Category Archives: Political Correctness

Published: 2/7/2022 11:22:36 AM

Modified: 2/7/2022 11:20:57 AM

Joe Bidens commitment to nominating a Black woman to replace Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court is drawing heavy criticism from the right and left.

Readers may recall that he made this commitment initially just before the 2020 Democratic primary in South Carolina. Representative James Clyburn (D-SC), a man of great influence in South Carolina politics, urged Biden to do so and the rest, as they say, is history. Biden won the primary and the presidency in some or large part because of the Black vote.

The objections from the political right were predictable. GOP leaders and their conservative media friends would have a hissy fit no matter the eventual nominee. Slightly more surprising and far more discouraging is the response from so-called liberals and progressives.

This week, the progressive, Black New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote a characteristically powerful column celebrating Bidens commitment. The Blow-back in readers comments was overwhelming. As a comment junkie myself, I find the sentiments expressed in the comment section to be a reliable gauge of Democratic-leaning voter reaction. Most objections followed the identity politics will be the ruination of the Democratic Party theme. Many included just appoint the most qualified person advice. Only a select few applauded the commitment. Even many of those who think nomination of a Black women is a good idea, worry that announcing it looks like affirmative action and that a successful nominee will be forever tainted by that appearance.

The growing animus toward identity politics is baffling and infuriating. The most vehement objections seem to come from those who have benefitted from their identity for all of American history white men like me. Women only gained the right to vote with passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, 72 years after the womens rights movement began with the Seneca Falls Convention. Even thereafter, Native women and Asian women were denied the franchise in many states based on identity politics. Voting rights were consistently withheld from Black men and women until the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Massive voter suppression is a cancerous feature of Republican politics today.

For decades, school and college admission was denied or limited based on applicants identity. Same sex marriages were illegal for most of our history, everywhere in the fictional exceptional America. For millions of women, Black, gay, native and minority groups , American Exceptionalism has meant EXCEPT YOU!

In the 231 year history of the Supreme Court, 5.3% of justices have been women or minorities. 51% of Americans are women, yet 24% and 27% of Senators and Representatives, respectively, are women. I published these statistics a few months ago:

Black households have median family wealth of $24,100, according to the Federal Reserve. For white households the figure is $188,200.

Black incarceration rates are nearly six times that of whites, according to the Prison Policy Initiative.

The Urban Institute finds 71.9% of white families own homes compared with 41.8% of Black families.

CBS News reported that Black executives hold only 3.2% of senior corporate leadership positions and only 0.8% of Fortune 500 CEO positions.

Black people are 12% of the population and comprise 5% of doctors, the Association of American Medical Colleges finds.

The Economic Policy Institute notes that 30.8% of Black children live in poverty compared with 10.8% of white children.

In every dimension of our society, white identity predicts advantage. Male identity gives even more privilege. And now, when the president promises a nomination based partially on identity, we scream NOT FAIR! I guess to many so-called liberals and progressives (and nearly all Republicans), its only consideration of someone elses identity thats a problem. White men never have to reflect that it was often their identity that provided opportunity and experience, because it was never spoken out loud. The privilege of a white male identity is something so deeply embedded in our culture and history that we dont even recognize it.

The nomination of a Black woman will not be tokenism or political correctness. It will be long, long overdue inclusion of an identity that has disadvantaged generations of women and girls. It will bring a set of values, perspectives and experiences to bear on American justice that no white man or woman can fully understand. And it will give Black women and girls a powerful example to identify with.

Identity politics? Damn right, and its about time.

Visit link:

Column: Inclusion is the correct course for high court - Valley News

Article content

ZIP IT TRUDEAUSo, in the past few days Parliaments own Wiarton Willie, aka Justin Trudeau, poked out his head from his hiding hole to lecture us on how disgusted Canadians are with the truckers convoy that is paralyzing downtown Ottawa. If anyone should understand how disgusted Canadians are it would be our intrepid PM, whose track record includes Blackface, the Kokanee Grope, the SNC-Lavalin affair, etc. In another display of nation-building, the PM has refused to meet with the convoy protesters and prefers to label many of them as misogynistic and racist. It also seems that the PM and his leftists are suddenly the new arbiters of proper etiquette when it comes to protests. While some in Ottawa desecrated a statue by placing a baseball cap and hanging a flag and a sign on it, it would appear they have much to learn from the leftists/progressives who much prefer to pour paint over statues or pull them to the ground and remove the head (e.g. Sir John A. Macdonald). Or, better still, how about burning down churches in various parts of the country? When it comes to anything involving ethics or morals, I just wish the most divisive and most destructive PM this country has ever had would just be quiet!

Martin LennonMarkham(He never misses an opportunity to inflame further divisions between Canadians)

CHURCH OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESSIts time our country reimagined its separation of church and state. Political correctness has become the new religion with its own commandments, one of which is critical race theory. This dogma is being imposed in our supposedly public, secular schools at the expense of the Three Rs. Why not establish a Church of Political Correctness where you and your family would be free to attend or not. You could then drill down as deep as you want and even evangelize for converts. This would free up our public schools and teachers to fulfill their original purpose, that of actually educating our kids.

Tim ConwayToronto(But why narrow yourself to one place of worship when there are multiple institutions to spread the message no matter how misguided)

TOUGHEN UPOnce again Jerry Agar hits the nail right on the head! (Close calls on the road thanks to bad drivers, Jan. 18) It is was too easy to get a drivers licence. Pretty much all you need to be able to do is breathe and thats just barely a requirement. The number of really bad drivers is probably close to triple the number of adequate drivers. And whats up with this driving all the way to the end on the on-ramp before merging into traffic? The lane is down to three-feet wide and now you think people should let you in? You had your chance and you blew it! As far as Im concerned, driving is a privilege, not a right. Some people just dont have what it takes to drive well and I think they just shouldnt be allowed to. Either that, or once a month they should just have a no-rules free-for-all on the highways. Let the morons fight it out to the death. Its a Darwin thing. Cmon, government, do the right thing just this once. Make it much more difficult to get a licence. Make it so that you actually have to know the rules and be able to drive very well before youre let loose on the streets. Just think, the next fatality just might be your own and you could have prevented it.

