vdare--2020-12-18--Congress Vs Workers, Deplatforming At Eton, Blackening Up History, And Ray Wolters, RIP

To subscribe for our periodic emails with lawfare strategy and news , please fill in the required ( * ) @ @ @ @ @ captcha , which is the text you see on the image , and click to @ @ @ @ @

02m05s Congress versus American white-collar workers. (The continuing saga.)
14m32s Jolly woke boating weather. (Deplatforming at Eton.)
23m36s Worst casting decision of 2020. (Blackening up history.)
30m14s Back to the garret. (Toil, envy, want, the patron and the jail.)
39m37s A friend passes. (Ray Wolters, RIP.)
40m55s So does a psychometrist … (James Flynn, RIP.)
41m41s … and a novelist. (John Le Carré, RIP.)
43m09s One more thing to worry about. (A rogue iceberg.)
45m00s War of the generations. (Die, white geezers!)
49m04s Headline of the week. (Strigicide avenged.)
50m54s Signoff. (With Beethoven, of course.)
01—Intro. And Radio Derb is on the air! Greetings, listeners, from your credentially genial host John Derbyshire, Esquire.
Wait a minute; I think I can claim more than that. When I graduated university I was the first person in my family to have done so. My mother, a coal-miner's daughter, was deeply impressed. When she sent me letters thereafter she would write my name on the envelope thus: "Mr John Derbyshire, B.Sc."
Some years later I acquired a Postgraduate Diploma in Chinese. So I think I should most properly be addressed as Mr John Derbyshire, Esq., B.Sc., P.G.Dip.Chin. Please make a note of this for purposes of future correspondence.
With those formalities out of the way, let's take a glance at the news.
[Permalink]
02—Congress versus American white-collar workers (cont.) In my December 4th podcast I railed against the U.S. Senate passing on December 2nd, by unanimous consent—no debate, no vote—the horrible and anti-American bill called S.386. The bill means, as I said then, quote: "a massive loosening of the rules for foreign workers to take up white-collar jobs in the U.S.A." End quote.
Along with the unspeakable awfulness of the bill itself, the Senate's action revealed once again, if further revelation were needed, the utter uselessness of the Republican Party. A single Republican dissenter could have stopped this monstrosity; but nobody spoke up. They are all bought and paid for by the cheap-labor lobbies.
Well, how are the congresscritters doing at getting that bill to the President's desk for signing? I wish I could tell you. The reason I can't tell you is that the bill has gotten all tangled up in the weeds of congressional procedure.
For one thing, there is another house in Congress, the House of Representatives. They have their own version of a cheap-labor bill to prevent U.S. citizens getting access to good middle-class jobs. Their bill is called H.R. 1044, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, proposed by Democratic Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, and passed by the House way back in July last year.
There are of course differences between the two bills, the House bill and the Senate bill; and those differences have to be reconciled. The latest news I have, from Wednesday this week, is that they haven't yet been.
That's a problem for the cheap-labor lobbies because the hope has been to slip this legislation into an omnibus spending bill. Current funding for government operations runs out tonight, Friday midnight, so Congress needs to pass a bill before then. As at midday on Friday, it doesn't look as though they will.
Don't panic, though, citizens! Your elected legislators are working hard to get the job done. If they can't meet tonight's deadline, they'll pass a Continuing Resolution to plug the gap, and do the omnibus thing later.
And please don't worry that this Continuing Resolution will be some kind of extraordinary emergency measure. Congress passes 'em all the time: matter of fact, government operations are being funded right now by a Continuing Resolution signed by the President last Friday, December 11th. And before that, funding was via an earlier Continuing Resolution passed October 1st, the first day of fiscal year 2021, because Congress, as usual, hadn't been able to pass any proper appropriations bills in time for the new fiscal year.
As I said: your legislators hard at work.
What's holding them up now? Bickering over the cost of the omnibus bill, mainly, with some side bickering about the amount of COVID relief, the powers of the Federal Reserve, and other stuff too arcane to surmount my threshold of tolerance for procedural minutiae.
All those minutiae and all that bickering are of course catnip for the cheap-labor crowd. They can settle their own differences, then slip their legislation into the omnibus funding bill when at last it emerges, without anyone paying much attention.
Concerning those differences between the House cheap-labor bill and the Senate cheap-labor bill, I should note that, this being 2020 U.S.A., there is or course a race angle.
The Senate bill—S.386, the one I started with here—has a clause, insisted on by Senator Rick Scott of Florida, that denies permanent residence to any Chinese national who's participated in training by the Chinese Communist Party. Since pretty much any Chinese citizen—yes, including Mrs Derbyshire—has had some such training, it's hard to see how any of them could get a green card under the terms of the Senate bill.
That of course has gotten the Chinese and Chinese-American lobbies howling, including Representative Judy Chu, also of California. "It's a new Chinese Exclusion Act!" they're screeching.
If only. The main motive for the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act—not the only one, I'll grant, but the main one—was to protect American workers from cheaper foreign labor. Even Woke-ipedia grudgingly allows that, quote:
Although widespread dislike for the Chinese persisted well after the law itself was passed, of note is that some capitalists and entrepreneurs resisted their exclusion because they accepted lower wages.
End quote.
Indians want the China clause dropped from the Senate bill too. They couldn't care less about the Chinese, but Indians will be far and away the main beneficiaries of the bill if passed, so they don't want anything to impede its passage.
With Charles Koch, George Soros, all the big software firms, all the Indian body shops, the Chamber of Commerce, and all their countless allies, enablers, and funders pushing hard, I'm sure the differences will be resolved and the omnibus funding bill will end up on President Trump's desk with the cheap-labor poison pill tucked away in its folds and convolutions.
The thing for President Trump to then do, if all his expressions of support for American white-collar workers are worth a damn, the thing for him to do would be to veto the omnibus spending bill.
If he does veto it, Congress could overturn his veto. Given the lockstep support for mass white-collar immigration in both parties, likely they would.
If Trump vetoes and Congress does not overturn his veto, we're back in Continuing Resolution territory, and the issue might drag on into the new administration, with all the variables there of a diminished Democrat majority in the House and uncertainty about the Senate.
I used to think higher math was hard, but it ain't nothing compared with trying to figure out what Congress will do.
What if Trump does not veto the omnibus spending bill? What if he signs the filthy thing, with the cheap-labor poison pill included? Neil Munro addressed this very pointedly over at Breitbart.com, December 17th, quote from Neil:
If the legislation is included in the year-end omnibus spending legislation, the Silicon Valley giveaway will end up being the only immigration law that Congress allowed [Trump] to sign, despite steep GOP losses among college graduates during the 2020 election.
End quote.
Footnote. Just as I was heading to the microphone with my notes, I saw this post from the U.S. Tech Workers group, an outfit that has been fighting the white-collar cheap-labor bills. Edited quote:
Today, I can categorically state that H.R. 1044 / S.386 is dead in the water. It will not be signed into law by being sent to the President's desk nor will it be placed in an omnibus or other appropriations bill. It appears the amendments attached to it were too big a pill to swallow for Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren and her immigration attorney pals, as well as Congresswoman Judy Chu and her Chinese Communist Party interests. So, the bill will languish until the 116th Congress ends in a few short days.
But rest assured: we haven't seen the last of these "fairness for high-skilled immigrants" acts. In 2021, we must be prepared to meet them head on and commit to employing evermore effective strategies to stop them.
End quote.
That's great news. As the post says, though, this only heralds a lull in the war. Battle will resume in the next Congress.
[Permalink]
03—Jolly woke boating weather.
That, listeners, was a snippet of The Eton Boating Song. If you didn't catch the words, they go like this:
Jolly boating weather
And a hay-harvest breeze.
Blade on the feather;
Shade off the trees.
Swing, swing together,
With your bodies between your knees …
Now I have to explain about Eton. Be patient, please.
Eton, properly Eton College, is a school in England, twenty miles west of London, near Windsor Castle. It's a private boarding school for boys, very expensive but offering scholarships to worthy cases. It's what in England is called a "public school."
That may seem odd, given that I just said it's private, but that's what the toniest, oldest, most expensive, most prestigious private schools are called in England: "public schools." In pre-modern times, you see, the children of the highest classes were educated by private tutors at home; actual schools, where a lot of unrelated kids were taught together, were for the upper-middle stratum of society—the "public." For the strata below that—hoi polloi—there was no regular system of education at all.
These grand old pricey boys' boarding schools have played a big part in the history and the imagination of the English, none more so than Eton. They taught their boys an ethos of manliness, sportsmanship, and patriotism.
"The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton," the Duke of Wellington is supposed to have said. It's not likely he actually did say it. Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy's 1977 book The Public School Phenomenon, the go-to source for everything to do with the public schools, tells us that the Duke was a lonely and withdrawn boy. Quote:
He loathed his two and a half years at Eton and left in 1783. He did not go back for thirty-four years.
End quote.
Besides, there were no organized games at the schools until well into the 19th century; and the first recorded notice of the famous quotation was by a Frenchman, writing in French. You're not going to believe one of them, are you?
So that's Eton, alma mater of innumerable famous Englishmen, including George Orwell, Ian Fleming, and the current Prime Minister.
It would be hard to name any institution more thoroughly, immutably English than Eton. It is therefore what stock-market analysts call a "leading indicator" of England's decay that Eton has gone woke.
In November a teacher of English at Eton, name of Will Knowland, was scheduled to give a talk to senior boys there titled "The Patriarchy Paradox." The entire talk is posted at YouTube. Here are the opening words.
[Clip: Patriarchy is a theory that says the differences between the sexes and their social roles are not the result of biology. Instead they are socially constructed and they have resulted in the pervasiveness of male domination in women's lives.
This idea of male domination has led the Good Lads Initiative to claim that traditional ideas of masculinity need to be re-imagined. But it has also led, according to Doris Lessing, the novelist and feminist icon, to an unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed.
Despite this rubbishing of men, however, the Marvel movies show that in popular culture, masculine archetypes such as Captain America, Thor, and Iron Man—described by the philosopher Edward Feser as "a patriotic soldier, the son of a heavenly father come to Earth, and a strutting capitalist alpha male"—retain their appeal …]
Well, you get the idea. It's really pretty dry stuff. Further along in the lecture Knowland suggests that, quote: "saying 'smash the patriarchy' amounts to saying smash human nature and biological reality," end quote. That's about as controversial as it gets.
Dry it may be, but it was too moist for Eton. A teacher who got a preview of the lecture complained, and the headmaster ordered the lecture canceled. When Mr Knowland posted the lecture to his own private YouTube channel anyway, the school fired him.
It's like this all over at these fine old public schools, according to an article in the December 12th issue of The Economist. Another school, Dulwich College, offers pupils unconscious bias training and a history curriculum which aims, quote from that article, "to amplify the voices of the colonised as much as the coloniser." End quote.
Marlborough College, which educated the poet John Betjeman, movie actor James Mason, and an infinite number of famous cricketers, focuses on black history, filling its curriculum with, quote, "as many diverse texts, guests and experiences as possible." End quote.
Harrow School, whose most famous alumnus is Sir Winston Churchill, has a summer reading list that includes Robin DiAngelo's best-seller White Fragility. I have tried without success to imagine what Sir Winston would have thought about that.
So nations die; so civilizations die. I see no hope for England, but cling to the belief that we here in the U.S.A. may yet save a remnant.
[Permalink]
04—Worst casting decision of 2020. Some race news here. A British TV channel is producing a costume drama about Anne Boleyn, who was the second wife of King Henry VIII of England back in the 16th century. Henry's first wife, Catherine, had not been able to give him a male heir, so he had his marriage to her annulled in 1533 and married Anne. The issue of the annulment was what drove Henry to break with the Pope.
When Anne likewise failed to produce a male heir after three years of marriage, Henry had her charged with adultery and executed. The charges were most likely bogus, but that was the end of Anne; although, in a nice instance of generational revenge, her daughter later became Queen Elizabeth the First, a much better monarch than Henry.
Well, this TV channel is producing a drama about Anne, to be aired at some future date not specified. The actress playing Anne will be Jodie Turner-Smith, a full-blood negress. And no, they're not making her put on white-face makeup.
This is of course historically preposterous. Anne Boleyn was a white English lady—we have contemporary portraits of her.
The producers of historical dramas—including this one, I'm guessing—go to great pains and expense to make everything look authentic: costumes, furnishings, weapons, transportation, … We want the illusion of reality. No producer would have the Duke of Norfolk drive up to Henry VIII's hunting lodge in a Lamborghini and carrying an AR-15.
