Book Review

Jan312022

Episode 481 – An Awful Human Being

A woman shows just how much hate is on the Left.

The military ain’t what it used to be.

And what can put our kids on the right path?

 

This Is A Terrible Human Being

According to Fox News:

New York City police Officer Jason Rivera was killed Jan. 21 by a suspect while responding to a domestic dispute in Harlem. A second police officer died days later.

On Friday, thousands lined Manhattan’s streets to mourn the 22-year-old Rivera, but actress Jacqueline Guzman likely wasn’t one of them, the New York Post reported.

This is what she said:

What an f-ing terrible human being!

First off, everything she said was wrong:

  • Cops do not kill people, will-nilly.
    • There are around 50 million police interactions a year. Everything from traffic stops to civilians 911 calls.
    • In 2021, there were only 880 people shot and a total of 1140 were killed. That is .0023% of interactions lead to a death at the hands of police. Does that sound like police are hunting people?
    • Blacks are also not dying at huge rates in 2021. Out of 880 police shootings, 113 blacks were killed. That’s 13%. According to the last census, the black population is 12.4%.
    • Hispanics make up 32% of the population but only 7.2% of police shooting deaths.
    • None of this is true.

This year, 8 police have already been killed. Only 74 were killed all year last year. All this because police are not being supported by DAs, Leftist politicians and morons like the one you just heard. This was not only mourning the lost life of a young police officer. This is a protest of the mistreatment police and he lax efforts of the district attorney in prosecuting criminals.

Here’s a news report from CBS News. It is about Jason Rivera’s widow, Dominique Luzuriaga, blasting the Left wing liberal Manhattan district attorney.  Normally would just play her words, but I want you to hear the report because what the media is pushing in half the problem:

 

First thing I want to point out is that the officer and his widow is Hispanic. There is this narrative that police department are systemically racist against people of color. The reality is 50% of the police forces in big cities are made up of people of color. That kind of throws a wrench into the narrative. So how des the media handle it? They ignore it.

I also love the narrative that is being pushed that everything is about gun violence. Here’s a secret: Guns don’t commit violence. Guns don’t wake up in the morning and just decide to shoot someone. People commit violece and people use more than guns. They use knives, bats, cars and assorted other weapons. Two police officers were killed this year because they were intentionally run over by a car. Criminals commit violence. They are the problem, not guns. But the narrative requires we take the criminal out of the equation because they are now considered victims by the Left.

This gals speech is important because she is basically not allowing the narrative. Her husband was killed by a criminal who was on the streets because of their piece of crap district attorney. He was not killed by an inanimate object. This whole display is a protest by cops and we need to see more of this.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-actress-jacqueline-guzman-fired-jason-rivera-funeral-rant-streets-one-cop
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/improved-race-ethnicity-measures-reveal-united-states-population-much-more-multiracial.html

 

Speaking of Corruption

According to Fox News:

Black Lives Matter (BLM) moved millions of dollars to a charity in Canada run by the wife of co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors to purchase a mansion that used to be the headquarters of the Communist Party of Canada, according to public records reviewed by the New York Post.

M4BJ, which is a non-profit based in Toronto that was set up in part by Janaya Khan, bought the 10,000-square foot mansion for $6.3 million in July 2021. Khan is the wife of Khan-Cullors, a self-professed Marxist who helped found Black Lives Matter Global Foundation Network.

Gee, who saw that coming?

BLM is worth $60 million and has had its fair share of scandals:

  • Patrisse Khan-Cullors bought three homes with BLM money for $3.2 million.
  • She resigned from BLM and apparently picked a successor.
  • Unfortunately, the successor didn’t know she was appointed, leading people to not know who is running the organization.
  • One of their leaders for the New York City chapter said that if policing becomes more aggressive to curb the crime problem, BLM was going to get violent.
  • Chapters throughout the United States have been asking BLM what they are doing with all the money since they see nothing being done in black neighborhoods where blacks are being killed by other blacks on a daily basis. I’ve talked about that before.

BLM is a non-profit organization and does not need to pay taxes. Many are wondering why? What do they do? Where are all the donations going?

Well, we know. The money is being used to enrich the leadership. They are a Marxist organization (they admit this) that uses tragedy in the black community to push discord. Their ultimate goal (again, they admit this) is to overturn all the American institutions to transform the country into a communist utopia. But it is not just race they use. They also use gender. Their goal is to pit people against each other.

This is an organization that should not be a non-profit and should be investigated for corruption. They use white guilt, a term brought to be by a book of the same name by Shelby Steele, to con companies into donating to them. They peaked after George Floyd died.