Jeremy ThorntonScarborough(Driving is a privilege, not a right, and in order to exercise this, you need to be competent)

Originally posted here:

Letters to the Editor, Jan. 6, 2022 - Toronto Sun

In the introduction to his 16th book, George Will quotes Peter De Vries, who proclaimed, I write when Im inspired, and I see to it that I am inspired at nine oclock every morning.

Will then adds a codicil: he goes to work before 8 a.m., as he has done for half a century.

These thousands of hours have led to the aforementioned books, a Pulitzer Prize for Commentary in 1977, and a reputation as arguably Americas foremost journalist. American Happiness and Discontents: The Unruly Torrent, 2008-2020 shows that Will remains, at 80, at the height of his powers.

In declarative but rarely simple sentences and columns roughly 750 words long, Will opines on major subjects that the book helpfully organizes by topics: Politics and Policies, Skirmishes in the Culture Wars, even Games, and so on. Over the decades, Will has felt liberal, conservative and now libertarian-conservative sensibilities and has published them in The Washington Post and in syndication. While being brief, he seeks to opine without being superficial.

A dive into this 2021 collection confirms Wills self-assessment. Without stooping to the name-calling so common in what often passes as journalistic commentary today, Will offers his curmudgeonly, contrarian take on one matter after another. He derides populism, defends monopolies and deplores political correctness. In a cautiously pessimistic way, Will offers something to offend almost anyone. His words, however, serve as catalysts rather than cudgels. He makes his readers think.

I find it impossible to read American Happiness and Discontents without pausing every few minutes to exclaim, I never knew that! and Where on earth did he find that?! For example, in his column A Year in U.S. History as Disruptive as 2020, Will flecks (a verb he enjoys using) his discourse about 1942 with such tidbits as the first successful use of penicillin, a ban on cuffs and pleats on mens trousers, and a bizarre quotation from Georgias Eugene Talmadge about putting our debutantes to hoeing potatoes. These items, it seems, came from the Tracy Campbell book (The Year of Peril: America in 1942) recommended in the column.

Will frequently calls readers attention to books that drew his. Subjects vary. One book I have already ordered based on Wills recommendation is John Tamnys Popular Economics: What the Rolling Stones, Downton Abbey, and LeBron James Can Teach You about Economics. This is the book that comes down in favor of monopolies as friendly to consumers. I am not persuaded, but the discussion and the title are alluring.

The books Will recommends about education alone could make for a fascinating course reading list. So do the articles referenced from the Chronicle of Higher Education and blogs. All the while, Will (a Princeton PhD himself) cautions readers against the babble coming from the professoriate. Only the highly educated, Will declaims, write so badly.

So encyclopedic is Wills knowledge that he appears to have a staff and a working knowledge of every major writer or event in history. The latter or something approximating it emerges from a lifetime of reading, studying, and thinking. Will acknowledges the former in detail, with those he singles out including five research assistants and Sarah Walton, for her many years of indispensable assistance. Will includes a poignant personal tribute to Walton, the widow of a soldier killed in Afghanistan in 2008.

Shakespeare, Camus, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Philip Larkin are among the many authors Will quotes with fluency. The same goes for events and individuals ranging from (in the first column) the signing of the Magna Carta to (in the penultimate, The Last Doughboy) Frank Buckles, who served in World War I and survived and thrived into the Obama administration. Buckles extraordinary life, in more than one way, calls to mind Wills remarkable career.

I would have liked to see a more thorough index for American Happiness and Discontents. Too few of the writers and publications Will discusses appear in the index. Eugene Talmadge appears more than once in the text but not at all in the index. Talmadges comments on debutantes and, elsewhere, his heinous remarks after Americas Last Mass Lynching call out for indexing, if only as examples of a how not to govern variety.

This is a minor complaint, however. Will offers more insights and fascinating tidbits than I can hope to do justice in approximately 750 words. I highly recommend a few or all the columns in American Happiness and Discontents to anyone who cares about our past, or especially how we shape our future.

Dr. Lee Brewer Jones is a Newnan native and professor of English at Georgia State University.

Read more from the original source:

American Happiness and Discontents: The Unruly Torrent - Newnan Times-Herald

QAnon's Featured Ghosts

We all witnessed the witless waves of QAnoners gathered in Dallas's Dealey Plaza last November, eagerly awaiting the return of John F. Kennedyand/or his equally deceased son, JFK Jr. It was daunting to watch their devotion. Many remained on the sidewalks waiting for a Kennedy Moment days after the promised resurrection date had passed. (Granted, a few true believers bailed and decamped to a Rolling Stone concert that evening, buoyed by rumors that the Stone's Keith Richards was actually JFK Jr. in disguise.)

So now: an update on Trump's Reincarnation Nation.

A Trumpster recently interviewed on national TV assured reporters that The Donald would not only win reelection in 2024, but that the entertainment for his victory celebration would feature an appearance by Michael Jackson!

What is it with the Far Right's fetish for wanting to bring-back-the-dead? Is this a faith-based fixationthe belief in the coming of an A-List Neo-Jesus (minus The Rapture)?

But here's the really odd part about these Second Comings of pop-culture icons: why are these "featured ghosts" all celebrities of a "liberal" persuasion? Why are there no forecasts that Trump's Triumph will be visited by the ghastly likes of a ghostly Rush Limbaugh? A not-yet-deceased David Koch? A wide-awake Herman Cain?

Russia Defuses Ireland's Ire

The Russian military, which had announced naval drills off the coast of Ireland, subsequently agreed to move them further away after the local fisherfolk threatened to disrupt the sea-going exercises. CNN's Donie O'Sullivan interviewed two of the fishermen who were involved in "making waves" and netting a win for diplomacy. Thank you, Ireland! Thank you, Russia!

PS: I can't imagine a scenario in which our pugnacious Pentagon would order the US Navy to stand down from a war game because of complaints from a foreign fishing fleet.

Trump Keeps On Lyin' On Line

D. Trump continues to be a terrifying and malignant force in US politics. According to his self-aggrandizing DonaldTrump.com website, "the Former Guy" appears to believe he's still an in-charge nation-builder. The home page blandly boasts: "Together, we are rebuilding our nation. Help fulfill our promise to Make America Great Again!"