The classic Henry VIII TV biopic was an earlier British production: The Six Wives of Henry VIII, aired in 1971. Keith Mitchell played the part of Henry, and he played him with red hair. Why? Because Henry VIII had red hair, duh. That was fifty years ago, though, when we still had some common sense.
So what's the point of this gross, glaring anachronism—a negress playing Anne Boleyn? Let the producers tell us, quote from the news story:
Producers Fable Pictures say the drama [inner quote] "challenges all the conventions of who we think Anne Boleyn was and shines a feminist light on her story." [End inner quote.]
End quote.
They're challenging conventions, see? Down with conventions!
What they are actually challenging, of course, is historical truth. So: Down with historical truth!
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." If you're in any doubt about who controls the present, try starting an online protest movement against this casting decision. Then watch your PayPal account close down, and your Twitter account, your Facebook account, your bank account, your credit-card accounts, …
"Hold on there, Derb," I hear you cry. "Didn't you cover a similar story back in November, about a black actress playing Agent 007 in the new James Bond movie? And didn't you say you were fine with it?"
Yes and yes. However, number one, that's fiction, where you can make stuff up. In historical dramas you should cleave to the historical truth as closely as you can. Number two, there is nothing implausible about a present-day intelligence agency having a black female operative; and if, as seems to be the case, James Bond is retired in this movie, or dead, or otherwise indisposed, there's nothing implausible about giving the lady his agent number. So yes, I'm fine with it.
What I am not fine with is halfwit producers committing gross historical falsehoods in order to signal that they are faithful congregants of the Most Holy and Blessed Church of Negritude. I am not fine with lies and hypocrisy.
(To be perfectly fair, the charge of hypocrisy there is presumptive. I'm presuming that these producers, in their private lives—in their residential and educational decisions—stay as far away from big concentrations of black people as everyone else does that can afford to. If it can be proven to me that this is not the case, I shall make a modest donation to The United Negro College Fund.)
[Permalink]
05—Back to the garret. A related item, although it may take me a while to get around to the relatedness.
Back in August I passed a comment on the technology of facial recognition. To what degree are facial-recognition programs foiled by the wearing of anti-virus face masks? I reported on what I had heard from people working in the field: that facial recognition can work with people wearing masks, but only in small populations. Quote from self:
So if you have, say, a company workforce of five thousand people, all wearing masks, the software can tell you which employee you're looking at. With populations bigger than a few thousand, though, a given image of one masked individual can return multiple matches.
End quote.
Well, here's something that might really fox the facial-recognition software. Reuters reports that a Japanese company is about to market full face-covering masks that are very precise 3-D-printed images of someone else's face. The masks will go on sale early next year in Japan for 98,000 yen each. That's $950, which is pricey: but the quality of these masks is really excellent. They look just like human faces.
If you're wearing one of these masks, the software will take you to be the person the mask is modeled on—they're that realistic.
Now bear in mind that we also have software that can create hyper-realistic images of faces that don't actually exist. These images are generic faces, not actual faces of actual people. Again, though, the quality is excellent. Check it out: There is actually a website called thispersondoesnotexist.com.
Put these two technologies together—the hyper-realistic full-face masks and the hyper-realistic images of people who don't exist—and facial-recognition software could really be up against a challenge here.
OK, I promised you some relation to the previous segment. Here it is.
The age of the movie star may be over. Totally realistic computer-generated images will be way cheaper than human beings, and we'll be spared the most emetic parts of the Oscars ceremony.
Will this mean that "casting director" becomes an obsolete profession? I don't know; but if a lot of casting directors are as bat-poop crazy as the one on that Anne Boleyn movie, I hope so.
And if all this technology really does put movie actors on the dole queue, it may be fulfilling another of Ed West's predictions in his review of Joel Kotkin's book The Coming of Neo-Feudalism, which I wrote about in my November Diary. Quote from Ed:
Patronage has made a comeback, especially among artists, who have largely returned to their pre-modern financial norm: desperate poverty. Whereas musicians and writers have always struggled, the combination of housing costs, reduced government support and the internet has ended what was until then an unappreciated golden age; instead they turn once again to patrons, although today it is digital patronage rather than aristocratic benevolence.
End quote.
Until the modern age, intellectual work, especially any kind of creative work, never supported any but a tiny number of superstars in financial security. Think of Dr Johnson's lines:
There mark what Ills the Scholar's Life assail,
Toil, Envy, Want, the Garret, and the Jail.
(In regard to aristocratic patrons, I should note that after he got stiffed by the Earl of Chesterfield, Johnson revised that second line for later editions of the poem to: "Toil, Envy, Want, the Patron, and the Jail.")
That's how things were before mass entertainment became big business. The actors who first performed Shakespeare's plays did not have the 16th-century equivalent of Malibu beach houses. They were, as the saying of the time went, "vagabonds and strumpets." The poet Thomas Chatterton, Dr Johnson's younger contemporary, committed suicide while on the verge of starvation, having been unable to find a patron.
I'm thinking now of a friend whose son was a member of a rock group: not a famous one, but they made a living. Then the living dried up. Nobody bought vinyl disks, tapes, or CDs any more: they just download their music. The only way to make serious money was to perform concerts. Then COVID came along and knocked that on the head. Last I heard, the young man is selling insurance.
I'm also thinking of a sad little story from Tuesday's Daily Mail.
London's theaters are of course all closed, leaving the vagabonds and strumpets with time on their hands. Sunday evening, on a street in Hampstead, north London, a small group of them gave an impromptu concert of songs from Les Miserables, followed up with Christmas carols.
The concert was well-received by passers-by. Quote from one such:
They were obviously professionals … They were working from a backing tape and able to project without using microphones.
End quote.
I said this struck me as a sad story. I know Hampstead well—I used to live just off Platt's Lane. It was a tony area back then, and my information is it's gotten even tonier since. Still, this was a dark evening with rain drizzling down; and even in tony neighborhoods, London's residential streets are not very prepossessing, even in daylight and sunshine.
I hope those passers-by threw the players some coins.
[Permalink]
06—Miscellany. And now, our closing miscellany of brief items.
Imprimis: There are some deaths to be recorded this week.
First in our minds here at VDARE.com was the passing of historian Ray Wolters. James Fulford posted a full tribute on Thursday, which I can't improve on. It includes links to both of the pieces I have posted relevant to Ray and his work: my April 2015 review of Ray's book The Long Crusade: Profiles in Education Reform, 1967-2014 and my April 2017 account of a cowardly academic journal retracting one of Ray's reviews at the command of CultMarx shriekers.
I'll only add that I met Ray and his loyal and charming wife on several occasions, always finding him a thoughtful, witty, and exceptionally well-read American gentleman. Condolences to his loved ones.
[Permalink]
Item: And then, psychometrician James Flynn, standard-bearer for the "nurture" side of the "nature/nurture" argument. Flynn gave his name to the Flynn Effect: the phenomenon of rising average scores on standardized IQ tests through the 20th century.
I have much more to say about Flynn, his Effect, and my one personal encounter with him; but I shall reserve that all for my December Diary.
[Permalink]
Item: Third, John Le Carré, British writer of spy thrillers. I read three or four of them back in the day—which is to say, the 1970s—but retained not much memory of them other than that they kept my attention with clever plotting.
There's a connection with an earlier segment here: Le Carré taught for a couple of years at Eton in the mid-1950s. His own public school was Sherborne, which is almost as tony as Eton, and way older—the school not long ago celebrated its thirteenth centenary.
Reading Le Carré's obituaries, and recalling his fictional character George Smiley, I'd guess that Le Carré was one of those many, many public-school-educated Brits, like the Duke of Wellington, who hated his schooldays and never psychologically recovered from them. Whatever: I hope he rests in peace now.
[Permalink]
Item: Here's one more thing to worry about: a rogue iceberg.
This one has a name: A-68A. It's ninety miles long and twenty wide, roughly the same shape as Jamaica but only sixty percent the size. It broke off from the Antarctic ice shelves three years ago and has been drifting down there in the southern ocean ever since.
The people who should worry most about A-68A would be the inhabitants of South Georgia island, a speck of land down there in the southern Atlantic that's about the same size as the rogue iceberg. As I go to tape here, iceberg is just about to collide with island. That will be one heck of a collision, ninety-mile-long iceberg grinding up against hundred-mile-long island.
Fortunately South Georgia has no permanent inhabitants. The imminent collision will be a catastrophe only for the penguins and seals who call South Georgia home. Still, it's a reminder of the variety of things Mother Nature can throw at us when she's in the mood. Earthquakes, volcanos, tsunamis, solar flares, … rogue icebergs.
[Permalink]
Item: Here's a headline from The Hill that caught my eye. Headline:
The story tells us that a third of federal civilian employees are eligible for retirement in the next five years, and fewer than six percent of employees are under the age of thirty.
That's one more data point in support of a part-baked theory I'm working up, that I shall deliver to you coherently when it's fully baked. At the heart of it is the idea that relations between the old and the young in our society—economic relations, political relations, affections and hostility—have undergone, or are undergoing, some radical change.
Smart, capable young people don't want jobs in the federal government? Perhaps because they know it's an arena of slovenly incompetence and racial favoritism ever since Jimmy Carter abolished qualifying exams for the federal Civil Service.
There's more going on than that, though. Look at the congresscritters: Chuck Grassley, 87 years old; Maxine Waters, 82; Nancy Pelosi, 80; Mitch McConnell, 78; Dianne Feinstein, 125; … And look at this recent Presidential election: Bernie Sanders, 79; Joe Biden, 78; Donald Trump, 74; …
Do young Americans really want to be governed by these creaking old geezers? I sure don't, and I'm no spring chicken myself. Whatever happened to the Term Limits movement?
There's a fuss going on as I speak over a December 15th article in the New York Times about distribution of the COVID vaccine. Who should have priority: geezers, who are more likely to die from the virus, or essential workers, who are younger and more, you know, essential?
The article quotes one member of a committee of medical experts advising the CDC on the issue. Quote:
To me the issue of ethics is very significant, very important for this country, and clearly favors the essential worker group because of the high proportion of minority, low-income and low-education workers among essential workers.
End quote.
We get the point: Die, white geezers! But then, why do we let so many of them cement themselves in at the highest positions of political power?
There is definitely something going on here. When I get to the bottom of it, I shall report back … if I'm still among the living.
[Permalink]
Item: Finally: In my daily browse of the news outlets in search of interesting and informative items to bring you, it sometimes happens that I come across a headline that makes me pause to savor it, without any strong desire to read the story it's attached to.
Here is one such, my Headline of the Week. This is from the Daily Mail, December 15th. Headline: Woman who sparked outcry by decapitating an owl on social media video is shot dead in drive-by shooting in Colombia.
By way of journalistic due diligence, I did read far enough into this story to learn that the deceased—the woman, not the owl—was named Mileydis Aldana, 21 years old. Her assassination does seem to have been inspired by outrage at her having killed the owl.
I bear no ill will whatsoever to the strigine community, but I must say, the killing of Ms Aldana strikes me as an over-reaction on the part of their supporters. I hope she will rest in peace, and find forgiveness in the Afterlife for her one regrettable act of strigicide.
[Permalink]
07—Signoff. That's all I have, ladies and gents. Thank you for listening; and, since you won't be hearing next week's podcast until some time on Boxing Day, allow me to wish you all a very Merry Christmas.
Thursday this week, December 17th, marked the 250th anniversary of the birth of Ludwig van Beethoven, so I must of course play you out with a snippet from that composer's amazing oeuvre.
Now, my last two podcasts both signed off with violin music, although in very different modes. December 4th I treated you to some real West Virginia fiddling; last week I offered the extremely gifted Jenny O'Connor playing some movie music. So for the sake of continuity, let's see what Beethoven gave us violinwise.
What he most notably gave us was the sixteen string quartets: long pieces for two violins, a viola, and a cello, composed from 1801 to 1826.
I'll put in a promotional plug here for Professor Greenberg's course on these string quartets at thegreatcourses.com. The good professor covers all of them in 24 brilliant lectures, with detailed analyses of ten of the sixteen.
Here is some of the seventh: properly Opus 59 Number One, composed on a commission from the Russian ambassador in Vienna, Count Razumovsky. The players here are students at the New England Conservatory of Music in Boston. If there is any fault to be found with their performance, I can't find it.
There will be more from Radio Derb next week.
[Permalink]


