theamericanconservative--2020-07-28--Considering My Nazi Reparations

Considering My Nazi Reparations

Ernst and Julinka ( Van Buren ) fled Germany for New York before WWII .
Ernst 's father and extended family were killed in a concentration camp in Poland .
( Courtesy Peter Van Buren ) My great grandfather was a slave .
He died on May 7 , 1943 alongside most of his loved ones in the Sobibor concentration camp , about 120 miles from Warsaw .
I ’ ve been thinking a lot about reparations .
One son and his family escaped years earlier to America .
Ernst and Julinka arrived with no special skills , and proved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marriage falling apart not long after arrival in New York .
About the best we can say is they brought their five-year-old son with them .
My father .
He naturalized as a teen , making me the first native born American in the family and later , the first to get an advanced degree .
Immigrants , we get the job done , right ?
Through a happenstance discussion with a former German diplomat , I learned of a technical change in German law dealing with the loss of citizenship under Nazi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ German citizen by birth , transmitted through my father .
The adjudication process is complex and success not assured , but as the diplomat said , “ We can not undo the past .
We can not raise the dead .
But we can offer you this , citizenship , something we hold dear.
” A reparation .
Nazi reparations , with well over $ 60 billion paid out , are the gold standard , and fall into three broad categories .
The first leg of reparation was early financial support to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germany was supplying over 87 percent of Israel ’ s state revenue .
The second leg is direct payments to survivors .
There are multiple programs , established through the ongoing NGO-like Claims Conference , for payments to elderly survivors , those needing medical care , payments to children taken from their parents , payments to victims of medical experiments , claims for looted art , and more .
The payments vary , but are modest , thousands of dollars , symbolic not life-changing .
As one head of the Claims Conference said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the money .
It was always about recognition.
” These payments are directed at those who directly suffered .
Though payments continue for the life of the victim , they are not given to later generations ( though in some cases surviving spouses continue to be paid ) .
I have no claim to Holocaust money .
Reparations went to the living individuals harmed , not to the generations removed .
My extended family got nothing ; they were all dead .
The final leg of German reparations is what might be called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of being extended German citizenship makes for a small part of all that .
Germany ’ s postwar Constitution outlawed hate symbols , specifically the swastika .
In 1952 Germany officially apologized for Nazi crimes .
The explicit story of WWII is taught in schools , and memorials and museums expose the horrors of the Third Reich .
Modern Germans know their history .
Another important element of Nazi reparations is much of the money comes from direct perpetrators of the crimes .
French and Swiss banks had held funds deposited by murdered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tried to keep the money , but were instead forced to pay it into reparation accounts .
Life insurance companies which refused to pay beneficiaries on the specious ground that premiums were not kept current while policyholders were in concentration camps were made to contribute .
Hundreds of German and Austrian companies that employed slave laborers paid up .
It was an uneven process ; in 1999 , class action lawsuits against slave users Deutsche Bank , Siemens , BMW , Volkswagen , and Opel failed , though the German government and industrial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The amounts were small , in the thousands of dollars .
And so we come to America , where BLM and others are demanding reparations for slavery .
Unlike the Nazi system , as well as the reparations the U.S. paid to Japanese-American internees ( payments went to survivors and a very limited number of descendants ) and to victims of horrid syphilis experiments at Tuskegee University ( payments went to survivors , spouses , and children ) , financial reparations are envisioned on a broad scale , as wide as paying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ African Americans now living in America .
The majority who believe they are descendants of slaves do so based on family lore ; how many can documentarily connect back 400 years to a slave without a last name ?
The scale of slavery reparations and the amount of time passed since enslavement also means unlike Germany , 100 percent of America ’ s reparations would be paid out of general Federal taxes collected from , among others , descendants of slaves themselves .
Does anything say “ white supremacy ” clearer than forcing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own reparations ?
For the rest of us fully unconnected to slavery , the money taken has about as much meaning as a spoonful of hot spit .
Divided among so many , it is like figuring how many inches of interstate highway your taxes paid for .
Modern reparations are as separated from the reality of ownership and of being owned as four centuries will allow .
If reparations are symbolic , these would be near meaningless .
There isn ’ t space here to discuss the reparations inherent in the Civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trillions spent , as well as existing racial preferences in federal contracting , affirmative action , job quotas , and educational admissions .
Never mind the massive practical problems of raising additional reparations money and creating a distribution system for payments .
Nor is there room to enlarge the story as it needs to be and ask what amends are owed by Arab , African , and European slavers , never mind the European textile manufacturers who profited mightily from cheap cotton .
Few are ready to talk about the Portuguese slave trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fields of the Caribbean and South America to profit in part American sugar refiners and rum makers .
Less than five percent of African slaves went to the U.S. Slavery was a massive interconnected global system .
In reality reparations for slavery will need to be of the atonal kind we see in Germany .
Much of this is already hard on the ground .
We have the National Museum of African American History and Culture on the National Mall .
America ’ s commitment to free speech makes it unlikely hate symbols @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will ever be banned outright ( the Supreme Court consistently refuses to create a “ hate speech ” carve out in the 1A ) but clearly a cultural corner has been turned which will see those symbols have less and less place in mainstream society .
An apology is overdue ; just words of course , but words are sometimes all we have .
President Reagan apologized to Japanese-American internees in 1988 .
Bill Clinton in 1997 apologized to the people affected by government medical experiments conducted at Tuskegee University in the 1930s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , North Carolina , and Virginia , have formally apologized for slavery , during the Obama administration the House and Senate passed bipartisan resolutions of apology but failed to reconcile the two versions .
Obama , a coward when courage called , chose not to apologize without that political support .
So the question is : does BLM want to move forward or remain in the past ?
Financial reparations at this point accomplish nothing .
They do not compensate the victims , they do not punish the slavers , they would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an almost shallow act .
The form reparations must take , atonement , is partially underway and will someday include a formal apology .
The problem is that such actions are meant to provide closure , an endpoint to allow a new starting point .
One never forgets the past , the dead are always with us and we build memorials and tell their stories to ensure that , but we accept some sort of ending to empower the living to shoulder the responsibility of going on .
Will BLM do that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in ensuring slavery remains a scab to be picked as necessary , crisscrossing the same lines like a figure skater , to be blamed for everything from COVID deaths to low SAT scores , to forever remain a collar ?
Are people ready to stop being victims , responsibility of their fate outside their control ?
Reparations carries with it an agreement to heal ; the line is never forget , not never forgive .
It will be a long time before I hear whether I qualify for German citizenship .
Nothing will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , nothing will displace the dark spaces inside my complex father , but I am anxious to see what does change if I become a German citizen .
So I ’ ve been thinking a lot about reparations .
Peter Van Buren , a 24-year State Department veteran , is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People , Hooper ’ s War : A Novel of WWII Japan , and Ghosts of Tom Joad : A Story @ @ @ @ @

