Ending the war on drugs – Detroit Metro Times

Fighting marijuana

prohibition isn't just about marijuana. It's also about fighting police brutality, militarization, and asset forfeiture. It's about reducing a U.S. prison population that is the biggest in the world. It's about civil rights and civil liberties.

The national law enforcement group LEAP connected the dots on much of that last week in announcing the organization's name change from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition to Law Enforcement Action Partnership. Maintaining the same acronym probably saves a little money on letterheads and the like.

Success in the LEAP agenda, however, saves lives.

"LEAP wanted to start focusing beyond just speaking out against the war on drugs and talking about criminal justice reform in general," says Steve Miller, a sergeant retiree from the Canton police department and a spokesman for LEAP. "My philosophy is the war on drugs is central to all of this. If we end the war on drugs we could solve a lot of other areas that are in need of reform in the criminal justice system."

LEAP is officially making a connection that many of its members made long ago. LEAP executive director Neill Franklin, a retired Maryland State Police officer, helped convince the national NAACP board to call for an end to the war on drugs back in 2011. Not that the Detroit chapter seems to have heeded that call.

Attorney Michelle Alexander was also in the working group that helped convince the NAACP to make that choice. Her book The New Jim Crow details how the war on drugs has crippled black communities by labeling marijuana users as criminals.

Despite that, the black community has been slow to come around on marijuana legalization. At least among the local institutions that tend to support or represent African-Americans. After all, they're working on civil rights, not drug user rights. And while there are plenty of black marijuana consumers (and inmates), there are precious few in the new and growing industry. Somewhere around 1 percent.

That's something the Rev. Al Sharpton mentioned in addressing the Cannabis World Congress and Business Exposition on Friday, June 16. In a pre-exposition statement told to The Huffington Post, Sharpton said, "I will challenge the cannabis industry and its distributors in states where it is legal to support civil rights movements and ensure that we are not disproportionately excluded from business opportunities."

Sharpton asserts a connection between the marijuana insurgency and civil rights movements here. They are indeed connected.

At a time when the idea of "fake news" is prominent in the national political discourse, the war on drugs stands out as a testament to the government's ability to just make things up and destroy lives from that base. Marijuana prohibition went nationwide in 1937 as a racist attack on Latinos and blacks. When President Richard Nixon launched the war on drugs it was in direct contradiction to the findings of his own Shafer Commission that recommended marijuana possession be decriminalized.

The success of that propaganda has been that even though the war on drugs has obvious detriments to black communities, most "responsible" members of those communities can't see it.

"The misconceptions out there are horrible and they are based on government lies that have been passed on for the past 80 years," says Miller. "The most dangerous part of the drug war is the drug war itself."

Can the government make things up and base life-altering policy on it? You bet it can. That's one reason why fighting marijuana prohibition is intricately tied to larger political struggles.

Here's how Dan K. Morhaim, a member of the Maryland House of Delegates, put it in a May Baltimore Sun opinion piece:

"It's a war that has claimed tens of thousands of casualties both at home and abroad, destroyed the lives of countless innocent bystanders, turned neighborhoods and in some cases whole regions into killing fields, filled prisons to overflowing with non-violent offenders, poisoned farmlands and forests, undermined police and government agencies, corrupted multinational banks and financial companies, funded overseas enemies and terrorists, and despite the tremendous cost in blood and treasure, has not advanced the cause for which the war was declared. Drug use has not measurably declined since President Nixon started that war in 1970.

"Not only has the war on drugs failed, it continues to make the situation worse. It's turned into a war on people, communities, institutions, and ultimately ourselves. A new strategy is needed."

That is what LEAP seeks. It's not a strategy aimed only at drugs. It's a holistic strategy aimed at what the war on drugs has done to our people, police forces, and our communities. Even the police know we need a new strategy. Unfortunately, they generally don't speak out about it until they have retired. It's their job to enforce the law, not change it.

Miller has totally flipped his script. Since retiring from the police force he has gotten a private investigator's license and works for attorney Mike Komorn, a prominent defender of people charged with marijuana offenses. He's also become a supporter of MI Legalize, part of the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol that is running a petition initiative to get the question of recreational legalization in Michigan on the 2018 ballot. He believes legalizing marijuana will change the way police do their business.

"For one, we're taking a huge thing away from the police to go out and use that aggressive enforcement," says Miller. "Marijuana is an easy target with its smell. It's low-hanging fruit for the police. ... The majority of my career it was get in these crappy neighborhoods and stop every kid that's passing on the street. It's all centralized in the war on drugs getting people, searching people, get in their car, find drugs. Police go out and use that and create a hostile relationship. If marijuana is legal police can move on and do other things. Drug task forces spend a large amount of time on marijuana."

In 2014, according to FBI data, almost 90 percent of about 700,000 marijuana arrests were for possession alone. It seems that if police didn't have to spend their time chasing people for marijuana possession it would save them a lot of effort and expense, let alone pressure on the courts and jails.

LEAP is on the right path and it would do us well to get with it. Repealing marijuana prohibition will ease a lot of other problems that have grown in the prohibition industry. And maybe if police don't have that adversarial relationship with communities, there could be a lot more Officer Friendly types on the streets.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been making lots of noise about enforcing federal marijuana laws and belittling the idea that the plant has medicinal value. Maybe he should spend a little time studying up on recent science about cannabinoids. However, based on the amount of things he just couldn't remember during recent testimony to the U.S. Senate, information retention isn't one of his strong points.

The rest is here:

Ending the war on drugs - Detroit Metro Times

Donald Trump, Jeff Sessions Drug War Is Bad | Time.com – TIME

President Trump speaks as Jeff Sessions listens in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on Feb. 9, 2017. Andrew HarrerBloomberg/Getty Images

Donald Trump wants to drag us back into one of the most catastrophic social policies in this nations history: the war on drugs.

The president wants to return to a bygone era of mass incarceration and a full-blown War on Drugs that significantly contributed to the current American prison population of 2.2 million people the largest in the world. Apparently, that isnt enough for the "law and order" president and his accomplice, Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Trump and Sessions think the War on Drugs has been a very good thing. They are either woefully or willfully ignorant of the facts.

As author of The Power of the Dog and The Cartel, I spent almost 20 years researching and writing about the War on Drugs. After five decades of this war, drugs are cheaper, more plentiful and more potent than ever (as Mr. Sessions himself has conceded). If thats Trumps idea of success, Id hate to see his version of failure.

The so-called War on Drugs quadrupled our prison population (overwhelmingly and disproportionately composed of minorities), handed out life sentences to nonviolent offenders, militarized our police forces, promoted the disgusting concept of for-profit prisons, shredded the Bill of Rights and cost taxpayers upward of a trillion dollars.

Did Trump and Sessions somehow miss all this? Surely the president and the top justice official in the country are aware that violent crime is at a a record low , and most criminologists agree that incarceration was a minor factor in its thirty-year decline. The more important causes were demographic changes, improved police techniques, community policing and strong economic growth.

Trump and Sessions cite a rise in homicide rates in some cities since 2015. But fully half those murders, mostly a result of gang violence, occurred in one city Chicago while many of the rest were concentrated in Houston, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. The murder rate in New York City actually dropped 25% during that period.

Trump and Sessions blame this gang violence on drugs, but that's reductive to say the least.

Lets look at Chicago. Writing in US News & World Report, Alan Neuhauser points out that the Chicago police force has lost a quarter of its homicide detectives since 2008. And two years ago the state of Illinois drastically cut funding for community policing and violence prevention programs, which directly corresponds to the spike in violence.

Chicago police superintendent Eddie Johnson said, Impoverished neighborhoods, people without hope, do these kind of things... You show me a man that doesnt have hope, Ill show you one thats willing to pick up a gun and do anything with it.

Johnson has a point. A study by the Brennan Center for Justice shows that cities with at least a ten-year history of poverty and unemployment are the same cities that have experienced a rise in violence.

That there is a relationship between poverty and crime should come as no surprise to our country's chief executive and his top law enforcement official, but apparently it does.

Trump and Sessions want to cut funds for social programs and community policing and return to the era of mass arrests and incarceration in short, the War on Drugs. They want to trade policies that work for policies that dont.

Sessionss assistant Steven Cook told the Washington Post, Drug trafficking is inherently violent. Drug traffickers are dealing in a heavy cash business. They cant resolve disputes in court. They resolve the disputes on the street and they resolve them through violence.

Mr. Sessions made remarks to the same effect.

And they're right: Drug trafficking is inherently violent . Because of drug prohibition .

Nicotine is a legal drug you dont see the tobacco companies slugging it out on the street. Alcohol is a legal drug, and you dont see gangs killing each other for the right to sell beer and whiskey (as they did in Prohibition days).

There is, of course, another major difference between drug dealers and people who sell nicotine and alcohol products the latter two are mostly white. Sell drugs, youre a guest in the Big House; sell enough booze or cigarettes, youre a guest in the White House.

The racial disparities are indisputable. African-American males are thirteen times as likely to be sent to prison for drug offenses than white males, whose drug usage is proportionally much higher . Sentences for African-American males are over 13% longer than those for whites. The War on Drugs has largely been a war on people of color.

Apparently, the current administration doesnt mind that these policies are racist. Prompted by his boss, Mr. Sessions recently instructed federal prosecutors to seek maximum sentences for even nonviolent drug offenses.

Its wrong, and it makes no sense on any level.

We know that rehabilitation programs and treatment are vastly more effective at reducing drug use than imprisonment. In fact, our jails and prisons are rife with illegal drugs, and those who go in as addicts usually come out as addicts. If mass incarceration worked, wouldnt our drug problem now be better instead of worse?

But rather than make a real effort to address the drug problem at its roots at a time when more Americans die from opiate overdose than from car accidents Trump and Sessions hand us fantasies such as the border wall, which will do absolutely nothing to slow the flow of drugs, and facile, intellectually lazy, "lock `em up" sound bites that make for good politics but horrible policy.

The mass incarceration policy is also a fiscal disaster.

An administration that prides itself on trimming the budget wants to expand our spending on prisons, even though a year spent in a California cell is more expensive $75,650 than a year at Harvard. As of 2012, the United States spent $63.4 billion a year on incarceration . Trump and Sessions want to spend even more.

Trump and Sessions are tough on gangs that wield guns, but not so much on those who push guns on the American public. The National Rifle Association donated over $30 million to Trumps campaign, and he promised, among other things, to end gun-free zones. The attorney general has an A+ rating (along with $35,750 in Senate campaign contributions) from the NRA and has voted against background checks on buyers at gun shows.