vdare--2020-12-18--John Derbyshire On Jodie Turner-Smith As Anne Boleyn—Worst Casting Decision Of 2020?

[ Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb , now available exclusively through VDARE.com ] See , earlier : NO , William The Conqueror Did NOT Have A Black Advisor .
SJWs Are Just Rewriting English History ( Sound Familiar ? )
A British TV channel is producing a costume drama about Anne Boleyn , who was the second wife of King Henry VIII of England back in the 16th century .
Henry 's first wife , Catherine , had not been able to give him a male heir , so he had his marriage to her annulled in 1533 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ annulment was what drove Henry to break with the Pope .
When Anne likewise failed to produce a male heir after three years of marriage , Henry had her charged with adultery and executed .
The charges were most likely bogus , but that was the end of Anne ; although , in a nice instance of generational revenge , her daughter later became Queen Elizabeth the First , a much better monarch than Henry .
Well , this TV channel is producing a drama about Anne , to be aired at some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playing Anne will be Jodie Turner-Smith , a full-blood negress .
[ Jodie Turner-Smith plays Anne Boleyn in new Channel 5 drama that seeks to 'challenge conventions ' by casting black actress as Henry VIII 's executed wife and 'shine a feminist light ' on her story Daily Mail , December 18 , 2020 ] And no , they 're not making her put on white-face makeup .
This is of course historically preposterous .
Anne Boleyn was a white English lady—we have contemporary portraits of her .
The producers of historical dramas—including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great pains and expense to make everything look authentic : costumes , furnishings , weapons , transportation….We want the illusion of reality .
No producer would have the Duke of Norfolk drive up to Henry VIII 's hunting lodge in a Lamborghini and carrying an AR-15 .
The classic Henry VIII TV biopic was an earlier British production : The Six Wives of Henry VIII , aired in 1971 .
Keith Mitchell played the part of Henry , and he played him with red hair .
Why ?
Because Henry VIII had red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ago , though , when we still had some common sense .
So what 's the point of this gross , glaring anachronism—a negress playing Anne Boleyn ?
Let the producers tell us , quote from the news story : They 're challenging conventions , see ?
Down with conventions !
What they are actually challenging , of course , is historical truth .
So : Down with historical truth !
`` Who controls the past controls the future : who controls the present controls the past . ''
If you 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ present , try starting an online protest movement against this casting decision .
Then watch your PayPal account close down , and your Twitter account , your Facebook account , your bank account , your credit-card accounts , … '' Hold on there , Derb , '' I hear you cry .
`` Did n't you cover a similar story back in November , about a black actress playing Agent 007 in the new James Bond movie ?
And did n't you say you were fine with it ? ''
Yes and yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where you can make stuff up .
In historical dramas you should cleave to the historical truth as closely as you can .
• there is nothing implausible about a present-day intelligence agency having a black female operative ; and if , as seems to be the case , James Bond is retired in this movie , or dead , or otherwise indisposed , there 's nothing implausible about giving the lady his agent number .
So yes , I 'm fine with it .
What I am not fine with is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order to signal that they are faithful congregants of the Most Holy and Blessed Church of Negritude .
I am not fine with lies and hypocrisy .
Of course , the charge of hypocrisy there is presumptive .
I 'm presuming that these producers , in their private lives—in their residential and educational decisions—stay as far away from big concentrations of black people as everyone else does that can afford to .
If it can be proven to me that this is not the case , I shall make a modest donation to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Previously on VDARE.com on blackwashing white characters , and other casting atrocities : • CBS Reality Shows to Be 50 % “ People of Color ” —Why Not Just Ban Casting White People ?
• Who ?
Whom ?
In Casting : Wonderful To Give Black People White Roles , But The Reverse Is Monstrous • `` Olivier 's Occupation 's Gone '' —When White Men Were Allowed To Play Black Roles , Olivier Tried Harder • An Italian-American Objects To Spielberg 's One-Sided Ethnic Casting In WEST SIDE STORY • Meg Murry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WRINKLE IN TIME Film , Black Director Deliberately Casts Black Actress in White Role • A WRINKLE IN TIME Bombs While BLACK PANTHER Succeeds Because Blackface Doesn ’ t Work—Blacks Want the Real Thing • Homer Said Achilles Was Blond—Netflix Hired An African To Play Him In TROY : FALL OF A CITY • MISS SAIGON : White Actor Denied Immigration Visa for Not Being Asian • Tim Burton Denounced for Only Casting One Black in Movie Set on a Welsh Island During WWII • `` Hamilton '' Musical Violates Job Anti-Discrimination Law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Women ” • “ We Wuz Kings !
” Afrocentrism And The Collapse Of White Civilizations , From Egypt To Atlanta • NYT : Blacks Do n't Get Enough Oscars For Playing Nonblacks email him ] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets .
( This no longer includes National Review , whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him . )
He is the author of We Are Doomed : Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books .
He has had two books @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DISSIDENT RIGHT ( also available in Kindle ) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II : ESSAYS 2013 .
For years he ’ s been podcasting at Radio Derb , now available at VDARE.com for no charge .
His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com .
Readers who wish to donate ( tax deductible ) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire 's writings at VDARE.com can do so here .