My great grandfather was a slave. He died on May 7, 1943 alongside most of his loved ones in the Sobibor concentration camp, about 120 miles from Warsaw. I’ve been thinking a lot about reparations.
One son and his family escaped years earlier to America. Ernst and Julinka arrived with no special skills, and proved to be imperfect people, with their marriage falling apart not long after arrival in New York. About the best we can say is they brought their five-year-old son with them. My father. He naturalized as a teen, making me the first native born American in the family and later, the first to get an advanced degree. Immigrants, we get the job done, right?
Through a happenstance discussion with a former German diplomat, I learned of a technical change in German law dealing with the loss of citizenship under Nazi persecution that may mean I am a German citizen by birth, transmitted through my father. The adjudication process is complex and success not assured, but as the diplomat said, “We cannot undo the past. We cannot raise the dead. But we can offer you this, citizenship, something we hold dear.” A reparation.
Nazi reparations, with well over $60 billion paid out, are the gold standard, and fall into three broad categories.
The first leg of reparation was early financial support to Israel, now ended. By 1956 Germany was supplying over 87 percent of Israel’s state revenue.
The second leg is direct payments to survivors. There are multiple programs, established through the ongoing NGO-like Claims Conference, for payments to elderly survivors, those needing medical care, payments to children taken from their parents, payments to victims of medical experiments, claims for looted art, and more. The payments vary, but are modest, thousands of dollars, symbolic not life-changing. As one head of the Claims Conference said, “It has never been about the money. It was always about recognition.”
These payments are directed at those who directly suffered. Though payments continue for the life of the victim, they are not given to later generations (though in some cases surviving spouses continue to be paid). I have no claim to Holocaust money. Reparations went to the living individuals harmed, not to the generations removed. My extended family got nothing; they were all dead.
The final leg of German reparations is what might be called atonement. For me, the possibility of being extended German citizenship makes for a small part of all that. Germany’s postwar Constitution outlawed hate symbols, specifically the swastika. In 1952 Germany officially apologized for Nazi crimes. The explicit story of WWII is taught in schools, and memorials and museums expose the horrors of the Third Reich. Modern Germans know their history.
Another important element of Nazi reparations is much of the money comes from direct perpetrators of the crimes. French and Swiss banks had held funds deposited by murdered Jews. After the war the banks tried to keep the money, but were instead forced to pay it into reparation accounts. Life insurance companies which refused to pay beneficiaries on the specious ground that premiums were not kept current while policyholders were in concentration camps were made to contribute.
Hundreds of German and Austrian companies that employed slave laborers paid up. It was an uneven process; in 1999, class action lawsuits against slave users Deutsche Bank, Siemens, BMW, Volkswagen, and Opel failed, though the German government and industrial groups agreed separately to compensate former slaves. The amounts were small, in the thousands of dollars.
And so we come to America, where BLM and others are demanding reparations for slavery. Unlike the Nazi system, as well as the reparations the U.S. paid to Japanese-American internees (payments went to survivors and a very limited number of descendants) and to victims of horrid syphilis experiments at Tuskegee University (payments went to survivors, spouses, and children), financial reparations are envisioned on a broad scale, as wide as paying something to most of the 37 million African Americans now living in America. The majority who believe they are descendants of slaves do so based on family lore; how many can documentarily connect back 400 years to a slave without a last name?
The scale of slavery reparations and the amount of time passed since enslavement also means unlike Germany, 100 percent of America’s reparations would be paid out of general Federal taxes collected from, among others, descendants of slaves themselves. Does anything say “white supremacy” clearer than forcing modern African Americans to pay for their own reparations? For the rest of us fully unconnected to slavery, the money taken has about as much meaning as a spoonful of hot spit. Divided among so many, it is like figuring how many inches of interstate highway your taxes paid for. Modern reparations are as separated from the reality of ownership and of being owned as four centuries will allow. If reparations are symbolic, these would be near meaningless.
There isn’t space here to discuss the reparations inherent in the Civil Rights Acts and the Great Society, trillions spent, as well as existing racial preferences in federal contracting, affirmative action, job quotas, and educational admissions. Never mind the massive practical problems of raising additional reparations money and creating a distribution system for payments. Nor is there room to enlarge the story as it needs to be and ask what amends are owed by Arab, African, and European slavers, never mind the European textile manufacturers who profited mightily from cheap cotton. Few are ready to talk about the Portuguese slave trade which sent forced laborers into the cane fields of the Caribbean and South America to profit in part American sugar refiners and rum makers. Less than five percent of African slaves went to the U.S. Slavery was a massive interconnected global system.
In reality reparations for slavery will need to be of the atonal kind we see in Germany. Much of this is already hard on the ground. We have the National Museum of African American History and Culture on the National Mall. America’s commitment to free speech makes it unlikely hate symbols, such as the Confederate flag, will ever be banned outright (the Supreme Court consistently refuses to create a “hate speech” carve out in the 1A) but clearly a cultural corner has been turned which will see those symbols have less and less place in mainstream society.
An apology is overdue; just words of course, but words are sometimes all we have. President Reagan apologized to Japanese-American internees in 1988. Bill Clinton in 1997 apologized to the people affected by government medical experiments conducted at Tuskegee University in the 1930s. Though nine states, including Alabama, North Carolina, and Virginia, have formally apologized for slavery, during the Obama administration the House and Senate passed bipartisan resolutions of apology but failed to reconcile the two versions. Obama, a coward when courage called, chose not to apologize without that political support.
So the question is: does BLM want to move forward or remain in the past? Financial reparations at this point accomplish nothing. They do not compensate the victims, they do not punish the slavers, they would be in any amount too little too late, an almost shallow act. The form reparations must take, atonement, is partially underway and will someday include a formal apology. The problem is that such actions are meant to provide closure, an endpoint to allow a new starting point. One never forgets the past, the dead are always with us and we build memorials and tell their stories to ensure that, but we accept some sort of ending to empower the living to shoulder the responsibility of going on.
Will BLM do that, or is there still political fodder in ensuring slavery remains a scab to be picked as necessary, crisscrossing the same lines like a figure skater, to be blamed for everything from COVID deaths to low SAT scores, to forever remain a collar? Are people ready to stop being victims, responsibility of their fate outside their control? Reparations carries with it an agreement to heal; the line is never forget, not never forgive.
It will be a long time before I hear whether I qualify for German citizenship. Nothing will replace an extended family I will never know, nothing will displace the dark spaces inside my complex father, but I am anxious to see what does change if I become a German citizen. So I’ve been thinking a lot about reparations.
Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People, Hooper’s War: A Novel of WWII Japan, and Ghosts of Tom Joad: A Story of the 99 Percent.


theamericanconservative--2020-07-28--American ‘Stormtroopers’ — A Bright Shining Lie

