Unknown's avatar

About theartfuldilettante

The Artful Dilettante is a native of Pittsburgh, PA, and a graduate of Penn State University. He is a lover of liberty and a lifelong and passionate student of the same. He is voracious reader of books on the Enlightenment and the American colonial and revolutionary periods. He is a student of libertarian and Objectivist philosophies. He collects revolutionary war and period currency, books, and newspapers. He is married and the father of one teenage son. He is kind, witty, generous to a fault, and unjustifiably proud of himself. He is the life of the party and an unparalleled raconteur.

Does the Will of the Biden Regime Trump the Constitution?

The entire justification for the U.S. government is its willingness to uphold individual rights, specifically the Bill of Rights.

It’s the whole moral justification for any proper government: to UPHOLD the inalienable rights of the individuals within a society. Government exists for the sake of the people; NOT the other way around. That was the exact premise of America’s original Constitution and Bill of Rights. That is the polar opposite of today’s governing regime in Washington, DC, and in most of our states.

When a U.S. President and Congress use executive orders to replace legislation; openly threaten peaceful citizens with the full force of the military, including nuclear weapons, should they resist forthcoming gun confiscation (as Biden has done); openly spy on the social media posts of private citizens and order the companies who sponsor those posts to censor them; shut down virtually all human activity (with the exception of large corporations) whenever the flu breaks out, or whenever they feel like declaring an “emergency”; pass laws nationalizing all procedures in state and local elections to favor only one party; and force people to subsidize government schools and universities that actively teach in favor of tyranny and overthrowing the whole concept of the Bill of Rights … this is way, way more than enough to conclude that government has lost any claim of its legitimacy.

Somebody has to say it. We can’t go on like this, and it’s really the Patriots, the conservatives, the (authentic) Republicans, the individualists, the liberty-lovers and the libertarians who must face the truth. The left is getting everything it wants, and need not face any consequences of any kind — other than the evil and irrationality of their own depraved views, something most of them will never do.

Most of the good guys, for now, put their hopes in the next two election cycles, restoring Donald Trump to the Presidency in 2025, to the promise of God, faith, country, the flag and all the rest. I sincerely wish everyone well with these goals. But at least in the back of your minds, you have to accept what will happen if none of this works, and if the bad guys keep winning every single cultural and political battle — as they have, to date.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Price Gouging and Politics

Do you remember what happened on May 7th of this year?  The Colonial Pipeline, which originates in Houston, Texas, and carries gasoline to the Southeastern United States and the Eastern Seaboard, suffered a ransomware cyberattack by a cyberattacker known to operate in Russia.  The cyberattack, which impacted computerized equipment that manages the pipeline, is believed to have been at least tacitly approved by the Russian government.

Soon afterward, demented Joe Biden warned gas station owners against price gouging.  He said, “I also want to say something to the gas stations: do not, I repeat, do not try to take advantage of consumers during this time.  I’m going to work with governors of the affected states to put a stop to price gouging wherever it arises…  Nobody should be using this situation for financial gain.”

Okay, we’ve been put on notice by Demented Joe to not price gouge because it takes advantage of consumers.  So it’s worth our time and effort to study what it is.  And to see how Joe ignores his own warning.

Price gouging occurs when a seller increases the prices of goods (and/or services) to a level much higher than what is considered fair.  ThoughtCo.com offers this: “Price gouging is loosely defined as charging a price that is higher than normal or fair, usually in times of natural disaster or other crisis… Price gouging is typically thought of as immoral, and, as such, price gouging is explicitly illegal in many jurisdictions.” 

If supply changes and the price doesn’t change (no price gouging), a shortage will always develop.  When a shortage occurs, the supply of the goods always gets rationed in some way — perhaps by people who showed up first (panic buyers?), maybe by people willing to pay the higher (gouged) price to the goods’ owner. Top ArticlesREAD MOREWhy the Global Minimum Tax ThreatensAmerican Sovereigntyhttps://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.472.0_en.html#goog_1920540878https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.472.0_en.html#goog_1158720988https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.472.0_en.html#goog_230105946

The important thing to remember is that everyone gets as much as they want at the original price is not an option. 