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through VDARE.com]
See, earlier: NO, William The Conqueror Did NOT Have A Black Advisor. SJWs Are Just Rewriting English History (Sound Familiar?)
A British TV channel is producing a costume drama about Anne Boleyn, who was the second wife of King Henry VIII of England back in the 16th century. Henry's first wife, Catherine, had not been able to give him a male heir, so he had his marriage to her annulled in 1533 and married Anne. The issue of the annulment was what drove Henry to break with the Pope.
When Anne likewise failed to produce a male heir after three years of marriage, Henry had her charged with adultery and executed. The charges were most likely bogus, but that was the end of Anne; although, in a nice instance of generational revenge, her daughter later became Queen Elizabeth the First, a much better monarch than Henry.
Well, this TV channel is producing a drama about Anne, to be aired at some future date not specified. The actress playing Anne will be Jodie Turner-Smith, a full-blood negress [Jodie Turner-Smith plays Anne Boleyn in new Channel 5 drama that seeks to 'challenge conventions' by casting black actress as Henry VIII's executed wife and 'shine a feminist light' on her story Daily Mail, December 18, 2020]. And no, they're not making her put on white-face makeup.
This is of course historically preposterous. Anne Boleyn was a white English lady—we have contemporary portraits of her.
This is real slap in the face for actors from the limb different community.
Everybody knows that Anne Boleyn had six fingers on her right hand. https://t.co/jH4bdhttay — Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) December 15, 2020
The producers of historical dramas—including this one, I'm guessing—go to great pains and expense to make everything look authentic: costumes, furnishings, weapons, transportation….We want the illusion of reality. No producer would have the Duke of Norfolk drive up to Henry VIII's hunting lodge in a Lamborghini and carrying an AR-15.
The classic Henry VIII TV biopic was an earlier British production: The Six Wives of Henry VIII, aired in 1971. Keith Mitchell played the part of Henry, and he played him with red hair. Why? Because Henry VIII had red hair, duh. That was fifty years ago, though, when we still had some common sense.
So what's the point of this gross, glaring anachronism—a negress playing Anne Boleyn? Let the producers tell us, quote from the news story:
"Producers Fable Pictures say the drama challenges all the conventions of who we think Anne Boleyn was and shines a feminist light on her story."
They're challenging conventions, see? Down with conventions!
What they are actually challenging, of course, is historical truth.
So: Down with historical truth!
"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." If you're in any doubt about who controls the present, try starting an online protest movement against this casting decision. Then watch your PayPal account close down, and your Twitter account, your Facebook account, your bank account, your credit-card accounts, …
"Hold on there, Derb," I hear you cry. "Didn't you cover a similar story back in November, about a black actress playing Agent 007 in the new James Bond movie? And didn't you say you were fine with it?"
Yes and yes. However,
that's fiction, where you can make stuff up. In historical dramas you should cleave to the historical truth as closely as you can.
there is nothing implausible about a present-day intelligence agency having a black female operative; and if, as seems to be the case, James Bond is retired in this movie, or dead, or otherwise indisposed, there's nothing implausible about giving the lady his agent number. So yes, I'm fine with it.
What I am not fine with is halfwit producers committing gross historical falsehoods in order to signal that they are faithful congregants of the Most Holy and Blessed Church of Negritude.
I am not fine with lies and hypocrisy.
Of course, the charge of hypocrisy there is presumptive. I'm presuming that these producers, in their private lives—in their residential and educational decisions—stay as far away from big concentrations of black people as everyone else does that can afford to.
If it can be proven to me that this is not the case, I shall make a modest donation to The United Negro College Fund.)
Previously on VDARE.com on blackwashing white characters, and other casting atrocities:
John Derbyshire [ email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him.) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by VDARE.com com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.
For years he’s been podcasting at Radio Derb, now available at VDARE.com for no charge. His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.
Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire's writings at VDARE.com can do so here.


vdare--2020-12-18--The Great Reset Comes For NYC Public Schools

New York mayor Bill de Blasio is out to prove my theory of the Not So Great Reset right .
As I wrote in Taki ’ s Magazine on 11/18/20 : At this point , I ’ m less worried that there is a carefully calculated master plan than that our elites are just making things up as they go along based on the latest Woke bad ideas .
For decades , I ’ ve been pointing out the various hypocrisies of the ruling elite : For example , graduates of prestige colleges contend that the worst thing imaginable is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence , but their alma maters use admissions tests on which , indeed , the races score differently on average .
Likewise , urban elites in New York City rely upon the massive NYPD to keep them safe from criminals .
But hypocrisy is a good thing when you are in charge of important functions but nominally subscribe to a ridiculous ideology .
It ’ s better than trying to live up to your anti-empirical assertions .
Since Memorial Day , though , it ’ s almost as if the ruling class has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing all the self-destructive things I ’ ve pointed out they didn ’ t do in the past : the Not So Great Reset .
In our brave new post-hypocritical America in the Year Zero AGF ( After George Floyd ) , black criminals don ’ t have to be arrested if they don ’ t feel like it and dumb kids can go to UCLA just like smart kids .
But I think what is really going on is this : Elites never actually admitted to themselves that they were hypocritical .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ think about it .
Inertia , not hypocrisy , ruled .
Requiring the SAT to get into Berkeley was just the way things were .
Locking up vastly more black criminals than Asian criminals was merely something that happened , year after year .
I suspect here ’ s the obscure connection between the coronavirus and The Establishment deciding to blow up America in the name of the Racial Reckoning as they drifted from inanity to insanity : The pandemic required a certain amount of temporary rearrangement of old ways of doing things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ACT was canceled during the spring lockdown .
So colleges adjusted by making application tests optional .
As a one-year expedient , that wouldn ’ t have been too destructive .
But this need to improvise new rules empowered the current year ’ s ignorant , science-denialist ideas about “ racial justice.
” No longer could the people running American colleges just kick the can down the road on college testing ’ s race gaps because now they had to make some changes .
And they wound up making extremely destructive permanent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing system that had evolved intelligently during the Depression and Cold War when Americans needed to make smart choices .
A judge now has banned students applying to the University of California from even choosing on their own to send in their test scores .
With our current Narrative about white evilness dominating our thinking , Americans less and less can do rational minor maintenance on our inherited institutions .
From the New York Times today : New York City Will Change Many Selective Schools to Address Segregation The pandemic prompted the mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ integration : a major shift in how hundreds of schools admit students .
Mayor Bill de Blasio announced on Friday major changes to the way hundreds of New York City ’ s selective middle and high schools admit their students , a move intended to address long-simmering concerns that admissions policies have discriminated against Black and Latino students and exacerbated segregation in the country ’ s largest school district .
New York is more reliant on high-stakes admissions requirements than any other district in the country , and the mayor has for years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action to desegregate the city ’ s racially and socioeconomically divided public schools .
Black and Latino students are significantly underrepresented in selective middle and high schools , though they represent nearly 70 percent of the district ’ s 1.1 million students .
But it was the pandemic that finally prompted Mr. de Blasio , now in his seventh year in office , to implement some of the most sweeping school integration measures in New York City ’ s recent history .
The alterations , however , will not affect admissions at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schools , like Stuyvesant High School and Bronx High School of Science .
When schools shuttered in the spring , grading systems and standardized tests used by the city to admit students to its selective schools were altered or paused .
That has made it next to impossible for most selective schools to sort students by academic performance as they have in previous years .
Still , changes forged in a crisis are now set to outlast the pandemic .
“ By the time I leave the mayoralty , I think we will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different course , certainly vis-à-vis screened schools , ” Mr. de Blasio said in a news conference on Friday .
“ This is clearly a beginning.
” The new policies , which will go into effect for this year ’ s round of admissions , will affect how about 400 of the city ’ s 1,800 schools admit students .
Mr. de Blasio and his successor will no doubt face demands to integrate many more city high schools , particularly screened schools , which are among the most racially unrepresentative in the system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screened high schools has long been considered a third-rail in the district , and changes made there would no doubt be highly contentious .
Middle schools will see the most significant policy revisions .
The city will eliminate all admissions screening for the schools for at least one year , the mayor said .
About 200 middle schools — 40 percent of the total — use metrics like grades , attendance and test scores to determine which students should be admitted .
Now those schools will use a random lottery to admit students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blasio is essentially piloting an experiment that , if deemed successful , could permanently end the city ’ s academically selective middle schools , which tend to be much whiter than the district overall .
The time frame for a final decision on whether to get rid of middle school screening for good — which will come shortly before Mr. de Blasio leaves office on New Year ’ s Day in 2022 — instantly created a quandary for the phalanx of candidates vying to replace him .
The candidates are likely to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been a particularly contentious practice : measuring the academic achievements of fourth graders to determine if they can attend a selective middle school .
City officials said that because of the pandemic , there simply was not enough data to assess how rising middle school students were performing this year .
After schools were closed in March , the state ’ s standardized English and math exams were canceled , and the mayor scrapped attendance records as a measure of achievement .
Students in younger grades switched from a letter-grade system to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class or needed to repeat it .
In 2018 , one local district , Brooklyn ’ s District 15 , switched to a lottery admissions system .
That closely watched effort , heralded as one of the most substantial desegregation measures in years , will now be extended across the city .
The admissions process for selective schools typically takes place in the fall , but was delayed this year because of the pandemic .
Families can start applying to middle schools under the new system in early January until the week of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced by Mr. de Blasio , New York will also eliminate a policy that allowed some high schools to give students who live nearby first dibs at spots — even though all seats are supposed to be available to all students , regardless of where they reside .