Enough is enough , law enforcement needs to take a stand against the rioters .
NEW YORK , NY - JULY 02 : New York City Police Academy cadets attend their graduation ceremony at the Barclays Center on July 2 , 2013 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City .
( Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images ) With the Mark O. Hatfield United States Courthouse under nightly siege from violent radicals , and Portland ’ s police hard-pressed to protect it , President Trump sent in federal agents to secure the building .
The reaction from Speaker of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of stormtroopers under the guise of law and order is a tactic that is not appropriate to our country in any way.
” Majority Whip James Clyburn endorsed the speaker ’ s equating of the U.S. law enforcement officers to Ernst Rohm ’ s SA thugs being deployed to do the dirty work of Adolph Hitler .
“ Nobody asked the federal government to come into Portland .
Nobody asked them to come to Seattle , ” ranted Clyburn .
“ This is something that ’ s made up of whole cloth by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in stormtroopers to incite the people.
” Clyburn had earlier compared the U.S. officers sent to Portland to Heinrich Himmler ’ s Nazi secret police : “ This president and this attorney general seem to be doing everything they possibly can to impose Gestapo activities on local communities , and this is what I ’ ve been warning about for a long time.
” His Gestapo comparison recalls Sen. Abe Ribicoff ’ s denunciation of the Chicago police of Mayor Richard J. Daley during the 1968 Democratic National Convention , after police clashed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With George McGovern , we wouldn ’ t have Gestapo tactics in the streets of Chicago !
” What do the men and women of the FBI , DEA , ICE , DHS , CBP and the U.S .
Marshals Service think of congressional leaders who equate them with Nazi stormtroopers and the Gestapo ?
Outraged that Trump sent in federal agents to protect a building they had under siege for weeks , the Portland mob came out in even greater numbers and rioted through the weekend .
Saturday night , there were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oakland , Austin , Richmond , and other cities .
Consider the depth of hatred of Trump that would cause leaders of the Democratic Party to compare U.S. law enforcement to Nazis .
Still , to date , no apologies have been heard .
Yet , as police are again being cursed and showered with debris , it is hard to see how this country reunites , and around what , no matter which party prevails in November .
In addition to the reigniting of protests and riots in urban centers there has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ defund the police , ” a surge in violent crime .
Last week , Trump offered some staggering statistics : “ In New York City , over 300 people were shot in the last month alone , a 277 … percent increase over the same period of a year ago .
Murders this year have spiked 27 percent in Philadelphia and 94 percent in Minneapolis compared to the same period in 2019 .
“ Perhaps no citizens have suffered more from the menace of violent crime than the wonderful people of Chicago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ murdered in the city this year , a roughly 50 percent increase over last year .
More than 1,900 people have been shot .
These are numbers that aren ’ t even to be believed.
” As Black Lives Matter protests revive , ostensibly for greater justice for black folks , a vastly disproportionate number of victims of these urban shootings and killings are black , as are a disproportionate number of the criminals doing the shooting and killing .
The New York Times suggests that a new “ Silent Majority ” of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Silent Majority of 1969 , backs the protesters and their causes .
A dissent : While the country was disgusted and outraged at George Floyd ’ s death from that cop kneeling on his neck , and supported the protests and the calls for police reform , two months of leftist rampages have taken their toll .
When the protests turned into riots , when the looting and arson began , when the statues began to be pulled down , when the rampages went on and on for weeks and months after Floyd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wane .
And it is dissipating quickly .
The country is not going to sit still for three more months of this .
At some point soon , America is going to say : Enough is enough .
Moreover , Trump has turned a permanent presidential spotlight on a real outrage : The shootings and killings that go on year in and year out , and are now escalating , especially in poor black neighborhoods of major cities , and are accepted as normal by the same liberal Democrats who have misruled those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this issue on the table for the indefinite future .
And the ferocity of the liberal reaction testifies to the validity of the issue and the terror of the left that a consistent stand for law and order — and with the cops who guarantee it against the mobs that threaten it — might turn the tide in Middle America back to where it naturally resides .
The majority of Americans believe , and rightly so , that this is a good country .
And they will eventually tune out radicals who visibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on offer nothing but their own inchoate rage .
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “ Nixon ’ s White House Wars : The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever .
”

With the Mark O. Hatfield United States Courthouse under nightly siege from violent radicals, and Portland’s police hard-pressed to protect it, President Trump sent in federal agents to secure the building.
The reaction from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi:
“The use of stormtroopers under the guise of law and order is a tactic that is not appropriate to our country in any way.”
Majority Whip James Clyburn endorsed the speaker’s equating of the U.S. law enforcement officers to Ernst Rohm’s SA thugs being deployed to do the dirty work of Adolph Hitler.
“Nobody asked the federal government to come into Portland. Nobody asked them to come to Seattle,” ranted Clyburn. “This is something that’s made up of whole cloth by this administration as an excuse for sending in stormtroopers to incite the people.”
Clyburn had earlier compared the U.S. officers sent to Portland to Heinrich Himmler’s Nazi secret police: “This president and this attorney general seem to be doing everything they possibly can to impose Gestapo activities on local communities, and this is what I’ve been warning about for a long time.”
His Gestapo comparison recalls Sen. Abe Ribicoff’s denunciation of the Chicago police of Mayor Richard J. Daley during the 1968 Democratic National Convention, after police clashed with radicals in Grant Park: “With George McGovern, we wouldn’t have Gestapo tactics in the streets of Chicago!”
What do the men and women of the FBI, DEA, ICE, DHS, CBP and the U.S. Marshals Service think of congressional leaders who equate them with Nazi stormtroopers and the Gestapo?
Outraged that Trump sent in federal agents to protect a building they had under siege for weeks, the Portland mob came out in even greater numbers and rioted through the weekend. Saturday night, there were solidarity riots with Portland in Seattle, Oakland, Austin, Richmond, and other cities.
Consider the depth of hatred of Trump that would cause leaders of the Democratic Party to compare U.S. law enforcement to Nazis.
Still, to date, no apologies have been heard.
Yet, as police are again being cursed and showered with debris, it is hard to see how this country reunites, and around what, no matter which party prevails in November.
In addition to the reigniting of protests and riots in urban centers there has come, in tandem with demands to “defund the police,” a surge in violent crime. Last week, Trump offered some staggering statistics:
“In New York City, over 300 people were shot in the last month alone, a 277 … percent increase over the same period of a year ago. Murders this year have spiked 27 percent in Philadelphia and 94 percent in Minneapolis compared to the same period in 2019.
“Perhaps no citizens have suffered more from the menace of violent crime than the wonderful people of Chicago … At least 414 people have been murdered in the city this year, a roughly 50 percent increase over last year. More than 1,900 people have been shot. These are numbers that aren’t even to be believed.”
As Black Lives Matter protests revive, ostensibly for greater justice for black folks, a vastly disproportionate number of victims of these urban shootings and killings are black, as are a disproportionate number of the criminals doing the shooting and killing.
The New York Times suggests that a new “Silent Majority” of 2020, unlike Richard Nixon’s Silent Majority of 1969, backs the protesters and their causes.
A dissent: While the country was disgusted and outraged at George Floyd’s death from that cop kneeling on his neck, and supported the protests and the calls for police reform, two months of leftist rampages have taken their toll.
When the protests turned into riots, when the looting and arson began, when the statues began to be pulled down, when the rampages went on and on for weeks and months after Floyd’s death, support began to wane. And it is dissipating quickly.
The country is not going to sit still for three more months of this. At some point soon, America is going to say: Enough is enough.
Moreover, Trump has turned a permanent presidential spotlight on a real outrage: The shootings and killings that go on year in and year out, and are now escalating, especially in poor black neighborhoods of major cities, and are accepted as normal by the same liberal Democrats who have misruled those cities for decades.
Trump has put this issue on the table for the indefinite future. And the ferocity of the liberal reaction testifies to the validity of the issue and the terror of the left that a consistent stand for law and order — and with the cops who guarantee it against the mobs that threaten it — might turn the tide in Middle America back to where it naturally resides.
The majority of Americans believe, and rightly so, that this is a good country. And they will eventually tune out radicals who visibly hate its heroes and history and have on offer nothing but their own inchoate rage.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”


theamericanconservative--2020-07-29--Go Big on COVID Relief, or Get Thrown Out of Power