Higher prices will allocate the supply of goods to the people who value them most.  When the supply of goods is fixed and prices are used to allocate goods, rich people will buy all the supply and leave less wealthy people with none.  This isn’t a concern for luxury items, but it presents a philosophical dilemma (something liberal politicians never pass up) when considering necessity items.  This opens the door for politicians to define the terms ‘luxury’ and ‘necessity.’  Here’s where the argument leaves economics and enters the realm of politics.  For example, if a beer shortage occurred, politicians would say beer is a luxury, but I personally consider it a necessity.

The price of all goods operates in response to supply and demand.  As supply and/or demand change, the price changes in response.  A free-to-respond price leads to higher prices where the good is needed most, encourages suppliers to more urgently sell their goods, thus more quickly resolving the problem.  However, when price gouging is prevented (by limiting free price change), the result is always shortages.  Supplies of goods in the short run are often limited to whatever inventory is on hand (like with gas stations for days after the pipeline was attacked), so short-run supply is perfectly inelastic (unresponsive to price change).  If the goods’ owner causes the unavailability, then price gouging is possible.  But if not, from a supply/price/demand perspective, price gouging is not possible.  I’ve found nothing to suggest Colonial Pipeline caused the unavailability.

There are several state laws as well as a federal law to ‘prevent’ price gouging.  But they actually do more harm than good.  Ludwig von Mises, in Human Actionsaid, “…[Economics] says that [government interference] produces results contrary to its purpose, that it makes conditions worse, not better, from the point of view of the government and those backing its interference.”

Further, there are problems in specifying a legally permissible increase in prices for goods caused by rising demand and/or limited supply.  That’s because there is no single definition of price gouging, the term has no fixed meaning.  Alabama, Florida, and Maine forbid selling at an ‘unconscionable’ price.  Idaho and Texas prohibit sales at an ‘exorbitant or excessive price.’  New York outlaws ‘unconscionably excessive price’ increases during an emergency.  New York’s Senator Brad Hoylman would “establish that an ‘unconscionable excessive price’ is a price greater than 10% higher than before an emergency began.”  Here’s my favorite: Asked when rising prices become price gouging, New York Attorney General Letitia James said, “there’s no definitive answer to that question, but you know it when you see it.”  Yeah, right.  Laws to prevent price gouging are written to make politicians look good.  But what they ultimately do is make them appear foolish. 

Let’s examine the current situation in this country in terms of Demented Joe’s policies, that of filling jobs, higher unemployment benefits, and price gouging.

Filling Jobs: This doesn’t directly have anything to do with price gouging, but it provides a perfect backdrop for illustrating the concept.  About 10 million people are unemployed despite employers struggling to find employees.  The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) conducted in March a survey of its members and discovered that 42% of business owners had job openings they couldn’t fill.  Many business owners said higher unemployment benefits as one of the main reasons why people weren’t returning to work.  This poll illustrates why there is a problem from the worker’s perspective.  About 1.8 million people actively collecting unemployment benefits said they turned down jobs specifically because of the generosity of the benefits.

Higher Unemployment Benefits: For many low-wage workers, enhanced unemployment benefits exceed what they could make by working.  The federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (passed under Trump, expanded, extended under Biden) offers all workers an additional $600 per week on top of the state aid which ranges from $144 to $515 per week.  An unemployed low-wage worker can receive from $744 to $1115 per week in benefits to remain unemployed.  That’s between $18.60 (256% of minimum wage) and $27.88 (384%) per hour (assuming a 40-hour week) to do nothing.