My most recent novel, The Force, deals with the New York Police Departments struggle against drugs and guns. My research shows that most of the weapons used in gang violence originate in states that have weak gun laws and unrestricted gun shows. From there, buyers ship weapons up the "Iron Pipeline" of Interstate 95 and its connecting highways, to cities such as Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C.; guns that police forces are desperate to get off their streets; guns that kill gang members, innocent bystanders, and, yes, cops. But Trump and Sessions advocate loosening what few restrictions still exist.

That is not law and order. That is lawlessness and disorder.

In the last days of the Obama administration, we finally began to see a more sensible policy toward illegal drugs: clemency for nonviolent offenders serving long prison terms, a move to end mandatory minimum sentences, a less aggressive stance on enforcing marijuana laws and the abolition of prison privatization on the federal level.

In his endless, thoughtless rush to undo all things Obama, Trump wants to roll all that back, to a failed policy that will only result in more suffering, more expense, and more death.

Thats a catastrophe.

Don Winslow is the author of The Cartel and The Force.

Read the original:

Donald Trump, Jeff Sessions Drug War Is Bad | Time.com - TIME

Despite new FA stance, clubs’ seedy relationship with gambling companies as strong as ever – The42

Image: Tony Marshall

IT WAS FOUR years ago when the former Bolton striker Kevin Davies wrote about a team-mate who was checking his phone in the toilet during half-time of a league game because he had 20,000 resting on the result of a horse race.

Its also four years since Keith Gillespie revealed he lost 62,000 during a 48-hour gambling spree.

Its seven years since Matthew Etherington admitted to having gambled his weekly wage of 20,000 between getting on and stepping off the team bus before a game.

And still, despite the epidemic, its only now that the FA have decided to take action and step away from their own sponsorship deal with Ladbrokes, which was worth 4m per year.

But, as embarrassing as it is that the governing body for football in England has taken so long to make a stand, at least they have done.

In complete contrast, clubs continue to treat partnerships with gambling companies as a lucrative bit of business, regardless of the signal it sends.

The three players mentioned above Davies, Gillespie and Etherington played for (at their height) Bolton, Newcastle, Stoke City and West Ham.

The irony is that all four of those clubs count on a gambling company as their main shirt sponsor, despite their former employees well-documented battle with gambling addiction.

It was only earlier this month that Bolton announced Betfred as their new partner. Stoke had little issue in rechristening the Brittania Stadium when they aligned themselves with Bet365. West Hams deal with Betway is the biggest deal in the clubs history.

And, of course, Newcastle have never really been ones for integrity when it comes to sponsorship.

Their 24m three-year deal with Fun88 a Chinese-based online gaming company that specialises in live casinos and sports betting is the most lucrative in the clubs history, eclipsing the previous arrangement with payday lender (essentially legal loan sharks) Wonga.

That deal with Wonga was incredibly controversial.

Source: Richard Sellers

The company was forced to remove its logo from childrens replica kits while striker Papiss Cisse refused to wear anything bearing the Wonga name because it contravened his Muslim faith and his personal beliefs. It led to him being left behind as Newcastle went on a summer tour in 2013. But, the entire thing backfired on Cisse. The deal had already been in place for a year, there were photographs of him gambling at a casino and other Muslims at the club Moussa Sissoko,Hatem Ben Arfa, the late Cheik Tiot and Mapou Yanga-Mbiwa had no issue with Wongas sponsorship.

Newcastle learned their lesson. No more payday lenders on the front of their shirts. Theyd play it safe with Fun88 instead. No moral grandstanding when it comes to online gaming companies, you see.

There was a delicious irony too when Joey Barton was recently slapped with an 18-month ban for betting offences.

Barton was with Burnley at the time of the suspension a club sponsored by Dafabet. Before that, he was with Glasgow Rangers (where he served a one-game ban for betting practices), whose main sponsor is 32Red an online casino company. The club also play in the Ladbrokes Premiership and compete for the William Hill Scottish Cup.

Source: Peter Byrne

Barton, in a well-crafted statement after his sentence had been handed-down, said the following:

If the FA is truly serious about tackling the culture of gambling in football, it needs to look at its own dependence on the gambling companies, their role in football and in sports broadcasting, rather than just blaming the players who place a bet.

We now live in an age where the pay-per-view TV channels that show live football consistently encourages those watching to place bets on the game. And not just in advance of it. Before, during and after.

We now live in an age where entire leagues (Skybet Championship, Skybet League One, Skybet League Two, Ladbrokes Premiership) are backed by gambling companies.

We now live in an age where its commonplace for clubs to have official betting partners. William Hill is in bed with three teams: Chelsea, Tottenham and Everton. Manchester United even have an Official Casino Resort partner. Thats Donaco, in case youre wondering.

And yet, when footballers gamble irresponsibly or make a mis-step or risk their fortunes on the outcome of a horse race, they get the punishment, the shame and the public condemnation.

Source: Mike Egerton

Their employers, knee-deep in responsibility, dust themselves down and move onto the next commercial deal.

Of course, the immediate counter-argument is that with some self-control and self-awareness, players wouldnt get themselves in such a mess.

But there is a duty of care that needs to exist in any workplace. Its like the companies that supply fruit for employees or offer a staff discount when you join the gym downstairs.Its a way of encouraging wellness, however small the gesture.

For football clubs, they hide behind the massive wages they pay and say, Dont we do enough for you? Because, ultimately, the money remains the motivator. Its why key decisions are made.

But, when the governing body overseeing those clubs makes a stand, it leads to inevitable questions. Will gambling companies be prohibited from having sponsorship arrangements with clubs? If not, why? Why would the FA not enforce a policy? And what does it say about clubs if they continue to merely look the other way while their own players struggle under the weight of something theyre indirectly responsible for?

The42 is on Instagram! Tap the button below on your phone to follow us!

The heat of the action and the heart of the conversation, The42 via Facebook. Just click Like.

Original post:

Despite new FA stance, clubs' seedy relationship with gambling companies as strong as ever - The42

Success of Tasmanian problem gambling programs can’t be judged, auditor-general finds – ABC Online

Updated June 22, 2017 17:01:55

Tasmania's auditor-general has been unable to judge if the state's problem gambling programs are working.

A performance audit has examined how effectively Treasury's Liquor and Gaming Branch managed the collection of gambling revenue, and the effectiveness of harm-minimisation measures.

When poker machines were rolled out in Tasmanian pubs and clubs in the 1990s, a Community Support Levy (CSL) was set up, with money to go into community programs and into research about problem gambling.

Auditor-general Rod Whitehead said there was not a reliable measurement about the prevalence of problem gambling.

"No conclusion can be made as to whether activities funded by the CSL to reduce the risk of harm from gambling are achieving the intended outcomes, as the evidence is insufficient for us to form an opinion," he said.

"The Productivity Commission identified that difficulties arising from the nature of problem gambling - such as stigma, deceit, and irrational beliefs that the next wager will solve any problems - means sufferers are unlikely to identify themselves."

Because there has never been a reliable measure of how many Tasmanians are problem gamblers, the auditor-general could not determine how much CSL programs had contributed to reducing harm.

Anglicare Tasmania estimates there are 2,000 problem gamblers in Tasmania, and a further 6,000 "moderate risk" gamblers, and together these people lose 40% of the total spend of gambling in the state.

Independent MP for Denison Andrew Wilkie - who has long opposed the proliferation of poker machines - said it was evident from other data that the CSL programs were not working.

"When you look at the figures more broadly, there has been no significant reduction in poker machine revenue over the last several years," he said.

"[And] there has been no significant change in the rate of gambling addiction in Tasmania.

"While it's fair enough the auditor-general is struggling to understand the effectiveness of the programs funded by the CSL, we do know overall the whole range of harm-minimisation measures are pretty much ineffective."

The Tasmanian Greens are pushing for the number of poker machines to be limited.

"Rather than tinkering around the edges, we'd like to see the Liberals take harm minimisation on pokies really seriously and remove them from pubs and clubs in Tasmania," leader Cassy O'Connor said.

Mr Whitehead did recommend the services provided under a gambling support program should improve their targets and performance measures.

He also recommended the state's Neighbourhood House model - which provides an alternative venue to pubs or casinos to socialise in the evening - be reviewed, so it can better cater to problem gamblers.

The audit also found Treasury was effectively collecting all the revenue derived from gambling in Tasmania, and was distributing it correctly to the CSL administrators.

A parliamentary inquiry is currently underway to examine the Federal Group monopoly on poker machines, amid calls for more assistance for problem gamblers.

Federal Group owns both of Tasmania's two casinos, and has exclusive rights to all of the state's poker machines under a license set to expire in 2023.

The Tasmanian Government has already vowed to put gaming licences out to public tender, which could break the monopoly Federal Group has held for over 40 years.

Topics: gambling, community-and-society, tas

First posted June 22, 2017 16:00:03

See the original post here:

Success of Tasmanian problem gambling programs can't be judged, auditor-general finds - ABC Online

Precinct 4: Deputies raid illegal gambling establishments in East Montgomery County – Chron.com

By Jay R. Jordan, jjordan@hcnonline.com

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County on Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Precinct 4: Deputies raid illegal gambling establishments in East Montgomery County

Deputies and prosecutors executed multiple search warrants in East Montgomery County Wednesday on businesses police say are running illegal gaming machines.

Illegal gambling machines can contribute to large amount of drug and other illegal activity, according to deputies with the Precinct 4 Constable's Office. They also say the machines prey on elderly individuals.

While the machines themselves were not seized, deputies and prosecutors took the motherboards from the machines as evidence and seized the money inside them. According to Precinct 4 Constable's Sgt. Jim Slack, authorities raided three gas stations all within a half mile of each other near New Caney:

Exxon gas station in the 24700 block of FM 1485

Coleman's Drive In in the 25900 block of FM 1485

Bill's 3 GS Food Mart in the 23500 block of FM 1485

Although no arrests have been made directly to the search, Jimmy Moon, 50, of Houston, was arrested on an unrelated third-degree felony warrant for allegedly assaulting a family member. Deputies claim Moon was found using one of the machines.