New York mayor Bill de Blasio is out to prove my theory of the Not So Great Reset right. As I wrote in Taki’s Magazine on 11/18/20:
At this point, I’m less worried that there is a carefully calculated master plan than that our elites are just making things up as they go along based on the latest Woke bad ideas. For decades, I’ve been pointing out the various hypocrisies of the ruling elite: For example, graduates of prestige colleges contend that the worst thing imaginable is pointing out that the races differ in intelligence, but their alma maters use admissions tests on which, indeed, the races score differently on average. Likewise, urban elites in New York City rely upon the massive NYPD to keep them safe from criminals. But hypocrisy is a good thing when you are in charge of important functions but nominally subscribe to a ridiculous ideology. It’s better than trying to live up to your anti-empirical assertions. Since Memorial Day, though, it’s almost as if the ruling class has been out to prove me wrong by doing all the self-destructive things I’ve pointed out they didn’t do in the past: the Not So Great Reset. In our brave new post-hypocritical America in the Year Zero AGF (After George Floyd), black criminals don’t have to be arrested if they don’t feel like it and dumb kids can go to UCLA just like smart kids. But I think what is really going on is this: Elites never actually admitted to themselves that they were hypocritical. Instead, they just didn’t think about it. Inertia, not hypocrisy, ruled. Requiring the SAT to get into Berkeley was just the way things were. Locking up vastly more black criminals than Asian criminals was merely something that happened, year after year. I suspect here’s the obscure connection between the coronavirus and The Establishment deciding to blow up America in the name of the Racial Reckoning as they drifted from inanity to insanity: The pandemic required a certain amount of temporary rearrangement of old ways of doing things. For instance, administering the SAT and ACT was canceled during the spring lockdown. So colleges adjusted by making application tests optional. As a one-year expedient, that wouldn’t have been too destructive. But this need to improvise new rules empowered the current year’s ignorant, science-denialist ideas about “racial justice.” No longer could the people running American colleges just kick the can down the road on college testing’s race gaps because now they had to make some changes. And they wound up making extremely destructive permanent alterations, with many colleges junking a testing system that had evolved intelligently during the Depression and Cold War when Americans needed to make smart choices. A judge now has banned students applying to the University of California from even choosing on their own to send in their test scores. With our current Narrative about white evilness dominating our thinking, Americans less and less can do rational minor maintenance on our inherited institutions.
From the New York Times today:
New York City Will Change Many Selective Schools to Address Segregation The pandemic prompted the mayor’s most significant action yet on integration: a major shift in how hundreds of schools admit students. By Eliza Shapiro
Dec. 18, 2020 Mayor Bill de Blasio announced on Friday major changes to the way hundreds of New York City’s selective middle and high schools admit their students, a move intended to address long-simmering concerns that admissions policies have discriminated against Black and Latino students and exacerbated segregation in the country’s largest school district. New York is more reliant on high-stakes admissions requirements than any other district in the country, and the mayor has for years faced mounting pressure to take more forceful action to desegregate the city’s racially and socioeconomically divided public schools. Black and Latino students are significantly underrepresented in selective middle and high schools, though they represent nearly 70 percent of the district’s 1.1 million students. But it was the pandemic that finally prompted Mr. de Blasio, now in his seventh year in office, to implement some of the most sweeping school integration measures in New York City’s recent history. The alterations, however, will not affect admissions at the city’s most elite selective high schools, like Stuyvesant High School and Bronx High School of Science. When schools shuttered in the spring, grading systems and standardized tests used by the city to admit students to its selective schools were altered or paused. That has made it next to impossible for most selective schools to sort students by academic performance as they have in previous years. Still, changes forged in a crisis are now set to outlast the pandemic. “By the time I leave the mayoralty, I think we will have put the city on a very different course, certainly vis-à-vis screened schools,” Mr. de Blasio said in a news conference on Friday. “This is clearly a beginning.” The new policies, which will go into effect for this year’s round of admissions, will affect how about 400 of the city’s 1,800 schools admit students. Mr. de Blasio and his successor will no doubt face demands to integrate many more city high schools, particularly screened schools, which are among the most racially unrepresentative in the system. But the integration of specialized and screened high schools has long been considered a third-rail in the district, and changes made there would no doubt be highly contentious. Middle schools will see the most significant policy revisions. The city will eliminate all admissions screening for the schools for at least one year, the mayor said. About 200 middle schools — 40 percent of the total — use metrics like grades, attendance and test scores to determine which students should be admitted. Now those schools will use a random lottery to admit students. In doing this, Mr. de Blasio is essentially piloting an experiment that, if deemed successful, could permanently end the city’s academically selective middle schools, which tend to be much whiter than the district overall. The time frame for a final decision on whether to get rid of middle school screening for good — which will come shortly before Mr. de Blasio leaves office on New Year’s Day in 2022 — instantly created a quandary for the phalanx of candidates vying to replace him. The candidates are likely to be pressed on whether they would resume what has been a particularly contentious practice: measuring the academic achievements of fourth graders to determine if they can attend a selective middle school. City officials said that because of the pandemic, there simply was not enough data to assess how rising middle school students were performing this year. After schools were closed in March, the state’s standardized English and math exams were canceled, and the mayor scrapped attendance records as a measure of achievement. Students in younger grades switched from a letter-grade system to one that indicated if they passed a class or needed to repeat it. In 2018, one local district, Brooklyn’s District 15, switched to a lottery admissions system. That closely watched effort, heralded as one of the most substantial desegregation measures in years, will now be extended across the city. The admissions process for selective schools typically takes place in the fall, but was delayed this year because of the pandemic. Families can start applying to middle schools under the new system in early January until the week of Feb. 8. In another major shift announced by Mr. de Blasio, New York will also eliminate a policy that allowed some high schools to give students who live nearby first dibs at spots — even though all seats are supposed to be available to all students, regardless of where they reside.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-12-19--Thanks To Mark Steyn For Supporting VDARE.com Against The Tech Totalitarians'  "Big Shut-Up"

Earlier : Thanks To Mark Steyn For His Kind Words On Network Solutions ' Attempted Deplatforming Of VDARE.com The Weekend @ @ @ @ @ Show has a segment on what Steyn calls the `` Accelerating Big Shut-Up . ''
@ @ @ @ @ Mark Steyn Show , December 18 , 2020 , which covers the threat from VDARE.com @ @ @ @ @ us off .
Steyn 's theme : `` Unless you 're prepared to surrender everything @ @ @ @ @ Listen below to the segment that concerns us , and the current Monumental Destruction .
@ @ @ @ @ here .
If you 're inspired by that call to action ( real lawyers cost @ @ @ @ @ below :

Earlier: Thanks To Mark Steyn For His Kind Words On Network Solutions' Attempted Deplatforming Of VDARE.com
UPDATE: As of Sunday at 4:00 PM, Credit Card Donations are still working!
The Weekend edition of The Mark Steyn Show has a segment on what Steyn calls the "Accelerating Big Shut-Up." See Surrender Nothing, The Mark Steyn Show, December 18, 2020, which covers the threat from VDARE.com's payment processor to cut us off.
Steyn's theme: "Unless you're prepared to surrender everything, surrender nothing!"
Listen below to the segment that concerns us, and the current Monumental Destruction.
Listen to the whole thing here.
Quote from Steyn:
"Peter Brimelow did the right thing he lawyered up and sent a strong legal pushback. That's all you can do. They don't want any chitchat with you. They think you're a loser, they can crush like a bug. And the only thing that will give them pause is a legal threat from a real lawyer. And so the gutless fairies is at the merchant processor have fallen silent and for the moment donations are still going through. And VDARE is monitoring the situation hour by hour. So if you weren't had been planning to chip in a few bucks for those guys, you had better hurry!"
If you're inspired by that call to action (real lawyers cost money) click the button below:
Donate to VDARE.com


vdare--2020-12-19--Lifehacker On Spitting, And Spitting On Chinese Stereotypes

See , earlier : The “ China Virus ” Came From China And Chinese People .
AND IT 'S OK TO SAY SO On Lifehacker.com , one writer is inveighing against spitting on the sidewalk , which he says is prevalent in modern America : I know Dr. Fauci hasn ’ t issued a national PSA about the dangers of spitting with impunity , but you should still know that it ’ s obscenely reckless given the currently rampaging state of the pandemic .
It must bear repeating that there ’ s a worldwide pestilence that ’ s hit the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ve had over 300,000 people die of COVID-19 in under a year , and the grim tally really sees little sign of abating in the immediate future .
So why the hell are you spitting on the ground , where people walk ?
COVID is transmitted in a number of ways , and yes , the saliva you ’ re spewing onto the ground is one of the vehicles by which this virus spreads .
But wait , it can spread other diseases , too !
Do n't Spit on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) by Sam Blum , December 18 , 2020 He 's right , of course .
The comments are full of people who ( a ) do n't believe that diseased phlegm on the sidewalk is a threat , ( b ) are absolutely furious at the idea of swallowing their own phlegm or spit , or ( c ) deny that this is at all common .
Briefly , this should not be a new idea : spitting on the sidewalk was forbidden by law in many cities in the 1920s to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is returning to America with immigrants from less sanitary lands : • The Anti-Spitting Campaigns Designed to Stop the Spread of Tuberculosis , by Shaunacy Ferro , Mental Floss , November 13 , 2018 .
• When a Women-Led Campaign Made It Illegal to Spit in Public in New York City , by Theresa Machemer , Smithsonianmag.com February 10 , 2020 .
I say `` from less sanitary lands '' —the reason you probably could n't go out shopping or to a Christmas party today is because China is very much less sanitary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't want to hear that , as witness this exchange between Lifehacker commenters : Well , maybe he got from things like the 2012 book Pretty Woman Spitting , by Leanne Adams .
You can watch Leanne Adams talk about experiencing another culture , the good and the bad .
The spitting—massive public expectoration , even by by well-dressed , stylish and pretty Chinese women—is part of the bad .
Maybe the guy who had `` arrived at '' a stereotupe the other fellow had never heard of had seen this clip , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loudly and repeatedly , and blaming it on the Chicago weather .
Maybe stereotype believing guy had lived in or near his local Chinatown .
Maybe , like John Derbyshire , he had lived in China .
During a 2016 trip to Hong Kong , Derb noted that the locals complained that Chinese Mainlanders spit publicly and he added On a more recent trip to China , Derbyshire noted that the Chinese Communist government is discouraging spitting on the streets : And the reason it 's working is that the Chinese government can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-known Chinese custom of spitting on the streets without worrying about whether of not they 're being racist .
American , apparently , ca n't .
This , by the way , like the unsanitary Chinese habit of eating live bats , etc.
, in the “ wet markets ” of Wuhan .
is a cultural rather than racial characteristic , and thus can be changed .