They really need to be investigated and people should be going to prison.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/blm-transferred-millions-canadian-charity-buy-mansion-formerly-owned-communist-party
https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/commentary/the-agenda-black-lives-matter-far-different-the-slogan

 

Diversity is Overrated

John Kirby went on Fox News with Dana Perino. They were talking about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. At the end of the interview, Dana Perino asked the question every normal human being is wondering. Is wokeness in the military hurting the military. I thought it was a great and relevant question. John Kirby didn’t. In fact, he got kind of ticked. Listen:

I’m not sure what his answer is. He says wokeness isn’t a thing and then he goes out of his way to defend it. He basically is admitting that there is a diversity, wokeness, social justice thing going on in the military though he doesn’t want to say it in so many words.

I was in the military. Let me let you in on something: The military is already diverse. Black, white and Hispanic are all together. Jews, Muslims and Christians are all together. Men and women are all together. Smart and dumb are all together. The speech that Gunnery Sargent Hartman gave in the beginning of Full Metal Jacket pretty much sums up the military. Everyone is equal, no one is different. They are all military. Their color doesn’t matter. Their class doesn’t matter. Their religion doesn’t matter. Their sex doesn’t matter. The military is a brotherhood and I mean brotherhood to be genderless. They are all soldiers and they are there for one thing: Defeat the enemy and be there for each other.

This is where the military is going wrong right now. Instead of creating a brotherhood by stripping away individuality, they are now extenuating individuality. This is what causes conflict between people. When I was in the military, I did not care whether the person next to me was black or white. I only worried about that person having my back. Now, with critical race theory and gender theory being pushed, soldiers have to worry about that.

By the way, those theories they are pushing onto the soldiers were written by people who have never been in the military, don’t understand it and, typically, don’t like it.

And another thing, what is so important about diversity anyway? Why force it? Ann Coulter and a bunch or other writers have asked that question before. Why force it? It has been happening naturally for decades.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/pentagon-spox-fires-back-at-dana-perino-over-question-about-woke-military-ridiculous

 

That’s a Good Idea

I just finished a book called Woke, Inc. by a former pharma CEO named Vivek Ramaswamy. It was a pretty good book about how corporations are going woke and why they are doing it. It also talks about why that is dangerous for democracy within the United States. The book was pretty good and very informative when it comes to how corporations work and what they do that affects the country politically. It also talks about the train of thought of woke CEOs and their true intentions.

I think the author has some credibility based on the fact that he was a politically moderate CEO for a successful pharma company and had to deal with woke employees and other CEOs.

The second to last chapter of the book was enlightening. He talks about the bastardization of service within this country. All except the best of us perform service for personal reasons. A student may volunteer so that he can get into a good college. Adults may donate money to get a good tax deduction. We rarely do something without getting something back.

He sees this as very embedded into woke service. People go to protests in order to feel better about themselves. People don’t really know why they are protesting. People really don’t care about what they are protesting. People like Jesse Waters, Steven Crowder and Fleccas show this when they interview protestors and ask them questions about the issues. They are just out there to show how woke they are and want to feel good about being social justice warriors.

The big problem with this type of service is that it is distinctly anti-American. Ramaswamy says we need to push people into service that is distinctly pro-American. I believe this. I have always thought it would be a good idea that Americans are forced to join the service for two years like Singapore and Israel do. I am what I am because the military really did shape me. To be clear, I did not complete my service because of youthful indiscretions which I will not get into, but it did have an affect on me and I appreciate the three years I was in.

But Ramaswamy says this would not work. First, we do have freedoms in this country. Conscious objections are an accepted part of society. If you don’t want to serve in the military because you hate war, you have that right. Second, it’s too late. We need to have our youth performing pro-American, pro-community service. The problem is the kids are already learning the quid pro quo of service. He suggest forcing children into civic service during summer vacations.

He says our children have way too much free time. They get 2 1/2 months off for summer, a month off for Christmas vacation, two weeks off for spring break. And what are they doing during all this free time? Nothing. They don’t even work anymore. I was working at the age of 13. My parents forced me to work so I could learn some work ethic.

I think that’s a great idea. I don’t think something like this will work, can be implemented because I can imagine the backlash. But our kids need something to put them on the right track. I seriously worry about our future because our children seem to have no direction, they’re not educated, they reject debate and reason and they are being indoctrinated into this twisted, anti-American philosophy.

 

 

 

 

 

Beijing Olympics Athletes Brace for the Most Complex Games Ever https://www.wsj.com/articles/beijing-olympics-winter-games-athletes-covid-china-politics-11643562434

 

https://www.foxnews.com/world/nova-scotia-outlaws-gathering-highway-freedom-convoy-truckers-vaccine-mandatehttps://www.foxnews.com/world/canada-pm-trudeau-undisclosed-location-freedom-convoy

 

spacer
Nov152020

Episode 249 – Animal Farm, Chapter 9

Here is chapter 9 of George Orwell’s Animal Farm. This chapter will show us the utter evil of the pigs and their oppression is beginning to become a stark reality for the animals of the farm.

1 – This is a flat out lie as we will see later. There is no lush green pasture for those who are too old to work.