Price Gouging: Here’s where Demented Joe’s mendacity shows through.  Higher unemployment benefits exceed the predominant hourly minimum ($7.25) wage by 156% to 284%.  Are these amounts above minimum wage that are caused by higher unemployment benefits ‘unconscionable?’  Are they an ‘exorbitant or excessive [labor] price’ increase?  Is this, the labor price increase, ‘price gouging?’  Is an employer willing to pay more than $20.46 ($18.60 + 10%), or up to more than $30.67 ($27.88 + 10%) to get employees and pass the cost increase on to customers guilty of price gouging those customers? 

Laws (especially Senator Hoylman’s proposed law) say ‘yes.’  Yet I can find no protests, no identification, no documentation of this type of price gouging. 

Price gouging is, in a free market economy, impossible.  But we don’t have a ‘free’ free market economy.  Politicians, trying to make themselves look good, intervene by passing anti-price gouging laws.  Politicians ‘talk the talk’ but don’t do their homework.  That, coupled with the majority of the unthinking, uneducated U.S. population, makes price gouging appear possible.

When the next cyberattack occurs (it will, thanks to Biden’s bumbling), get ready for politicians (of every stripe) to decry price gouging.  There is political capital to be had. You can bet Demented Joe will make a statement designed to harvest some.

Warren Beatty

Image: Steven DePolo

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

If you would like to comment on this or any other American Thinker article or post, we invite you to visit the American Thinker Forum at MeWe. There, you can converse with other American Thinker readers and comment freely (subject to MeWe’s terms of use). The Forum will be fully populated and ready for comments by midday (Eastern time) each day.

American Thinker on MeWe

| Print| Emailsponsored contentFrom the WebPowered by ZergNet

White House Press Sec. Reveals The Reason She’s Stepping Down

These Stars Claim To Have Slept With Over 1,000 People

Elliot Page Shares Shirtless Photo After Coming Out As Trans

Hauntingly Beautiful Baby Names No One is Using

It’s Time To Stop Ignoring The Bizarre Truth About Prince Harry

RECOMMENDED

FOLLOW US ON

American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on MeWe

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

Olympics Hotel Not Quite Good Enough For First Lady Jill Biden

Here’s What Doctor Strange Has To Do With The Loki Series

Tulsi Gabbard Torches Bezos Rocket Launch With Brutal Comment

There Are Only 11 Near-Perfect Westerns, According To Metacritic

Top Irish Insults For When You’ve Just Had Enough

The Real Threat Posed by Grotesque Man We Call “President”

In a society less far gone than ours, this dimwitted second hander (even pre-dementia) would be incapable of doing much of lasting damage. Unfortunately, the widespread combination of lazy thinking, massive ignorance and also willful evasion have put us in a position where this perverted sycophant occupies the seat of men like Jefferson, Washington, Madison, Lincoln and, yes, Reagan and Trump too. Unthinkable, but it’s happening.

It’s not that he matters. It’s the fact that we, the rational and the good people who still exist, have to live among (and increasingly at the mercy of) people who willingly put him into high office. It’s like a sick, cosmic joke. But, as we continue to live with the consequences, we all must know it’s no joke.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Biden Doubles Down on Voters

President Joe Biden has now declared that the United States is facing an existential crisis comparable to what it experienced during the Civil War, a struggle that will produce a truly democratic form of government with universal franchise or which will result in the denial of basic rights to many citizens. And he is quite willing to address the issue employing a maximum of emotion and fear mongering unmitigated by a minimum of reasonable suasion, saying “We’re facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War. That’s not hyperbole. Since the Civil War — the Confederates back then never breached the Capitol as insurrectionists did on January the 6th. I’m not saying this to alarm you. I’m saying this because you should be alarmed.”

Of course, what may have occurred on January 6th has nothing to do with the issue currently in play, which is voting rights, though it is only one aspect of what is essentially a revolution sponsored by the Democratic Party to reorder the American political system in such a fashion as to guarantee its dominance for decades to come. Other steps will include greatly increased immigration, a war on so-called domestic terrorists and decriminalizing or choosing not to prosecute many felonies committed by party constituencies.