See, earlier: The “China Virus” Came From China And Chinese People. AND IT'S OK TO SAY SO
On Lifehacker.com, one writer is inveighing against spitting on the sidewalk, which he says is prevalent in modern America:
I know Dr. Fauci hasn’t issued a national PSA about the dangers of spitting with impunity, but you should still know that it’s obscenely reckless given the currently rampaging state of the pandemic. It must bear repeating that there’s a worldwide pestilence that’s hit the U.S. harder than any other country; we’ve had over 300,000 people die of COVID-19 in under a year, and the grim tally really sees little sign of abating in the immediate future. So why the hell are you spitting on the ground, where people walk? COVID is transmitted in a number of ways, and yes, the saliva you’re spewing onto the ground is one of the vehicles by which this virus spreads. But wait, it can spread other diseases, too! Don't Spit on the Ground During a Pandemic (Or Ever) by Sam Blum, December 18, 2020
He's right, of course. The comments are full of people who (a) don't believe that diseased phlegm on the sidewalk is a threat, (b) are absolutely furious at the idea of swallowing their own phlegm or spit, or (c) deny that this is at all common.
Briefly, this should not be a new idea: spitting on the sidewalk was forbidden by law in many cities in the 1920s to prevent the spread of TB, which is returning to America with immigrants from less sanitary lands:
I say "from less sanitary lands"—the reason you probably couldn't go out shopping or to a Christmas party today is because China is very much less sanitary than modern America, but people don't want to hear that, as witness this exchange between Lifehacker commenters:
Well, maybe he got from things like the 2012 book Pretty Woman Spitting, by Leanne Adams.
You can watch Leanne Adams talk about experiencing another culture, the good and the bad.
The spitting—massive public expectoration, even by by well-dressed, stylish and pretty Chinese women—is part of the bad.
Maybe the guy who had "arrived at" a stereotupe the other fellow had never heard of had seen this clip, of a Chinese visitor to America spitting loudly and repeatedly, and blaming it on the Chicago weather.
Maybe stereotype believing guy had lived in or near his local Chinatown. Maybe, like John Derbyshire, he had lived in China.
During a 2016 trip to Hong Kong, Derb noted that the locals complained that Chinese Mainlanders spit publicly and he added
In regard to spitting, Hong Kongers seem to have been totally cured of the habit. Forty-five years ago, when I was busily memorizing all the Chinese characters my eye fell upon, the signs on the Star Ferry from Kowloon to Hong Kong island begged 請勿吐痰—"Please don't spit"—to not much effect that I could see. The Star Ferry is still sailing—with some of the same boats, to judge by their physical condition — but the signs are long gone.
On a more recent trip to China, Derbyshire noted that the Chinese Communist government is discouraging spitting on the streets:
China's leaders have become acutely aware that Westerners regard some of their long-established social customs—spitting in the street, promiscuous smoking, fighting scrimmages to get on trains—as uncouth. They want their citizens to clean up their acts, as a matter of national pride. It's working, at any rate in the big cities.
And the reason it's working is that the Chinese government can tell Chinese people not to follow the well-known Chinese custom of spitting on the streets without worrying about whether of not they're being racist. Americans, apparently, can't.
This, by the way, like the unsanitary Chinese habit of eating live bats, etc., in the “wet markets” of Wuhan, is a cultural rather than racial characteristic, and thus can be changed.


vdare--2020-12-19--Dictionary.com Denying The War On Christmas With The Same Old Stuff

Earlier : The War On Christmas Goes On , With COVID-19 Piling On .
And Christophobia Is Getting Worse Dictionary.com , which sounds like an apolitical reference site , has an entry on the War On Christmas which includes all the media tropes which we 've so often debunked and discredited : What does the war on Christmas mean ?
Perhaps , you ’ re familiar with the “ War on Christmas ” that ’ s been raging over the last several years .
It stems from the radical belief that inclusivity—that honors other holidays , like Hanukkah , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ celebrate Christmas—is overshadowing traditional American values .
The provocative phrase has been linked to figures like President Donald Trump ( remember “ [ People ] don ’ t use the word Christmas … because it ’ s not politically correct .
Guess what ?
We ’ re saying Merry Christmas again !
” ) and to silly controversies like the drawings printed on Starbucks coffee cups .
Well , according to the Pew Research Center , 92 % of all Americans , regardless of religious background , celebrate Christmas in some form .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s hard to believe this popular holiday is under serious threat .
Christmas imagery still largely dominates the media and entertainment landscape in the United States ... .
[ Links in original , boldface added to highlight bias . ]
Sure , it 's just banned by your school and employer .
Not severe enough , apparently .
Not nearly , by the way , anything like as severe as the Dissident Right is facing now .
By the way , there are no actual links to external sources to prove any of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just to other Dictionary.com pages on the words themselves .
I suspect this of being plagiariazed from Snopes .
Now in 2020 , the “ War on Christmas ” has resurfaced as a criticism of COVID-19 restrictions and health department suggestions to avoid gatherings .
According to Representative Jim Jordan , “ They tried to cancel Thanksgiving .
Didn ’ t work !
They ’ re coming for Christmas next.
” Let ’ s face it , the holiday season isn ’ t really about what ’ s printed on a cup of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how someone greets you in a shopping mall , whether that ’ s with Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays .
Rather , in this time of such divisiveness , we should all strive to appreciate the common threads found in all winter celebrations : family , friends , food , tradition , and yes—gifts .
Well , maybe in a time of divisiveness , people should n't be attacking other people for putting up Christmas lights , but they did just the other day .
See PowerLine ’ s blog post A Christmas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and from Canada 's National Post Jonathan Kay : How humourless progressive puritans take offence at just about anything , December 12 , 2020 .
Remember , we here at VDARE.com did n't invent the War On Christmas , we 're just fighting back .

Earlier: The War On Christmas Goes On, With COVID-19 Piling On. And Christophobia Is Getting Worse
Dictionary.com, which sounds like an apolitical reference site, has an entry on the War On Christmas which includes all the media tropes which we've so often debunked and discredited:
Christmastime. A festive season for family, food … and warfare? What does the war on Christmas mean? Perhaps, you’re familiar with the “War on Christmas” that’s been raging over the last several years. It stems from the radical belief that inclusivity—that honors other holidays, like Hanukkah, and accounts for those who don’t celebrate Christmas—is overshadowing traditional American values. The provocative phrase has been linked to figures like President Donald Trump (remember “[People] don’t use the word Christmas … because it’s not politically correct. Guess what? We’re saying Merry Christmas again!”) and to silly controversies like the drawings printed on Starbucks coffee cups. Well, according to the Pew Research Center, 92% of all Americans, regardless of religious background, celebrate Christmas in some form. Judging by numbers alone, it’s hard to believe this popular holiday is under serious threat. Christmas imagery still largely dominates the media and entertainment landscape in the United States....[Links in original, boldface added to highlight bias.]
Sure, it's just banned by your school and employer.
In the 1920s, Henry Ford—a known anti-Semite–distributed a series of pamphlets that claimed to expose the “whole record of Jewish opposition to Christmas” and other Christian holidays like Easter. A spike of religiosity in the ’50s (with church attendance at 50%) ensured that Christian values were included in the curriculum of most public schools. When people spoke out against this incorporation of church and state, they faced severe backlash.
Not severe enough, apparently. Not nearly, by the way, anything like as severe as the Dissident Right is facing now.
In 2004, conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly revitalized the woeful “War on Christmas” for modern audiences. Although the phrase was apparently coined by author Peter Brimelow, O’Reilly launched it to new heights on his highly rated Fox News program. He also decried the phrase happy holidays, labeling it as anti-Christmas because he said it represented the marginalization of the holiday. Shortly after, another Fox News contributor released a book detailing the supposed “Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday.”
By the way, there are no actual links to external sources to prove any of these assertions, the links above are just to other Dictionary.com pages on the words themselves. I suspect this of being plagiarized from Snopes.
Now in 2020, the “War on Christmas” has resurfaced as a criticism of COVID-19 restrictions and health department suggestions to avoid gatherings. According to Representative Jim Jordan, “They tried to cancel Thanksgiving. Didn’t work! They’re coming for Christmas next.” Let’s face it, the holiday season isn’t really about what’s printed on a cup of coffee. It’s not about how someone greets you in a shopping mall, whether that’s with Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays. Rather, in this time of such divisiveness, we should all strive to appreciate the common threads found in all winter celebrations: family, friends, food, tradition, and yes—gifts.
Well, maybe in a time of divisiveness, people shouldn't be attacking other people for putting up Christmas lights, but they did just the other day. See PowerLine’s blog post A Christmas Diversity Grinch, December 8, 2020, and from Canada's National Post Jonathan Kay: How humourless progressive puritans take offence at just about anything, December 12, 2020.
Remember, we here at VDARE.com didn't invent the War On Christmas, we're just fighting back.


vdare--2020-12-19--Bloc-Based Vs. Individual-Based Thinking On Vaccine Priorities: "Seniors Are More Likely To Be Privi

Bloc-Based Vs. Individual-Based Thinking On Vaccine Priorities: "Seniors Are More Likely To Be Privileged And White."