The options at the top right of Trump's "Save America" screen offer seven selectionsAbout, Events, News, Alerts, Contact, Shop, and Contribute. Let's take a look.

You would think that an "About" page by-and-about a recognized hyper-narcissist would be filled with large blocks of type, celebrity photos, lots of ego-crowing, and bales of boastful blather. But Trump's "About" page is pretty bare-bones.

A 96-word overview claims: "my administration delivered for Americans of all backgrounds like never before" and "we respect our great American Flag." A dozen short sentences salute a familiar roster of conservative touchstones: "Judeo-Christian values," human rights that "come from God" including "the right to Keep and Bear Arms," "rebuilding our previously depleted military," opposing the "oppressive dictates of political correctness," believing "that the Constitution means exactly what it says AS WRITTEN," that police "deserve our absolute support," "that America must always have the most powerful military on the face of the Earth," and that leaders should be chosen by "secure elections going forward where every LEGAL VOTE counts."

Trump's Webpage Presence: One Dead-end After Another

Two of the seven selections receive special treatment. "Shop" is highlighted in a box. "Contribute" appears as a MAGA-red button. Clicking on the "Events" option brings forth a blank screen. Similarly, the "News" option has no news to offer, just a page with a sign-up sheet for "exclusive updates from Donald J. Trump" and the "Alerts" page contains nothing but the same, empty sign-up sheet.

The "Contact" link leads to a small gallery of photos, mainly depicting Trump in front of large crowds. Unlike the previous pages, there is a hunk of text on this screen that reads: "The Office of Donald J. Trump is committed to preserving the magnificent legacy of the Trump Administration, while at the same time advancing the America First agenda. Through civic engagement and public activism, the Office of Donald J. Trump will strive to inform, educate, and inspire Americans from all walks of life as we seek to build a truly great American Future. Through this office, President Trump will remain a tireless champion for the hardworking men and women of our great countryand for their right to live in safety, dignity, prosperity, and peace."

For Trump, The Press is So Depressing

In a special slot designed to handle "Press Inquiries," there is just a single photo of Trump posed in front of a mob of reporters. But there's really no reason to visit this page since (as the only verbiage on display explains): "Donald J. Trump and Melania Trump enjoy hearing from the American people. Due to the volume of media requests President and Mrs. Trump receive, we will not provide status updates. Thank you for your understanding."

Understood. The Trumps are clearly too busy with affairs-of-state (the state being Florida) to attend to the needs of curious reporters (and too cheap to hire an intern to handle the "flood" of press queries). At least the page doesn't invoke the phrase, "enemy of the people."

Trump.com's Only Working Pages: Buy and Give

The only two functioning links on the Trump webpage are "Contribute" and "Shop." The page for contributions offers the following news: "Having enough cash on hand is essential to SAVING AMERICA from Joe Biden and his liberal cronies. Step up now! Were about to surpass 1 MILLION online donors - an absolutely historic achievement! As soon as we hit 1 MILLION, were sending President Trump a PRINTED donor list IMMEDIATELY. Will your name be in the 1 millionth spot?

"Shop," the final webpage (and the only one to feature actual content) is both shameless and sad. It displays an array of cheesy collectibles, all sporting Trump's brand name and/or his smirking image. The opening page displays a dozen featured items ranging from Special Edition MAGA Caps ($40), to Save America beer glasses ($22) and Trump Signature Photo Mugs ($30).

But the sorriest sight is all the items apparently left over from what must have been a rather listless holiday sales season. The collection of unsold Christmas gifts include a Single Trump Merry Christmas Greeting Card ($10, postage not included), an ornamental Save America Cap to hang on your holiday tree ($68), a Trump Save America Christmas Stocking ($40), and six-feet of holiday wrapping paper featuring the face of the smiling ex-president wearing a "Trump Santa Hat" ($28).

There are six pages of not-so-goodies, in toto, including, on the very last page, a $20 yard sign reading "Let's Go Brandon"which, if you haven't heard, is a rightwing slur-chant aimed at the current president. It translates into: "F Joe Biden."

Kinda tacky, even for a disgraced ex-president. But just more proof that TrumpleThinSkin remains a living contagion capable of spreading lies faster and farther than the latest COVID-19 variant. He deserves to be quarantined and confinedideally in a federal prison (following a trial and conviction, of course).

Peace Constitutions

Wouldn't it be great if peace was enshrined as a right under national law? Well, the Action Network has come up with a campaign to petition "Governments of the World's Nations to Put Military Neutrality and a Ban on War in Every Nation's Constitution."

A group called the Veterans Global Peace Network has begun promoting a proposal to persuade countries to "enshrine positive military neutrality in their constitutions." VGPN notes that the Hague Convention on neutrality provides the legal foundation on which to build internationally recognized laws on military neutrality. If the prospect of enshrining peace (and proscribing war) appeals to you, you can learn more and take action by clicking here. In the meantime, here's an "instant bumper-sticker" you can enlarge and print out:Want Peace, Unconditional?Make War Unconstitutional!

And if you want to protest the fact that US "defense spending" (including veterans benefits and nuclear weapons costs hidden in the Department of Energy budget) claims nearly two-thirds of the $1.522 trillion FY 2022 federal budget, here's a slogan you might want to use for the annual April anti-war tax protests:

View original post here:

SMITHEREENS: Reflections on Bits & Pieces. Category: Columns from The Berkeley Daily Planet - Berkeley Daily Planet

The NBA in the 1990s was like a different world.

Hard fouls were the norm, and brawls in the locker room or the hardwood were as expected as a hockey game skirmish.

However, one player virtually defined the rock em, sock em style of the era, and that man was Xavier McDaniel.

As he was known to Wichita State University Shocker fans, where he played college ball, X was the first player in NCAA history to lead the nation in scoring (27.2 points per game) and rebounding (14.8 rebounds per game) as a senior in 1985.

McDaniel finished his career as the schools all-time leading rebounder (1,359) and second in scoring (2,152). Playing for Wichita State from 1981-85, McDaniel was a first-team Associated Press and United States Basketball Writers Association All-American as a senior.