The voting rights legislation currently before Congress includes the interestingly named For the People Act and its successor the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, both of which would seek to restore certain unconstitutional aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Most important, they would eliminate the ability of the states to pass legislation that creates conditions on registering and voting. The text of the John Lewis Act now before Congress refers to these steps as “discriminatory laws, needless barriers, and partisan dirty tricks.”

At the heart of the push by the Democrats is the creation of a uniform national electoral system which will essentially make it much easier for people to vote, permitting block voting, ballot harvesting and both registration and voting itself by mail. If passed, the new legislation will compel each state to adopt “automatic and same-day voter registration, voting rights for felons, no-excuse absentee balloting, mandatory early voting, and taxpayer funding for political campaigns.”

The key objections to the new voting procedure being promoted by Biden are several, largely related to its lack of any requirement for potential voters to provide information or show documentation confirming citizenship and residency or even one’s identity. The Democrats are denouncing their Republican opponents who are raising these issues as guilty of “voter suppression.” If the Democrats win the debate, it will be possible for anyone to vote in elections without having any human contact whatsoever using the mail-in ballots which are potentially susceptible to large scale fraud.

Another problem with the Biden program to nationalize voting procedures is that the there are four amendments to the United States Constitution that make it clear that it is left to the states to determine the modalities of voting. That means that even if the new voting act passes through Congress and is signed by the president there still would certainly be challenges based on its unconstitutionality. While Blue states will presumably go along with the guidance from Washington, those states still leaning Red will undoubtedly resist any nationalization of voting procedures.

It is not as if the current voting system is fraud-resistant. All too often it is not, which is why state legislatures in Georgia, Texas and several other Republican controlled states have passed new voting laws that actually require in many cases one’s physical presence to vote as well as production of documentation or information confirming citizenship and residency. They also include the purging of electoral rolls of voters who have died or moved. The new laws come as close as is reasonably possible to creating a system where voting security and integrity will be greatly enhanced, but the fact is that the Democrats are not at all interested in reducing criminal voting. They are interested in creating a permissive environment where all their presumed supporters will be able to vote without having to make any effort to do so or even be compelled to demonstrate who they really are and that they are citizens.

Prior to the recent national election, I examined the procedures to register and vote in my home state of Virginia and determined that one could both register and vote without any human contact at all. The registration process can be accomplished by filling out an online form, which is linked here. Note particularly the following: the form requires one to check the box indicating US citizenship. It then asks for name and address as well as social security number, date of birth and whether one has a criminal record or is otherwise disqualified to vote. You then have to sign and date the document and mail it off. Within ten days, you should receive a voter’s registration card for Virginia which you can present if you vote in person, though even that is not required.

It is important to realize that no documents have to actually be presented to support the application, which means that all the information can be false. You can even opt out of providing a social security number by checking the box indicating that you have never been issued one, even though the form indicates that you must have one to be registered, and you can also submit a temporary address by claiming you are “homeless.” Even date of birth information is useless as the form does not ask where you were born, which is how birth records are filed by state and local governments. Ultimately, it is only the social security number that validates the document and that is what also appears on the Voter’s ID Card, but even that can be false or completely fabricated, as many illegal immigrant workers in the US have discovered.

Prior to the November election my wife and I received unsolicited four mail-in ballots, all of which were sent to us anonymously. I examined the ballots carefully and noted that they bore no serial numbers or other forms of validation that could conceivably be used to limit the potential for fraud. In a state like Virginia, the actual mail-in ballot only requires your signature and that of a witness, who can be anyone. That is also true in six other states. Thirty-one states require only your own signature on the ballot while just three states require that the document be notarized, a good safeguard since it requires the voter to actually produce some documentation and identification. Seven states require your additional signature on the ballot envelope and two states require that a photocopy of the voter ID accompany the ballot. Some of these procedures may have been changed since the November allegation but it appears that only the handful of Republican states that are in the process of passing new voting laws are taking the problem seriously. In other words, the safeguards in the system continue at this time to vary from state to state but in most cases, fraud would be relatively easy if one is using mail-in voting. In fact, former President Jimmy Carter’s headed a bipartisan commission in 2005 that concluded that mail-in ballots constitute the “largest source of potential voter fraud” of any voting system.