Earlier : ( December 6 ) by Steve Sailer : NYT : Too Many Whites Might Get Vaccine From Ross Douthat ’ s column today in the New York Times : Then there ’ s the now-pressing question of who actually gets the vaccine first , which has been taken up at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a way that throws the limits of science-trusting into even sharper relief .
Last month their Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices produced a working document that ’ s a masterpiece of para-scientific effort , in which questions that are legitimately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine help the most ) , questions that are more logistical and sociological ( which pattern of distribution will be easier to put in place ) and moral questions about who deserves a vaccine are all jumbled up , assessed with a form of pseudo-rigor that resembles someone bluffing the way through a McKinsey job interview and then used to justify the conclusion that we should vaccinate essential workers before seniors … because seniors are more likely to be privileged and white .
As Matthew Yglesias noted , this ( provisional , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarkable example of how a certain kind of progressive moral thinking ignores the actual needs of racial minorities .
Because if you vaccinate working-age people before you vaccinate older people , you will actually end up not vaccinating the most vulnerable minority population , African-American seniors — so more minorities might die for the sake of a racial balance in overall vaccination rates .
But even if the recommendation didn ’ t have that kind of perverse implication , even if all things being equal you were just choosing between more minority deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccination plans , it ’ s still not the kind of question that the C.D.C.
’ s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has any particular competency to address .
If policy X leads to racially disparate death rates but policy Y requires overt racial discrimination , then the choice between the two is moral and political , not medical or scientific — as are other important questions like , “ Who is actually an essential worker ?
” or “ Should we focus more on slowing the spread or reducing the death rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Should we vaccinate men before women given that men are more likely to die of the disease ?
” ) These are the kind of questions , in other words , that our elected leaders should be willing to answer without recourse to a self-protective “ just following the science ” default .
But that default is deeply inscribed into our political culture , and especially the culture of liberalism , where even something as obviously moral-political as the decision to let Black Lives Matter protests go forward amid a pandemic was justified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a push for better public health .
By the way , why would a metric of maximally Reducing Deaths be superior to a metric of maximally Reducing Expected Life-Years Losts ?
Say one strategy would stop 25 people with a non-Covid life expectancy of one year from dying of Covid , while another strategy would stop one person with 30 years of life expectancy of dying of Covid .
I could see arguments for both points of view … Also , I could see arguments that we should be weighting helping the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life-years .
Are people with very short life expectancies big spenders at restaurants and bars ?
Well , some are , but in general … One obvious flaw in this CDC paper is that its model of how to choose the order in which to vaccinate is ridiculous .
It posits four huge blocs of Americans , running in size from 21 million ( healthcare workers ) to over 100 million ( adults with health concerns ) and then decides which giant blocs should go in which order : all healthcare workers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 65 and Americans with health concerns will just have to wait patiently while all of the healthcare workers and all of the essential workers are inoculated We should have a point system that looks at each individual and rates him on multiple criteria , with the highest scoring individuals , not the highest scoring blocs , being first in line .
I don ’ t know what those criteria should be but I do know that is far superior to the CDC ’ s bloc based approach .
The quality of work by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health and bioethics “ experts ” on this problem has been very weak .

Earlier: (December 6) by Steve Sailer: NYT: Too Many Whites Might Get Vaccine
From Ross Douthat’s column today in the New York Times:
Then there’s the now-pressing question of who actually gets the vaccine first, which has been taken up at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a way that throws the limits of science-trusting into even sharper relief. Last month their Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices produced a working document that’s a masterpiece of para-scientific effort, in which questions that are legitimately medical and scientific (who will the vaccine help the most), questions that are more logistical and sociological (which pattern of distribution will be easier to put in place) and moral questions about who deserves a vaccine are all jumbled up, assessed with a form of pseudo-rigor that resembles someone bluffing the way through a McKinsey job interview and then used to justify the conclusion that we should vaccinate essential workers before seniors … because seniors are more likely to be privileged and white. As Matthew Yglesias noted, this (provisional, it should be stressed) recommendation is a remarkable example of how a certain kind of progressive moral thinking ignores the actual needs of racial minorities. Because if you vaccinate working-age people before you vaccinate older people, you will actually end up not vaccinating the most vulnerable minority population, African-American seniors — so more minorities might die for the sake of a racial balance in overall vaccination rates. But even if the recommendation didn’t have that kind of perverse implication, even if all things being equal you were just choosing between more minority deaths and more white deaths in two different vaccination plans, it’s still not the kind of question that the C.D.C.’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has any particular competency to address. If policy X leads to racially disparate death rates but policy Y requires overt racial discrimination, then the choice between the two is moral and political, not medical or scientific — as are other important questions like, “Who is actually an essential worker?” or “Should we focus more on slowing the spread or reducing the death rate?” (Or even, “Should we vaccinate men before women given that men are more likely to die of the disease?”) These are the kind of questions, in other words, that our elected leaders should be willing to answer without recourse to a self-protective “just following the science” default. But that default is deeply inscribed into our political culture, and especially the culture of liberalism, where even something as obviously moral-political as the decision to let Black Lives Matter protests go forward amid a pandemic was justified by redescribing their motor, antiracism, as a push for better public health.
By the way, why would a metric of maximally Reducing Deaths be superior to a metric of maximally Reducing Expected Life-Years Lost? Say one strategy would stop 25 people with a non-Covid life expectancy of one year from dying of Covid, while another strategy would stop one person with 30 years of life expectancy of dying of Covid. I could see arguments for both points of view …
Also, I could see arguments that we should be weighting helping the economy as well as saving lives or life-years. Are people with very short life expectancies big spenders at restaurants and bars? Well, some are, but in general …
One obvious flaw in this CDC paper is that its model of how to choose the order in which to vaccinate is ridiculous. It posits four huge blocs of Americans, running in size from 21 million (healthcare workers) to over 100 million (adults with health concerns) and then decides which giant blocs should go in which order: all healthcare workers, then all essential workers. Americans over 65 and Americans with health concerns will just have to wait patiently while all of the healthcare workers and all of the essential workers are inoculated
C’mon …
We should have a point system that looks at each individual and rates him on multiple criteria, with the highest scoring individuals, not the highest scoring blocs, being first in line. I don’t know what those criteria should be but I do know that is far superior to the CDC’s bloc based approach.
The quality of work by America’s numerous and well-compensated public health and bioethics “experts” on this problem has been very weak.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-12-19--Michelle Malkin [VIDEO]: "VDARE.com is one of the most consequential websites on the internet!"

Merry Christmas .
I want to extend my warm congratulations to Peter Brimelow and the staff of VDARE.com on the 20th anniversary of one of the most consequential websites on the Internet .
I first started reading Peter Brimelow ’ s reporting in Forbes while a cub editorial writer in Los Angeles in the mid-1990s .
Peter ’ s thorough investigative journalism in both The Worm in the Apple and Alien Nation greatly influenced my own work .
I remember well the backlash to Alien Nation from the usual Open Borders suspects , especially the anti-American Wall Street Journal .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Generation Z nationalists who ’ ve taken up the cause .
But Peter and VDARE.com have been battling the Cancel Cult and gatekeepers for two decades .
For fun , I scrolled through the 1,100-plus posts listed in my author archive on VDARE.com and found the first three : a link to my syndicated column in February 2002 on religious worker visa fraud in mosques , a column on the INS whistleblowers who exposed the Catch And Release policies that allowed illegal alien and D.C. sniper Lee Malvo to remain the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whitewash of the black-on-white Wichita Kansas massacre in the fall of 2002 .
When I launched my own eponymous blog in 2004 , VDARE.com was on my original blogroll must-read links and remained there to the chagrin of the SPLC and Conservatism Inc .
There are too many indispensable contributors to mention , but I ’ ve been a longtime fan of Brenda Walker , Juan Mann , Joe Guzzardi , Allan Wall , James Kirkpatrick , John Derbyshire , Federale , and Washington Watcher .
I rely on the site to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ground reports , data , and insider scoops all focused on the National Question that no one else dares publish .
I will be forever indebted to Peter for his generous review of Invasion and friendship over the years .
We tag-teamed for a memorable debate against Frank Sharry and his ilk in New York City at some hoity-toity donor-class event in 2002 .
17 years later , Peter and Lydia were with me to unwind after my CPAC speech calling out Conservatism Inc. to its bloated , traitorous face – two decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter , for your patience and good cheer throughout .
VDARE.com is more important than ever as it turns 20 because a vigorous new generation of twenty-somethings is rising in revolt against Conservatism Inc and Open Borders Inc .
Your impact can be seen as young nationalists echo exactly the principles that undergird VDARE.com : America is a real homeland , not just a credal proposition .

