community, and found almost all of them eager to support her.</p>
<p>You can read the introductory chapters to her book <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13771961-light-in-the-dark-belt">here</a>; however, I have reproduced a later chapter to give you a sense of Young's understanding of the problems that beset Southern blacks of that time.</p>
<center><h2><p>Chapter 7</p>
<p>Why I Wanted to Build a School</p></h2>
<p><i>“For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth and gross darkness the people..” -- Is 60:2</i></p></center>
<p>It was not the thought of money that convinced me that I ought to start a school. From the time I received my diploma and went forth from the university into the battle of life, it had ever been my desire to serve. I was ready to serve under any and all conditions. My highest ambition is still to serve, to be a faithful servant of God and my people. I would rather serve than be served. I have never desired a high position. I would rather do the humble work among the despised and outcast. As I saw the great need of my people, my desire to do something for their education grew. And so I might state my reasons for wanting to start a school as follows:</p>
<p>1. I saw the grievous condition of my race, of my brothers and sisters. It was a pathetic sight. The ignorance and superstition in all matters were amazing. I hope that my school would help to overcome some of this ignorance and superstition. </p>
<p>2. Morals and manners were at a low ebb. It was a rare thing to see a man who did not have two or more wives or to see a woman who had only one husband. It was a common thing to see a young girl approaching the age of 20, who was a mother and drifting about with no husband. Both young and old had lost all regard for the holy estate of matrimony. There were hundreds of people who had been married, but were separated. It was a common thing to see girls or women living by themselves in little huts doted over the plantations. Young girls would often bundle their clothes, move out from their father’s home, away from the care and protection of a loving mother, and start keeping house by themselves. The reputation of some of these people was shameful. Their manners in all places, at home, in church, on the roadsides, in public places, such as stores and railroad stations, were rough, uncouth, boisterous. Even their word of honor was of no account. I hope that my school would help to improve morals and manners.</p>
<p>3. The homes in which these poor people lived were horrible. In every community there were two classes of people, the Big Dogs and the Little Dogs. Of course, in the homes of the so-called Big Dogs conditions were a little more decent. In the homes of the so-called Little Dogs, conditions, up on the whole, were indecent. There were no arrangements made for bathing or ventilation in the houses. In most of them there was too much ventilation. While sitting in the house behind closed doors, one could look up and see this sky, the moon, and the stars through the holes in the roof; one could look down and through the holes in the floor see the ground -- chickens, hogs, little pigs, and dogs. One could seldom find a decent pair of steps at a door. The chimneys, made of sticks daubed with red mud reached only halfway up the houses. On a cold day it might happen that the wind would blow down the chimney and that the smoke would prevent the family from having a fire.</p>
<p>In many cases the whole family, half-grown young men and women, smaller children, and father and mother, had to sleep and cook in the same room. The bed clothes were filthy; most of the members of the family would sleep in the clothes they had worn during the day. Dishes and cooking utensils remained unwashed from meal to meal, day after day. The bed clothes, dishes, and cooking utensils were covered with swarms of flies. Scarcely any lamps could be found in the homes, and in most cases where there were lamps they had no chimneys.</p>
<p>There were no dinner tables on which to serve when the dinner was prepared. The mother gave each member of the family his or her dinner on a plate, or in a pan, bucket, or skillet. Some would sit in the doorway, some on the steps, others put out in the yard, and the little children on the floor. All ate with their hands and fingers. </p>
<center><p>Lunch at school.</center></p>
<p>They used gourds for dippers, broom sage and pine tops for brooms. A few chairs, boxes, blocks or wagon-body seats on the floor were used for seats. The floors were seldom, if ever, scrubbed and not often swept. About the yard lay all kinds of filthy rags, inviting disease. Through my school I hoped to improve these conditions by inspiring children and young people to improve also their material surroundings.</p>
<p>4. The children, the dear little children of the rural districts whom I love so well and in whom I am so interested, where in a sad condition. Some of them had to come to school partly dressed in adults’ clothing. In the dead of winter some of them would have to come to my school with only one or two pieces of clothing on as a protection against the stings and howls of the winter winds, half-hungry, half-naked, barefooted, toes and heels cracked open from the rain, ice, and frost. The little girls' hair was combed only once in a while. It was knotty, kinky, dirty, matted and full of cockleburs. The boys, poor things, their hair was never combed. Once in a while some member of the family would take a pair of scissors and cut the boys' hair, which was so gummy and matted that it would come off in a caplike form. In many cases there were hog lice in the little boys' hair. On their hands, wrists, forearms, in the back of their necks, on their kneecaps, on the front part of their legs, on their ankles, heels, feet, and toes grew banks of dirt until it formed a scaly crust, so thick that you could take a pin and stick deep or scrape hard, and they would not feel it. The finger and toe nails were long and dirty. Their teeth were yellow with stain. The best they knew to do was to steal, lie, curse, swear, and fight like cats and dogs. My heart went out to these children, and I desired to do for them whatever lay in my power to do.</p>
<p>5. The educational advantages offered these children by the State were entirely inadequate. The school terms lasted only three or four months a year. Before the children could get a good start in school, the term would be over. During the long vacation of eight or nine months the children would forget most, if not all, of what they had learned during the previous term. I planned a school that would provide an adequate school term.</p>
<p>6. Among these poor children there were some bright boys and girls, filled with high ambitions, with the marks of leadership on their dusky brows, which shone like diamonds in a coal bed in the bright sun. Their poor parents were unable to send them to school. They had nothing with which to pay their board; they were just barely existing themselves.</p>
<p>However, most of the children were dull and backward. There were large boys and girls said to be in the fifth, sixth, and seventh grades who could not read through a paragraph correctly. If they were asked to spell a simple word, for instance, the word "smooth," they might begin to spell it with a P or a Q. There were large children who could not write the letters of the alphabet or do primary work in arithmetic. They would not have the slightest idea of how to solve the simplest problem. Some ten- and fifteen-year-old boys and girls could not read the first lesson on the chart or in the primer.</p>
<p>I wanted to help all children, but especially to give the brighter and more ambitious ones a better chance in life.</p>
<p>7. As a general thing, there were no schoolhouses; for the most part the public schools were taught in the churches. Most of the churches were dilapidated and so exposed to the elements that one might as well teach outdoors under an oak tree. There were big holes in the roofs and in the floors. Many a time during a heavy shower of rain the large children would have to hold an umbrella over me while I heard a class recite.