2 – This is a common tragedy in communist countries: starvation and famine. That is because most of the countries are isolated and cannot produce what is necessary for the population. It is also because the population must perform other tasks outside of their normal duties. In this case, the windmill needs to be rebuilt. This takes the animals time away from farming. The pigs are both blind to this and turn the other way. They do not think it is a bad as all that because the pigs are satisfied. Communist countries that have suffered from starvation and famine leading to tens of thousands of deaths include China under Mao, the Soviet Union under Stalin, Cuba under Castro, North Korea under the Kim family and Venezuela under the Chavez/Maduro regimes. By the way, Orwell is specifically talking about communist governments but this is really about tyrannical governments. Mao, Stalin, the Kim family, Castro, Chavez and Maduro were all dictators.

3 – The great lie we are even being told today. When life is dictated by a government, one can never be free. Suffering, risk and hard work are part of freedom. That is how one can rise above their current situation and become successful. That’s capitalism. Socialism promises nothing and gives no rewards for success. We will get that example with Boxer, the hardest worker on the farm, later in the chapter.

4 – This is the creation of the upper and lower class. The pigs were to be segregated from the rest of the population because the rest of the population was below them. What’s worse: the animals now had to work harder to build structures that only benefitted the pigs.

5 – Pure tone-deafness of the pig leadership. Or they just didn’t care. With the animals starving and not enough food being grown, the pigs take up much needed fertile land to grow barley for their luxury of beer.

6 – This is a prime example of military parades. These parades are meant to instill pride with its citizens and instill fear for their enemies. Though the animals did not have a vast army of large missiles to show their strength, the firing of the gun could be that intended intimidation.

7 – Do you ever notice tyrannical governments always refer to themselves as “democracy” or “democratic republics” even though they are clearly dictatorships or totalitarian communists? Union of Soviet Socialist Republic. People’s Republic of North Korea. People’s Republic of China. German Democratic Republic (East Germany under the Soviet Union). None of these countries practiced the political systems of the republic or democracy.

Also, we see the continued erosion of history. This is needed to continue with the “revolution” or “us and them” mentality.

8 – This metaphor is pretty obvious. Moses represents Moses from the Old Testament who led the Jews out slavery from the Egyptians and to the promised land. This could be a rebuke at the rejection of the animals for disavowing their god (God?) for the promises of earthly material things also know as utopia (heaven on earth).

I’m not sure I like that Orwell added this metaphor into this book. As far as I’m concerned, it’s too little, too late and it has not been something brought up since the beginning of the book. Not to mention, it has very little to do with the conclusion of the book. It’s almost as if Orwell wanted to add another page to the chapter.

9 – This is probably the second most powerful scene in the entire book. Boxer was a devout follower, almost a religious follower. This might explain the religious context from the Moses text. But, when his value to the collective ran its course, he was banished and his body, which had three years left, was used to profit the farm, leading to his death. See, the collective only sees people as commodities that are there to serve the collective. When the commodity cannot provide for the collective, it is cast away. To the tyrannical collective; in this case, communism, people are things that can be discarded.

10 – This is a threat. A warning. All dissenters will face the lash, the gulag or the guillotine.

11 – Something I want to conclude with. In this book, Orwell is trying to convey the evils of communism. But I rarely talk about communism. I talk mostly about the tyrant or tyranny. I do this because the country he is referring to, the Soviet Union, was not really a true communist or Marxist country. Neither are many of the “communist” countries. The were dictatorships. They may have started as communist countries but the, eventually turned into dictatorships.

Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, the Kim family, Maduro, Chavez, Hitler, Mussolini were all dictators that practiced either a socialist or fascist economic system. They were no different the open dictators like Bashar al-Assad, Ferdinand Marcos, Napoleon or Genghis Kahn.

Remember, tyranny is about power, and power can only belong to one. And it must be protected by the tyrant.

spacer
Mar242020

Episode 146 Show Notes – It is a Chinese Virus

The news is saturated with the Wuhan Virus. I am not going to bite on it anymore. I’ve been stuck in my place for a week. I’ve heard all the statistics and news. Let’s just talk about it from a real life perspective. And, since we’re all stuck inside, waiting for everyone to die a terrible plague-like death, lets talk about what is happening in the human terms. Not like what we hear on the news. Because what we are hearing on the news and from the government is stupid.

Then, lets talk about what we should be hearing. What we need as a society. What we need to hear from our government. What we regular people may need to do.to get through this.

 

No More News

Well, it seems that life has stopped. There isn’t any news except for this damn virus. I decided it was time to change some of the content of this podcast because there is nothing really in the news. No debates or news outside of this pandemic. Even the Presidential campaign has been put on hold. But is that a surprise? All the candidates are well in the age range for mortality for this virus. Not to mention I’m sure the campaigns don’t want their candidates saying anything because they are so dumb.