He was the Missouri Valley Conference Player of the Year in 1984 and 1985. He had nine career 20-point/20-rebound games most in school history and led the Shockers to two NCAA Tournament appearances.

Frankly put, he was destined for greatness; however, once he entered the NBA, he went on a quest to establish his dominance within the league and on his teams.

McDaniel is mainly known for his Seattle SuperSonics days. He was drafted fourth overall in the first round in 1985 by the former Pacific Northwest team.

McDaniel and Sonics teammate Dale Ellis once got into a fistfight early on during the 1990-91 season. Ellis, recovering from a foot injury, was readying his season debut and McDaniel felt he came to practice unprepared.

According to reports, McDaniels told him it was unacceptable, and Ellis threw a portable telephone at McDaniel. It resulted in police being called to report a fight in which five people attempted to intervene.

He also spent time with the Boston Celtics and had a memorable one season with the New York Knicks in 1991-1992.

He was part of the last golden era for the Knicks under the direction of then-coach Pat Riley; former Georgetown standout-turned-New York icon Patrick Ewing and the strong underdog crew of Charles Oakley, Anthony Mason, and John Starks.

However, in addition to getting into a fight with Mason on the first day of practice, McDaniel had other more peculiar ways of showing the team he had arrived.

In his new book Blood in the Garden, author Chris Herring reveals some of McDaniels more interesting assertions of his manhood in the locker room.

McDaniel prioritized manhood. Specifically, his own manhood. According to McDanielss teammates in Seattle, he often walked around the Sonics locker room fully erect after games, hanging towels on his hardened member. Also, he fought people and he fought them constantly.

The former NBA All-Star averaged 20 and 8 for the first five years of his career. In the 1992 NBA playoffs against the Chicago Bulls, he will forever be known as the guy who abused Scottie Pippen horribly over the seven-game series.

It was so bad that Michael Jordan interceded before the Bulls won and eventually solidified their second NBA title.

In a world of political correctness and heavy referee scrutiny, Xavier McDaniel is a reminder of a long-gone era of competitors that took no prisoners.

More news from our partners:

Antonio Brown Joins Kanye Wests Donda Sports To Provide More Creative, Genius Ideas For Fashion Looks For Athletes In General

His Parents Have Called Me a Liar: Georgia Sheriff Puts Up $500K of His Own Money to Anyone Who Can Prove Kendrick Johnsons Death Was Not an Accident

African-Americans Face Higher Premiums: Why You May Be Paying More for Car Insurance Due to Bias

See the article here:

The X-Man Always Had to Prove How Hard He Was | New Book Sheds Light On Ejections, Erections Of Former NBA Enforcer Xavier McDaniel - The Shadow...

(Image: Jose Llamas/Unsplash.com)

With the American political scene having clearly devolved into dysfunctionality, those of us seeking a constructive response are bound to reconsider first principles, examine alternative viewpoints, and delve into unexplored avenues of the American tradition.

For instance, it has been largely forgotten that although Thomas Jefferson was himself a man of wealth and privilege, his political theory cherished the small landholders, who were in Jeffersons view the most precious part of a state. According to Jefferson, the yeoman farmer enjoys a self-sufficiency and self-reliance quite alien to the hired laborer or for that matter even the shopkeeper, who is still somewhat dependent upon the goodwill of his customers. With a little fertile land and the skill to work it, a man might never want for bread or a roof over his head, and so might never be controlled by a boss, be that boss an actual manager, a group of investors, or the bureaucracy of a leviathan state.

So the self-sufficient landholder would be a man in a position to think for himself, vote however he liked, and express his honest opinions on public affairs without fear or favor. Hence Jeffersonians have tended to regard the decline of the family farm not merely with melancholy but alarm, for they foresee in the collapse of traditional farming communities the decline of the republic itself. In 1930, concern for the American republic inspired a particular group of Jeffersonians to collectively issue their now-famous manifesto, Ill Take My Stand.

A number of specific issues provoked the aforementioned volumes twelve authors to rally together. Most pressing, perhaps, was their concern regarding the deteriorating effects of industrialism and mass culture upon their home states and communities. Moreover, several of the Vanderbilt cadre had traveled abroad and/or served in the army during the First World War, and when they returned home to the rural South they found themselves regarding it with fresh perspective and deeper appreciation. More than a few were put off by the negative press directed at Tennessee in particular and the Bible Belt in general during the so-called Scopes Monkey Trial.

Last but not least, their manifesto is in part a retort to the sarcastic and atheistic Baltimore journalist H.L. Mencken, who in a scathing essay dubbed the South the Sahara of the Bozarts. In effect, Mencken was insinuating that the only real American culture was to be found in Northern metropolises such as Boston, Philadelphia, or New York City.

So Ill Take My Stand is first and foremost a defense of Southern rural culture, set in opposition to an aggressively urbanizing New South, which the authors regarded as little more than an imitation of the industrialist North and a second-rate imitation, at that. That the Vanderbilt Agrarians did not oppose science, technology, or urban life as such is made clear in this excerpt from the Statement of Principles which serves as a preamble to the book:

An agrarian society is hardly one that has no use at all for industries, for professional vocations, for scholars and artists, and for the life of cities. Technically, perhaps, an agrarian society is one in which agriculture is the leading vocation, whether for wealth, for pleasure, or for prestige a form of labor that is pursued with intelligence and leisure, and that becomes the model to which the other forms approach as well as they may. [] The theory of agrarianism is that the culture of the soil is the best and most sensitive of vocations, and that therefore it should have the economic preference and enlist the maximum number of workers.

So rather than say that the Vanderbilt Agrarians were against cities and technology and so on, it would be more accurate to say instead that they were very much for farmers and rural communities. And that they believed that cities which failed to maintain a healthy, vibrant relationship with the surrounding countryside would soon degenerate into squalid wastelands of ugliness and despair. To set up Progress as a god, they contended, was the surest way to rob men of their political liberty, stifle economic independence, and erode traditional culture.