<p>In some of those churches there were small heaters, but no flues; so we had to take out a window pane and run the stovepipe out through the side of the wall. When the wind was high on a cold day, the smoke would turn us all away from the fire. In churches where there were no heaters we were obliged to build big fires outdoors. Then I would have to watch the little fellows to prevent their clothes from catching fire.</p>
<p>I hoped to provide a good school in a decent building.</p>
<p>8. The poor people were lacking in leadership. It is one of the great needs of the colored race even to this day to have sufficient and efficient leaders. The number of able, prepared leaders is so small that real work is difficult.</p>
<p>The public school teachers were inefficient. Not more than one third of them could pass a third-grade state examination fairly well. Some of them did not have the least idea of how to grade a school. They would permit children to enter the sixth and seventh grades that should have been in the third. Discipline in the school was unknown. Before one reached the school building or church where the school was being held, one could hear the children giggling, murmuring, and shuffling their feet. There was a continual commotion during the school hours. The teachers would ask the children questions about their lessons and have to look in the book to see if the child answered correctly.</p>
<p>These teachers would permit the children to sing all kinds of songs and give some of the most ridiculous recitations. The public school teachers would sometimes have Christmas trees and present Christmas programs for the benefit of the community. The following are some of the recitations the children would recite. A little ashy-faced country lad comes forward, so happy he has a chance to speak that his face is wreathed in smiles. He recites as follows: </p>
<blockquote><p>
Black gum bits and bullet rains, <br>
White oak saddle and hickory horse,<br>
Um gwine to ride all up and down the line.</p></blockquote>
<p>At this all the people would whoop, shout, and laugh. Then another child would come forward and give his Christmas selection: </p>
<blockquote><p>
Milk in the picture and butter in the bowl;<br>
I cannot get a sweetheart to save my soul.<br>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Then another would step forward and recite:</p>
<blockquote><p>
With a jug of molasses and a pan of biscuits in my hand,<br>
I'll sop my way to the Promised Land.<br>
</p></blockquote>
<p>Now, such recitations were given on the solemn occasion of the commemoration of the birth of Jesus, the Savior of the world. "Gross darkness covered the people.”</p>
<p>The so-called preachers often were worse than those to whom they preached. Some were both ignorant and immoral. The better class of laymen would not trust them in their homes during their absence. These so-called preachers where the downfall of many poor, ignorant, young girls. They destroyed the peace and harmony many humble country home.</p>
<p>It was a common thing to see a preacher at one of those annual meetings just out of the pulpit staggering down some dark alley, drunk with wine, beer, "shinny," or whisky, heaving like a dog, while the other preachers looked upon it as a joke. Besides this, many preachers were greedy for money. They would rove the rural districts, holding out false inducements to the poor, ignorant people, enticing them to join all kinds of fraternal societies. They would offer the people sick, accident, and death benefits, and every other kind of benefit, just to get their money. Most people could not resist the temptation. Those who had credit would go to their landlords and borrow the money to join. Others would sell their corn, eggs, pigs, chickens, the very food out of the mounts of their little children, to obtain money with which to join these societies. After they had stripped the people of all the money they could get, these scoundrels would escape and no more would be heard from them, while the people were left in need as before.</p>
<p>They would impose heavy taxation, or assessment, upon the church people; and if those who were thus taxed failed to pay, they were excommunicated, or their names were put on the dead list. A person whose name was on the dead list was not permitted to partake of the Lord's Supper. If he became sick, no pastor visited him; and if he died, no pastor would bury him or preach the funeral sermon. Some of these preachers would hire out to the people to preach so many sermons a year or month for so much money. Visiting the sick and burying the dead was not included. A Baptism was performed for twenty-five cents and up per head. When a member died, the funeral was used as an occasion to draw a large crowd in order to get a lot of money.</p>
<p>These preachers would not humble themselves, or feel enough interest in the people, to live in the parsonages the people had provided for them. The homes these poor people had strained themselves to build for them they allowed to ruin. The preachers went to the cities, hanging around the streets in the towns during the week. On Saturdays they would go out to their country churches, do their kind of preaching, get all the money, chickens, and eggs they could get from the people and on Monday mornings board the train for the city with these gifts, joking about the people, calling them "n______"* and saying: "I told them n______ so and so." Instead of trying to enlighten the people, they were calling them fools.</p>
<p>My school was intended to contribute its part in developing intelligent and unselfish leaders for my people.</p>
<p>9. I always believed in the education of the heart; for a bright head with a wicked heart stands for naught. It only tends to breed trouble. I knew something was wrong with the kind of religion my people had, but I did not know what was wrong about it. I desired a better Christian training for myself and my people, but I did not know where to find it. The religion of my people was a mere pretense, a kind of manufactured religion. Those who belonged to church were no better than those who did not. In most of the homes the so-called Christian families as well as the unbelievers lived in envy, strife, malice, prejudice, bitter hatred, yea, hellish riot; in covetousness; in adultery and fornication; in theft and lying.</p>
<p>In hundreds of homes the Bible was never read, a prayer was never spoken, and a Christian hymn was never sung. The whole family lay down at night and rose the next morning, and each went out to do his work without saying a word of thanks to God. Sin was looked upon by most people as a small thing. They held divine services in their churches twelve times a year, on the average once a month. No one took the time to teach them Christian hymns; they sang old plantation songs during their services.</p>