WASHINGTON , DC - JULY 28 : Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) arrives at the Senate Republican policy luncheon in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill July 28 , 2020 in Washington , DC .
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows continue to lead the Trump administration 's coronavirus economic stimulus negotiations on Capitol Hill .
( Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images ) It would be a fitting denouement for the Republican Party ’ s brief flirtation with populism to find itself chained to a bunch of supply-side dinosaurs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months by an American people whose demands for relief they failed , out of a sense of free-market purism , to adequately respond to .
That ’ s the direction we ’ re heading at the moment .
The $ 600 unemployment insurance boost , which Republicans have claimed creates a situation in which people are being paid more not to work than to work , expires at the end of the month , and the federal eviction moratorium has already expired .
There is still a lot of distance between the Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trillion of distance , in fact—as well as substantial division within both Mitch McConnell ’ s caucus and the administration itself , with Steve Mnuchin favoring another big package without a payroll tax cut , while some of the president ’ s economic advisors suggested refusing to pass a package without one .
McConnell is skeptical something can be passed before the unemployment boost runs out , raising the possibility of , according to one estimate , millions of renters being evicted three months before an election .
In reality , the UI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eviction moratorium .
The latter doesn ’ t apply to most renters in the United States , only ones in federal programs or who live in units with federally-backed mortgages .
But from the standpoint of politics , it doesn ’ t really matter .
Unless something changes , this is a recipe for the GOP losing both the White House and Senate .
Senators Cruz , Paul , and other critics of the Republican bill would do well to consider the fate of small-government priorities in a Biden administration with unified control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is often good politics for conservatives , but with your own party in the White House and an unemployment rate of 14.8 , 13 , and 10.9 percent in Michigan , Pennsylvania , and Ohio respectively , it ’ s a lot less likely to work .
The phrase “ zombie Reaganism ” gets thrown around a lot these days , but it ’ s hard to think of a better example than people who reach for a welfare cliff-style argument to argue against remediating hardship caused by the government throwing millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bigger problem requiring the attention of legislators is the millions of people who can ’ t go back to work instead of the much smaller number who decline to .
As for the UI boost , fix it , if it indeed needs to be fixed , but for heaven ’ s sake don ’ t go on television and talk about it .
One also wonders if there is a bit of kayfabe going on here , in stories like this ABC news article from two months ago about a Maryland PPE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , chiseling employees are taking advantage of the system : “ It ’ s been very difficult to get some people to return to work , ” Livesay , the vice president of operations for Maryland Thermoform Corporation , told ABC News .
“ In some cases , depending on what their compensation was , they make more money with unemployment and the federal stipend of $ 600 a week.
” “ There are significant unintended consequences , ” Livesay , who is also advising Maryland Gov .
Larry Hogan on reopening the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PPP .
“ I ’ m hoping that they give us some extra time to get up to full staff .
We ’ re interviewing three to five people a day for jobs we have open , and we can ’ t even get them to show up for interviews.
” Legally , if someone is offered reemployment and turns it down , they ’ re likely to lose their unemployment insurance .
But employers like Livesay are still finding it challenging to bring people back to work because of an unexpected decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make more money on unemployment ?
In other words , the problem of people declining to go back to their old jobs doesn ’ t really exist .
It ’ s a notional ethical quandary for executives like this guy who seems to think , based on everything else he ’ s said , that the answer is yes , he should rehire them .
And if they decline , they are supposed to lose the benefit .
If that ’ s not being enforced , then perhaps it should be , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk about incentive structures , conservatives talk about enforcing the law .
In addition to the worry that we ’ re being too generous to the millions of people the government has thrown out of work , what else is in the Senate ’ s next COVID relief package ?
According to Axios , billions for schools , just in time for them to start teaching the 1619 Project in the fall , and liability protection to immunize corporations from COVID-related lawsuits , and another round of paycheck protection loans .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump to win the messaging war over COVID relief , especially given the now widely-broadcast fears among some talking-heads that it ’ s being profligate .
The administration needs to telegraph grave concern and readiness to spend to get the country back on track .
Republicans should absolutely deny aid to states and localities , and that will not be a hard fight to win : Trump just needs to hammer on the fact that for the last two months , local and state politicians were perfectly happy to let their downtowns burn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why should the feds bail them out after that ?
Even better , if the administration suggested a plan to take the opportunity of a lull in commerce to employ people rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure , something McConnell himself is unwilling to consider .
If Dems still reject it any that point , it will be clear to everyone that they view COVID relief as a means to direct money to their clients , not real economic recovery .
Running against a do-nothing Congress in the midst of a crisis , as Pat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well for Truman .
The key is getting Trump on-message about this stuff and getting him to talk about it daily , which is , I think we can say now , by no means a sure thing .

It would be a fitting denouement for the Republican Party’s brief flirtation with populism to find itself chained to a bunch of supply-side dinosaurs and thrown out of office in five months by an American people whose demands for relief they failed, out of a sense of free-market purism, to adequately respond to. That’s the direction we’re heading at the moment.
The $600 unemployment insurance boost, which Republicans have claimed creates a situation in which people are being paid more not to work than to work, expires at the end of the month, and the federal eviction moratorium has already expired. There is still a lot of distance between the Republican Senate and the Democratic House—$2 trillion of distance, in fact—as well as substantial division within both Mitch McConnell’s caucus and the administration itself, with Steve Mnuchin favoring another big package without a payroll tax cut, while some of the president’s economic advisors suggested refusing to pass a package without one. McConnell is skeptical something can be passed before the unemployment boost runs out, raising the possibility of, according to one estimate, millions of renters being evicted three months before an election.
In reality, the UI boost is much more important than the eviction moratorium. The latter doesn’t apply to most renters in the United States, only ones in federal programs or who live in units with federally-backed mortgages. But from the standpoint of politics, it doesn’t really matter.
Unless something changes, this is a recipe for the GOP losing both the White House and Senate. Senators Cruz, Paul, and other critics of the Republican bill would do well to consider the fate of small-government priorities in a Biden administration with unified control of Congress. Criticizing a spendthrift government is often good politics for conservatives, but with your own party in the White House and an unemployment rate of 14.8, 13, and 10.9 percent in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio respectively, it’s a lot less likely to work.
The phrase “zombie Reaganism” gets thrown around a lot these days, but it’s hard to think of a better example than people who reach for a welfare cliff-style argument to argue against remediating hardship caused by the government throwing millions of people out of work. Surely the bigger problem requiring the attention of legislators is the millions of people who can’t go back to work instead of the much smaller number who decline to. As for the UI boost, fix it, if it indeed needs to be fixed, but for heaven’s sake don’t go on television and talk about it.
One also wonders if there is a bit of kayfabe going on here, in stories like this ABC news article from two months ago about a Maryland PPE manufacturer who worries about whether his lazy, chiseling employees are taking advantage of the system:
“It’s been very difficult to get some people to return to work,” Livesay, the vice president of operations for Maryland Thermoform Corporation, told ABC News. “In some cases, depending on what their compensation was, they make more money with unemployment and the federal stipend of $600 a week.” “There are significant unintended consequences,” Livesay, who is also advising Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan on reopening the state’s economy, said of PPP. “I’m hoping that they give us some extra time to get up to full staff. We’re interviewing three to five people a day for jobs we have open, and we can’t even get them to show up for interviews.” Legally, if someone is offered reemployment and turns it down, they’re likely to lose their unemployment insurance. But employers like Livesay are still finding it challenging to bring people back to work because of an unexpected decision: Should they rehire workers who stand to make more money on unemployment?
In other words, the problem of people declining to go back to their old jobs doesn’t really exist. It’s a notional ethical quandary for executives like this guy who seems to think, based on everything else he’s said, that the answer is yes, he should rehire them. And if they decline, they are supposed to lose the benefit. If that’s not being enforced, then perhaps it should be, which is a separate problem. Liberals talk about incentive structures, conservatives talk about enforcing the law.
In addition to the worry that we’re being too generous to the millions of people the government has thrown out of work, what else is in the Senate’s next COVID relief package? According to Axios, billions for schools, just in time for them to start teaching the 1619 Project in the fall, and liability protection to immunize corporations from COVID-related lawsuits, and another round of paycheck protection loans.
This is probably not going to be enough for Trump to win the messaging war over COVID relief, especially given the now widely-broadcast fears among some talking-heads that it’s being profligate. The administration needs to telegraph grave concern and readiness to spend to get the country back on track. Republicans should absolutely deny aid to states and localities, and that will not be a hard fight to win: Trump just needs to hammer on the fact that for the last two months, local and state politicians were perfectly happy to let their downtowns burn and let protestors flout quarantine restrictions. Why should the feds bail them out after that? Even better, if the administration suggested a plan to take the opportunity of a lull in commerce to employ people rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, something McConnell himself is unwilling to consider. If Dems still reject it any that point, it will be clear to everyone that they view COVID relief as a means to direct money to their clients, not real economic recovery.
Running against a do-nothing Congress in the midst of a crisis, as Pat Buchanan pointed out recently, worked very well for Truman. The key is getting Trump on-message about this stuff and getting him to talk about it daily, which is, I think we can say now, by no means a sure thing.