Nor would insatiable Progress spare religious devotion, they continued:

Religion can hardly expect to flourish in an industrial society. Religion is our submission to the general intention of a nature that is fairly inscrutable; it is the sense of our role as creatures within it. But nature industrialized, transformed into cities and artificial habitations, manufactured into commodities, is no longer nature but a highly simplified picture of nature. We receive the illusion of having power over nature, and lose the sense of nature as something mysterious and contingent. The God of nature under these conditions is merely an amiable expression, a superfluity, and the philosophical understanding ordinarily carried in the religious experience is not there for us to have.

While the Vanderbilt definition of religion might have its limits, anyone doubting the claim that an overemphasis upon applied technology will lead to godlessness is invited to pay a visit to Silicon Valley.

Speaking of religion, it so happens that the Agrarians came to the approving attention of G.K. Chesterton, who saw their work as addressing some of his own concerns about the abuses of early 20th-century industrial capitalism. Indeed, Chestertons renowned friend and colleague Hilaire Belloc would personally engage the Agrarian project, contributing the anthropological study The Modern Man to Who Owns America?, the 1936 sequel to Ill Take My Stand. Yet another contributor to Who Owns America? was Father John C. Rawe, S.J., an important advocate of the Roman Catholic rural life movement. Per Father Rawe, agricultural policy should be oriented toward the needs of family homesteads rather than the canons of investment and finance.

Later, two of the most prominent of the original Vanderbilt Agrarians would themselves became Catholic one formally, the other through baptism of desire. The widely celebrated poet Allen Tate entered the Church in 1950 partly because he saw it as the only remedy for an increasingly depersonalizing mass-society, but also in part because of the persuasive powers of his friends Jacques and Raissa Maritain. As one biographer notes, the philosopher Maritain not only served as Tates godfather but somewhat romantically compared Tate to the fifth-century Frankish king Clovis, whose conversion brought a nation into the church.

As for the other Catholic Agrarian, Donald Davidson, his longstanding view of the Bible as the consummate tradition is illumined by the fact that on the very night before he died he revealed to his wife his intention to receive instruction in the Catholic Faith. (Mrs. Davidson subsequently became Catholic.)

To say that the Southern agrarian movement is out of fashion in this age of Zoom education, populist politics, and political-correctness on steroids is an understatement. So, no doubt many readers would just as soon gloss over any Catholic connection to it. Before allowing an unimaginative spirit of fear to dictate our intellectual life, however, we might concede the Agrarian thesis at least addresses many of the problems bemoaned by Catholic natural lawyers today.

Among other things, Tate, Davidson, and the rest warned that an overemphasis on industry and applied science would alienate man from the natural order. Given the perversities now taken for granted and the spectacle of COVID hermits living life in self-imposed isolation, all in a context of trusting the Science, how can any serious Catholic entirely dismiss the Agrarians warning?

We might also mull over Tates specific contribution to the Agrarian manifesto, wherein he identifies the technocratic dream for what it is a surrogate religion:

We know that the cult of infallible working is a religion because it sets up an irrational value; it is irrational to believe in omnipotent human rationality. Nothing infallibly works, and the new half-religionists are simply worshipping a principle, and with true half-religious fanaticism they ignore what they do not want to see which is the breakdown of the principle in numerous instances of practice. It is a bad religion, for that very reason; it can predict only success.

Note that even before coming into the Church, Tate questioned the dogma of technocratic secularism more than do many clergy today. In any event, neither absurdly off-target election night predictions, nor decades of worthless military reports about Afghanistan, nor protean COVID decrees have done all that much to diminish the cult of infallible working. If anything, the Agrarian critique rings sharper than it did when it was first issued.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

More:

Why the Agrarian critique of American culture rings true today - Catholic World Report

Joe Markowski thinks Bob Arum should speak for himself as it relates to his controversy-raising remarks on womens boxing.

Arum, the 90-year-old head of Top Rank Inc., caused a firestorm recently when he claimed that people dont particularly pay attention to the womens fights. The comments were made in light of the fact that Arum is promoting a lightweight unification bout between Shakur Stevenson and Oscar Valdez on the same night, April 30, as the womens undisputed lightweight title bout between Katie Taylor and Amanda Serrano. Arum dug the knife even deeper by putting the onus on ESPN, his exclusive broadcast partner, claiming that the network had no interest in airing womens boxing.

The answer is ESPN made the schedule and they couldnt care less [about womens boxing], Arum said in an interview with IFL TV. I dont want to denigrate fights, I dont want to be accused of being anti-women in sports, but Im telling you, this is like the Premier League against womens football.

Markowski, an executive vice president at DAZN, the platform that will broadcast Taylor-Serrano, thinks Arums comments were a source of embarrassment for ESPN and will haunt him, and the network, moving forward.

I would imagine the executives at ESPN winced when they saw that, Markowski told BoxingScene.com Wednesday afternoon at a press conference in New York City to announce Taylor-Serrano. As the World Wide Leader in Sports, as they market themselves, they are going to be pretty embarrassed that one of their content suppliers is speaking about womens sport in that way.

Markowski was also at pains to point out that DAZN has made a concrete investment in womens boxing, not out of some superficial fealty to notions of political correctness, but because it makes good business sense.

More importantly its not the view of DAZN, clearly, Markowski said. As a group, before we were DAZN, our original parent company, Perform, landed the biggest ever womens sport deal with the WTA tennis, a 10-year media distribution deal thats halfway through right now. DAZN, since our inception since 2016, have always invested and sought out opportunities to invest in women's sport.

I think a lot of time we are challenged by that by [people] saying, Oh youre just doing it for the PR, youre doing it because it appears to be the right thing to do. Thats not the reason we do it. We do it because it makes good business sense. This fight (Taylor-Serrano) is a very good example of that. This fight has more of an opportunity to cut through the mainstream audience full stop than the vast majority of male boxing fights.

Markowski pointed to the media turnout for the US press conference for Taylor-Serrano, which was held at Madison Square Garden, as evidence of the bout's broad appeal.

The fact that the New York Times, Good Morning America are here, the fact that there are mainstream media outlets genuinely intrigued makes me very confident that it will be very valuable to us and will make for a good investment, Markowski said of Taylor-Serrano. I am very excited about that.