I love the politicizing of this virus though. My girlfriend came over one day and called Trump ma racist because he called the virus the Chinese flu. I asked if she was kidding. I then pointed out the different viruses that were named after where the started. That included:

  • Spanish flu
  • Asian Flu
  • Russian flu
  • Hong Kong flu
  • MERS (Middle East)
  • Lyme disease
  • Ebola

 

All of these are named after the place they started. COVID-19 started in Wuhan, China. It’s actually known as the Wuhan virus but got its name because the Chinese government is responsible for causing this pandemic and President Trump doesn’t want you to forget it. I’ll talk about that more a little later.

Here’s the thing, and it’s so simple I won’t waste a lot of time on it: this virus started in Wuhan, China. The Chinese government hid the virus as not to embarrass themselves, which is true of any communist dictatorship. If they had alerted the world of the virus and prevented their people from just doing their thing, including traveling to other countries, this thing would be done already. The virus did start in Wuhan but it is the Chinese government nthat aided in the spread of the disease. Seriously, folks, they killed the doctor who discovered and tried to alert the people about it.

So, it is the Chinese virus.

The second thing I keep hearing is how Trump messed this whole thing up. And, in the beginning, he did. He didn’t take this seriously, didn’t think of the impact and brushed it off.But he’s recovered. He has the best doctors in the country advising him, he place Vice President Pence in charge, distancing himself to allow others to control yet showing the government is involved and taking it seriously.

This is an unprecedented event. Nothing like this has happened since the Spanish Flu in 1918. No one today knows how to deal with this. Denmark decided to perform something called Herd Immunization. What that means is people would go out and do their thing while those who are susceptible to the virus would hide out. The virus would spread, people who can weather it would get sick, develop an immunity and they would live happily ever after.

Nope. Didn’t work out that way. Denmark is now doing what we’re doing. Best laid plans of mice and men, I guess.

The reality is, no one really knows how to deal with this.

 

What Can The Government and Trump Do

Why is the stock market flipping out? Why are there no rolls of toilet paper anywhere? Why are there lines of people wrapped around the Costco parking lot? Why can’t I find a loaf of bread for my tuna fish salad sandwich?

Because we are all in a panic.

There have been over one billion references to the Wuhan virus in the news media. That is 10 times more than there was for SARS, MERS, Ebola or H1N1. And those were more serious viruses (that we know of).

The fact is, we don’t know much about this virus. So the government must walk the fine line between we’re all going to die and everything is going to be fine. That’s easier said than done.

The media went far to one direction and told us we are all going to die. Statistics show that is not the case. The virus is more dangerous than the flu and it is showing that young people are susceptible. Italy has shown that.

Trump went the other direction. He minimized the virus. He told us we were all going to be fine, this is no big deal, nothing to see here. That wasn’t true either. This virus does suck. It is more dangerous and contagious than we thought. People will die. And the administration decided this was a serious thing and adjusted. Now, they are doing well.

What do I think? It’s probably kind of in the middle. This is a dangerous virus and I should stay away from my parents and others who are susceptible. But I am not sure it is as bad as the media plays it out. I think the government should overreact because this thing is scaring people and the government needs to take their fear seriously. And we don’t know anything about this virus. So we should think the worst of it and deal with it. If it ends up not being as bad as we thought, no big deal.

We also need to realize what we are doing. We are, justifiably, shutting down the economy. Stores and businesses are shutting down, people are losing the jobs and can’t pay their bills. We’re all stuck at home. This could kill our economy. Everything the government is doing, from ordering businesses to close to giving us a couple of grand a month, is meant to suspend the economy so that it doesn’t crash completely.

Here’s the problem: I don’t trust the government. You’ve heard me say this before. The government sucks at everuything. And I am afraid they are going to do things that help make the government bigger. This week, the Senate refused to pass a $1 trillion package, supported by the President, because some of the provisions would be made permenant. That’s scary. Business cannot support paid sick leave all the time and Universal Basic Income (which is what the Democrats want) is unsustainable. We can’t afford it. And this is not a time to allow a single payer health care system sneak into our lives. This is not the time to implement the Green New Deal, which a lot of Democrats are pushing with this $1 trillion deal.

The only thing the government is suppose to do is suspend the economy for a month, maybe two. Not make the government bigger.

Finally, The last thing the government can do is give us a timeline. I have been stuck in my house for a week and I am going nuts. My girlfriend is going nuts. Her kids are going nuts. My parents are going nuts. My friends are going nuts. We are all going nuts. And if the government thinks we are all going to sit in our homes for two months, they’re stupid.

The American people are too used to freedom. They are not going to last long imprisoned in their homes. We need to know there is light at the end of the tunnel. And we need to be given an idea when we might see that light. I know that the government may not know. That’s fine but tell us what they are thinking. Not just the doom and gloom. Because people are not going to do this forever. Hell, they’re not going to do this for three weeks.

China did not have a problem controlling their population. Anyone did what they did not say, they were killed or imprisoned. This is not that country.

Please, President Trump, come up with a plan and let us know what is going on. We know this is not going to last forever. Tell us how long we are going to have to go through even if it means the bad news of a second wave of an infection.

We are Americans. We can handle it.