Follow this link:

Precinct 4: Deputies raid illegal gambling establishments in East Montgomery County - Chron.com

Do programs to curb problem gambling in Ontario, Canada work? – GamingTodaySlotsToday

June 22, 2017 9:00 AM by Robert Mann

Do programs to curb problem gambling in Ontario, Canada work?

To help make that determination, two members of Carleton UniversitysDepartment of Psychology, have received more than $650,000 in funding from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-term Care (OMHLTC) to investigate programs aimed at the prevention of problem gambling.

The project, entitledPreventing Problem Gambling in Ontario: Building the Evidence Base for Cultivating Responsible Gambling Knowledge and Habits, will study the attitudes, knowledge of availability, and behaviors related to responsible gambling initiatives in Ontario.

This research project will focus on gamblers exposed to a new responsible gambling initiative called My PlaySmart, provided to Ontarians by Ontario Lottery and Gaming. The researchers will identify the best practices for the development of an effective responsible gambling program that meets the needs of Ontarians.

Carleton University is a comprehensive university located in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Visit link:

Do programs to curb problem gambling in Ontario, Canada work? - GamingTodaySlotsToday

Euthanasia mindset looms over disabled baby’s legal fight, ethicist … – Catholic News Agency

London, England, Jun 22, 2017 / 03:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Legal efforts to bar the parents of a British baby born with a disabling medical condition from seeking treatment overseas are based on deep ethical errors, a Catholic expert in medical ethics has warned.

It seems to me completely wrongheaded that the state should be stepping in here when the decision that the parents are making is really aimed at the best interests of the child, Dr. Melissa Moschella, a Catholic University of America philosophy professor, told CNA.

Its not crazy, its not abusive, its not neglectful. Its the decision of parents who want to, however they can, to give their very sick child a chance for life.

She said such a decision should be completely within the prerogative of the parent, citing the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. According to Moschella, that declaration clearly indicates that the parents, not the state will have primarily responsibility.

Charlie Gard, now aged 10 months, is believed to suffer from a rare genetic condition called mitochondrial depletion syndrome, which causes progressive muscle weakness. The disorder is believed to affect fewer than 20 children worldwide. Charlie has been in intensive care since October 2016. He has suffered significant brain damage due to the disease and is currently fed through a tube. He breathes with an artificial ventilator and is unable to move.

His parents, Connie Yates and Chris Gard, have wanted to keep him on life support and transport him to the United States in order to try an experimental treatment.

However, their decision was challenged in court by hospitals and an attorney appointed to represent Charlie. The parents appealed a High Court decision, and their appeal to the U.K.s Supreme Court was rejected.

Their final legal challenge is presently before the European Court of Human Rights. The court has said Charlie must continue to receive treatment until its judges make a decision.

Moschella said the legal decisions favoring ending life support for Charlie are effectively telling the parents that their childs life has no value and that therefore they should cease any effort to heal him of his disease.

These decisions represent a quality of life ethic and an ideology that say human life is valuable only if it meets certain capacities.

Its the same ideology that underlies allowing euthanasia or physician assisted suicide, she said. Thats completely opposed to the Catholic view in which every human life has intrinsic value regardless of the quality of that life.

Charlies parents have raised more than $1.6 million to help seek experimental treatment for him in the U.S. Their decision faced legal challenge from Great Ormond Street Hospital, where he is being treated.

In early April, the babys hospital challenged their efforts. The hospitals experts argued in court that long-term life support should be withdrawn from the baby because his quality of life was so poor.

Charlies court-appointed lawyer argued before a High Court judge that any treatments in the U.S. would be experimental and long-term life-support would only prolong the process of dying.

Charlies parents had their own legal representative in the case, who argued that travel to the U.S. for treatment would not cause the boy significant suffering or harm and could give him another chance.

Yates, Charlies mother, has argued that she would welcome any treatment that could help him live. She also suggested anything learned during an experimental treatment could help treat future babies who suffer from the disorder.

According to Moschella, who has a background in parental rights and medical ethics, said parental rights derive both from the special intimate relationship they have with their child and from their primary obligations to care for their own children. Interfering with their conscientious best efforts is akin to violating religious freedom, she said.

It is a deep violation of conscience, when, without a very serious reason, the state presents parents from fulfilling that conscientious obligation, she said.

She noted that what Charlies parents are trying to do by helping secure extraordinary treatment is not ethically required by Catholic ethics.

It would be perfectly morally acceptable should they choose to forgo seeking further treatment and take the baby off life support and allow him to pass away naturally due to the underlying disease, the professor said. But its also acceptable, on Catholic ethics, to do whatever you can to heal a person if you think that theres any chance that a treatment could have a positive effect.

She suggested that extraordinary treatment could be unethical only when there is absolutely no hope of any benefit whatsoever and the treatment is painful to the patient, or the treatment would take away important resources that are needed to help other patients who could benefit.

Moschella said there should only be legal intervention against the wishes of parents in cases when there is a clear case of abuse or neglect or some significant threat to the public order.

Neither of those situations is the case here.

View original post here:

Euthanasia mindset looms over disabled baby's legal fight, ethicist ... - Catholic News Agency

Netherlander Euthanasia Guru Bemoans His Handiwork – National Review

Boudewijn Chabot was the Netherlander psychiatrist who assisted the suicide of a deeply depressed woman who wanted to die after the demise of her two children. All she wanted to do was be buried between them. Chabot met with her four times over several weeksnever engaged actual treatmentand then supplied her with poison pills, which she took. He watched as she died.

That led to a prosecution. I put the word in quotes becauseas Chabots lawyer told me in an interview for my book Forced Exitthere was never any intention of actually imprisoning Chabot, or indeed, sanction him in any way. Rather, the purpose was to set a precedent to allow deep psychological suffering to justify euthanasia.

The gambit worked. The Supreme Court ruled, essentially, that suffering is sufferingand whether physical or emotionalIT is what justifies assisted suicide/euthanasia, not disease itself.

Twenty or so years later and Netherlander psychiatrists euthanize mentally ill patients, whose organs may be voluntarily harvested post-death.

Now, Chabot has been stricken by conscience. He notes that euthanasia groups have recruited psychiatrists to kill. From his article, Worrisome Culture Shift in the Context of Self-Selected Death:

Without a therapeutic relationship [ME: which he didn't really have, by the way], by far most psychiatrists cannot reliably determine whether a death wish is a serious, enduring desire. Even within a therapeutic relationship, it remains difficult. But a psychiatrist of the clinic can do so without a therapeutic relationship, with less than ten in-depth conversations?

Hey, you opened this door: Own it! More:

In 2016, there were three reports of euthanasia of deep-demented persons who could not confirm their death wish. One of the three was identified as having been done without due care; her advance request could be interpreted in different ways. The execution was also done without due care; the doctor had first put a sedative in her coffee. When the patient was lying drowsily on her bed and was about to be given a high dose, she got up with fear in her eyes and had to be held down by family members. The doctor stated that she had continued the procedure very consciously.

Chabot looks at the social and moral wreckage he helped unleash and wonders:

Where did the Euthanasia Law go off the tracks? The euthanasia practice is running amok because the legal requirements which doctors can reasonably apply in the context of physically ill people, are being declared equally applicable without limitation in the context of vulnerable patients with incurable brain diseases.

In psychiatry, an essential limitation disappeared when the existence of a treatment relationship was no longer required. In the case of dementia, such a restriction disappeared by making the written advance request equivalent to an actual oral request.

And lastly, it really went off the tracks when the review committee concealed that incapacitated people were surreptitiously killed.

Please. It was all so predictable. Heck, I predicted it.

Euthanasia consciousness changes mindsets. It alters societal morality. It distorts our views of the importance of vulnerable lives. It leads to abandonment and various forms of subtle and blatant coercion.

Over time, it cant be controlled.

See original here:

Netherlander Euthanasia Guru Bemoans His Handiwork - National Review

Rajiv Gandhi Assassin Robert Pious Seeks Euthanasia – Live Law

A convict, Robert Pious, who has served 26 years in prison after being convicted for former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhis assassination, has requested the Puzhal Prison authorities for mercy killing.

According to another news report, Pious wrote in the letter to the prison authorities that that he has lost all purpose in life as his family does not visit him in the prison anymore, and therefore, has sought permission for euthanasia.

Pious claims that the government does not intend to release him and he would never again be a free person.

He, therefore, wants mercy killing and his body to be handed over to his family.

Robert Pious, along with six other persons, were convicted in 1991 for the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Three out of these seven convicts were awarded the death sentence.

The Jayalalithaa-led government of Tamil Nadu, in 2014, ordered a release of these seven prisoners. However, this order was stayed by a constitution bench of the Supreme Court in 2015, on the ground that the power to do the same lies with the Centre. The Supreme Courts decision has been appealed by the state of Tamil Nadu; however, the matter is still pending before the court.

See the original post:

Rajiv Gandhi Assassin Robert Pious Seeks Euthanasia - Live Law

Child porn is not ‘just pictures’ – Jacksonville Daily News

Amanda Thames AmandaThames

Many people believe child pornography is a victimless crime, but thats not the case, according to law enforcement.

The State Bureau of Investigation hears its just pictures a lot, even from judges and defense attorneys in the courtroom, according to Assistant Special Agent in Charge Kevin Roughton, who works in the SBIs Computer Crimes Unit.

It is such a misinterpreted thing, Roughton said. It is one of the most frustrating things that we deal with.

The victims, Onslow County Sheriff Hans Miller said, are the children.

Child pornography victims

Every time someone watches a child pornography video or looks at a photo of a child in a sexual way, it re-victimizes the child, Roughton said.

This child had to endure whatever that event was while it was being videoed and then every time it gets watched, every time it gets shown ... it is a perpetual living memory with that event as long as that video exists, he said.

While there are some exposed children who grew up and became outspoken about it, Roughton said most child sex victims simply live their lives knowing these photos or videos of them exists and theres nothing they can do to stop it.

They walk the streets and wonder if the stranger on the sidewalk has seen it, or if the man serving them coffee has shared it with others. Every time someone is arrested on a child pornography charge, Roughton says the victims wonder if the offender had been watching them.

Victims of assault or rape and the families of murder victims have one person they focus on and follow throughout their arrest and trial, and they receive a closure of sorts from a guilty verdict, Roughton said.

But not victims of child pornography.

Thats something they live with and carry, he said. Its not something they can ever forget.

The possession of child pornography is a felony, and the seriousness of the charge gets higher for those who share or create child pornography, Miller said.