Irelands Taylor (20-0, 6 KOs), the WBO/WBA/WBC/IBF unified 135-pound champion, will take on seven-division titlist and New York native Serrano (42-1-1, 30 KOs) in a 10-round championship bout. It is the first female bout to headline Madison Square Garden and is being regarded as a historical milestone. Promoting the bout is Eddie Hearn of Matchroom Boxing and Jake Paul, the content creator/boxer, who doubles as Serranos chief business partner. Paul, who boasts a significant social media presence, was one of the more vocal critics of Arums comments, calling the nonagenarian a dinosaur out of step with the times.

Markowski believes, in the end, Arums comments will be something of a recurring motif as it relates to the promotion of Taylor-Serrano.

I will choose to ignore Bob Arums comments, Markowski said. Actually, they will blow up in his face to a certain extent because it will draw attention that will ultimately result in eyeballs watching this fight. So you can almost thank him on that basis. Were going to go after him. You saw Jake today, Jake went after him on it, and Jake should. Outdated views should be challenged on a platform as big as Jakes got, hes gonna do that.

Read the original post:

DAZN Exec on Arum's Womens Boxing Comments: 'They Will Blow Up in His Face' - BoxingScene.com

The queen of CanLit is in the national spotlight. At the end of November, Canada Post issued a stamp with an image of writer and poet Margaret Atwood wearing a pensive expression against a background of lines from her poem Spelling. Atwoods admirers cheer this coronation, which seems perfectly timed. It lends added gravitas to the bold public stance that Atwood has taken in the last two weeks on the uprising of truckers that has convulsed Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver, and parts of Quebec and made headlines around the world.

The truckers of the Freedom Convoy object to Covid restrictions and to their governments high-handedness, and are sick of their concerns going ignored. They particularly object to vaccine mandates for cross-border travel, a measure that makes their lives even tougher. But Atwood, a writer known for her concern for marginalized members of society, wishes they would shut up and go home.

On February 4, Atwood let rip with a caustic tweet about the noise and chaos that the Freedom Convoy has brought to Ottawa, and compared being in the city in the midst of the protests to torture. Atwood also retweeted an article about a $9.8 million class-action lawsuit over the noise and disruptions and a story about an online petition calling for a tougher police response. Another tweet the next day called out alleged Trump interference in the furor over GoFundMes suspension of $9 million in donations meant for the truckers. Atwood also retweeted a positive comment about a counterprotest in Vancouver.

Atwoods snootiness toward the truckers, a bunch of hairy guys waving the Canadian flag, and her contempt for their concerns are of a piece with the reactions of many progressives. What makes her case interesting is that Atwood has lashed out at Americans in the past for their indifference to the duskier expressions of Canadian individuality and patriotism.

The United States does not think of its own nationalism as being anything out of the ordinary, but it has never cherished warm feelings for other peoples. Reaction to the current Canadian wave has ranged from anger, to squeeze plays of the If-you-dont-let-us-buy-you, we-wont-let-you-buy-us variety, to jocular condescension, Atwood states in her 1981 essay, originally written as a speech, Canadian-American Relations: Surviving the Eighties.

The essay was a slap in the face to those who disdained popular expressions of Canadian identity and yearning for freedom. Now, in the face of a sincere protest from working-class, patriotic Canadians who do a grueling job that keeps the nation running smoothly and makes Atwoods cozy life possible, Atwood indulges in some jocular condescension of her own. Those unwashed, flag-waving, beer-guzzling rubes who dare to question the policies laid down by the countrys rich technocratic elite should all turn their trucks right around and go home to their dusky little homes and trailer parks in parts of the country that rightly have no voice.

Americans experience themselves, individually, as small toads in the biggest and most powerful puddle in the world. Their sense of power comes from identifying with the puddle. Canadians as individuals may have more power within the puddle, since there are fewer toads in it; its the puddle thats seen as powerless, Atwood writes in the same essay.

Obviously, some of the toads dont feel this way and are clamoring for a redress of their lack of a voice. But who cares about a bunch of toads.

To be sure, many welcome Canada Posts recognition of a highbrow writer with popular appeal. Atwoods novels, stories, poetry, and literary criticism have engrossed readers and given the literati much to debate and argue about for well over fifty years now. Her most famous novel, The Handmaids Tale, presents a dystopia so richly imagined and ominous that it served as the springboard for a popular series. The decision to place Atwood on a stamp offers hope that not everyone today considers serious writers to be irrelevant and that more may come to take an interest in Atwood. It follows a decision in 2013 to honor in similar fashion the late Robertson Davies, a delightful novelist even more unabashedly literary and esoteric than Atwood.

So, bravo for Canada Post and Margaret Atwood and all her fans. Her talents and her contribution to CanLit are not in doubt. But in a society with a history as rich and complex as Canadas, you have to wonder whether the enshrinement of anyone can be wholly without controversy.

The furor over the upstart truckers is hardly the first occasion where Atwood has jumped into the political fray. Atwoods political correctness has been evident for years, but she is rather selective in her sympathies.

Some may think that Atwood is a writer of moral courage in this era of cancellation, where the woke continually redefine their own rights to the exclusion of the rights of others, and freedom of expression is so often the victim. Atwood did send out a tweet on October 19 to her more than two million followers with the header Why Cant We Say Woman Anymore? The headline was also the title of a Toronto Star op-ed piece by Rosie DiManno, linked in Atwoods tweet, in which DiManno bemoaned the woke fad du jour of finding more inclusive substitutes for woman.

But the tweet is not an example of a bold politically incorrect stance on Atwoods part. Again and again, Atwood has bent over backward to signal her endorsement of woke causes and progressive view of gender fluidity, notably by tweeting on October 23 a link to a Scientific American article whose claims include, Arguments about innate biological differences between the sexes have persisted long past the time they should have been put to rest. (If you think there are actually differences between mens and womens bodies, unlearn your prejudice fast.) Contemporary progressivism is a den of competing claims to ber-victimhood, and Atwoods retweet of the Toronto Star piece, and the vituperation that followed it, are just one of the latest circular semantic quarrels on the woke left.