 

Week On in Captivity

I have been stuck in my place for six days. and this sucks.

Good news is, after five days of not knowing what to do with myself, I developed a routine. That really helped today. I do work from home and this was the first time I was actually productive from home. I am not going to talk about my routine yet. We’ll save that for tomorrow’s podcast.

But I am watching a lot of Netflix and Amazon Prime. Not much news because the news is the same. So here’s some things you might enjoy too:

  • Read Loserthink by Scott Adams.
  • Watched Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.
  • Watch 1917.
  • Watched The Platform on Netflix. Reminds me of The Cube.
  • Binge-watched BloodRide on Netflix.
  • Am binge-watching Frasier from Amazon Prime

 

This week, I’m going to start a new book called You Can’t Lie to Me by Janine Driver. I read this book before but I never annotated it. It is an awesome book so I want to spend sometime with it.

 

spacer
Dec292019

Book Review: The Diversity Delusion

I love Fox News. Not because I am wildly entertained or believe in everything they tout. Tucker Carlson, who I religiously watch, is full of crap half the time. I watch them because I always great books to read. And I have just finished one on Audible. The book is The Diversity Delusion by Heather MacDonald.

In a nutshell, the book is about how our education system sacrificed education of our youth for the need to put diversity into the curriculem. Instead of making a priority of Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Dante, the Bible, St. Thomas Aquines, Freud, Chaucer, Bronte amongst thousands of others, our schools have decided to that the need for diversity (between races, religions and gender identity) far outweighs the need for art, especially when it comes to the promotion of Western Civilization.

This book really had an impact on me. Not because of the the seven hours of information (I knew a lot of that already) but because of the thirty minutes of analysis.

The book was broken into three parts. The first part was about how are students are behaving today. This goes over the snowflake generation. How our youth, especially the millineals and later generations, fight the discussions over anything they decide not to believe in. It starts with what happen right after my generation was in college and high school. Though the education system was alreay liberal, I could still argue with my instructors when I did not agree (though, being immature, I lost mostof the time) without any fear of repracussions. But, as the teachers got older and were replaced with far more radical teachers and as the lower grade levels were being indoctrinated into the school system, the conservative or inquisitive began to suffer retaliation.

This part goes through some extreme examples of the snowflakes fighting “the man.” It shows how nothing was off the table, how careers of great teachers were ruined and how our children just became more demanding and never learned how to deal with life. It also showed how diversity manipulated major do that something like Lesbian Dance Theory would become a legitimate major as opposed to math and science.

The second part of the book dealt with how the colleges dealt with this metamorphisis with the new generations of the college students.

They didn’t. In fact, they enabled behavior.

Teachers, who had become a minority compared to most administrations, were disciplined, fired or force to quit whenever  they said something that offended the snowflakes. Students would protest and even become violent when conservative speakers would show up to campus. Faculty was required to go the diversity and implicit bias training.

The final part of the book dealt with the ever-expanding administations which required diversity committees, investigative committees searching and investigating bias, racism and sexual harassment and assault (I always thought the last was suppose to involve law enforcement but nope). The additional administration for these useless departments cost the state billions of dollars they did not have.

And with all this waste, who suffered? Teachers must now measure their curriculum for fear of hurting feelings. The students lose the education they need to have a critical mind that will give them the ability to see many points of view  and question the reasons for those view .

But the worst loss for the students is the hiding of art because it may make some students uncomfortable or the artist might be the wrong race or gender. Artists like Plato, Aristotle, Twain, Mozart and Beethoven are rejected because of their race and are replaced African American history, gender studies and diversity education. The history of Western Civilization and being replaced and forgotten with our students learning how bad it is. Is it a wonder most Harvard students can’t pass the standard citizen test or recite the Pledge of Allegiance?

But, worse, it is not only the soft sciences that are being attacked but the hard sciences such as math, biology, chemistry and physics. The hard sciences require aptitude. I can never be a mathematician because I am just not good enough in math. There’s nothing wrong with it, I’m just nut great in math. The problem the social justice warriors are seeing is there are not enough blacks, women and transgenders in the hard sciences. So, the colleges, in order to be diverse, are lowering their standards for minorities so that more of them can be in these programs. Forget that most who are accepted based on these lower standards usually do not make it through the programs and that another minority, Asians, are losing spots to other minorities. Forget that some of the hard sciences, like medicine, require the competition for the best because these people will be operating on people in the future.

It’s just disgusting.

The last two chapters in the book I have mentioned already. They had the most impact and were also the shortest.

All the arguments McDonald made I have heard before. But her last argument was the best. Our student lose. Our young people, the ones who are going to lead our country will know nothing about it. They won’t know about the telios of Greek reason. They will not know about the moral purpose of Judeo Christian philosophy. They will not know the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas that brought the two philosophies together. They will not be able to critically read Neitsche, Marx, the Constitution or The Federalist Papers. They won’t know the beauty of Bach, The Beatles, Elvis, DaVinci, Picaso or Van Gogh because they are white and not worth celebrating.