<p>Both men and women would get down on their knees and pray just as loud as they could hollo, often using all kinds of profane language and blasphemy. They would call on God as if He were asleep or dead. The preachers would read a text and then branch off and preach all kinds of man-made doctrines, telling the people that these things are in the Bible. Many a time the name of Jesus was not mentioned during a whole sermon. The preachers would whoop, hollo, pat, and stamp, snort, and blow until the people were in an uproar, shouting and hollowing, too. Then the preachers would just say anything. I once heard a preacher laughing and telling how he curses when he gets "n______" to shouting and holloing.</p>
<p>The people were obliged to carry on most of the church work without the preachers; they just came and preached. The people would have Sunday school about three months out of the year, beginning a few Sundays before Easter each year and continuing until July or August. They had the wrong conception of Christmas and other Christian festivals. I hoped to be of some help in improving the sad religious conditions, though I did not know just how that might be accomplished.</p>
<p>10. Though the teaching of the Bible and of the Six Chief Parts of the Christian religion was neglected, I cannot say that this was one of my reasons for wanting to build a school for my race, for in this respect I was in the dark myself. Sad! Sad! We were all blind and leaders of the blind. We did not know the Bible, neither did the preachers know it. We did not know what we must do to be saved, neither did the preachers. They were preaching false doctrine, and we did not know it. We did not know that Jesus has done all that is necessary for our salvation, and the preachers did not know it. We did not know what Jesus, the Savior, meant to us. We did not know that we were sinners. We wanted to go to heaven; but we did not know the way, and the preachers did not know it. We were trying to work our way to heaven, and the preachers were doing the same. We were not following our Bibles, neither were the preachers.</p>
<p>Now, what was to be done? Our white people had given us our schools and churches. We sent calls and had our leaders; and I presume the white people thought we were getting along fine.</p>
<p>The Lord, our Savior, who loved us saw all this and had compassion on us. He saw that the sad plight of our immortal souls was far worse than our physical condition. The Lord looked down from heaven upon us. He saw darkness had covered our land. Our eyes were blind to the knowledge contained in His blessed Gospel. The Lord saw that we were all on the wrong road, regardless of how well we meant, and could never reach heaven that way.</p>
<p>God saw that I was concerned, that I was worried, about many things pertaining to the temporal welfare of my people. God saw my eager desires and longings to do something for Him and my race. I did not have the least idea of what was to be done. I could not preach, for women are not allowed to preach. But the Lord instilled in me the thought of building a school, gave me strength to begin this work, and sustained me.</p>
<p>At that time I knew nothing about the Lutheran Church and its pure Gospel preaching; but God knew all about it and was pleased with it. God was going to use my school as an instrument to put the true Church in this dark land. The Lord did send us the light through the Lutheran Church, of which you will read later.</p>
<p><i>* Rosa Young spells out the word, although I do not.</i></p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-45273367116694382082021-03-01T23:53:00.000-05:002021-03-01T23:53:50.924-05:00The Dark Night of Fascism, USAF Edition<p>Remember <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat">"Samizdat"</a>? It was <i>impermissible literature</i> in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Remember how we were proud of being an open society back then? Those were good days.
<p>Now look at this graphic:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PWoQDJbyp88/YDveVcm8F9I/AAAAAAAABok/2PWiU89cUs8NyBhP_0lcfD7yyIYPSTwywCLcBGAsYHQ/s1280/Samizdat.png" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="420" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PWoQDJbyp88/YDveVcm8F9I/AAAAAAAABok/2PWiU89cUs8NyBhP_0lcfD7yyIYPSTwywCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Samizdat.png"/></a></div>
<p>This graphic is taken from page G5 of the Department of the Air Force's "Extremism Stand-Down Day Playbook", dated 24 Feb 2021, although the pdf copy in my posession may have been created on 15 February. It is not currently available on the open internet that I can find, but those with access to the Air Force Portal can find it at go dot usa dot gov slash xs9YR. It was prepared in accordance with SecDef Lloyd Austin's directive that all the Armed Services conduct an <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210224100539/https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/24/pentagon-hunt-extremists-471291">Extremism Stand-down Day</a> within 60 days of the order.</p>
<p>Strap in, everyone. This is going to be a long post.</p>
<p>Under the heading of "Identifying Impermissible Behavior", we read, starting from the left:</p>
<blockquote>
<ul><li><p>Interest</p>
<ul><li>Watching impermissible videos</li>
<li>Reading impermissible literature</li>
<li>Visiting websites promoting impermissible ideology</li>
<li>Membership in an impermissible group</li></ul>
<li><p>Language</p>
<ul><li>Making statements sympathizing with impermissible ideologies</li>
<li>Making social media posts that mention impermissible causes</li></ul></li></ul></blockquote>
<p>And so forth. The graphic cites <a href="https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/132506p.pdf">DoDI 1325.06</a>, "Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces" (22 Feb 2012), and <a href="https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_ja/publication/afi51-508/afi51-508.pdf">AFI 51-508</a>, "Political Activities, Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly of Air Force Personnel" (12 Oct 2018).</p>
<p>From 51-508, Chapter 3, "Dissident and Protest Activities": On the one hand, we have</p>
<blockquote><p>3.1.1. AF commanders must preserve the service member’s constitutional right of expression to the maximum extent possible, consistent with good order, discipline, and national security. </p></blockquote>
<p>But what the AFI gives, the AFI takes away:</p>
<blockquote><p>3.4. Prohibited Activities. Military personnel must not actively advocate supremacist, extremist, or criminal gang doctrine, ideology, or causes, including those that <b>advance, encourage, or advocate illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, sex, religion, ethnicity, or national origin</b> or those that <b>advance, encourage, or advocate the use of force, violence, or criminal activity or otherwise advance efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights</b>.</p>
<p>3.4.2. Active participation in such gangs or organizations is prohibited . . . .</p>
<p>3.4.2.1. Active participation includes, but is not limited to:
<ul><li>3.4.2.1.1. Fundraising for, <b>or donating money to</b>, the organization;</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.2. Demonstrating or rallying;</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.3. Recruiting, training, organizing, or leading members;</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.4. Distributing material (including posting on-line);</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.5. Knowingly wearing gang colors or clothing;</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.6. Having tattoos or body markings associated with such gangs or organizations; or</li>
<li>3.4.2.1.7. Otherwise engaging in activities in furtherance of the objective of such gangs organizations that are detrimental to good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment or are incompatible with military service.</li></ul>
<p>3.4.2.2. Mere membership in the type of organization listed above is not prohibited. <b>However, membership must be considered in evaluating or assigning members, both military and civilian, as addressed in AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, and, AFI 36-2706, Equal Opportunity Program, Military and Civilian.</b>.</p>
<p>3.4.2.3. A supremacist doctrine, ideology, or cause is characterized by, but is not limited to, having a fundamental tenet of its nature that particular members of one race, color, gender, national origin, or ethnic group are <b>genetically superior</b> to others. Membership in such organizations is usually restricted to those belonging to that particular race, color, gender, national origin, or ethnic group.</p>
<p>3.4.2.4. An extremist doctrine, ideology, or cause is characterized by, but is not limited to, a common belief which might otherwise be politically or socially acceptable, but that <b>espouse the use or threat of force or violence to obtain their goals</b>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>DoDI 1325.06 has pretty much the same thing. It's specific enough to steer clear of, right? But then . . .</p>
<blockquote>
<p>3.4.4. It is a function of command to be vigilant about the existence of the type of activities enumerated above. <b>Commanders should intervene early, primarily through counseling, when observing such signs even though the signs may not rise to active advocacy or active participation or may not threaten good order and discipline, but only suggest such potential.</b> Active use of investigative authority to include a prompt and fair complaint process, and the use of administrative powers, such as <b>non-punitive counseling, and performance evaluations</b> should be used to deter such activities. The goal of early intervention is to minimize the risk of future prohibited activities.</p>
<ul><li><p>3.4.4.1. Examples of such signs, which, in the absence of the active advocacy or active participation, could include mere membership in criminal gangs and other organizations covered under paragraph 3.4.</p></li>
<li><p>3.4.4.2. Signs could also include <b>possession of literature, or visiting websites,</b> associated with such gangs or organizations, or with related ideology, doctrine, or causes.</p></li>
<li><p>3.4.4.3. <b>While mere membership, possession of literature or visiting such websites on a non-Government computer normally is not prohibited, it may merit further investigation and possibly counseling</b> to emphasize the importance of adherence to the AF values and to ensure that the Service member understands what activities are prohibited.</p></li></ul></blockquote>
<p></p>
<p>Regarding the two references above to AFI 36-2406, the performance evaluation system, it's important to understand what it does. Service members with so much as <i>tepid</i> evaluations, let alone actual <i>negative</i> evaluations, are typically blackballed for promotion, and members who are passed over for promotion are usually not permitted to remain in the service. DOD Civil Servants ("Civilians") do not generally have expectation of promotion once they reach journeyman grade. Otherwise, it varies by agency, but generally a sufficiently negative performance evaluation is usually one step towards dismissal. Civilians have a lot of protections that military don't have, but a sufficiently motivated and corrupt leadership can leave one fighting for his job.</p>
<p>So what does <a href="https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afi36-2406/afi36-2406.pdf">AFI 36-2406</a>, "Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems" (14 Nov 2019) have to say? From section 1.8, "Evaluator’s Mandatory Considerations":</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1.8.4. Prohibited Activities. Airmen are prohibited from <b>actively advocating supremacist, extremist, or criminal gang doctrine, ideology, or causes</b>, including those that <b>advance, encourage, or advocate illegal discrimination or deprive others of their civil rights</b>. Such behavior is incompatible with military service. Evaluators must <b>consider a ratee’s membership in these types of groups and document prohibited activity</b> by the ratee as prescribed in AFI 51-508, Political Activities, Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly of Air Force Personnel.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I suppose one could point out that "mere membership" should only be "considered", and only "prohibited activity" should be documented. But that would assume a good-faith interpretation of the language as written. The point of the Playbook is that, sure, you may <i>technically</i> have the right to freedom of association, but that won't stop the military from drubbing you out of the service anyway.</p>
<p>But, okay, so you don't join an organization that advocates violence. You're okay then, right? Don't be so sure. I had this very question about <a href="https://oathkeepers.org/declaration-of-orders-we-will-not-obey/">Oathkeepers</a>, whose members pledge not to obey unconstitutional orders, of which they list ten specifically, including an order to <a href="https://oathkeepers.org/2017/01/oath-keepers-molon-labe-pledge-archived-january-2013/">disarm the populace</a>. Does this count as "threatening violence"?</p>
<p>The Playbook has several QandA at the beginning. On p.C2:</p>
<blockquote><p>Q6: I thought Service members retained their Constitutional rights when they joined the military. Are you telling me I no longer have the right to Free Speech or Peaceful Assembly?</p>
<p>A6: Remember that military members and DoD civilian employees have access to classified information and occupy sensitive positions with access to lethal equipment, training, and tactics. Everyone with access to classified information or in a sensitive position is evaluated continuously, using government-wide guidelines to assess their strength of character, honesty, discretion, sound judgment, reliability to protect classified or sensitive information, and trustworthiness. Any doubt is resolved in favor of the national security.