For the record, Atwood has shown she is quite capable of venom toward the downtrodden as long as they are not people the woke left cares about. In Survival, her 1972 survey of themes in Canadian literature, Atwood explicitly acknowledges that both anglophones and francophones have had to fight to survive and to keep their customs and traditions alive in a land beset by harsh climes and political conflicts.

For all that, some of the portrayals of French Canadians in Atwoods work are decidedly harsh and border on caricature. You should go and read a novel that came out the very same year as Survival yet appears in places to be from the pen of a different author. That novel is Surfacing, Atwoods first-person account of a young woman, whose name we never learn, who sets out with her boyfriend and another couple into the wilds of northern Quebec one summer. The protagonist spent parts of her early youth there but has not been back in many years, and it is a shock for her to run into people whose first language is not English and who seem to look askance at outsiders.

When she enters a store in a remote rural area, the French-speakers there are not just different. Atwood renders them as provincial, faintly menacing rubes who retaliate for what they see at outsiders condescension by speaking a mangled, cartoonish English in a really in-your-face way, as if to say, This what you want? Are you happy now? Atwoods portrayal of these people is cruel, and she appears to want the reader to identify wholly with the protagonist, who cannot get away from the dumb rubes fast enough and lards later parts of her interior monologue with explicit distaste for the French, though she also hates Americans aplenty. If you think that the dueling banjos scene in Deliverance is cruel, check out Surfacing.

Lest anyone assume that such prejudice against French Canadians was a common tic or reflex among Anglo-Canadian authors of the time, consider the work of Montreal writer John Buell, whose career hit high gear in the 1960s and 1970s and whom literary critic Edmund Wilson praised for his excellent novels. Buells 1976 novel Playground has thematic and structural parallels with Surfacing, but the attitudes on display are notably different. In this expertly written novel, Montreal businessman Spence Morrison gets lost in the course of a solo trip to the wilds of northern Quebec, and comes close to starving to death and losing his mind as he wanders all alone in hope of finding someone, anyone.

At the end, when Morrison (spoiler alert!) at last comes upon a settlement, we feel his awe and relief at the sound of voices speaking in French, and its not just because he gets to live another day. The French are representatives of order, stability. In Buells debut novel from 1959, The Pyx, Anglo and French detectives in Montreal share a shopworn bonhomie. You can see this in even sharper relief in Harvey Harts outstanding (little-seen) 1973 screen adaptation of the novel, in which Christopher Plummers Sgt. Jim Henderson responds to a call about a woman having fallen from a tall building. Or did someone push her? On arriving at the scene, another detective is impressed to hear that Henderson now works with French-Canadian cop Pierre Paquette. Youre working with Paquette, the eager beaver? Why, do you know him? Henderson replies. Know him? Im surprised he didnt get to her before she hit the ground! the other rejoins.

Atwood departs from the spirit of such bonhomie in her mean-spirited portrayals. No one is likely to take Atwood to task over this, of course. With some exceptions, cancellation these days is for white male authors who have the temerity to think aloud or in print. But the second-class status of the French in Canada is a very real issue, and is not about to get any better as a result of anything Atwood has said or done.

In 2013, the year that Canada Post honored Robertson Davies, one of the most horrific events in Canadas modern history unfolded in the town of Lac-Mgantic in the Eastern Townships of Quebec. On the night of July 6, a Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway freight train carrying loads of crude oil and parked on a hill above the town while its conductor slept in a hotel downtown unexpectedly rolled down the hill and derailed. The resulting blast killed 47 people and leveled much of Lac-Mgantic. A number of factors led to the brake failure, but the catastrophe would never have happened if, as per longstanding custom, the train had had a second conductor to assume oversight while the first one was off duty.

Bruce Campbells excellent The Lac-Mgantic Rail Disaster: Public Betrayal, Justice Denied details the relaxation of safety rules and requirements that MMA, an American firm headquartered in Maine, demanded from Ottawa from the 1980s on. The Anglo-Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney was one of the most anti-regulation leaders in the nations history, and changes initiated under his watch and later stripped Transport Canada of the power to require companies to follow safety rules and protocols. Transport Canada had to resort to issuing toothless letters of concern. When MMA wanted to switch from two conductors to one conductor per freight train on the Lac-Mgantic and other routes to save money, there was little the regulatory body could do to stop it. Though this was not the only factor involved, forty-seven French Canadians died as a result. It is only one of the recent episodes in a long history of horrendous neglect and mistreatment of a people.

Margaret Atwood is a writer of substantial talent, but in todays parlance, she has othered French Canadians. If we are really to care about these things as much as the woke demand, then we might ask whether placing her on a postage stamp rubs salt into still fresh wounds.

The rest is here:

Margaret Atwood Gets a Stamp of Approval - Book and Film Globe

The Highest in the Land is the Jazz Butchers (aka Pat Fish, ne Patrick Huntrods) first studio album since Last of the Gentleman Adventurers in 2012. Sadly, it is also his last. Fish died at home in October 2021. He was only 63, but on Time from the new record, he seems resigned to his fate: My hairs all wrong / My time aint long / Fishy go to Heaven, get along, get along. In a recent series of fan Q&A videos, Fish is hardly seen without a cigarette or a pint in hand. He did it his way, playing small club shows and, later, online sessions with his friends, staying classy, with no regrets.

This intimate, comfortable mood translates to The Highest in the Land. The sultry, woozy, 1920s-style shuffle of Melanie Hargreaves Fathers Jaguar sets the tone, sounding like it is wafting in from the smoky backroom of a bygone speakeasy. The appearance of longtime foil Max Eider on guitar adds to the vintage feel.

Within this cozy milieu, The Highest in the Land is typically eclectic, touching on several styles that Fish is fond ofpop, rock, rockabilly, blues, and, of course, jazz. All of it is grounded in pleasingly jangly hollow body guitar. The one exception to the overall feel, and the one musical surprise, is the instrumental Amalfi Coast May 1963. The track sounds exactly like its title, referencing an Italian coastal village. The gently shuffling rhythm and odd time signature lead to swooning, widescreen strings, and a melody that suggests drama, but not enough to disturb the cocktail in ones hand. Its a retro easy-listening treat that would be equally at home on Bert Kaempfert or Saint Etienne records, one that reveals a musical sophistication that is easy to overlook given Fishs pop smarts.