Joe Biden is of course right about a crisis developing comparable to the Civil War, but what he is choosing to ignore is that his White House is carelessly feeding into what has become a growing chorus of dissent. He and his colleagues in Congress are deliberately and with malice pushing an agenda that, if successful, will lead to something like one party rule in the United States. Combine that with impending legislation and executive action to pursue “domestic extremists,” whom the Administration has also defined as “white supremacists,” it is not hard to imagine what kind of trouble is brewing.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org

Paying People not to work won’t make us Richer

One of the most important principles of economics is that people respond to incentives. You get more of whatever you incentivize. You get less of whatever you disincentivize. This is irrefutable. The supplemental unemployment payment does both—it incentivizes people not to work, and simultaneously disincentivizes them from working.

The number of people who have dropped out of the labor force in Colorado, those who are not actively seeking employment, remains near record highs even as open jobs go begging. Employers cannot find sufficient workers to restart their businesses, or to expand existing operations back to full capacity. They face higher costs by having to entice people out of unemployment. After a full year of partial economic lockdown in Colorado, this is holding back our recovery.

According to U.S. government data, total employment in Colorado has yet to return to pre-lockdown levels. Personal income in Colorado has yet to return to pre-lockdown levels. Real GDP in Colorado has yet to return to pre-lockdown levels. Furthermore, employment and income losses are concentrated among the poor and minorities. The last thing they need is an increased incentive not to work.

Another important economic principle is that income is created by production. When fewer people work and fewer businesses operate at capacity, it is axiomatic that less income is produced. Government payments in lieu of earned income may help some individuals in the short run, but it harms the economy as a whole in the long run. One dollar of supplemental unemployment does not have the same economic impact as one dollar of production-based earned income.

Progressives imagine that they can ignore the laws of economics. But they cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring the laws of economics. They imagine that their policies, that pay people not to work, do not result in fewer people working. They are shocked, shocked, at the very suggestion.

With supplemental benefits, many people receive more in unemployment than they earned in their previous job. And, although even more people receive less in unemployment that at their previous job, the differential at the margin is frequently not enough to incentivize a return to work. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal makes my point, “Unemployment Rolls Shrink Faster in States Cutting Aid.” Businesses see an increase in job applications as jobless aid is reduced. That is based on data—what used to be called “science.”

Even for those who receive more in unemployment than by working, the short-term money cannot make up for the long-term loss of moving up the employment ladder, achieving seniority, and earning raises. At a sociological level, the loss of earned self-esteem that comes from gainful employment is incalculable. Generational damage will occur from children not observing the social benefits of employed parents.

The unintended economic consequences to Colorado of paying people not to work go far beyond the immediate impact of reduced employment. From where will the money come? Taxes on job creators? That harms all Coloradans as fewer jobs will be created. The government printing press? That harms all Coloradans through increased inflation. From Communist China buying more U.S. Treasury debt? That harms all Coloradans by making us more beholden to a country that has shown itself to be a global enemy of freedom.

I am reminded of a saying by one of my favorite economists, Murray Rothbard, “It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”

Ludwig von Mises

Looters in the Streets — or in Government — Cannot Win Forever

Two men in a Los Angeles suburb were seen on camera brazenly leaving a TJ Maxx store with their arms full of shoplifted items.