<p>Potentially disqualifying conditions include:</p>
<ul><li>involvement in, support of, or association/sympathy with persons attempting to or training to commit, or advocacy of any act of sabotage, espionage, treason, terrorism, or sedition against the United States;</li>
<li>association or sympathy with persons or organizations that advocate, threaten, or use force or violence, or use any other illegal or unconstitutional means, in an effort to:
<ul><li>attempt to overthrow the U.S. Government or any state government;</li>
<li><b>prevent federal, state, or local government personnel from performing their official duties</b>;</li>
<li>gain retribution for perceived wrongs caused by the Federal, state, or local government; or prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or any state.</li></ul></li></ul>
</blockquote>
<p>
<p>We'll see more references to the security clearance process, but be aware that all servicemen carry a SECRET clearance, normally granted after a favorable "National Agency Check", which as I understand it is looking for criminal records. The clearance in itself doesn't automatically grant a servicemen access to classified information; he must also have a "need to know", meaning his duties require the access. I can't claim to know how much burden <i>not</i> having such access would impose on most servicemen. I can say that people working in the IC, and who carry TOP SECRET clearances, would basically be unemployable without a clearance.</p>
<p>The characterization in answer A6, above, isn't what the current version of the <a href="https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86.pdf">SF-86</a>, "Standard Questionnaire for National Security Positions" says. From Section 29, "Association Record":</p>
<blockquote><p>For the purpose of this question, terrorism is defined as any criminal acts that involve violence or are
dangerous to human life and appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or
coercion or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.</p>
<ul><li><p>29.1: Are you now or have you EVER been a member of an organization dedicated to terrorism, either with an awareness of the organization's dedication to that end, or with the specific intent to further such activities?</p></li>
<li><p>29.2: Have you EVER knowingly engaged in any acts of terrorism?</p></li>
<li><p>29.3: Have you EVER advocated any acts of terrorism or activities designed to overthrow the U.S. Government by force?</p></li>
<li><p>29.4: Have you EVER been a member of an organization dedicated to the use of violence or force to overthrow the United States Government, and which engaged in activities to that end with an awareness of the organization's dedication to that end or with the specific intent to further such activities?</p></li>
<li><p>29.5: Have you EVER been a member of an organization that advocates or practices commission of acts of force or violence to discourage others from exercising their rights under the U.S. Constitution or any state of the United States with the specific intent to further such action?</p></li>
<li><p>29.6: Have you EVER knowingly engaged in activities designed to overthrow the U.S. Government by force?</p></li>
<li><p>29.7: Have you EVER associated with anyone involved in activities to further terrorism?</p></li></ul>
</blockquote>
<p>Those are very different questions (and a big improvement over the 2010 versions in effect when I <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2012/03/whos-up-whos-down.html">first wrote</a> on this topic). I could point out that they say nothing at all about "preventing government personnel from performing their duties". I could also point out that the formal purpose of the clearance process is to <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2013/05/security-fun-frolics.html">protect classified information</a>, and nothing in the Playbook even pretends to establish a connection between "association or sympathy" with such organizations and its compromise. But again, these assume a good-faith interpretation of the regulations as written, and the Playbook clearly signals the intention to do the opposite. I would not expect the same standard would be applied to Oathkeepers and, say, BlackLivesMatter, which killed 18 people and caused $2B worth of damage on behalf of a fentanyl addict resisting arrest.</p>
<p>Well, okay, you'll play it safe and not join Oathkeepers. I'll be safe then, right?</p>
<p>The Playbook (p.C1) says "at this time we are not aware of an official, comprehensive U.S. government approved list of domestic extremist organizations." But some organizations are listed anyway.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ERSr8FHNTxQ/YDwluI7RPcI/AAAAAAAABos/2ZJ3qPjGLrgrYgtkXezsNW6e3xG5OdVqgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1280/WhatDoesWrongLookLike.png" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ERSr8FHNTxQ/YDwluI7RPcI/AAAAAAAABos/2ZJ3qPjGLrgrYgtkXezsNW6e3xG5OdVqgCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/WhatDoesWrongLookLike.png"/></a></div>
<p>This graphic is taken from an un-numbered page in Appendix G, "Impermissible Behaviors". Let's start with the easiest organization, <a href="https://www.identityevropa.com">Identity Evropa</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>Who we are:</b> We are a group of patriotic American Identitarians who have realized that we are descended from the great traditions, history, and people that flowed from Europe. We embrace the idea that our identities are central to who we are, and take pride in our history and rich cultural heritage. At a time when every other group is free to stand behind its identity, we choose to assert ours as well.</p></blockquote>
<p>Identity Evropa is mentioned on p.22 of "Report to Armed Services Committees on Screening Individuals Who Seek To Enlist in the Armed Forces", Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, delivered to Congress on 14 October 2020. This, too, I could not find on the open internet, but it appears to be the subject of <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2021/02/16/pentagon-report-reveals-inroads-white-supremacists-have-made-in-military/">this article</a>. The report, citing not the IE website but the Anti-Defamation League, calls the above statement "White Supremacy":</p>
<blockquote><p>IE/AIM described their objectives as "an American Identitarian organization. As such, our main objective is to create a better world for people of European heritage particularly in America--by peacefully effecting cultural change. Identity Evropa is thus an explicitly non-violent organization <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200514220456/https://www.adl.org/resources/profiles/identity-evropa">(ADL, n.d.)</a>." IE/AIM summarizes its views into "five principles: nationalism, identitarianism, protectionism, non-interventionism, and populism" (ADL, n.d.). Their goals include seeking political positions for its members and promoting several political candidates to run in the 2020 U.S. elections to shift the power structure in the United States and influence U.S. immigration policies.</p></blockquote>
<p>The linked reference is to the archive page of the ADL on the day prior to when it was retrieved for the purposes of the Report (15 May 2020). I want to call attention to the fact that nothing cited claims superiority, let alone genetic superiority, on behalf of anyone. Yet apparently, the ADL asserts this to be true, and everything else -- the Report, the Playbook -- is downstream from that assertion. Thus an NCO, doxxed by the Huffington Post, was <a href="https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/02/24/board-recommends-discharge-of-airman-with-white-nationalist-ties/">"discharged for misconduct"</a> for his association.</p>