It’s sad. It’s also reason we need to be far more involved in our children’s educations. We cannot trust the government to raise our kids for us not matter how convenient it will be.

 

Criticism

I have read several books about how the minds of our children are being molded because parents have entrusted the public school system to teach their children. This book should be the second in a two volume series.

There is a book called The Coddling of the American Mind by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff. This book, though not as entertaining as McDonald’s book, shows the economic motivations of colleges. They believe colleges have become nothing more than for-profit corporations and students have become customers. And, you know what corporations say about the customers: the customer is always right. Behavior like this is, not only acceptable, but encouraged and seen as a growing, independent mind. Watch:

This amazing scene at at Yale University and the professor being threatened and yelled at is a tenured professor who has dozens of published studies. And this renowned Sociology professor, along with his wife who is also a teacher at Yale, are being threatened and yelled at by these snot-nosed teenagers because he sent an E-mail to the students stating that the students should be able to wear any Halloween costume that they want.

Let me repeat this: These are Yale students yelling at a tenured Yale professor because he sent an E-mail saying students should wear whatever Halloween costume they want!

Not only were these students not disciplined, the professors were threatened and almost forced to quit. It was only because of the publicity that this show got that gave the professors the bravery to continue on. Even the Left thought that this was a really poor and immature showing by the children. Bill Mahr, far from a Conservative, blasted these kids.

But this is what the system has supported and tolerates. Schools do not discipline their students anymore whether it be for disciplinary problems or bad grades. It is not not “if” I get my degree, it’s “when.” There are no articles of decorum. Do you think I would be able to talk to one of my professors like that at Cal State Northridge?

Anyway, back to The Diversity Dellusion. MacDonald’s book is far more entertaining and, honestly, sad than The Coddling of the American Mind. Unlike the former, Coddling rips on the structure and greed of the universities. It really does a good job analyzing how universities have changed and the expectation of the students that attend them. But it does not really do a deep dive on how the students are permanently affected.

MAcDonald’s book goes at the actions the universities execute and how our children are affected. MacDonald’s book is also written by a journalist not academics. So the writing, though less informational, is far more compelling and readable.

Both books are valuable to understanding the educational system and should be read together. The books together will give the readers a great look at the state of our universities.

 

spacer
Dec192019

Plato’s Republic Book I

 

Book I Summary

In this book, Socrates is in a small town outside of Athens for a religious festival. Just as the festival is concluding and he is about to leave, he is stopped by the sons of an acquaintance of Socrates. As they are traveling the subject of justice came up.  

This turns out to be what the entire chapter is about. Each person gives their opinion on what justice is. In this chapter, Socrates does not actually define what justice is. He just argues against the other opinions of what justice and injustice is. One thing I want to point out is that I will not use names or summarize the chapter. I won’t mention that Cephalus thinks one thing and Polemarchus want to beat Socrates up. The reason is because trying to grasp 2400-year-old Greek names is difficult and the actual story is irrelevant to the ideas though it is interesting to see that people get pissed off when they lose an argument.  

The first idea is that justice is one who follows his legal obligations, pays his debts and is honest. So if you owe a man money, it is just to pay the money back and injustice not to do so. But Socrates thinks this is wrong. He points out that some men are fools and will waste what he gets. Sometimes it might be better to keep the money until he is better able to deal with it. Another example would be borrowing a weapon from an insane man. Would it be prudent and just to give a mad man a weapon? Because it would endanger the lives of others, it would not be justice to return the weapon to its rightful owner. 

Let’s say my friend loans me a shotgun so I can go hunting. I come back from my trip and find out he had a horrible fight with his girlfriend and they break up. When I talk to him, I find that he is angry, hurt and depressed. Would it be a good idea that I give him his shotgun back when he is in such a fragile state? Because I would be giving him a tool that could hurt him, his girlfriend or both, Socrates says it would be unjust to give him his property. 

The second attempt at defining justice is from a young man (the son of Socrates’ friend). Justice is bringing friends help and causing harm to enemies. This argument shows the differences between the generations which is the goal of Plato. Though the two arguments may seem completely different, they aren’t. The first argument is made my an old, established and successful man. It is passive. This argument is made by a younger man who is trying to establish himself and is preparing for conflict. The younger man’s response is more aggressive. 

Socrates has little problem blowing this argument out of the water. He says that human beings are not infallible. We may befriend bad people and have enemies that are virtuous. It is not just by helping a person without virtue yet attack those that are virtuous. He also says that friends and enemies change. Socrates also points out that it is hard to seeing causing harm, no matter to who, is justice in any way. 

Then the discussion gets interesting. Enter Thrasymachus. Thrasymachus is a Sophist. A Sophist is a Greek teacher in philosophy. They are known to embrace human reason and be very skeptical of any moral standards, including that of justice.  