Anyone who says its a victimless crime is wrong, Miller said. Every time that image or movie is viewed, that child is re-victimized because somebody is seeing that child in a manner that children should not be portrayed.

Even if the child doesnt know someone is watching it, the fact that people are watching it encourages those producing child pornography to continue, Miller said.

Crimes of opportunity

Most of the people viewing it would molest a child in person if the opportunity presented itself, Roughton said.

People are often skeptical of this statement, and Roughton says he has an example he uses when he teaches.

If you came to his home and he had a basketball goal outside with a basketball at the base, and inside he had tennis shoes by the door, basketball trophies on a shelf, photos of basketball players on the walls, and a Sports Illustrated magazine on the coffee table open to a basketball article, you would assume he likes the sport.

Youd think it odd, Roughton continued, if you asked him to come play basketball and he responded with, No, Im not really interested in basketball.

Its the same for those who look at child pornography.

If someone is interested in watching a child be molested or raped, Roughton said, it doesnt make sense for that person to say theyre not interested in molesting kids.

Theres been research supporting this theory as well, Roughton said, and spoke about a 2008 study by Michael Bourke and Andres Hernandez on two groups: offenders convicted of possessing, receiving, or distributing child porn and those convicted of similar offenses with a history of hands-on sexual offenses with children, according to the study.

The goal was to determine whether the former group of offenders were merely collectors of child pornography at little risk for engaging in hands-on sexual offenses, or if they were contact sex offenders whose criminal sexual behavior involving children, with the exception of Internet crimes, went undetected, according to the study.

Over 18 months, Bourke and Hernandez studied 155 inmates who volunteered to be part of the program, 74 percent of whom had no documented hands-on victims. By the end of the study, they found 85 percent of them had at least one hands-on sexual offense and between all of the offenders, there were 1,777 victims, according to the study.

While law enforcement wont arrest someone just on suspicion or because they might do something, Roughton said viewing child porn should be a red flag.

The reality is, most of these guys are not just looking at pictures, Roughton said. Our main concern is that many times, the quote unquote people who have just pictures really have had other offenses, we just dont know about it.

Anyone with information on someone viewing child pornography, victims of child pornography, and anyone else with valuable information pertaining to an open case of child pornography is asked to contact the Onslow County Sheriff's Office at 910-455-3113 or Crime Stoppers at 910-938-3273. Crime Stoppers offers cash rewards of up to $2,500 for information provided thats deemed of value or assistance to law enforcement. Callers to Crime Stoppers are not required to reveal their identities. Information can also be anonymously texted via Text-A-Tip by typing TIP4CSJAX and the message to 274637.

Reporter Amanda Thames can be reached at 910-219-8467 or Amanda.Thames@JDNews.com

Read the original here:

Child porn is not 'just pictures' - Jacksonville Daily News

Graffiti vandal behind a 34,000 rail crime spree is named | Express … – expressandstar.com

Ashley Byrd, 24, left his 'tag' at stations in the Black Country, and was finally caught after a dramatic police chase on rail tracks.

He was caught in an operation launched when 18 trains were vandalised in just 12 days.

Byrd would get on to the lines via a metal post and lie in wait in a tunnel as trains arrived into Birmingham New Street from the east.

As trains waited to come into the station, he would spray carriages just below the window and out of sight of passengers

He was finally arrested on December 27 last year, when a driver coming into New Street at around 7pm spotted him on the tracks.

Officers found him hiding in the tunnel and he fled, but police knew which way he would try to escape and were waiting for him at the other end.

His presences on the lines that evening caused delays totalling 467 minutes, costing Network Rail 30,556.

Carriage clean-up work cost 3,500.

Sketch books found at his house, on Inverness Road, Northfield, revealed tags matching those on the trains.

Traces of paint on his clothes matched that used on trains and at Dudley Port station, while his phone records linked him to times and dates when graffiti was scrawled at Coseley and Tipton stations.

Byrd went on to admit obstruction, trespass and criminal damage.

Last week, he was jailed for eight weeks and ordered to pay train operators CrossCountry and London Midland compensation of 3,772 in total.

PC Dave Rich from BTP in Birmingham said: These were not victimless crimes: Byrds actions delayed passengers and the cost to clean his graffiti will undoubtedly be passed onto the travelling public in some form.

We are satisfied with the sentence handed to him and we hope it sends a clear message to other graffiti vandals that we will do everything in our power to put you before the courts, who take a dim view of such mindless acts.

Visit link:

Graffiti vandal behind a 34,000 rail crime spree is named | Express ... - expressandstar.com

Castile Killing Jury Was Stacked For Defense – The National Memo (blog)

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Dashcam footage of the exact moment Philando Castile was murdered by Minnesota police officer Jeronimo Yanez was released late Tuesday. The video proves two things: Castile could not have been more compliant, while Yanez responded with violence and seven rounds of gunfire. There is no ambiguity in the footage or the audio, no question that Yanez was unqualified to be carrying that gun, no question he was a far greater danger to Minnesotas citizens than the man he killed. To watch that scene and not believe Philando Castile was murdered is to believe black life has no inherent claim to existence.

The jury was shown the footage several times over the course of Yanezs trial, yet they chose to acquit him on all charges. Its a verdict thats maddeningly, infuriatingly and heartbreakingly illogical, yet consistent with every jury in this country thats been asked to rule on the deaths of black people at the hands of police. The U.S. system of criminal injustice fails black folks from start to finish by design.

A more intimate look at the jurors in Yanezs criminal case, compiled by the Minneapolis Star Tribune, offers not only insights into how they arrived at their decisions, but a look at just how well-stacked the jury was against a just verdict for Castile. There were just two black people on the jury of Castiles supposed peers. Juror One is a young African American who works as a shift manager at Wendys and personal care attendant for his mom. He expressed some lack of faith in the criminal justice system, reportedly expressing a belief that the wealthy and powerful could get off in the legal system because they could hire better attorneys. Juror 8 is an 18-year-old Ethiopian American who has lived in the U.S. since age 10. The Tribune notes that the defense tried to strike her due to unfamiliarity with the U.S. legal system, but the judge denied the attempt.

The rest of those selected for the jury were overwhelmingly middle-aged white Minnesotans, many of whom expressly stated support for police or a belief in the infallibility of the criminal justice system. Heres how the list shakes out, taken directly from the Star Tribune:

Juror 2: An older white female who manages a White Bear Lake gas station that has a contract with police. She said she had never heard of the Castile case. The judge denied an attempt by prosecutors to strike her after it was revealed that she had pro-police posts on her Facebook page. One of those posts was heavily critical of NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who began kneeling during national anthems last year to protest police shootings. She said she had forgotten about the posts.

Juror 3: Middle-aged white male whose wife works for the St. Paul School District, as did Castile but she did not know him. He lives very close to the where Castile was shot and works as the number one guy at a small metal finishing shop. He said his father was a fire chief and he grew up around law enforcement, and also has a nephew whos a police officer. He said it would be difficult for him to be unbiased. He has permit to carry and said he knew to keep his hands visible during a traffic stop. Thats what they teach you, he said.

Juror 4: A middle-aged white male who had very little knowledge of the case. He said he owns a gun and called the criminal justice system a very fair process.

Juror 5: A middle-aged white female who works at an assisted-living center and is highly active in church volunteer work. She said she had heard about the shooting at the time it happened, but knew little else. Her husband was carjacked at gunpoint 18 years ago. She said she had a high regard for police.

Juror 6: A white male in his 40s who is the jury foreperson. A wellness coach for the last seven years, he believes too many victimless crimes are prosecuted, including drug use and sex work. He believes marijuana should be legalized. He said he was somewhat isolated and knew nothing about the Yanez case.

Juror 7: A white female in her late 30s to early 40s who works as a nurse at the same hospital as Yanezs wife but said she does not know her. She said she watched Diamond Reynolds Facebook video, but didnt seek out news about the case and knew a moderate amount about it. Shes a member of a Harley motorcycle group. She said she was dissatisfied with how police responded to a call in 1996.

Juror 9: A middle-aged computer support worker, she was not familiar with the Yanez case, and said Im thankful we have police officers. She believes in the right to own a firearm, but added Im trying to stay away from them right now.

Juror 10: A middle-aged white male who is retired from preprinting work, he said he followed news about the case off and on. He said he had seen Reynolds Facebook video. She seemed overly calm he said on his juror questionnaire. He owns a handgun and hunts.

Juror 11: A middle-aged white male who owns several shotguns and long rifles to hunt pheasants. A former business manager who now works in construction and remodeling, he said in his questionnaire that the criminal justice system has problems but is the best in the world.

Juror 12: A middle-aged white male who moved to Minnesota four years ago to get a new start. He said hes a regular listener to MPR who knew a lot about the case. A pipe fitter, he took a permit-to-carry class three months ago. Keep your hands visible and do not do anything until they tell you want [sic] to do he said of permit to carry education on traffic stop conduct. He believes minor criminal offenses snowball and trap people in the justice system. It seems like its rigged against you, he said.

Justice for Philando Castile never had a chance. The system isnt broken; in fact, its working exactly the way its supposed to. The Yanez case is yet more evidence of exactly how well it continues to function.

KaliHolloway is a senior writer and the associate editor of media and culture at AlterNet.

This article was made possible by the readers and supporters of AlterNet.

Header imagesource.

See the rest here:

Castile Killing Jury Was Stacked For Defense - The National Memo (blog)

‘Fargo’ Season 3 finale recap: A mostly satisfying, but ambiguous ending – Baltimore Sun

Season 3 of Fargo came to a satisfying and poignant close with its finale episode, Somebody to Love. Justice is exacted, stories are told, death is doled and we get a frustratingly ambiguous, yet narratively inevitable ending.

The episode begins with Gloria Burgle submitting her resignation from the sheriff's department. Then we are taken to the IRS agent outlining the litany of transgressions the Stussy company has participated in.

Next, we see Emmit signing papers with Varga peering over his shoulder, making another deal with the devil, as it were.

The IRS agent gets a note from Burgle requesting to talk. Burgle accepts that the case is closed, but the IRS agent tells Burgle of the mass conspiracy he is close to cracking.

Dont move, Ill be right there, Burgle says enthusiastically, Wait, whats your address?

She then removes her resignation notice and takes off.

Nikki, meanwhile, is planning her revenge like a game of bridge. It is revealed that this shrewd woman has already picked up a little sign language.

After we see the title card, Emmit finishes signing V.M.s documents he is simply worn down.