“They didn’t even run out, they walked out,” Los Angeles Police Department Sgt. Jerretta Sandoz told CBS LA of the incident. “And so, that’s sending a message that we, the criminals, are winning.” [Fox News]

It’s the death of civilization. Not only is criminal behavior tolerated. Not only are police instructed to enforce the law selectively, based on the political affiliation of the criminals. Theft is now openly celebrated by the looters in D.C. who enable the looters on the streets of Los Angeles and elsewhere. Theft isn’t merely cool; it’s a sign of moral virtue.

For now, it’s a looters’ paradise and a long cherished leftist dream: Communism in America, at last. That’s why looters walk, don’t run. For now, they’re winning.

The only thing they failed to consider: What happens when the people who make all the loot stop making it? What happens when there’s nothing left to loot?

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

Leftism Cannot Be Reasoned With — It’s Dictatorship

Leftism is mental illness merged with evil. No cure or reasoning will help. The only solution is total, decisive DEFEAT.

If you don’t think leftists are totalitarians on the scale of those we fought in past wars and the Cold War, then you must have been asleep in 2020 and now in 2021…and you are in for a big surprise when the regime in power eventually reaches your own front door.

Michael J. Hurd, Daily Dose of Reason

The American Descent into Madness

Nations have often gone mad in a matter of months. The French abandoned their supposedly idealistic revolutionary project and turned it into a monstrous hell for a year between July 1793 and 1794. After the election of November 1860, in a matter of weeks, Americans went from thinking secession was taboo to visions of killing the greatest number of their fellow citizens on both sides of the Mason-Dixon line. Mao’s China went from a failed communist state to the ninth circle of Dante’s Inferno, when he unleashed the Cultural Revolution in 1966.

In the last six months, we have seen absurdities never quite witnessed in modern America. Madness, not politics, defines it. There are three characteristics of all these upheavals. One, the events are unsustainable. They will either cease or they will destroy the nation, at least as we know it. Two, the law has largely been rendered meaningless. Three, left-wing political agendas justify any means necessary to achieve them.

Citizenship as mere residency

Two million people are anticipated to cross the southern border, en masse and illegally, over a 12-month period. If that absurdity were to continue, we would be adding the equivalent of a major US city every year. The new arrivals have three things in common. Their first act was to break US law by entering the country. Their second was to break the law by residing here illegally. And their third will be to find false identification or other illegal means to continue breaking the law. You do not arrive as a guest in a foreign country and immediately violate the laws of his host — unless you hold those laws in contempt.

Arrivals now cross a border that had been virtually closed to illegal immigration by January 2021. In the cynical and immoral logic of illegal immigration (that cares little for the concerns either of would-be legal immigrants or US citizens), arrivals will be dependent upon the state and thus become constituents of progressives who engineered their arrival.

Yet the issue is not illegal immigration per se. If protests were to continue in Cuba, and one million Cubans boated to Miami, the Biden administration would stop the influx, in terror that so many anti-communists might tip Florida red forever.

How strange that the US government is considering going door-to-door to bully the unvaccinated, even as it ignores the daily influx of thousands from Mexico and Latin America, without worrying whether they are carrying or vaccinated for COVID-19. Meanwhile, the progressive media shrilly warns that the new Delta variant of the virus is exploding south of the border. Note how the administration applies standards to its own citizens that it does not apply to foreign nationals illegally entering the country.

Crime as construct

Crime is another current absurdity. There exists a mini-industry of internet videos depicting young people, disproportionately African American males, stealing luxury goods from Nieman-Marcus in San Francisco, clearing a shelf from a Walgreens with impunity or assaulting Asian Americans. These iconic moments may be unrepresentative of reality, but given the mass transfers and retirements of police, and the frightening statistics of large increases in violent crime in certain cities, the popular conception is now entrenched that it is dangerous to walk in our major metropolises, either by day or at night. Chicago has turned into Tombstone or Dodge City in the popular imagination.