<p>Next up is Proud Boys. They don't have a website that I can find, so I can't give an account of them in their own words, but they are either stalwart defenders of the right to peaceably assemble (<a href="https://vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-thank-god-for-the-proud-boys">Ann Coulter</a>) or an FBI honeypot (<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210127235011/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/27/nyregion/proud-boys-informant-enrique-tarrio.html">New York Times</a>). (BTW, I'm going to try to use archive.org for links to MSM sources going forward.) Now, this person also was recorded making lose talk about getting into fistfights, "overthrowing the government", and "civil war", so it's hard to pin down what exactly got him barred from (I assume) Wright-Patterson AFB (AFMC HQ). My point here is that even the NYT is content to call them "far-right nationalist" rather than "supremacist", and their use of violence is by all accounts strictly defensive. So how does this meet the <i>impermissibility</i> criteria?</p>
<p>Finally*, we have the <a href="https://patriotfront.us/manifesto">Patriot Front</a>. I'm not even going to pretend I understand their manifesto, but I looked in vain for claims of "genetic superiority" or "threat of force to obtain goals". The graphic says, "SUBJECT engaged in white supremacist messaging over 2 years to include posting a slogan associated with the white nationalist group “Patriot Front” that read, “not stolen, conquered” over a map of the United States." So apparently, "Stolen, Not Conquered" joins "All Lives Matter" and "It's Okay to be White" on the list of <i>trivially true</i> statements that become "white supremacist messaging" because white supremacists are not allergic to trivially true statements. So, SUBJECT was <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20201029224654/https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marine-corps-white-supremacist-infantryman/">"issued nonjudicial punishment, demoted 2 ranks, [and] administratively separated."</a></p>
<p>It's pretty clear from this graphic that the DoD isn't declaring war on "supremacy" or "extremism" but on nationalism generally. But okay, so <i>you</i> aren't going to join some obscure right-wing group. So what do you have to worry about?</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fVTTA_Ffqxc/YDxBYKV5cpI/AAAAAAAABo0/bqMD9ik9STENqH4hW1l0XfVxrl-MpsHtACLcBGAsYHQ/s1280/Examples.png" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fVTTA_Ffqxc/YDxBYKV5cpI/AAAAAAAABo0/bqMD9ik9STENqH4hW1l0XfVxrl-MpsHtACLcBGAsYHQ/s400/Examples.png"/></a></div>
<p>This is the scenario description from Appendix G, "Impermissible Behavior" in the "Discussion Guide" section.</p>
<blockquote><p>SCENARIO 6: A civilian employee routinely eats lunch in the unit breakroom. She <b>sits alone and reads books that vilify a specific ethnic group</b>.</p>
<p>Considerations: If the employee is sitting in the breakroom reading magazines that vilify another ethnic group; this behavior alone is not necessarily actionable. Supervision should contact the servicing SJA [Staff Judge Advocate] and CPS [Civilian Personnel Services] to discuss the situation and options available. However, <b>if another employee or employees see this and complains, then it is incumbent upon the commander or management official to counsel the employee that such reading material in the public areas are offensive to others and instruct them to cease from reading such material in the open and in the workplace.</b> Any verbal instruction should be documented in some manner, such as in either the employee’s 971 file or a Memorandum for Record. If the employee refuses to do so and continues the behavior, then progressive discipline may be in order; however, it is recommended that the commander or management official instruct the employee to cease and desist reading such material in the public workspace and contact their servicing CPS for next steps. If the employee uses her government computer to access websites that vilify another ethnic group, the employee should be instructed to cease and desist the behavior, remove their
access to the computer and contact CPS. <b>A search of the computer is likely the reasonable next steps</b>, however, again the commander should contact their servicing CPS before taking this step or others. Depending on the egregiousness of the offense, a range of charges may be possible, to include misuse of government resources, inappropriate conduct, or conduct unbecoming a federal employee. The CPS will likely include Employee Assistance Program (EAP) information for the employee’s use. <b>The Agency could also report the incident to the security manager/IP office as a potential security violation.</b> If access to classified/secret information is removed, then possible “indefinite suspension” may be possible as well.</p></blockquote>
<p>This scenario goes well beyond "violence", "supremacy". It goes beyond "advocacy" or "participation". It's not even about race. It's about a little old lady sitting by herself reading about the history of Islam or the crime rates of immigrants, and thus is considered guilty until proven innocent, and then still guilty. Again, we read the transparent abuse of the security clearance process to allege a security violation (in other words, breaking rules designed to protect classified information) to punish someone for something that doesn't involved classified information at all.</p>
<p>There is oh-so-much more in this Playbook, but I will have to save it for subsequent posts.</p>
<p>* Finally, as in I'm not even going to bother with criminal no-hopers like Atomwaffen.
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-8604101713765072252021-02-14T14:43:00.000-05:002021-02-14T14:43:24.439-05:00I Hate the Cable Company II: Final Farewell.<p><a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2018/01/i-hate-cable-company.html">I fired my cable company.</a> Not just the television portion, mind you; I cut that back in 2015. No, this time I cancelled the whole smack: phone and internet both.</p>
<p>It wasn't exactly what I had intended. Over the last three years, Time Warner, a.k.a. Spectrum, had again ratcheted up my rates, until the last bill (for only two services) was $95/month. Thinking I knew the drill for getting another discounted rate, I took the modem down to their offices and dropped it on the desk. To which the underpaid customer service rep said: okay.</p>
<p>The first problem I had to solve was getting back on the internet. Spectrum bought AT&T, so there aren't really any bargains on DSL anymore. Fortunately, we have unlimited data through our cell phone provider. Unfortunately, this plan does not include tethering, which costs an additional $10/15GB/phone. I initially avoided this fee and cap with <a href="http://pdanet.co/">PdaNet</a>, a program that, once installed on a PC and phone, allows tethering over USB. The free tier of PdaNet has its own data limit, but I went ahead and bought the $8 "full version" without a limit. I wasn't sure how much this tethering aggravates the cell phone provider, so I also acquired a VPN service to mask my usage.</p>
<p>PdaNet has its own set of limitations:</p>
<ul><li><p>USB tethering requires the "developer options" and "USB debugging" to both be active on the phone. This worked on my daughter's and my Samsung phones, but not on my wife's LG phone. Not sure why.</p></li>
<li><p>The paid version is supports "WiFi Direct Hotspot" from the phone to one or more PCs. Note, however, that the wifi connection must be established to the phones from within the PCs' PdaNet application (Settings-->WiFi Pairing), not as you would connect to a standard hotspot.</p></li>
<li><p>The desktop app is supposed to support "WiFi Share (beta)" from the desktop's wifi as an ad hoc network; however, this apparently only works from computers running Windows 7, not from Windows 10. I guess this is consistent with the ad hoc capability being generally disabled on Windows 10. Supposedly this can be overcome by changing the wifi card driver, but I couldn't make that work either.</p></li>