theamericanconservative--2020-07-30--Cancelled to Death: The Mike Adams I Knew

“ Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial , ” write the signatories of the now infamous Harper ’ s Letter .
Despite the hysterical reactions it drew , the letter itself could not be more minimal or measured in its call for a check on “ public shaming and ostracism , and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.
” Last week , this warning was made tragically tangible , as friends and family grieved the loss of Mike Adams—conservative columnist , free speech activist , and gadfly professor of criminology at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifelong firearms enthusiast , Adams died by a gunshot wound , now confirmed to be self-inflicted .
Adams had recently stepped down as full tenured professor at the university , under pressure in the wake of his social media comments on COVID and the George Floyd protests .
He was vocally anti-lockdown and encouraged people to “ defy ” North Carolina governor Roy Cooper ’ s strictures .
After pizza and drinks with friends , hemade a tweet referring to North Carolina as a “ slave state , ” concluding “ Massa Cooper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He alsoreferred to BLM rioters as “ thugs.
” UNCW officially condemned the remarks , whileseveral Change.org petitions called for his resignation .
Rather than take the school to court again ( in a repeat of the grueling seven-year-long battle he finally won in 2014 ) , Adams chose to retire with a half-million dollar settlement .
The reactions to his death could not be more polarized .
While friends like David French haveeulogized him as a dedicated teacher and a fierce advocate for constitutional liberty , haters have danced on his grave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played woke bingo with the news , repeatedly attaching modifiers like “ racist , ” “ misogynist , ” “ vile ” —sometimes with the fig leaf of quote marks , sometimes without .
Journalists also engaged in artfully curtailed summations of Adams ’ s controversies .
The NBC News report referred ominously to his “ targeting ” of a Muslim UNCW student with no further details given .
A little more digging would reveal the context : a Facebook post where the student was making plans to attend a Trump rally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not prepared for what I ’ m about to do , ” and requesting prayer that she “ make it out alive.
” Adams did not report the student as a serious threat .
He simply laughed at her .
Meanwhile , UNCW colleagues tweeted out lip-curling reactions .
“ Please do mourn , ” murmured Dr. L. J. Randolph Jr. , “ but don ’ t sugarcoat his rhetoric.
” The sum of Adams ’ s legacy is still , “ racist , homophobic and sexist.
” Professor Tim Gill opined that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ just tried to avoid him , ” recalling his few “ very awkward ” attempts to make friendly small talk .
Gill ’ s point in sharing all this was unclear , but if the intended effect was to paint Adams as a sad object of pity , the actual effect was rather the opposite .
From the outside looking in , Adams may not seem like a typical cancel culture victim .
He had successfully won his old lawsuit , secured tenure , and negotiated an early golden handshake .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mike , who knew his passion for teaching and mentoring students , the timing does not seem so odd .
To some professors , early retirement equals wish-fulfillment .
To Mike , it was undoubtedly a personal and professional blow .
Ever the happy warrior , he always projected a fearless optimism that one could fight back , one could hold out hope of beating the machine .
But his was the optimism of an era that is going away .
When 2020 hit , Mike didn ’ t know what had hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who privately agreed with Mike to support him from the sidelines , in whispers .
Mike soaked up the heat , after all .
This was the guy who turned “ I Hate Mike Adams ” into his own bumper sticker .
This was the guy who would sneak into his own hate rallies and protest himself just for kicks ( a joke , but a reflection of Mike ’ s true dedication to free speech for all , not just for his admirers ) .
So let him do that , people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brash and edgy and hated .
We ’ ll just be over here , golf-clapping .
Mike had no time for golf-clappers .
“ Boy , some people think I appreciate them .
I don ’ t , ” he saysin a 2014 interview , recalling a particular instance of hallway-whispered “ support.
” But he wonders , what if it were different ?
“ What if all of them got up and said no , he ’ s right , it ’ s systematic ?
And even if it were just half @ @ @ @ @ @ @ university that just said ‘ Oh no , this stuff goes on all the time , ’ then they couldn ’ t just target one person .
So that ’ s the lesson I hope will be learned .
Sometimes we ’ re our own worst enemy.
” Mike ’ s words sting now more than ever .
Tragically , towards the end of his life , he privately confided to some that he ’ d come to feel distanced even from fellow conservatives like David French , who served on his defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ French ’ s star rose as he developed his brand of Never Trump commentary , Mike ’ s brand no longer quite fit anywhere .
He was no Trump supporter , as I can attest based on our own correspondence .
At the same time , he was disinclined to expend energy chiding those who were .
And when his social media posts stirred up the hornets ’ nest , like Benjamin Disraeli he never explained , never apologized .
As I write , a couple of friends are taking out their bitterness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so , despite my own frustrations at some of his recent rhetoric .
Hanging Mike ’ s death around his neck is not fair , and it ’ s not the answer .
To me , the whole thing seems all too tragic , all too human .
His eulogy might be dismissed by some as too little , too late , but from where I sit , it reads as the genuine offering of a grieving friend .
French writes poignantly about how for Mike , as for so many jesters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He recalls an especially dark moment from the Wilmington trials when Mike sat for cross-examination and listened to a string of decontextualized column quotes , carefully arranged to frame him as a vicious bigot .
For a moment , French saw the light go out of Mike ’ s eyes , his shoulders drooping under the weight .
“ Mike was not racist , ” French writes .
“ I knew him .
I knew his heart.
” This is no mere blind loyalty .
French speaks as an adoptive father who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s like to be on the receiving end of actual racist abuse .
Mike had many friends who knew the truth .
But one more falling domino in the COVID effect was the cancellation of the Summit worldview workshops where he taught in Colorado Springs every summer .
Zoom was a poor replacement .
As a teacher and a friend , Mike thrived on live connection , embodied give-and-take .
I spent extended time with him during one of these summers and can still recall how his table was always the “ it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all this , I am moved to reflect that there has not been nearly enough acknowledgement of the COVID lockdowns ’ intangible losses—losses of human fellowship , human connection , human touch .
Perhaps Mike ’ s death can inspire deeper reflection on that front as well .
As cancel culture has claimed more than one kind of victim , so too has COVID .
Still , there is no softening the cruel fact that in the end , Mike was his own perpetrator and victim together .
There never can be with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peddling platitudes at the expense of truth .
Nevertheless , in a man ’ s final act of despair , all who drove him to that end are implicated , whether by their speech or their failure to speak .
Let Mike ’ s death be a warning .
Let his life be an inspiration for those who knew him as he was : a flawed but good man , a generous friend , a gentlemanly foe , and a quintessential American conservative .
He is mourned .
He is missed .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Reilly is an American writer and conservative cultural critic .
She has written for Patheos , Quillette , The Critic , and Arc Digital .
In print , she has contributed to the anthology Myth and Meaning in Jordan Peterson ( Lexham Press ) .

“Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial,” write the signatories of the now infamous Harper’s Letter. Despite the hysterical reactions it drew, the letter itself could not be more minimal or measured in its call for a check on “public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.” Last week, this warning was made tragically tangible, as friends and family grieved the loss of Mike Adams—conservative columnist, free speech activist, and gadfly professor of criminology at University of North Carolina Wilmington. A lifelong firearms enthusiast, Adams died by a gunshot wound, now confirmed to be self-inflicted.
Adams had recently stepped down as full tenured professor at the university, under pressure in the wake of his social media comments on COVID and the George Floyd protests. He was vocally anti-lockdown and encouraged people to “defy” North Carolina governor Roy Cooper’s strictures. After pizza and drinks with friends, he made a tweet referring to North Carolina as a “slave state,” concluding “Massa Cooper, let my people go!” He also referred to BLM rioters as “thugs.” UNCW officially condemned the remarks, while several Change.org petitions called for his resignation. Rather than take the school to court again (in a repeat of the grueling seven-year-long battle he finally won in 2014), Adams chose to retire with a half-million dollar settlement.
The reactions to his death could not be more polarized. While friends like David French have eulogized him as a dedicated teacher and a fierce advocate for constitutional liberty, haters have danced on his grave. Mainstream media headlines from NBC News to Buzzfeed played woke bingo with the news, repeatedly attaching modifiers like “racist,” “misogynist,” “vile”—sometimes with the fig leaf of quote marks, sometimes without.
Journalists also engaged in artfully curtailed summations of Adams’s controversies. The NBC News report referred ominously to his “targeting” of a Muslim UNCW student with no further details given. A little more digging would reveal the context: a Facebook post where the student was making plans to attend a Trump rally, joking, “Y’all are not prepared for what I’m about to do,” and requesting prayer that she “make it out alive.” Adams did not report the student as a serious threat. He simply laughed at her.
Meanwhile, UNCW colleagues tweeted out lip-curling reactions. “Please do mourn,” murmured Dr. L. J. Randolph Jr., “but don’t sugarcoat his rhetoric.” The sum of Adams’s legacy is still, “racist, homophobic and sexist.” Professor Tim Gill opined that he found Adams’ words “reprehensible” and “just tried to avoid him,” recalling his few “very awkward” attempts to make friendly small talk. Gill’s point in sharing all this was unclear, but if the intended effect was to paint Adams as a sad object of pity, the actual effect was rather the opposite.
From the outside looking in, Adams may not seem like a typical cancel culture victim. He had successfully won his old lawsuit, secured tenure, and negotiated an early golden handshake. But for friends like myself who actually knew Mike, who knew his passion for teaching and mentoring students, the timing does not seem so odd. To some professors, early retirement equals wish-fulfillment. To Mike, it was undoubtedly a personal and professional blow. Ever the happy warrior, he always projected a fearless optimism that one could fight back, one could hold out hope of beating the machine. But his was the optimism of an era that is going away. When 2020 hit, Mike didn’t know what had hit him.
It was easy for peers who privately agreed with Mike to support him from the sidelines, in whispers. Mike soaked up the heat, after all. This was the guy who turned “I Hate Mike Adams” into his own bumper sticker. This was the guy who would sneak into his own hate rallies and protest himself just for kicks (a joke, but a reflection of Mike’s true dedication to free speech for all, not just for his admirers). So let him do that, people thought. Let him be loud and brash and edgy and hated. We’ll just be over here, golf-clapping.
Mike had no time for golf-clappers. “Boy, some people think I appreciate them. I don’t,” he says in a 2014 interview, recalling a particular instance of hallway-whispered “support.” But he wonders, what if it were different? “What if all of them got up and said no, he’s right, it’s systematic? And even if it were just half a dozen or a dozen at every university that just said ‘Oh no, this stuff goes on all the time,’ then they couldn’t just target one person. So that’s the lesson I hope will be learned. Sometimes we’re our own worst enemy.”
Mike’s words sting now more than ever. Tragically, towards the end of his life, he privately confided to some that he’d come to feel distanced even from fellow conservatives like David French, who served on his defense team in the Wilmington case. While French’s star rose as he developed his brand of Never Trump commentary, Mike’s brand no longer quite fit anywhere. He was no Trump supporter, as I can attest based on our own correspondence. At the same time, he was disinclined to expend energy chiding those who were. And when his social media posts stirred up the hornets’ nest, like Benjamin Disraeli he never explained, never apologized.
As I write, a couple of friends are taking out their bitterness on French. I have not done so, despite my own frustrations at some of his recent rhetoric. Hanging Mike’s death around his neck is not fair, and it’s not the answer. To me, the whole thing seems all too tragic, all too human. His eulogy might be dismissed by some as too little, too late, but from where I sit, it reads as the genuine offering of a grieving friend.
French writes poignantly about how for Mike, as for so many jesters, the outward brashness concealed deep private pain. He recalls an especially dark moment from the Wilmington trials when Mike sat for cross-examination and listened to a string of decontextualized column quotes, carefully arranged to frame him as a vicious bigot. For a moment, French saw the light go out of Mike’s eyes, his shoulders drooping under the weight. “Mike was not racist,” French writes. “I knew him. I knew his heart.” This is no mere blind loyalty. French speaks as an adoptive father who knows better than many what it’s like to be on the receiving end of actual racist abuse.
Mike had many friends who knew the truth. But one more falling domino in the COVID effect was the cancellation of the Summit worldview workshops where he taught in Colorado Springs every summer. Zoom was a poor replacement. As a teacher and a friend, Mike thrived on live connection, embodied give-and-take. I spent extended time with him during one of these summers and can still recall how his table was always the “it” table come meal times. In all this, I am moved to reflect that there has not been nearly enough acknowledgement of the COVID lockdowns’ intangible losses—losses of human fellowship, human connection, human touch. Perhaps Mike’s death can inspire deeper reflection on that front as well. As cancel culture has claimed more than one kind of victim, so too has COVID.
Still, there is no softening the cruel fact that in the end, Mike was his own perpetrator and victim together. There never can be with a death like this, not without peddling platitudes at the expense of truth. Nevertheless, in a man’s final act of despair, all who drove him to that end are implicated, whether by their speech or their failure to speak.
Let Mike’s death be a warning. Let his life be an inspiration for those who knew him as he was: a flawed but good man, a generous friend, a gentlemanly foe, and a quintessential American conservative. He is mourned. He is missed. He will not be forgotten.
Esther O’Reilly is an American writer and conservative cultural critic. She has written for Patheos, Quillette, The Critic, and Arc Digital. In print, she has contributed to the anthology Myth and Meaning in Jordan Peterson (Lexham Press).


theamericanconservative--2020-07-30--Donald Trump Has More Fans Than You Might Think