Its perfectly natural, you see it all the time in the wild the smaller animal going limp in the jaws of the larger, Varga says. Food knows its food.

Varga fields a call from Nikki about the next meeting while Emmit eyes the gun in Meemos chest. He grabs the gun in a rage because he was called food. Varga distracts Emmit by giving a monologue about the evolution of technology and says the gun has a fingerprint scanner. He blasts his breath spray in Emmits eyes and Meemo blasts him with a fire poker.

Meemo and Varga go to meet up with Nikki. Their small army follows a Latino boy into an abandoned building, where they follow directions written on the ground up to the third floor. They are playing Nikkis game now. With each direction, they lose more men in their army.

Varga, the coward, hangs back in the elevator while the army checks out the storage hallway. They come to an open storage unit that reads: Leave the money, the drives are in unit 207.

Varga recieves a text from an unknown number that reads: IRS has the drivers. Get Out.

As Varga closes the elevator door on his men with a genuine look of fear on his face, a storage locker door opens. Meemo and the others are gunned down and Varga listens in horror. Nikki is waiting for him at the bottom of the elevator, but she finds an empty coat on the floor and the roof panel taken off. The weasel got away.

A bloodied Mr. Wrench comes down the adjacent elevator with the money, which Nikki gives him for his help. Nikki runs off in search of Emmit.

Speaking of Emmit, he wakes up to an empty house with a stamp stuck on his forehead. He throws the stamp, worth $10,000, on the floor and drives off. He arrives at his offices to find Ms. Goldfarb has taken over.

You work for Varga, all this time. Like a fire door that leads to another fire, Stussy says.

Its a twist that I do not care about at all. But Emmit is instructed to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy because he is $300 million dollars in debt.

We then get an explanation from the IRS agent to Burgle of what Varga did to Stussy lots. He calls it a bleed out. Narwhal acquired Stussy, borrowed millions of dollars, then sold the company for a fraction of the price while it was drowning in debt. The money borrowed is pocketed by Varga and all working in his operation while Emmit has to take care of the debt.

This whole time it was easy to assume Varga was working for some kind of criminal organization laundering money, as Burgle said, but it turns out he is simply a shrewd, ruthless businessman. The only illegal action he took was that he didnt pay taxes; he put all of the money they borrowed into offshore accounts.

Burgle is called to the scene of the massacre Nikki enacted. Burgle, with the knowledge that Nikki is out for revenge, goes to warn Emmit.

Emmit, having a terrible day, continues his unlucky streak as his car breaks down on the side of the highway. Frustrated by his lack of service, as well as the death of his car, company and brother, Emmit smashes his phone on the ground.

Nikki rolls up in a truck with her shotgun in tow.

Are you as low as you can go? she asks.

Emmit thought he couldnt go lower when he turned himself in the day before, but it turned out that wasnt the case, so he is unable to answer her question. Nikki reminds Emmit before she blasts him that he has no one who loves him. Emmit then begs Nikki to shoot him. She starts to give Emmit the quote she got from the stranger at the bowling alley before, in the coincidence of all coincidences, a cop car rolls by to interrupt the line.

Its a long story, but at the end of it we all go home, Nikki says with misplaced optimism.

Emmit apparently changes his mind about wanting to die, as he is quick to whisper to the officer that Nikki has a gun. The officer tries to diffuse the situation and draws his firearm as Nikki creeps back toward her gun. Nikki grabs the shotgun and shots ring out, dropping the officer and Nikki to the floor, leaving Emmit still standing between them.

The officer was shot in the chest. Nikki was shot in the head. With our rogue warrior killed, it is up to Burgle to exact justice the legal way.

Burgle and her son sit on the trunk of her car licking popsicles. Burgle explains what happened to Ennis to her son.

Theres violence to knowing the world isnt what you want, Burgle said.

Its a short but sweet scene, in which Burgle espouses the value of teamwork and friendship as being guiding lights in an absurd, dark world.

Elsewhere, Emmit takes his new lease on life to his wife and immediately begins crying in her arms.

We then get a move very reminiscent of the first season as the show jumps five years later. Emmit has filed for bankruptcy and pleaded guilty to tax fraud. On probation, he was welcomed back to his family. Its very sweet he is praying with his family and everything is happy. Even a recovering Sy is there! I mean, we find out he might have $20 million hidden in an offshore account, but besides that, everything is on the up and up for Emmit Stussy.

Emmit looks over the pictures of his friends and family on the fridge He opens the fridge to get the salad, and the ever-loyal Mr. Wrench shoots him in the back of the head. Is it fair? Who knows. But, as Burgle said, not everything is.

Burgle, now working for the Department of Homeland Security, enters an interrogation room to none other than Varga, now under the name Daniel Rand and the guise of a salesman. The name may be a tribute to Ayn Rand, but I like to think it is an homage to Marvel superhero Iron Fist.

Oh that this was my salvation, a weary traveler I am, Varga says.

Varga gives Burgle a series of vague statements essentially amounting to, You havent got a thing on me. Gloria informs Varga of the Stussy murder.

It is a dangerous world for men of standing, Varga says. Human beings, you see have no inherent value other than the money they earn.

Burgle asks Varga if he killed Emmit. He refuses. Burgle informs Varga that he is going to prison on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit murder. She, meanwhile, will go home to her son and prepare for the state fair the next day.

Varga counters her story with one of his own: That a man will come in and tell him hes free to go. And he will leave.

Trust me. The future is certain. And when it comes you will know your place in the world, Varga says.

The lights go down on Varga, Burgle smiles, we see the door and the clock above it, and the episode ends.

The season of Fargo ends the way it began: two people in a room with differing stories, both believing theirs to be the truth. While at the beginning, the two people were debating over what already happened, now they are debating what is going to happen.

As Varga made clear: The past is unpredictable, but the future is certain.

This season finale was strong, as each character gets their own story wrapped neatly but not predictably into a bow.

Nikki is on a path of redemption, but on the way she kills a dutiful police officer, cutting that path short.

Emmit is on his own redemptive path but keeps a lot of his ill-gotten money to himself, so his is also cut short.

Burgle knows her place in the world and is confident that she has triumphed over the devil.

Varga believes he will escape and fade into the world yet again.

My only wish is that Varga got his comeuppance and, depending on how one interprets the show, whos to say he doesnt? His power, money and standing have been stripped from him and he might be headed to prison.

As is typical in Fargo and in many Coen brothers films, the mystical storylines and themes are left open for interpretation.

Season 3 of Fargo may not be the best of the series, but was inventive, took risks and definitely came close to the heights the previous two stories reached.

Read more:

'Fargo' Season 3 finale recap: A mostly satisfying, but ambiguous ending - Baltimore Sun

Travis Kalanick may have resigned as Uber’s CEO but he isn’t going away – Washington Post

With his resignation Tuesday from the chief executive officer job at Uber, Travis Kalanick joins the pantheon of company founders who've made the difficultmove beyond life as their company's CEO, even if temporarily. Some did it by choice: Howard Schultz, Ralph Lauren. Plenty of others didn't: American Apparel's Dov Charney. Men's Wearhouse's George Zimmer. And of course, way back in 1985, the example that must be included in every story aboutfounders leavingtheir companies: Apple's Steve Jobs.

However they may have left, whatmost sharein commonis a hard timeletting go. Many foundershave trouble givingtheir successors absolute authority. Schultz once wrote that it's like being a parent standing back and watching his children make their own choices.

Their DNA does not allow them to step back and be an independent board member, said Peter Crist, chairmanof the executive search firm Crist Kolder Associates. They still involve themselves. They still meddle. They still call someone three levels below and ask what's going on.

Management experts say that transitioncould be morechallengingfor Kalanick, who hasa reputation as an aggressive, win-at-all-costs chief executive who built a Hobbesian culture that's been under fire for unprofessional, frat house conductand allegations of widespread sexual harassment.

He has this competitive streak, said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a professor at the Yale School of Management who wrote a book about the psychology of CEOs departing their companies. This is not a guy who's going to go softly into the night.

[When company founders fight back]

In addition to his personality, Kalanick's management style has been described as particularly hands-on, amicromanagerwho's gotten involved indetails as minor as a redesign ofthe company's logo.He had such a consolidated level of power that the first recommendation in the report by the law firm Covington and Burling on Uber's cultural reformsurged the company to reallocatesome of Kalanick'sresponsibilities.

Even after he took an unspecified leave of absence last week, Kalanick was reportedto have stayed in frequentcontact with executives,interviewing candidates for the manyvacancies onUber's executive team and dialing in with his thoughts.After director David Bonderman made a disparagingremarkabout women during a company meeting designed to address the company'scultural issues, Kalanick personally worked the phonesto get Bonderman off the board, according to a report in the New York Times.

The next CEO of Uberis going to do things differently, and Kalanickis going to have a hard time with that becauseof his emotional investment, said Kerry Sulcowicz, a psychiatrist and psychologist who advises boards and CEOs, including several running successful start-ups. For many CEOs, there's a high risk of succumbing to the temptation to meddle. Or worse: to actively undermine the new CEO by unconsciously behaving in a way that destroys whats most importantto him, as a way of proving to himself and the world that he was indeed irreplaceable.

It's also possible Kalanick could be emboldened by his equity stake. Because he and his allies retainso much voting power throughthe shares he owns, management experts say it makes sense that he remains on the board. You know the old joke gone, but not forgotten? said Charles Elson, the director of a corporate governance center at the University of Delaware. Hes gone but has too big a stake to be forgotten.

[Why Travis Kalanick didn't survive Uber]

The Uber investors who wrote the letter calling for Kalanick's resignation have called for two of three empty board seats to be held by truly independent directors, according to the New York Times, which woulddilute Kalanick's vote on the board. A company spokeswoman declined to comment further on what else the board might do.

Sometimes, having an involved former founder on the board is a positive, a connection to the company's origins and a font of institutional knowledge and vision. Schultz is widely seen to have revived a fading Starbucks when he took back the reins from asuccessor, hearingcomplaintsfrom employeesand recognizing the company had drifted from its roots. And founders such asBill Gates at Microsoft wereseenas constructive board members to their successors afterthey stepped out of theCEO's seat.

Butthere are plenty of times when a CEO, even by his own choice, leaves the top jobbut clashes with his or her successor.Ralph Lauren handed the CEO title to outsider Stefan Larsson, but the two couldn't agreeon creative direction and Larssonleft the company less than two years after he started. Lululemon founder Chip Wilson, who hadn't been CEO since 2005 but remained on the company's board until 2015, arguedwith a successor over things like putting Ayn Rand quotes on shopping bags and voted against company directors over the direction of the company.