By the time they reach their later careers, some artists reach the point where the music is primarily a means to experience their lyrics, wisdom, and general gravitas. Leonard Cohen, Tom Waits, and Lou Reed come to mind. Is the Butcher worthy of such company? Surely. Although he did not reach the same level of critical attention or even commercial success, Fish was as keen, witty, insightful, and, when necessary, as ruthless.

The Highest in the Land provides plenty of evidence. While the album is missing the manic discontent that often made its way into earlier work, the relative restfulness of the music belies Fishs disillusion and frustration with the current state of affairs.

When writing about any Jazz Butcher release, the temptation is to list off all the great vignettes, images, and one-liners, and The Highest in the Land is no different.Lemmy and Bowie and Princeall gone, Fish laments on Running on Fumes. The lesson? People like us cant have nice things. The track is a takedown of those who instill fear and struggle for their own gain: Is there anything as cheap as chasing profit from despair? he asks. Though he leaves the listener to fill in the blanks, it seems he must be speaking of politicians, global elites, and, quite possibly, corporations. Any moment now somebodys going to say Toxic, thats assured, he predicts toward the end of the song. He may be older, but Fish is still pretty quick on his feet. The music, too, is jaunty skiffle, an album standout.

That isnt the only place where Fish offers some vitriol for todays social media-obsessed, cancel-happy culture. On Sebastians Medication, he calls it political correctness gone mad. His assessment is astute and eloquently worded enough to preclude any suspicion he is acting the curmudgeon: [Everybody] screaming on the laptop in the basement / Store all the hate up and wait for it to burst out / I cant believe youre such an architect of your own destruction. Again, the Stonesy music follows suit with a drawn-out, multi-tempo, distorted guitar solo. Its not quite the incendiary noise of some past Butcher tracks, but it is easily the albums most energized moment.

Those who know Fishs music will know he was also an unrepentant romantic. Thus, The Highest in the Land features a couple of his earnestly pretty ballads in Never Give Up and the poignantly-titled closing track Goodnight Sweetheart. Even here, though, the edge remains sharp. Never give up, Fish declares on the former, until you want to. His way, indeed.

Throughout, Fishs distinctive tenor is still boyish but also wizened and strangely comforting. Though it is certainly not a major release in what amounts to an incredible, 40-year canon, The Highest in the Land takes on particular importance because of its posthumous nature, rendering its creators premature death even more saddening. While the Butcher may have had nothing left to prove, he certainly had much more to say.

The rest is here:

The Jazz Butcher: The Highest in the Land (Album Review) - PopMatters

For most of the last 70 years in the United States, ever since the Red Scare of the 1950s, the Republican Party has been the party of repression -- more intolerant of political dissent, more inclined to censor, and more eager to use government to ruin livelihoods.

Of course the Democratic Party hasn't always been faithful to civil liberties. Southern Democratic administrations enforced racial segregation. Two Democratic national administrations put Martin Luther King under FBI surveillance and one also spied on Vietnam war protesters. But on the whole the Democrats moved past those things.

Not anymore. Amid the virus epidemic and the growth of political correctness and the "cancel culture," coercion of individuals now is almost entirely a phenomenon of the Democratic national administration, Democratic state administrations, and Democratic polemicists. Never before has the old joke been more accurate: that Democrats don't care what you do as long as it's mandatory.

The polling company Rasmussen Reports may not be the best in the country but it is generally taken seriously by leaders in both parties, and a poll it did last month on government policy toward the epidemic may be hard to dispute on the basis of published and broadcast news and commentary.

According to the Rasmussen poll:

-- 55% of Democrats favor authorizing the government to fine people who do not accept COVID-19 vaccination, while only 19% of Republicans and 25% of unaffiliated voters do.

-- 59% of Democrats favor authorizing the government to confine to their homes people who refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccination. Republicans oppose that idea by 79% and unaffiliated voters by 71%.

-- Worse, 48% of Democrats favor letting government fine or even imprison people who publicly question the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines. Only 27% of all voters -- just 14% of Republicans and 18% of unaffiliateds -- favor making such criticism a crime.

-- 45% of Democrats favor authorizing government to force people to live in "designated facilities or locations" if they refuse vaccination. This concentration camp idea is opposed by 71% of all voters, including 78% of Republicans and 64% of unaffiliateds.

-- 47% of Democrats favor having the government electronically track unvaccinated people. This is opposed by 66% of all poll respondents.

-- 29% of Democrats favor taking children away from parents who refuse to be vaccinated, more than twice the level of support found in the rest of the population.

Of course especially when Donald Trump is around polls show that many Republicans also express belief in nutty things. But as reckless and repugnant as Trump could be as president, he was never a serious threat to civil liberty.

Despite the huge support among Democrats for more coercive policies amid the epidemic, Democratic governors, including Connecticut's Ned Lamont, lately have been retreating from coercion, either because those policies seem to cause more damage than they prevent or because the governors realize that people are getting tired of coercion on the eve of election campaigns.

Nevertheless, with repression and coercion finding such support among Democrats -- not just in regard to the epidemic but in regard to dissent generally -- people who want to preserve civil liberty may want to test all Democratic candidates, up and down the party's ticket, about the potential policies itemized in the Rasmussen poll, just as people might want to question Republican candidates about the return of Trump.

Meanwhile complaints from parents about public school curriculums and books stocked by school libraries are being called censorship. They're not.

While the "cancel culture" seeks to drive dissenters out of all forums, complaints about school curriculums and libraries involve only what government chooses to teach or recommend to students. Even if the material being challenged in schools is removed, it will remain available elsewhere.

If a school is to be public, it must answer to the public for what it teaches and recommends, and school boards, superintendents, teachers, and librarians can't be the last word about that. What is taught and recommended by public schools is ultimately for the public to decide.

Chris Powell is a columnist for the Journal Inquirer.

Read the original here:

Democrats replace Republicans as the party of repression - Journal Inquirer