The polls show Donald Trump losing to Joe Biden by a wide margin , and yet the president seems to have more support than many might think .
And I ’ m not just talking about Americans afraid of being “ cancelled ” if they express a politically incorrect opinion such as support for Trump—although a recent poll by the Cato Institute did reveal that 62 percent of Americans are now fearful of publicly expressing their opinions .
Indeed , Trump might have some fans that do a really good job of hiding their affection for him .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Antifa , the folks smashing up cities , most notably , Portland and Seattle .
They could yet prove to be Trump ’ s most potent supporters .
A ridiculous assertion ?
Well , consider the words of Democratic stalwart Lanny Davis , tweeting on July 27 : “ Violent protesters lighting fires and using violence in Portland should wear @ realDonaldTrump buttons .
That is who they are helping .
Progressives in Portland need to call them out , including the Mayor .
ReTweet please .
Don ’ t allow violent people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 , here at TAC , this author made precisely that argument : that Antifa wanted to Trump to win a second term , following the revolutionary Leninist dictum of “ the worse the better.
” That is , Trump is the figure that Antifa wants in power , because in its view , the incumbent heightens the contradictions of capitalism , white supremacy , and cis-patriarchy .
By contrast , Biden is the sort of consensus-minded figure that could reduce the general level of societal anger—and that , of course , would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in the preferred scenario of partisan and pragmatic Democrats such as Lanny Davis , a President Biden would accommodate enough of the left ’ s agenda , so that most leftists would be happy , thereby isolating Antifa on the fringe .
As a result , Biden would preside happily over the center-left .
To be sure , Republicans say that Biden as the 46th president would cave in to Antifa craziness ; and yet that wasn ’ t the story of his presidential campaign , in which he took on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the future is always unknowable .
Yet in the meantime , an emerging fear of Democrats—joined , now , by many ex-Republicans supporting Biden—is that Antifa ’ s antics will keep Biden from getting elected .
For instance , here ’ s Steve Schmidt , who has traversed from supporting John McCain to supporting Howard Schultz ( remember his short-lived independent presidential campaign ? )
to now supporting Biden : “ This violence is a criminal act and destroys the moral legitimacy of the important messages that peaceful protesters are in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and affronts the grave of the late American Hero John Lewis and it helps Trump.
” Schmidt ’ s denunciation led sly pundit Mickey Kaus to ask about the street-fighting , “ If these guys can no longer pretend it ’ s not happening .
.
.
Has Schmidt maybe seen some polling on the violence ?
” Indeed , there ’ s some evidence that Antifa is driving a wedge inside the Democratic coalition—and that wedging could hurt Biden ’ s chances .
For instance , in a report on the ongoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported the reaction of one victim : “ Daryl Breaux , whose car was seriously damaged in the melee , said those using the demonstrations as cover for mayhem are drowning out the positive meaning of the protests .
‘ Almost 45 years I ’ ve been Black .
This is what Black Lives Matter does ?
I ’ m not with it.
’ ” In fact , the split between mostly white Antifa types and blacks and others angry at the police—but who are not seeking a new Bolshevik revolution—seems to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an avowed progressive : “ I ’ m a POC who lives in Seattle and has been covering these protests .
They have less and less to do with George Floyd or # BlackLivesMatter .
It ’ s a shame , but this movement for equality has been hijacked.
” Indeed , E.D .
Mondainé , president of the Portland branch of the NAACP , headlined his op-ed in The Washington Post , “ Portland ’ s protests were supposed to be about black lives .
Now , they ’ re white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ As the demonstrations continue every night in Portland , many people with their own agendas are co-opting , and distracting attention from , what should be our central concern : the Black Lives Matter movement.
” Asking , “ What are antifa and other leftist agitators achieving for the cause of black equality ?
” Mondainé had a blunt answer : nothing .
As of now , it ’ s hard to show that this division is actually costing Biden votes , but plenty of Biden supporters are worried—after all , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ till Election Day .
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough , who , way back when , won four elections as a Republican Congressman , recently tweeted , “ How does breaking windows at a courthouse , setting fire to a federal building , firing guns in crowds , and committing acts of vandalism forward any cause ?
” Scarborough is referring , of course , to liberal and progressive causes ; he ’ s choosing to ignore Antifa ’ s cause .
Of course , for its part , as its hazy agenda would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After all , if its goal is active and demonstrative “ self-defense ” against the imagined threats of fascism and Nazism , then it ’ s not so easy to corral it within the Democratic Party , or even within the norms of the democratic process .
Yet in the meantime , of course , Trump is eager to conflate Biden , the Democrats , and Antifa .
The president has said , in fact , that Biden will be a “ puppet ” of the radical left , ” and so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be safe.
” If Trump could truly make that charge stick , he would , in fact , likely win the election .
Indeed , Trump is always upping the ante .
Just on July 27 , he tweeted , “ Anarchists , Agitators or Protestors who vandalize or damage our Federal Courthouse in Portland , or any Federal Buildings in any of our Cities or States , will be prosecuted under our recently re-enacted Statues & Monuments Act .
MINIMUM TEN YEARS IN PRISON.
” Here , Trump is referring not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather to a June 26 Executive Order , parts of which read like a campaign speech , viz : So it would seem that candidate Biden needs to distance himself from Antifa .
That is , he needs a “ Sister Souljah ” moment , recalling the time during the 1992 presidential campaign when Bill Clinton used a majorly symbolic speech venue—appearing before Jesse Jackson ’ s Rainbow Coalition—to separate himself from a black rapper who had called for killing white people .
That November , Clinton won the election in a landslide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today , Biden would condemn Antifa , making it clear that , during his presidency , maniacal violence would not be tolerated .
Were Biden to do so in a loud and steady voice , he would greatly reassure Middle America—to say nothing of easing the angst of prominent supporters Davis , Schmidt , and Scarborough .
Yet here ’ s the thing : Biden hasn ’ t done that yet .
Maybe he will , but he hasn ’ t yet .
Yes , on July 28 , Biden denounced “ arsonists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , attacking Trump .
Thus he has yet to make a full-throated denunciation of Antifa by name , making it plain that under his presidential leadership , the violence would be stopped .
So what ’ s the holdup ?
What ’ s the blockage ?
Why isn ’ t Biden going full Sister Souljah on Antifa ?
The answer could have something to do with the changing nature of the Democratic Party .
Back in 1992 , when Clinton Sister Souljah-ed Sister Souljah , the party still had much of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign buttons boasting the Confederate stars and bars .
Indeed , in 1994 , President Clinton signed Joe Biden ’ s tough anti-crime bill , and in 1996 , Clinton signed right-wing welfare reform legislation , which Biden voted for .
As we can gather , for the Democratic Party of the Clinton era , slamming Antifa would have been a no-brainer .
Yet a quarter-century later , the party has changed .
In July 2018 , in the wake of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ’ s upset victory in a New York Democratic primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as she ’ s now universally known , would push the Democrats to the hard left .
In addition , last year , this author also noted the “ McGovernization ” of the Democratic Party , referring back to an earlier lurch to the left .
Indeed , earlier this month , I wondered aloud whether the Democrats would be able to separate themselves from their “ summer of love.
” So maybe that ’ s why Biden is so quiet .
Nobody thinks that he himself supports Antifa , but maybe his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fine line , such that he doesn ’ t seem to tolerating violence and yet , at the same time , doesn ’ t seem to be siding with Trump .
Great politicians walk fine lines for a living—so now we ’ ll have to see about Biden .
Because in the meantime , the violence rages , not just in Portland and Seattle , but in just about every big city in the country .
And if the violence continues , the words of Elon Musk , a man of indeterminate political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true : “ The left is losing the middle.
” Of course , if the left loses the middle , if more chaos ensues , and if Trump gets re-elected , that ’ s just fine with Antifa .