[Yet another crisis for Uber: Six vacant executive jobs, and no active CEO]

When such changescome amid an emotional personal hardship as has happened to Kalanick, whose mother recently died in a boating accident the change can be complicated, Sonnenfeld said, unless the founder gets involved in something new.

I have seen this before where there's a personal tragedy, he said. [Former Nike CEO] Phil Knight stepped out after his son died, but he got a second wind, came back, and pulled the rug from beneath [successor] Bill Perez, who was doing a good job.

Kalanick's board presence could also give some recruits to the CEO job pause. While plenty would probablyjump at the opportunity to overhaul what has become themost disruptive and valuableSilicon Valley start-up of this era, others could look warily athow much Kalanick will stay involved.

Theyll swallow hard, close their eyes and theyll do it, said Crist, the executive recruiter. But it doesnt change the fact that his influence and personality are still going to be quite evident.

Read also:

'Now, it's on our watch:' A chat with the new Uber executive who believes the company can change

Why a toxic workplace is now a much bigger liability for companies

Like On Leadership? Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and subscribe to our podcast on iTunes.

Read more:

Travis Kalanick may have resigned as Uber's CEO but he isn't going away - Washington Post

Where’s Ayn Rand when you need her? – Spectator.co.uk

A famous epigrammatic nugget of wisdom appears in The Leopard, Lampedusas great novel about a noble Sicilian familys fortunes: If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change. I thought of the novel as I was driven up to Gstaad during last weeks heatwave. Disembarking in Geneva, I felt I was back in Nairobi, circa 1970, on my way to Mombasa and a romantic interlude among the elephants and wildebeest. The old continent now looks like Africa, especially in airports and public spaces. But things will have to change if we want things to stay the same, I told myself again and again.

In the coolness and quiet of the mountains one can think clearly about important things, such as ambition and lack of it, or the conundrum of whether one declines to try out of a false sense of decorum, or just plain laziness. Personal doubts aside, right now the great question seems to be the economic inequality generated by capitalism and free enterprise, and the egalitarian drive bursting out in anti-capitalist demonstrations and militant rage, as in London this week. Mind you, the impression I got from looking at British television was that Jeremy Corbyn had won the election, and that the Tories, in a fit of pique, had allowed the fire at the Grenfell estate to get out of hand and burn Africans and Muslims alive. Talk about the power of the idiot box and the irresponsibility of leftie hacks.

Britain now resembles Central America, where the loser, immediately after an election, declares it null and void and demands a repeat performance. What is the difference between John McDonnells call for a million people to take to the streets and a banana-republic electoral losers call for civil disobedience? The temperature, I suppose. Never mind. My social schedule is rather full, starting next week, and I thank the Almighty that I no longer go to Ascot to keep company with glorified hairdressers and other such nice folk.

I know, it sounds snobby as hell, but Ive had it with this smouldering class resentment in Britain. We will always have differences in looks, intelligence and bank accounts, and if that causes outraged shrieks among do-gooders and phonies, too bad. Such is life. Immediately after the last world war, with all the large pleasure boats having been requisitioned by the warring states, I walked about the various marinas in the south of France and saw only tiny sailing boats or fishing vessels. Shipyards didnt start to build pleasure yachts until well into the 1950s. Hence all bathers looked the same, although I do remember King Farouk being held up by two flunkies on account of his weight. Then the yachts began to appear, separating the men from the boys. And the men did get to pick up women while the boys kept to their swimming. Life, after all, is unfair, and a man with a yacht has a better chance of picking up a tart than a man whose only asset at sea is his bathing suit.

Am I going all Ayn Rand on you? God, I hope not. She was too awful a woman, an arch capitalist and a man-eating cougar if ever there was one; not the most attractive of females. She did for selfishness what the saints did for altruism, and then some. But she had some very good points. When she was asked by her publisher to cut John Galts speech in Atlas Shrugged a long paean to runaway capitalism and individualism she snapped, Would you cut the Bible?

Rand was committed to the idea that capitalism was the greatest way of organising society ever invented, having experienced hunger and oppression and the loss of all her family wealth in St Petersburg to the communists. Once in the land of opportunity, Rand changed her name from Rosenbaum and took to wearing a dollar-sign pin to make sure people knew of her love of capitalism. The one problem Rand had were the businessmen she met. They did not match up to the bermenschen of her imagination, or those she created in her fiction. In fact, Rand had no more reverence for real capitalists than fellow intellectuals did. At the end, her individualism owed more to Nietzsche than to Adam Smith, but never mind. We could use someone like her in the capital this week, especially when the militants rage up and down central London screaming Tory scum and other such intellectual put-downs.

I suppose the best medicine for those consumed by rage against the system would be a bit of collectivism la North Korea. The Corbynites have never seen collectivism up close. This is why Poles and Hungarians and others who suffered so under communism have such adamantine confidence in the free-enterprise system. And it is why we would have the last laugh if, God forbid, people such as Corbyn ever came to power and turned this green and pleasant land into one of misery and poverty. But enough of thinking seriously. Time for a drink, and perhaps more than just the one.

More:

Where's Ayn Rand when you need her? - Spectator.co.uk

Heimerman: Officer reminds us of the golden rule | Daily Chronicle – DeKalb Daily Chronicle

Matthew Apgar - mapgar@shawmedia.com

Caption

The people who do the most incredible, selfless things are usually the ones we have to drag into the spotlight, kicking and screaming.

I get it. DeKalb police officer Jeff Winters didnt give a homeless man food, water, pillows, a duffel bag and bug spray with the hopes of flashbulbs popping. After all, he didnt get interviewed the many other times hes done something similar in his nearly 23-year career.

Most folks dont ring Salvation Army bells, donate to GoFundMe pages, volunteer for nonprofits, all those philanthropic actions, for personal benefit. That is, unless you count the warmth it puts in their heart when they put another persons well-being ahead of their own.

Many of them do those things for the very same reason I like to write about their doing them: with the hope selflessness is contagious, and that it could inspire others to follow suit.

Its not that we dont want to better society. We just get so busy, dont we? If we drive by a motorist with a flat tire, we might think of stopping, but weve also got to get to work on time. On the way home? The kids have baseball in half an hour. No time to stop.

Maybe weve gotten too jaded to toss our change into a kettle, or into the bucket of a homeless person addressing drivers with a cardboard sign. Too many people just looking for a handout, right?

Winters put that into perspective for me, however.

We dont know why people are down on their luck. Sometimes, bad things happen to good people. Sometimes, they come in waves. Many people dont choose their demons. Its the other way around.

What if a sandwich or, perhaps more powerfully, the compassion behind it, could be the turning point for someone who desperately needs a hand? What if feeling that someone cares could change the life trajectory for someone whos downtrodden?

The work done by beloved DeKalb High School teacher Ata Shakir dovetailed with Winters act of kindness. Shakir died far too soon, at age 41, Friday night. As a guy who doesnt live in DeKalb County yet, I was humbled to get a brief glimpse of Shakirs work, and the countless members of the community he touched, by speaking with his family and his peers.

Something his wife, Brenda, said stuck with me. A lot of what she said did, actually, but in particular, it was that she hurt so badly for the community because Shakir was going to keep making it better.

I figure the least we can do is our very best to pick up where he left off.

Getting to know Winters and Shakir as best I could reminded me of something: I might not be able to make the world a better place.

But we sure can.

Christopher Heimerman is the news editor at the Daily Chronicle. He can be reached at cheimerman@shawmedia.com.

Original post:

Heimerman: Officer reminds us of the golden rule | Daily Chronicle - DeKalb Daily Chronicle

The Three Golden Rules of Tax – MinuteHack (registration) (blog)

Taxation is political. We all have our own ideas about how the system functions and how it should change. Lets see how the Three Golden Rules of tax apply to one of Britains newest taxes, the soft drinks industry levy or sugar tax.

The First Golden Rule: Lots of small taxes together add up to make big tax bills

National insurance contributions are kept separate from income tax. There is no earthly reason for this except the government doesnt want to admit that, once you factor in NICs, the basic rate of income tax is effectively 32% for people in work, not the headline rate of 20%.

We also have taxes on insurance premiums, airline seats, televisions, legacies and capital gains. There are taxes on selling shares and selling houses. We pay a tax for our cars and lots of tax when we fill them with petrol.

If we smoke, were taxed. If we drink, were taxed. We pay tax on our houses and offices. Not all taxes raise much money.

Aggregates levy brings in 355 million; landfill tax 919 million and cider duty just 296 million. But a billion here and a billion there and soon you are talking about real money, as the US senator Everett Dirksen probably didnt say.

The point of all these taxes is to spread the pain so we notice it less. And, generally, that works. People have no idea how much tax they are actually suffering.

In accordance with the First Golden Rule, the sugar tax is a small impost added to the cost of soft drinks that are already subject to VAT. Its being introduced from April 2018 and will probably add 8p to the price of a can of Coca Cola.

Although the sugar tax is supposed to fight obesity by making sugary drinks more expensive, it is not clear that the most effective way of doing so is with another tax and all the bureaucracy that goes with it.

The sugar tax will be paid by consumers, maybe even on diet products

The Second Golden Rule: No matter what name is on the bill, all taxes are ultimately suffered by human beings

Only people can pay taxes. Employers national insurance contributions are really a tax on our salaries, not a tax on our employers. And while VAT may be handed to the taxman by the businesses we buy stuff from, we end up paying all of it.

Even corporation tax, which sounds like a tax on companies, is really suffered by shareholders, customers and staff.

The sugar tax is no exception. Consistent with the Second Golden Rule, it is levied on the manufacturers of sweetened drinks but they can be expected to pass the cost on to consumers by increasing the prices of their products.

Indeed, they might increase the price of diet drinks in order to keep the cost of their sugary and nonsugary products the same.

The Third Golden Rule: Taxes are kept as invisible as possible

Since we all hate paying taxes, the government has perfected the art of ensuring that we rarely have to hand over the money ourselves.

Most taxes are paid by businesses on our behalf. The PAYE system hides how much national insurance and income tax we pay, while VAT and excise duty are buried in highstreet prices.