Thrasymachus angrily enters the conversation. He states that justice is nothing more than the advantage of the strong. Thrasymachus doesn’t believe in moral concepts like justice and doesn’t really define it so much as he is delegitimizes it. He believes that concepts like justice are imposed on society by the strong and the desire to be just is unnatural. He believes it restrains us and we should ignore it entirely.  

Life just got tough for Socrates. Before, all the discussions involved finding a definition for justice. Now he has to show that it has value and do it in front of someone who is hostile enough to want to fight him. This is the long part of the chapter. 

The first thing Socrates does is to force Thrasymachus is to admit that he is promoting injustice as a virtue, not justice. He does this by pointing out that the only point, according to him, to life is to gather as much money and power as possible. The person with the most is considered the most virtuous. Socrates points out that injustice cannot be a virtue because it counters wisdom. The example he uses is one who has a skill that is virtuous like medicine, art and mathematics. The artist create art for the art itself and does not try to compete with other artists. For that, he’s paid for his art. A doctor does not compete with other doctors. He uses his wisdom for the benefit of the of the patient’s well-being and does not compete with any other doctors.  

In short, justice is selfless and injustice is selfish.  

Socrates points out that justice must exist even by the unjust. He uses the example of a gang of thieves. There must be justice, even among thieves, because if they followed Thrasymachus’ theory, the thieves would constantly be stealing from themselves and no one would trust or work with each other. 

Thrasymachus is thoroughly beaten and knows it. The last point that Socrates bring is that justice is important to the health of the soul. Thrasymachus believed that justice is unnecessary and serves no point. Socrates points out that wisdom is a virtue of the soul. Since wisdom and justice are interrelated, justice must also be a virtue of the soul. Like good food and medicine makes a healthy body, virtues like wisdom and justice make for a healthy soul. 

 

What Did We Learn

This chapter was just introducing us to justice and the subject. It also looked at the base philosophies on what justice is from the Hesiodic and the Sophist philosophy. Hesiodic philosophy studies a wide variety of philosophies from nature to divine justice. Unlike Sophist philosophy, morality and justice are embraced and debated. Plato’s goal was to have Socrates destroy the different takes on justice so that a new definition can be defined. Though justice is never defined in this first book, we see the direction Socrates is heading.

One of the best reasons to actually read the text as opposed to reading external resources suck as Spark Notes is to read how Socrates argues. He does not put words into the mouths of those he debates. He picks at their argument until the conclusion is undoubtedly what Socrates wants.

Because of some of the complicated explanations and lack of punctuation (quotes are not used) reading and understanding the debates can be very challenging. I had to read chapter 1 twice with outside resources. I am happy to say that chapter 2 is a lot easier to read and the the discoveries are really interesting.

What is really great is watching how Socrates debates. He doesn’t try to convince anyone of anything but uses the words of his adversary against him. He uses reason and his opponents own words against the argument. I have found that I have always done the same thing when I debate. I learned how to do this in a college speech and debate class. Now I know where the style came from.

And that is Book I of Plato’s Republic in a nutshell.

spacer
Nov102019

Episode 93 Show Notes – Such A Good Doggie!

Just finished a pretty good book and it has relevance for today’s subject. A meme about the dog who tried to eat al-Baghdadi gets fact-checked, which is insane. We need to take a deeper look at this. That will lead me to a great book I read and haven’t rated yet about the corruption of the media.

 

Unfreedom of the Press

I just finished a book by great orator Mark Levin called Unfreedom of the Press. The book covers the history of the press corps and its history in politics and with politicians. There was a great article you can read after you read the book that gives five points that the book makes.

KEY IDEA #1: HAVING A FREE PRESS IS VITAL FOR A FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY, BUT THE MODERN UNITED STATES PRESS IS FAR FROM FREE.

KEY IDEA #2: THE AMERICAN MEDIA OF THE PAST WAS BLATANTLY POLITICAL BUT BALANCED, AND ONLY LATER ATTAINED A FAKE AURA OF OBJECTIVITY.

KEY IDEA #3: THE MEDIA HAS BEEN UNPRECEDENTEDLY HOSTILE TOWARDS PRESIDENT TRUMP, AND YET HE HAS NOT PLACED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PRESS.

KEY IDEA #4: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY-PRESS NO LONGER REPORTS THE NEWS, AND INSTEAD OPTS TO CREATE FAKE NEWS. And hides other news.

KEY IDEA #5: INSTEAD OF BEING THE PAPER OF RECORD, THE NEW YORK TIMES HAS ACTED MORE LIKE THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE FOR DECADES.

The book was filled with information which I loved. But it did read like a text book, which is why I like to listened to these books on Audible. Mark Levin, as you may know if you listen to his podcast, is long-winded and and dry.

I have read his book, The Liberty Amendments which I also thought had some amazing ideas and was filled with information but is also really dry.

conscioused.org/books/unfreedom-of-the-press-mark-r-levin-review-summary

 

The Dreaded Meme!