<li><p>I was able to connect every PC I own, and an old Nokia phone without cell service, but I failed to connect a Samsung tablet. I didn't have a C2C USB cable, but none of the "WiFi Direct Hotspot", "WiFi Share (beta)", and "legacy bluetooth mode" would allow me to access the internet through the connections. Also not sure why, but connecting to ad hoc networks is generally a problem for tablets, unless one is willing to perform some serious hacks on the OS, and I was not. I may update this post when/if I get a C2C.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>So I wound up having to buy the cell company mobile hotspot anyway to run our tablet collection, but I anticipate keeping this below the 15GB monthly, and even if we don't, our plan let's us to exceed the limits at throttled speeds. </p>
<p>The next problem I had to solve was replacing my wife's email account, which had been provided by the cable company, and to which she unceremoniously lost access. For my non-blogging life, I've been happy with <a href="https://outlook.live.com/owa">Microsoft</a>, but in the interest of giving the finger to Big Tech, she chose <a href="https://www.protonmail.com">Protonmail</a>. Protonmail offers end-to-end encryption within it subscriber base, but not outside of it. The free tier get you very basic webmail, the paid tier ($4/month if you buy a year's worth) gets you MS Outlook integration (and other programs) and the ability to create additional online mail folders. Unfortunately, Protonmail does NOT allow contact synchronization, nor does it offer any calendar support at all.</p>
<p>A couple of interesting experiences with our VPN: </p>
<ul><li><p>My ability to access a website can depend on the server to which I connect. Last evening, I suddenly stopped connecting to a number of sites, one of which was <a href="https://www.duckduckgo.com">DuckDuckGo</a>. (Facebook was not affected.) Changing servers fixed the problem, but I'll be disappointed if this gets to be typical.</p></li>
<li><p>The VPN interferes with my voicemail reception. Voicemail recordings would normally download directly to my phone automatically, but the VPN prevents this, probably by cell company policy to prevent voicemail hacking. I can still access voicemails on the cell carrier's server (*86), but I don't have much confidence that I haven't lost any of them.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>It's mildly inconvenient not receiving internet service through our home router, to which we have ethernet connections to a printer and a shared drive, plus a couple of "smart" home devices. This doesn't matter much when we are USB tethering, but my a computer can only connect to one hotspot at a time; if we're tethering to the phone's "direct hotspot", we have to disconnect to connect to the home router to access files or run the printer. Likewise, I have to unplug the ethernet cable from a computer to connect it to the direct hotspot.</p>
Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-83396362884455364882021-01-27T17:56:00.000-05:002021-01-27T17:56:39.930-05:00Crime Victimization Survey, 2019<p>Last September, <a href="https://www.unz.com/isteve/feds-in-2018-blacks-violently-victimized-asians-275-times-as-often-as-asians-violently-victimized-blacks/">Steve Sailer</a> examined the <a href="https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf">2018 Crime Victimization Survey</a> published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the Department of Justice. In November, the <a href="https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv19.pdf">2019 CVS</a> was published, so I'm going to duplicate his results for interracial violent crime.</p>
<p>Here is the original data from table 15:</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z8qLr_2cEQw/YBHIRmoH3vI/AAAAAAAABnM/rT2Jn6FM29YqMPN1z46NvaDgRzOfCrulgCLcBGAsYHQ/s595/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_Original.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="450" data-original-height="152" data-original-width="595" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Z8qLr_2cEQw/YBHIRmoH3vI/AAAAAAAABnM/rT2Jn6FM29YqMPN1z46NvaDgRzOfCrulgCLcBGAsYHQ/s600/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_Original.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>The "Asian" category has been eliminated entirely as a victim category; according to the notes, the "Other" victim category "includes Asians, Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders, American Indians and Alaska Natives, persons of two or more races, and multiple offenders of
various races". I see from the "Highlights" section that Asians were 1% of perpetrators and 2.3% of victims; according to the text next to Table 9, the rate of Asian victimization fell by 50% from 2018 to 2019.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4hYSPGB06qQ/YBHM0X4WRqI/AAAAAAAABns/i-ytxIG152ADcRnw5VNTgc2uqLF67NVSgCLcBGAsYHQ/s536/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_RawNumbers.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="172" data-original-width="536" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4hYSPGB06qQ/YBHM0X4WRqI/AAAAAAAABns/i-ytxIG152ADcRnw5VNTgc2uqLF67NVSgCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_RawNumbers.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>Here I multiplied out the percentages to get the raw numbers in each category, summed them by offender, and calculated the percent of the total for each offender category. Note that the percentage of violent crimes committed by blacks and Hispanics rose substantially. Blacks, at 12% of the population, committed 20% of the violent crimes in 2018 and 26% in 2019. Hispanics at 17% of the population, committed 15% of violent crimes in 2018 and 20% in 2019. The white rate declined slightly and the "Other" rate declined dramatically.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d8RQhSN-lJ8/YBHkcucOhTI/AAAAAAAABn8/6Bnn_r1OxJ4-WbLrLZvRZ34c5CL9ONuKgCLcBGAsYHQ/s391/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_PercentOfPerps.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="146" data-original-width="391" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d8RQhSN-lJ8/YBHkcucOhTI/AAAAAAAABn8/6Bnn_r1OxJ4-WbLrLZvRZ34c5CL9ONuKgCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_PercentOfPerps.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>In this table, I have calculated the percentages by offender. For instance, 86.8% of the victims of white criminals are fellow whites, 4.5% are black, and 8.6% are Hispanic. Meanwhile, 44.2% of the victims of black criminals are white, 32.4% are fellow blacks, and 23.3% are Hispanic.</p>
<p>It's important to understand that the greater percentage of white victims of blacks offenders compared to black victims of white offenders does <i>not</i> mean that blacks are targeting whites. In a world where offenders were selecting their victims without regard to race, the percentage of victims for all perpetrators would be exactly that victim's percentage of the population. In other words, 62% of the victims of white offenders would be white, 12% would be black, etc. Likewise, 62% of the victims of black offenders would <i>also</i> be white, and 12% would be black, because <i>that's who makes up the population of victims</i>. And these percentages would apply irrespective of differential rates of crimality.</p>
<p>As it happens, the data show the preference* of all offenders for committing violence against members of their own race. As Steve has pointed out, this is good for social peace. But it's not the end of the story.</p>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lV_u-v2s0ck/YBHqKdLyw_I/AAAAAAAABoI/BgRxLLijfakh7zf3904taXgdNzlkaP8MwCLcBGAsYHQ/s370/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_IndividualViolenceRatios.jpg" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; "><img alt="" border="0" width="400" data-original-height="150" data-original-width="370" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lV_u-v2s0ck/YBHqKdLyw_I/AAAAAAAABoI/BgRxLLijfakh7zf3904taXgdNzlkaP8MwCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/DOJ_BJS_CVS2019_IndividualViolenceRatios.jpg"/></a></div>