Environmental taxes on our energy bills are in deep cover and dont even admit to being taxes. To be honest, almost all taxes are stealth taxes. We noted above that the sugar tax will be paid by drinks manufacturers but consumers will suffer the tax through higher prices.

However, shoppers wont know how much soft drinks industry levy they are paying when they buy a sugary beverage. In fact, they are unlikely to be aware that they are paying it at all. Following the Third Golden Rule, it is kept under wraps.

The new Making Tax Digital initiative will remove us even further from the process by which we pay tax. HMRC wants to collect whats due on our savings through the PAYE machinery operated by employers.

If the plan works, tax returns will be abolished within five years. Once that happens, the vast majority of the UK population will never have to think about tax again. It will represent the apotheosis of the Golden Rules of tax.

The Three Golden Rules explain why the tax system is organized the way it is. They are the reason we have so many taxes, why stealth taxes are so popular with governments, and why we rarely have to pay money directly to HMRC.

Taxes go direct to HMRC, so we don't have to think about them

The soft drinks industry levy complies with all three rules. This suggests to me that it is designed to raise extra revenue, even though the government claims it wants the levy to reduce sugar consumption.

If that were the case, it would be better if the tax were highly visible so that shoppers could immediately see how much extra their sugar hit was costing them. We are warned about the 5p charge for plastic bags, introduced in October 2015, every time we buy a bag at the checkout.

As a result, we have used billions fewer than we did before the 5p charge was introduced. If the government wants the soft drinks industry levy to change behaviour, it should defy the Golden Rules and make the tax as obvious as possible.

Lack of transparency is one reason that government attempts to use taxes to change behaviour are often ineffective. Another problem with tax incentives is that people take advantage of them in a way that governments didnt intend.

Tax avoidance of this kind gives rise to lots of extra tax rules specifically to prevent it. And the unexpected consequences of antiavoidance rules often provide new ways of avoiding taxes.

This leads to even more intricacies as the authorities try to close down loopholes they accidentally created closing other loopholes. In addition, tax reform often makes the law more elaborate as exceptions have to be made for those who would otherwise lose out from change.

This is an edited extract from What Everyone Needs to Know about Tax: An Introduction to the UK Tax System by James Hannam, PhD (Wiley, March 2017).

Go here to see the original:

The Three Golden Rules of Tax - MinuteHack (registration) (blog)

Liberal Elite Privilege Noblesse Oblige | National Review – National Review

Karen Kipples greatest wish in the world is that her eight-year-old daughter Ruby will have a good life. At the same time, in accordance with [her] politics and principles, she aspires to a life spent making a difference and helping those less fortunate than herself. Apart from their love for Ruby, Karen and her husband Matt are united by little beyond the same political outlook and commitment to social justice, combined with their willingness to impugn those who [dont] share it.

This tension between maternal love and political ideals propels Class, Lucinda Rosenfelds new novel. Its central dilemma concerns how, and where, to educate Ruby. New York City private schools are notoriously expensive. Karen and Matt do own a two-bedroom Brooklyn condominium worth more than $1 million but only because its value has doubled in the three years since they moved to a gentrifying neighborhood. Karen is a professional fundraiser for Hungry Kids, whose cause is made clear by its name, while Matt is starting a nonprofit of his own after two decades as an attorney fighting for tenants evicted by greedy landlords.

It will have to be a public school, then, which is just as well: Karen believes that public education [is] a force for good and that, without racially and economically integrated schools, equal opportunity couldnt exist. The choice is between: Mather, in a nearby neighborhood so thoroughly gentrified that seeing its students en masse for the first time made Karen feel she had fallen asleep and woken up in Norway; and Betts, Rubys school since kindergarten, where only a fourth of the students are white and many of the rest live in a public-housing project. Mather has an affluent, aggressive parentteacher association that renders it indistinguishable from a private school. The hundreds of thousands of dollars raised by the PTA each year pay for, among other things, a recess coach and an experimental puppeteering troupes performance of an age-appropriate version of Schindlers List. Karen likes that Betts exposes Ruby to less privileged children but worries about its academic reputation and quality. Apart from Latino History Month, it seems, the rest of the school year is Black History Month. Now in the third grade, Ruby knows the exact date of Martin Luther Kings wedding to Coretta Scott but has never heard of Julius Caesar.

The more acute problem is that Karen comes to fear for Rubys safety. Her daughters best friend transfers from Betts to Mather after a boy named Jayyden punches the little girl in the face. Karen feels sorry for Jayyden, who lives in the projects with assorted relatives, his mother thought to be in prison and his father in the wind. But Rubys vulnerability torments Karen, who tells Matt, I just dont feel comfortable leaving her there in the morning anymore. His opposition makes her defensive. Its not because so few Betts students are white or prosperous, she insists, but because so few come from a functional family where people care about their kids getting an education and encourage them. When they argue, Karen tries to use politics against her husband, accusing him of rejecting a move to Mather solely because he wants to brag to all your friends that your daughter attends a minority-white school.

A Tom Wolfe novel would deride Karen and her peers mercilessly, but Rosenfeld is wry and sympathetic. She allows Karen to recognize that her life [is] ripe for mockery, as she numbers herself among the educated white liberals nearly as terrified of being seen as racists as they are of encountering black male teenagers on an empty street after dark. Like Karen, Rosenfeld is at pains to make clear her antipathy to conservatives, especially whenever she begins sounding like one. Class is dedicated to public schools everywhere and has an epigraph from James Baldwin: White people cannot, in the generality, be taken as models of how to live. In the wake of the 2016 election, Rosenfeld described herself as a card-carrying member of the liberal and coastal elite so despised by Donald J. Trumps core constituency.

Despite Rosenfelds efforts, however, her novel makes clear that the liberal hypocrisy it depicts is no foible but reveals a serious defect: a facile, often brazen combination of self-righteousness and self-advancement. Class fictionalizes a controversy that erupted in 2015 when the New York City school system proposed to redraw district boundaries, sending many children from P.S. 8, an overcrowded Brooklyn elementary school whose student population was 59 percent white, to P.S. 307, which was nearby, less crowded, and 90 percent black and Latino. The affluent parents who opposed their childrens transfer to P.S. 307 insisted that they were concerned about test scores, resources, programs, the high price they had paid for their homes in the expectation of sending their children to P.S. 8 . . . anything but race.

Its more complicated when its about your own children, one parent told Reihan Salam, who rightly pointed out that every child is somebodys own. For liberals willing to impugn people who dont share their commitment to social justice, however, the extenuating circumstances that weigh heavily in Brooklyn Heights never explain or excuse red-state voters resistance to multiculturalism. Were tormented about a complex, tragic dilemma; theyre hate-filled bigots.

Its important to note that P.S. 8 was predominantly but not entirely white. It had some students of color, but not too many, as Nikole Hannah-Jones, a black writer for the New York Times with a daughter at P.S. 307, explained. Citywide, Hannah-Jones notes, New York public schools are just 15 percent white but half of those white students are concentrated in 11 percent of the schools.

Hannah-Jones scorns the carefully curated integration . . . that allows many white parents to boast that their childrens public schools look like the United Nations. This curation, not unique to New Yorks public schools, affirms the self-image and self-interest of wealthy liberal whites across the country, and at all levels of education.

In researching his 2007 book Creating a Class, the sociologist Mitchell L. Stevens spent more than a year embedded in the admissions office of a private liberal-arts college. The college and its personnel are not named in the book, per Stevenss agreement with the administration, but the school was quickly identified as Hamilton College in upstate New York.

This institution was, and remains, selective and prestigious. U.S. News & World Report ranks Hamilton twelfth on its list of 239 National Liberal Arts Colleges, a bit below such institutions as Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley but tied with Colby, Colgate, and Smith, among others. Hamilton rejects 75 percent of the students who apply, even though the admissions director at the time Creating a Class was published believed that a large majority of its applicants were strong and would be really successful there. In other words, more high-school seniors will consider it a reach school than a safety school.

In modern America, Stevens argues, preparing ones children for college and then enrolling them in the most desirable one possible is the culmination of social reproduction. He explains this sociological term as the transfer of knowledge, cultural perspective, and social position from one generation to the next, or, more broadly, all the things parents do to ensure that their children will have good lives.

Formal education has become central to social reproduction. Few American parents now transfer a family farm or business to their offspring. The business for a huge majority is a career selling labor on the open market rather than, as once was common, owning and operating some enterprise. Nor do more than a handful of parents bring children along in their own trade, schooling having displaced formal and informal apprenticeships as the pathway to careers. And smaller families mean that parents social-reproduction efforts are concentrated on fewer offspring.

Stevens shows how very selective colleges flexible understanding of diversity squares the circle between helping those less fortunate and giving ones children a leg up. The key is that official measures of campus diversity have turned into unofficial markers of institutional prestige in the little universe of elite higher education. The paradigmatic Hamilton student comes from a family like Karen, Matt, and Rubys, in which parents and child believe that a college with an excessively white student population is deficient in its morals and politics, to be sure, but also, and crucially, in terms of how much status it confers. Stevens explains that this mindset works to the disadvantage of applicants who would make a selective college more diverse, but only in ways that dont boost the numbers everyone looks at, such as black, Hispanic, and Native American enrollment. As a result, valedictorians from small rural high schools, or the children of families who recently immigrated from Eastern Europe, are almost certainly wasting their Hamilton application fees.

The right kind of minorities do benefit from the zero-sum diversity game, but their advantage is equivocal. It is hard, for example, to argue with students who protest, Im not here to be your black experience, given that such resentments reflect a large measure of truth. As Creating a Class shows, while Hamilton would welcome minority applicants in any case, it is especially receptive on account of its need to showcase the diversity attractive to those students, most of them white, from families that dont need financial aid and might even donate to some future capital campaign. According to U.S. News, 52 percent of Hamiltons 1,872 students received no need-based financial aid to cover the sticker price for room, board, and tuition, which was $64,250 last year. And according to the Equality of Opportunity Project, the median family income for Hamilton students is $208,600; more students are drawn from the top thousandth of the national income distribution (2.7 percent) than from the bottom fifth (2.2 percent), and nearly as many come from the top hundredth (20 percent) as from the bottom four-fifths (28 percent).

Leaked documents from the Princeton University admissions office, gathered in the course of a federal investigation into discrimination against Asian college applicants, give a rawer view than Creating a Class of how selective admissions works. An admissions officer wrote that it would be hard to recommend one Hispanic applicant since there was no cultural flavor in her packet. The need for a touch more cultural flavor is also a Hawaiian/Pacific Islander applicants shortcoming.