The Daily Wire released a meme showing President Trump awarding the Medal of Pawner to the dog that tried to eat the ISIS terrorist and all-around-asshole al-Baghdadi. It was a cute meme and was re-Tweeted by President Trump.

The media went insane.

Jim Acosta, the journalism hero from CNN, decided it was time to do some journalisming. And he journalismed everywhere. The walls, mirrors the bed sheets. It was disgusting.

He Tweeted, “A WH official said ‘the dog is not at the WH’”

Awesome journalisming. He’s probably going to need a cigarette.

Voice of America’s Steve Herman Tweeted, “I’ve requested details from the @WhiteHouse on this photo. There was no such canine event on today’s @POTUS schedule but there is a Medal of Honor ceremony set here for later today for an active duty Green Beret.”

USA Today called it a “doctored image.”

Not to be out shined, the New York Times assigned two reporters…two…and they determined that the picture was a faked photo.

The Huffington Post said, “Fine, just the president of the United States disseminating a doctored image created by a right-wing propaganda site.”

Finally, the Washington Post, not to be outdone, came up with the best, “Trump tweeted a photo of a Medal of Honor recipient — who was edited out and replaced by Conan the dog.”

That’s good but that’s not why the Washington Post won. It’s the E-mail correspondence with Jeremy Boring, the co-founder and COO of the Daily Wire. Let me read it to you.

Um, Boreing responded. But the post published that Boreing refused the respond. BECAUSE IT WAS A JOKE!

Ugh. Listen to Ben.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/knowles-democracy-dies-in-barkness

 

Connecting the Dots

There are two things to take away from the above story and the idiocy of the media is not one of them.

The mainstream media is trying to control the narrative. And they can’t do it with the very powerful conservative voices on the Internet and cable news. Conservatives look at stupid things like this, and it’s always against conservative outlets and think it is a big joke. The media knows this and aren’t trying to convince that base. They are trying to make the conservative outlets look like “fake news.” But that’s only the start.

The real goal is to silence these outlets. Ban them. And there is a real push for that now.

I did not get this until I listen to Ben Shapiro talk about it on his Thursday show.

 

Attacking Social Media

This week, Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter said he would not allow the publication of political ads. He encouraged Facebook to do the same thing. He stated:

“We’ve made the decision to stop all political advertising on Twitter globally. We believe political message reach should be earned, not bought … This isn’t about free expression. This is about paying for reach.”

In fact, all democrats stated that Facebook should ban advertising.

Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO for Facebook, has been defending free speech. Weird. He said:

“I believe strongly — and I believe that history supports — that free expression has been important for driving progress and building more inclusive societies around the world…I think we also need to be careful about adopting more and more rules that restrict the way that people can speak and what they can say. In a democracy, I don’t think it’s right for private companies to censor politicians or the news.”

Zuckerberg, a liberal, is right and Dorsey, a liberal, is wrong. When we start banning things, it is only a manner of time before we start banning more.

Studies show that 40% of the population gets its news from social media. This isn’t good. And I admit, I do get some of my news from social media. But, when I hear my favorite celebrity is dead, I act like an adult and look it up. I don’t trust social media. I also don’t need Jack Dorsey controlling what I see. I’m pretty smart. I can figure it out.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/aaron-sorkin-who-ripped-mark-zuckerberg-in-the-social-network-tries-again-zuckerberg-uses-sorkins-own-words-against-him
https://www.dailywire.com/news/twitters-dorsey-bans-political-ads-tweaks-facebook-zuckerberg-responds-by-defending-free-speech

 

Conclusion

We live in a If-you-give-a-mouse-a-cookie culture. Somebody who listens to this podcast about what I mean about that. It is a child’s parable showing what adults go through with children. Let me give you a bit of it:

  • If you give a mouse a cookie, it will ask for a glass of milk.
  • If you give a mouse a glass of milk, it will ask for a straw.
  • If you give a mouse a straw, it will ask for a napkin.
  • If you give a mouse a napkin, it will ask for a mirror to see if he has a mild mustache.
  • If you give a mouse a mirror, he will see his fur is long and will want a haircut.
  • If you give a mouse a haircut, it will want a broom to clean the hair.

 

Get the point? We need to stop giving in to the children because they will always demand more. Unfortunately the children, here, are fifty-year-old newscasters and twenty-five year old college graduates that are still living in their parents’ basements. Let me give you an example.

  • Gays ask for equal rights, then the ask for gay marriage.
  • We give them gay marriage, then they ask for trans rights.
  • We give trans rights, then they ask to ignore biology and call them their desired sex.
  • We can him a her or whatever, then they ask to allow kids to determine whether they are a he or she.
  • You allow the child to determine if it is a he or she, then they ask to be allowed to have sex with the child because he’s mature enough to be able to determine his own sex so he should be able to consent.

 

Folk, this is what’s happening. It’s happening to free speech.

 

http://www.ric.edu/sherlockcenter/dsi/mousecookie.pdf

 

 

 

spacer