The polls show Donald Trump losing to Joe Biden by a wide margin, and yet the president seems to have more support than many might think. And I’m not just talking about Americans afraid of being “cancelled” if they express a politically incorrect opinion such as support for Trump—although a recent poll by the Cato Institute did reveal that 62 percent of Americans are now fearful of publicly expressing their opinions.
Indeed, Trump might have some fans that do a really good job of hiding their affection for him. I’m talking, of course, about Antifa, the folks smashing up cities, most notably, Portland and Seattle. They could yet prove to be Trump’s most potent supporters.
A ridiculous assertion? Well, consider the words of Democratic stalwart Lanny Davis, tweeting on July 27: “Violent protesters lighting fires and using violence in Portland should wear @realDonaldTrump buttons. That is who they are helping. Progressives in Portland need to call them out, including the Mayor. ReTweet please. Don’t allow violent people help @realDonaldTrump.”
Back on June 4, here at TAC, this author made precisely that argument: that Antifa wanted to Trump to win a second term, following the revolutionary Leninist dictum of “the worse the better.” That is, Trump is the figure that Antifa wants in power, because in its view, the incumbent heightens the contradictions of capitalism, white supremacy, and cis-patriarchy.
By contrast, Biden is the sort of consensus-minded figure that could reduce the general level of societal anger—and that, of course, would be bad news for Antifa.
Indeed, in the preferred scenario of partisan and pragmatic Democrats such as Lanny Davis, a President Biden would accommodate enough of the left’s agenda, so that most leftists would be happy, thereby isolating Antifa on the fringe. As a result, Biden would preside happily over the center-left.
To be sure, Republicans say that Biden as the 46th president would cave in to Antifa craziness; and yet that wasn’t the story of his presidential campaign, in which he took on the left, albeit in muted terms—but then, the future is always unknowable.
Yet in the meantime, an emerging fear of Democrats—joined, now, by many ex-Republicans supporting Biden—is that Antifa’s antics will keep Biden from getting elected.
For instance, here’s Steve Schmidt, who has traversed from supporting John McCain to supporting Howard Schultz (remember his short-lived independent presidential campaign?) to now supporting Biden: “This violence is a criminal act and destroys the moral legitimacy of the important messages that peaceful protesters are in the street for. It desecrates the memory and affronts the grave of the late American Hero John Lewis and it helps Trump.”
Schmidt’s denunciation led sly pundit Mickey Kaus to ask about the street-fighting, “If these guys can no longer pretend it’s not happening . . . Has Schmidt maybe seen some polling on the violence?”
Indeed, there’s some evidence that Antifa is driving a wedge inside the Democratic coalition—and that wedging could hurt Biden’s chances. For instance, in a report on the ongoing of violence in Seattle, CBS News reported the reaction of one victim: “Daryl Breaux, whose car was seriously damaged in the melee, said those using the demonstrations as cover for mayhem are drowning out the positive meaning of the protests. ‘Almost 45 years I’ve been Black. This is what Black Lives Matter does? I’m not with it.’”
In fact, the split between mostly white Antifa types and blacks and others angry at the police—but who are not seeking a new Bolshevik revolution—seems to be widening. Here’s Naveed Jamali, an avowed progressive: “I’m a POC who lives in Seattle and has been covering these protests. They have less and less to do with George Floyd or #BlackLivesMatter. It’s a shame, but this movement for equality has been hijacked.”
Indeed, E.D. Mondainé, president of the Portland branch of the NAACP, headlined his op-ed in The Washington Post, “Portland’s protests were supposed to be about black lives. Now, they’re white spectacle.” As Mondainé put it, “As the demonstrations continue every night in Portland, many people with their own agendas are co-opting, and distracting attention from, what should be our central concern: the Black Lives Matter movement.” Asking, “What are antifa and other leftist agitators achieving for the cause of black equality?” Mondainé had a blunt answer: nothing.
As of now, it’s hard to show that this division is actually costing Biden votes, but plenty of Biden supporters are worried—after all, it’s still more than three months till Election Day. MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, who, way back when, won four elections as a Republican Congressman, recently tweeted, “How does breaking windows at a courthouse, setting fire to a federal building, firing guns in crowds, and committing acts of vandalism forward any cause?” Scarborough is referring, of course, to liberal and progressive causes; he’s choosing to ignore Antifa’s cause.
Of course, for its part, as its hazy agenda would indicate, Antifa has its own ideas. After all, if its goal is active and demonstrative “self-defense” against the imagined threats of fascism and Nazism, then it’s not so easy to corral it within the Democratic Party, or even within the norms of the democratic process.
Yet in the meantime, of course, Trump is eager to conflate Biden, the Democrats, and Antifa. The president has said, in fact, that Biden will be a “puppet” of the radical left,” and so, if he wins, “nobody will be safe.” If Trump could truly make that charge stick, he would, in fact, likely win the election.
Indeed, Trump is always upping the ante. Just on July 27, he tweeted, “Anarchists, Agitators or Protestors who vandalize or damage our Federal Courthouse in Portland, or any Federal Buildings in any of our Cities or States, will be prosecuted under our recently re-enacted Statues & Monuments Act. MINIMUM TEN YEARS IN PRISON.”
Here, Trump is referring not to an act of Congress, but rather to a June 26 Executive Order, parts of which read like a campaign speech, viz:
Anarchists and left-wing extremists have sought to advance a fringe ideology that paints the United States of America as fundamentally unjust and have sought to impose that ideology on Americans through violence and mob intimidation. They have led riots in the streets, burned police vehicles, killed and assaulted government officers as well as business owners defending their property, and even seized an area within one city where law and order gave way to anarchy. During the unrest, innocent citizens also have been harmed and killed.
So it would seem that candidate Biden needs to distance himself from Antifa. That is, he needs a “Sister Souljah” moment, recalling the time during the 1992 presidential campaign when Bill Clinton used a majorly symbolic speech venue—appearing before Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition—to separate himself from a black rapper who had called for killing white people. That November, Clinton won the election in a landslide.
Applying the Sister Souljah dynamic to today, Biden would condemn Antifa, making it clear that, during his presidency, maniacal violence would not be tolerated. Were Biden to do so in a loud and steady voice, he would greatly reassure Middle America—to say nothing of easing the angst of prominent supporters Davis, Schmidt, and Scarborough.
Yet here’s the thing: Biden hasn’t done that yet. Maybe he will, but he hasn’t yet. Yes, on July 28, Biden denounced “arsonists and anarchists,” while mostly, of course, attacking Trump. Thus he has yet to make a full-throated denunciation of Antifa by name, making it plain that under his presidential leadership, the violence would be stopped.
So what’s the holdup? What’s the blockage? Why isn’t Biden going full Sister Souljah on Antifa?
The answer could have something to do with the changing nature of the Democratic Party. Back in 1992, when Clinton Sister Souljah-ed Sister Souljah, the party still had much of its traditional Dixie orientation, including presidential campaign buttons boasting the Confederate stars and bars. Indeed, in 1994, President Clinton signed Joe Biden’s tough anti-crime bill, and in 1996, Clinton signed right-wing welfare reform legislation, which Biden voted for. As we can gather, for the Democratic Party of the Clinton era, slamming Antifa would have been a no-brainer.
Yet a quarter-century later, the party has changed. In July 2018, in the wake of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s upset victory in a New York Democratic primary, this author speculated that AOC, as she’s now universally known, would push the Democrats to the hard left. In addition, last year, this author also noted the “McGovernization” of the Democratic Party, referring back to an earlier lurch to the left. Indeed, earlier this month, I wondered aloud whether the Democrats would be able to separate themselves from their “summer of love.”
So maybe that’s why Biden is so quiet. Nobody thinks that he himself supports Antifa, but maybe his strategists think that he must walk a fine line, such that he doesn’t seem to tolerating violence and yet, at the same time, doesn’t seem to be siding with Trump. Great politicians walk fine lines for a living—so now we’ll have to see about Biden.
Because in the meantime, the violence rages, not just in Portland and Seattle, but in just about every big city in the country. And if the violence continues, the words of Elon Musk, a man of indeterminate political views, will seem all the more true: “The left is losing the middle.”
Of course, if the left loses the middle, if more chaos ensues, and if Trump gets re-elected, that’s just fine with Antifa.