This euphemism isnt hard to decode. Theres no point in going to the enormous trouble of creating a diverse student body if its diversity is so understated that students and their parents cannot readily discern the colleges all-important U.N.-like qualities. Minority applicants must contribute to diversity in ways that are vivid, not subtle. As George Orwell might say, all Hispanics are Hispanic, but some Hispanics are more Hispanic than others.

Speaking of Orwell, his observation that all leftist political parties are at bottom a sham, because they make it their business to fight against something which they do not really wish to destroy, holds up impressively after 75 years. An evil not really meant to be eradicated is, for instance, central to the global-warming crusade. Journalist Elizabeth Kolbert thinks the threat is grave, putting us in a race toward planetary disaster, but also considers the political effort against it thoroughly disingenuous. Most liberals, she argues, refuse to admit an inconvenient truth: The reduction in greenhouse gases necessary to reverse, halt, or even slow global warming will either prolong and worsen the misery of the planets poor countries or require Americans to reduce their energy consumption by more than 80 percent. Knowing that Americans have no interest in giving up air travel or air conditioning or HDTV or trips to the mall or the family car, environmentalists encourage the soothing fantasy that climate change can be tackled with minimal disruption to the American way of life.

Similarly, diversity in education, from preschool to postgraduate, and the resulting holy war on privilege, requires denouncing but not renouncing. Despite its stated intent to subvert unjust hierarchies, multiculturalism facilitates rather than impedes careerism. A degree from a selective college, one racially integrated in a carefully curated way, does wonders for those getting on in the world. Checking your privilege never involves transferring to Jerkwater A&M, diverse in ways selective colleges never will be, and thereby surrendering ones spot in the Ivy League so that it can be filled by a cashiers or opioid addicts kid. Noah Remnick, son of New Yorker editor David Remnick, devoted the summer before his senior year at Yale to sharing with Los Angeles Times readers the results of the great deal of time hed spent studying and talking with faculty and other students about what constitutes privilege, fairness and unfairness in American society. Remnick will begin a Rhodes scholarship at Oxford in October, pursuing his interest in race, resistance, and urban politics.

In The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy (1999), Nicholas Lemann wrote that our system of higher education has become a national personnel department. The reason for the crush at the gates of the most selective colleges and universities is that people believe admission can confer lifelong prestige, comfort, and safety.

The consuming concern with privilege and oppression, with confronting and correcting historical wrongs social justice, in short, the ideology of preeminent colleges has moved outward to less eminent ones and downward to secondary and primary schools. Many parents are eager, and many others are willing, to entrust their children to an educational system that inculcates this deep solicitude for the downtrodden, albeit just that portion of the downtrodden meeting certain demographic criteria. But the system, especially its most exalted institutions, is also expected to transmit the aspirations, expectations, and advantages of the uptrodden, those who started or climbed high and want their children to start and climb even higher.

Up to a point, the two goals are in harmony. Even 30 years ago, Wolfe observed in Bonfire of the Vanities that bigotrys biggest drawback, if not its worst attribute, was that it had become undignified, a sign of Low Rent origins, of inferior social status, of poor taste. Since people thus marked have little hope for lifelong prestige, comfort, and safety, our schools prepare students to do good and do well by instilling in them the habit of deploring all manifestations of racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.

But only up to a point. Brookings Institution researchers Richard V. Reeves and Dimitrios Halikias have said that our upper middle class relies on opportunity hoarding to separate itself from the rest of society, and that elite colleges have become the chief mechanism for compounding advantage. Similarly, Mitchell Stevenss conclusion in Creating a Class is that the college-admissions process has become the preponderant means of laundering privilege in contemporary American society.

Meritocracies purport to discern and reward merit, a decidedly intrinsic personal quality but intrinsic qualities such as intellectual facility and stubborn persistence only seem neutral to class, Stevens maintains. In reality, young people blessed with the right kinds of families and social environments are far better positioned to acquire, cultivate, and display such attributes. Some of the resulting advantages, such as tutoring or the availability of Advanced Placement courses, are easily identified. The more important ones are harder to identify, much less replicate and the most important is, in Karen Kipples description, a family that cares about its kids and encourages them. The laundering Stevens deplores is an acquired obliviousness to all these factors, a tacit agreement to deny privileges existence while perpetuating it. Merit is also a verb, a synonym of deserve. Those who have merit do merit the prestige, comfort, and safety they attain.

It turns out that social justice amounts to noblesse oblige, simultaneously strengthening the obligations and social status of our meritocracys credentialed gentry. Literary scholar William Deresiewicz, a self-described democratic socialist, says that the rise of political correctness means that privilege laundering pervades the entire college experience, not just the admissions process. The ultimate purpose of political correctness, he contends, is to flatter the elite rather than dismantle it. In effect, socioeconomically advantaged students, professors, and administrators use political correctness to alibi or erase their privilege, to tell themselves that they are . . . part of the solution to our social ills, not an integral component of the problem. The social-justice warriors stridency belies, even to themselves, the fact that their aims are so limited.

For Reeves and Halikias, the protests that drove Charles Murray from Middlebury College had less to do with alleging and then thwarting racism than with rich, progressive protestors refusing to hear a lecture on the roots of their own privilege. (The topic of Murrays speech was to have been the growing gulf between the upper class and the rest of America.) Tellingly, Middlebury is even more selective and affluent than Hamilton College. Tied with Swarthmore as the fourth-highest-rated liberal-arts college in the U.S., Middlebury rejected 83 percent of its applicants in 2015. Fifty-five percent of students received no need-based financial aid, not surprising given that the median family income of those students is $244,300. Only 2.7 percent of its students come from families in the bottom fifth of Americas income distribution, and 24 percent come from the bottom four-fifths. At the other end, 4.4 percent come from the top thousandth, and 23 percent from the top hundredth.

Conservatives are right to be appalled by vituperative social-justice warriors. Its oddly reassuring, however, that the No justice, no peace shock troops are as fraudulent as they are insolent. Peoples true beliefs can be revealed by their words or, far more reliably, by their actions. Until kabuki radicalism gets around to requiring privileged students, parents, and colleges to surrender some of their own advantages rather than denounce privilege in general, the social-justice crusade deserves to be regarded with more contempt than alarm.

Ultimately, a meritocracy divided against itself cannot stand. An educational system can either subvert existing hierarchies or fortify them, but not both.

READ MORE: You Gotta Lie: The Tangled Progressive Web A Party of Teeth Gnashers: The Broken Record of Racism/Sexism/Homophobia Class and the Trump Resistance

WilliamVoegeli, a senior editor of The Claremont Review of Books, is a visiting scholar at Claremont McKenna Colleges Salvatori Center and the author, most recently, of The Pity Party.

More:

Liberal Elite Privilege Noblesse Oblige | National Review - National Review

Ricky Gervais Rips Trump: ‘Hollywood Liberal Elites Are Not the Enemy’ – Breitbart News

In an extensive interview with Vulture,The Officercreator says the liberal celebrities who want politicians to raise tax rates are the ones willing to pay more.

What really annoys me is that Trump has convinced his gang that the real enemy is the Hollywood liberal elite, Gervais said. Whats so strange apart from the fact he has houses literally made of gold [laughs] is that most of these Hollywood liberal elite are the ones willing to pay more tax! Theyre literally voting themselves to pay more tax.

Gervais predicted that Trump would win the White House six months before Americans headed to the polls, writing in The Hollywood Reporter thatthe Republican candidates anti-politically messagehit a vein with everyday Americans.

Theproudly politically incorrect comedianalso defended Kathy Griffins infamousphotograph of her holding up afake, bloodied decapitated head meant to resemble President Donald Trump.

That was ridiculous. Yes, what she did was bad art, but it was still just art. There were people treating it like it was a real head. Im screaming, It wasnt a fucking presidents head!Gervais toldVulture.

It was a visual statement. Her crime was that it was a little bit crass and thoughtless, but who cares? Thats up to her, the he added.

Backlash over Griffins photo includeda boycottof Griffinscross-countrycomedy tour, the loss of hergig co-hosting CNNslive New Years Eve broadcast when the cable network fired her, and according to TMZ, a Secret Service investigation.

President Trumptweetedthat Griffins photo had been difficult for his children, including his 11-year-old son, Barron.

But Gervias said the people outraged by what Griffin did are hypocrites.

These are the same people that are screaming about freedom of speech, but then they shift the goalpost, Gervais said. They actually think that was a terror act.

Read the rest of Gervais interview with Vulturehere.

FollowJerome Hudsonon Twitter:@jeromeehudson

P.S. DO YOU WANT MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS ONE DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX?SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY BREITBART NEWSLETTER.

More here:

Ricky Gervais Rips Trump: 'Hollywood Liberal Elites Are Not the Enemy' - Breitbart News

Margaret Court met with protests at Liberal party event – 9news.com.au

Gay marriage advocates blocked streets in Melbourne to protest against tennis great Margaret Court who was speaking at a Liberal party event.

A crowd of at least 50 activists blocked the function entrance in the city and brought traffic to a standstill, with roads closed and dozens of police separating the crowd from attendees.

The function was a fundraiser for Brad Rowswell, the state Liberal candidate for suburban seat of Sandringham.

Court, a Christian pastor, wrote an open letter last month criticising Qantas and its CEO Alan Joyce for promoting same-sex marriage.

Protestors chanted "Margaret Court you've lost the set, your bigotry can't clear the net" while guests entered through side entrances.

Equal Love advocate and spokeswoman Danica Cheesley said while Ms Court had a right to voice her opinions on a national platform, the group had a right to protest.

"The comments she made were pretty abhorrent," Ms Cheesley said.

"It think it's disgusting she's speaking at this event after what she said and the party should have cancelled her appearance."

AAP 2017

Auto News:2017 Mercedes-AMG E63 S - the one we've been waiting for - caradvice.com.au

Career news: Three common career progression questions answered- seek.com.au

Auto news:New BMW M5 detailed - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Ford Australia vs Holden; who will win the battle on the racetrack? - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Suzuki is Australia's lovable underdog - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Jaguar's tough limited-tun XE SW Project 8 sports sedan - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Battle of the V8 Beasts: 5.0L Ford Mustang vs 6.2L Holden Commodore - caradvice.com.au

Read the rest here:

Margaret Court met with protests at Liberal party event - 9news.com.au