Merry Christmas. I want to extend my warm congratulations to Peter Brimelow and the staff of VDARE.com on the 20th anniversary of one of the most consequential websites on the Internet.
I first started reading Peter Brimelow’s reporting in Forbes while a cub editorial writer in Los Angeles in the mid-1990s. Peter’s thorough investigative journalism in both The Worm in the Apple and Alien Nation greatly influenced my own work. I remember well the backlash to Alien Nation from the usual Open Borders suspects, especially the anti-American Wall Street Journal.
De-personing and disavowing may be new to the Generation Z nationalists who’ve taken up the cause. But Peter and VDARE.com have been battling the Cancel Cult and gatekeepers for two decades.
For fun, I scrolled through the 1,100-plus posts listed in my author archive on VDARE.com and found the first three: a link to my syndicated column in February 2002 on religious worker visa fraud in mosques, a column on the INS whistleblowers who exposed the Catch And Release policies that allowed illegal alien and D.C. sniper Lee Malvo to remain the country, and a column on the media whitewash of the black-on-white Wichita Kansas massacre in the fall of 2002.
When I launched my own eponymous blog in 2004, VDARE.com was on my original blogroll must-read links and remained there to the chagrin of the SPLC and Conservatism Inc. There are too many indispensable contributors to mention, but I’ve been a longtime fan of Brenda Walker, Juan Mann, Joe Guzzardi, Allan Wall, James Kirkpatrick, John Derbyshire, Federale, and Washington Watcher. I rely on the site to get unparalleled news, commentary, on the ground reports, data, and insider scoops all focused on the National Question that no one else dares publish.
I will be forever indebted to Peter for his generous review of Invasion and friendship over the years. We tag-teamed for a memorable debate against Frank Sharry and his ilk in New York City at some hoity-toity donor-class event in 2002.
17 years later, Peter and Lydia were with me to unwind after my CPAC speech calling out Conservatism Inc. to its bloated, traitorous face – two decades in the making. Thank you, Peter, for your patience and good cheer throughout.
VDARE.com is more important than ever as it turns 20 because a vigorous new generation of twenty-somethings is rising in revolt against Conservatism Inc and Open Borders Inc. Your impact can be seen as young nationalists echo exactly the principles that undergird VDARE.com: America is a real homeland, not just a credal proposition.


vdare--2020-12-19--Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner  Actually Has a Special Attorney Dedicated to Keeping Illegals in Phil

Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner  Actually Has a Special Attorney Dedicated to Keeping Illegals in Philly

20 years ago , a young left-wing protestor from Colorado currently going as `` Caleb U. Arnold '' ( preferred pronouns are `` they '' and `` their '' ) travels to Philadelphia to protest the RNC convention .
`` They '' are arrested , and stepping in gallantly to represent `` them '' is Larry Krasner , who 's now DA .
Fast forward 18 years , and Krasner appoints `` them '' to the made-up position of `` Immigration Counsel . ''
What Krasner wants to do is frame—or drop—charges that put illegal aliens at risk of deportation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the point person for this , presumably at taxpayer expense .
Normal Americans , of course , might think it 's perfectly reasonable to deport someone who had the gall to break into the country and then commit crimes on top of that .
Come January 21 , it could get much worse .
Now FAIR is trying to get records on the details of this outrage .
See the Pennsylvania Public Records Request here .
They 're asking for , among other things : Patriots should n't forget that America 's freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national level , and many states have their own ) are a powerful weapon for getting information on the dirty deeds of the government .

Earlier: Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner's Gun Violence Counselor Shoots Male Prostitute
Here's a heartwarming tale from the Soros DA Files:
20 years ago, a young left-wing protestor from Colorado currently going as "Caleb U. Arnold" (preferred pronouns are "they" and "their") travels to Philadelphia to protest the RNC convention.
"They" are arrested, and stepping in gallantly to represent "them" is Larry Krasner, who's now DA.
Fast forward 18 years, and Krasner appoints "them" to the made-up position of "Immigration Counsel."
DA Larry Krasner Hires Staffer to Protect Immigrants’ Rights Among other things, Krasner said the new position will prevent deportation or other "collateral consequences" that threaten immigrants accused of minor crimes. By Claire Sasko, Phillymag.com, January 25, 2018,
What Krasner wants to do is frame—or drop—charges that put illegal aliens at risk of deportation.
"Caleb U. Arnold" is the point person for this, presumably at taxpayer expense.
Normal Americans, of course, might think it's perfectly reasonable to deport someone who had the gall to break into the country and then commit crimes on top of that.
Not Krasner.
Come January 21, it could get much worse.
Now FAIR is trying to get records on the details of this outrage.
See the Pennsylvania Public Records Request here.
They're asking for, among other things:
Patriots shouldn't forget that America's freedom of information laws (FOIA at the national level, and many states have their own) are a powerful weapon for getting information on the dirty deeds of the government.


vdare--2020-12-19--ATLANTIC: Women and BIPOC Scientists Fail to Contribute Their Share During Covid Fight

Earlier : NATURE Magazine : Coronavirus Crisis Will Cause Science to Concentrate on the Competent Rather Than the Diverse , and That 's BAD and ( in May ) Should n't They Just Make the Movie About How Kizzmekia Corbett Will Invent the Vaccine Right Now ?
How Science Beat the Virus And what it lost in the process This article was published online on December 14 , 2020 .
1. in fall of 2019 , exactly zero scientists were studying COVID‑19 , because no one knew the disease existed .
The coronavirus that causes it , SARS‑CoV‑2 , had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been neither identified nor named .
But by the end of March 2020 , it had spread to more than 170 countries , sickened more than 750,000 people , and triggered the biggest pivot in the history of modern science .
Thousands of researchers dropped whatever intellectual puzzles had previously consumed their curiosity and began working on the pandemic instead .
In mere months , science became thoroughly COVID-ized .
As of this writing , the biomedical library PubMed lists more than 74,000 COVID-related scientific papers—more than twice as many as there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dengue , or other diseases that have plagued humanity for centuries .
… But the COVID‑19 pivot has also revealed the all-too-human frailties of the scientific enterprise .
… Racial and gender inequalities in the scientific field widened .
… Among scientists , as in other fields , women do more child care , domestic work , and teaching than men , and are more often asked for emotional support by their students .
These burdens increased as the pandemic took hold , leaving women scientists “ less able to commit their time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study , and less able to start a whole new research project , ” says Molly M. King , a sociologist at Santa Clara University .
Women ’ s research hours fell by nine percentage points more than did men ’ s because of the pressures of COVID‑19 .
And when COVID‑19 created new opportunities , men grabbed them more quickly .
In the spring , the proportion of papers with women as first authors fell almost 44 percent in the preprint repository medRxiv , relative to 2019 .
And published COVID‑19 papers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authors compared with papers from the same journals in the previous year .
Men led more than 80 percent of national COVID‑19 task forces in 87 countries .
Male scientists were quoted four times as frequently as female scientists in American news stories about the pandemic .
American scientists of color also found it harder to pivot than their white peers , because of unique challenges that sapped their time and energy .
Black , Latino , and Indigenous scientists were most likely to have lost loved ones , adding mourning to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too , after the killings of Breonna Taylor , George Floyd , Ahmaud Arbery , and others .
They often faced questions from relatives who were mistrustful of the medical system , or were experiencing discriminatory care .
They were suddenly tasked with helping their predominantly white institutions fight racism .
Neil Lewis Jr. at Cornell , who studies racial health disparities , told me that many psychologists had long deemed his work irrelevant .
“ All of a sudden my inbox is drowning , ” he said , while some of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has died .
Science suffers from the so-called Matthew effect , whereby small successes snowball into ever greater advantages , irrespective of merit .
Similarly , early hindrances linger .
Young researchers who could not pivot because they were too busy caring or grieving for others might suffer lasting consequences from an unproductive year .
COVID‑19 “ has really put the clock back in terms of closing the gap for women and underrepresented minorities , ” Yale ’ s Akiko Iwasaki says .
“ Once we ’ re over the pandemic , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again .
”

Earlier: NATURE Magazine: Coronavirus Crisis Will Cause Science to Concentrate on the Competent Rather Than the Diverse, and That's BAD and (in May) Shouldn't They Just Make the Movie About How Kizzmekia Corbett Will Invent the Vaccine Right Now?
From The Atlantic:
How Science Beat the Virus
And what it lost in the process
Story by Ed Yong
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2021 ISSUE
This article was published online on December 14, 2020.
1.
in fall of 2019, exactly zero scientists were studying COVID‑19, because no one knew the disease existed. The coronavirus that causes it, SARS‑CoV‑2, had only recently jumped into humans and had been neither identified nor named. But by the end of March 2020, it had spread to more than 170 countries, sickened more than 750,000 people, and triggered the biggest pivot in the history of modern science. Thousands of researchers dropped whatever intellectual puzzles had previously consumed their curiosity and began working on the pandemic instead. In mere months, science became thoroughly COVID-ized.
As of this writing, the biomedical library PubMed lists more than 74,000 COVID-related scientific papers—more than twice as many as there are about polio, measles, cholera, dengue, or other diseases that have plagued humanity for centuries. …
But the COVID‑19 pivot has also revealed the all-too-human frailties of the scientific enterprise. … Racial and gender inequalities in the scientific field widened. …
Among scientists, as in other fields, women do more child care, domestic work, and teaching than men, and are more often asked for emotional support by their students. These burdens increased as the pandemic took hold, leaving women scientists “less able to commit their time to learning about a new area of study, and less able to start a whole new research project,” says Molly M. King, a sociologist at Santa Clara University. Women’s research hours fell by nine percentage points more than did men’s because of the pressures of COVID‑19. And when COVID‑19 created new opportunities, men grabbed them more quickly. In the spring, the proportion of papers with women as first authors fell almost 44 percent in the preprint repository medRxiv, relative to 2019. And published COVID‑19 papers had 19 percent fewer women as first authors compared with papers from the same journals in the previous year. Men led more than 80 percent of national COVID‑19 task forces in 87 countries. Male scientists were quoted four times as frequently as female scientists in American news stories about the pandemic.
American scientists of color also found it harder to pivot than their white peers, because of unique challenges that sapped their time and energy. Black, Latino, and Indigenous scientists were most likely to have lost loved ones, adding mourning to their list of duties. Many grieved, too, after the killings of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and others. They often faced questions from relatives who were mistrustful of the medical system, or were experiencing discriminatory care. They were suddenly tasked with helping their predominantly white institutions fight racism. Neil Lewis Jr. at Cornell, who studies racial health disparities, told me that many psychologists had long deemed his work irrelevant. “All of a sudden my inbox is drowning,” he said, while some of his own relatives have become ill and one has died.
Science suffers from the so-called Matthew effect, whereby small successes snowball into ever greater advantages, irrespective of merit. Similarly, early hindrances linger. Young researchers who could not pivot because they were too busy caring or grieving for others might suffer lasting consequences from an unproductive year. COVID‑19 “has really put the clock back in terms of closing the gap for women and underrepresented minorities,” Yale’s Akiko Iwasaki says. “Once we’re over the pandemic, we’ll need to fix it all again.”