<p>I obtained these ratios by conditioning the interracial crime raw numbers on the offenders percentage of the population, and then taking the ratio. For instance, I divided the number of black-on-white crimes from two slides ago (472,644) by the percentage of blacks in the population (12%). Likewise, I divided the number of white-on-black crimes (90,019) by the percentage of whites in the population (62%). I then divided the first ratio by the second to get what I will call an Individual Danger Ratio of 27.13. This is basically saying that a randomly selected black person is 27 times more likely to commit a crime against a randomly selected white person than that white person is to commit the same crime against the black person.</p>
<p>* Preference, that is, in a model of crime where criminals had criminal access to all races equally. Of course, that's not true: our communities are highly segregated by race, and this data mainly show the criminal preference for committing crimes close to home. To show actual racial preferences in victims, we would need to restrict the interracial crime numbers to people living in the same community, but I'm not sure that data exist.</p>Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-65655577802696534362021-01-23T16:58:00.000-05:002021-01-23T16:58:12.023-05:00On Multiracial Whiteness<p>Via <a href="https://www.unz.com/isteve/washington-post-the-racial-enemy-is-multiracial-whiteness/">iSteve</a>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/15/understand-trumps-support-we-must-think-terms-multiracial-whiteness/">a WaPo op-ed</a> on "Multiracial Whiteness".</p>
<p>Of course, it's easy to make fun of the obvious oxymoron, but let's admit this is a step up for us from the usual accusation of "racist" or "white supremacist". It's still terrible branding, which is why Cristina Beltrán uses it, given her intent to impugn. I prefer the name "American" without hyphens or qualification. But I'm not here to quibble over naming.</p>
<p>Rather, I want to counter her accusations of "agression, domination, and exclusion" with a definition of my own. What I call American and what Cristina calls "Whiteness" lies at the intersection of:</p>
<ul><li><p><b>Identity.</b> Who are you? Whither lie your loyalties? Do you look upon the faces of Mount Rushmore and say, "that's my heritage"? Do you read the stories of Jamestown and Plymouth Rock and say, "these are my people"?</p></li>
<li><p><b>Values.</b> What do you uphold? Do you believe in limited government? Self-reliance? RKBA? Do you respect the principles, both in law and in practice, contained in the Bill of Rights?</p></li>
<li><p><b>Social Competence.</b> Do you, on balance, generate positive rather than negative externalities? Do you earn your own living and pay your own way? Do you adhere to Commandments VI - X?</p></li></ul>
<p>Not all of us sit perfectly at this intersection, and not all the time. But the further we stray from it, the further we stray from being American.</p>
<p>This is not to be naive about the correlation between this intersection and being racially white. It is not to deny that the process by which non-whites are assimilated into this intersection has broken down under the weight of the rapidly rising percentage of non-whites. And it is not to pretend that the official culture is not now actively hostile to that assimilation and doesn't disincentivize it in various ways.
<p>It is only to say that the intersection itself doesn't require one to be "White" in its strict biological sense of having the majority of one's recent ancestors descend from the European peoples, but only requires something like what Ruth, the Moabite immigrant and ancestor to King David and Jesus, <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ruth%201:15-17&version=ESV">said</a> to her mother-in-law Naomi:</p>
<blockquote><p>Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God will be my God."</p></blockquote>
<p>Likewise, as God through Christ can <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+11%3A11-36&version=ESV">graft we Gentiles</a> onto the Tree of Life*, so have we gun-toting**, MAGA cap-wearing***, Republican-voting**** Americans grafted non-whites into the tree of Multiracial Whiteness.</p>
<p>* The metaphor is made stronger by my observation that the most of the graftees come to the American intersection by way of Evangelical Christianity.</p>
<p>** Only metaphorically. I lost all my guns in a boating accident last Tuesday in the Gulf, never to be seen again.</p>
<p>*** Also metaphorical. I've never actually worn one of those.</p>
<p>**** Since it looks like such voting is on its way to being a <a href="https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2021/01/21/bidens-secdef-nominee-says-dod-will-participate-in-democrats-extremist-witchhunt/">firing offense</a>, I should probably abjure on this one as well.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-64465106343407059952021-01-23T15:28:00.002-05:002021-01-23T15:28:29.011-05:00Scott Alexander is Back!<p>In <a href="https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/still-alive">a new substack blog</a> and under his real name. Welcome, and best wishes.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-48927321021394399652020-11-24T09:43:00.000-05:002020-11-24T09:43:40.230-05:00Whither Singles Ministries?<p>In my <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-bad-decision-handbook.html">last post</a>, I wrote:
<blockquote>the social space in which a non-college-educated woman (for instance) can be courted by a college-educated professional man is much smaller than it perhaps once was.
</blockquote>
<p>I started to add that one such social space remaining would be church singles ministries. These usually take the form of age-bracketed Sunday school classes, often specifically advertised as catering to unmarried people. I <a href="https://academywatch.blogspot.com/2017/05/clogging-social.htm">met my own wife</a> in one such class at a large mainline church in a city Out West and have no regrets.</p>
<p>But I noted some time ago that this church no longer offers such classes. I did a quick check among the larger local Protestant Evangelical churches I knew about (at least one of which is famous enough that you, too, have heard of it), yet found only one that advertised a singles ministry (for 30- and 40-somethings). My RC friends have reported a similar decline in single's ministries for Roman Catholics. What's going on?</p>
<p>Has online dating really sucked dry the market for IRL social spaces? Perhaps all single people today believe the advantages of online dating (large pool of participants, limited personal exposure prior to date commitment) outweigh the costs (Tinder screening factors, date commitment necessary to meet and interact).</p>
<p>Perhaps it reflects the desires of women, or at least of those with the loudest voices. Putting single men and women together inevitably means the former will approach the latter. No doubt some women want to be approached, but it may be difficult for those women to express this against women who do not want to be approached, or for whom being approached by the wrong men or in the wrong way is an intolerable social cost. I expect their complaints would find a receptive ear among the church leaders, older men who met and married their wives in a different age, men who accpet uncritically the claim that today's low marriage rates are wholly the fault of men for their failure to meet women's expectations.Dr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.com0