Scarier still is the realization that if you are robbed, assaulted or find your car vandalized, it is near certain the miscreant will never be held to account. Either the police have pulled back and find arrests of criminals a lose-lose situation, or radical big-city district attorneys see the law as a critical legal theory construct, and thus will not enforce it. Or the criminal will be arrested and released within hours.

So a subculture has developed among Americans, of passing information about where in the country it is safe, where it is not, and where you can go, where you cannot. This is clearly not America, but something bizarre out of São Paulo, Durban or Caracas.

The campus con

The universities over the past 40 years were intolerant, hard left and increasingly anti-constitutional. But they also fostered a golden-goose confidence scheme that administrators dared not injure, given the precious eggs of federally guaranteed student loans that ensured zero academic accountability and sent tuition costs into the stratosphere. There was an unquestioned supposition that a degree of any sort, of any major, was the ticket to American success. In cynical fashion, we shrugged that most prestigious institutions were little more than cattle branders that stamped graduates with imprints that gave them unearned privilege for life.

Yet universities now have both hands around their golden goose’s neck and are determined to strangle it. The public is becoming repulsed at the woke McCarthyite culture on campus, and will be more turned off when campuses open in the fall in 2019-style. At the Ivy League or major state university campuses, admissions are no longer based on proportional representation in the context of affirmative action, but are defined increasingly by a reparatory character.

Grades, test scores and ‘activities’ of the white and Asian male college applicants are growing less relevant. Only ‘privileged’ white males with sports skills, connections or families who give lots of money are exempt from the new racial reparation quotas. The new woke admission policy ironically is targeting the liberal suburban professional family, the left’s constituency, whose lives are so fixated on whether children graduate from Yale, Princeton, Harvard, Stanford or like campuses.

Given the radical change in incoming student profiles, the faculty increasingly will have to choose between accusations of racism or grading regardless of actual performance, given thousands of new enrollees do not meet the entrance standards of just two or three years ago. Remember that since wokeism was always a top-down elite industry, minority progressives still will fight it out with white leftists in intramural scraps over titles, salaries, and managerial posts.

The public has had enough. For the first time, people will ask why are we subsidizing student loans, why are multibillion-dollar endowments not taxed, and why do we think a BA in sociology or psychology or gender studies is an ‘investment’ that prepares anyone for anything?

Commissars and Jacobins

The critical race theory craze is reaching peak woke or is already on the downslope. No complex and sophisticated society is sustainable with a Maoist creed of cannibalizing citizens for thought crimes. Commissars do not produce anything or serve anybody, but only monitor thoughts and speech to ascertain the purity of diversity, equity and inclusion. They are not just a drain on the productive sector but will insidiously destroy it, since their currency is to ensure a timid, obsequiousness and banal orthodoxy.

We know from the failed Soviet system and from the French Revolution that the most mediocre in society became its most eager auditors of correct behavior. The arbiters of proper thought — the self-righteous paid toady, the perpetual victim employed in service to government payback, the freelancing snitch — were always the villains of freedom, productivity and humanity, whether we read of the killing off of Alexander the Great’s inner circle, the forced suicides of the Neronian circle, the Jacobin murder spree or the nightmarish world described by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

That the Biden administration has now joined with Silicon Valley to hunt down on social media any dissenters from this month’s official policy on vaccinations and mask-wearing was not so shocking as to be expected from a media that banned coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop. In Cuban fashion, millions of judge-jury-executioner online snitches, with government encouragement, will help root out incorrect thoughts at light speed.

Inflation is a mere construct

We used to know what inflation was, its pernicious role in past civilizations, and how to combat it. The danger of worthless currency is a staple of classical literature from Aristophanes to Procopius. The scary fact is not just that we are destroying the value of our money — the exploding price of gas, food, appliances, lumber, power, and housing are overwhelming even Joe Biden’s entitlement machine — but that we are constructing pseudoeconomics to justify the nihilism.

Right now, we witness a multitrillion-dollar fight over borrowing beyond our $30 trillion debt to build ‘infrastructure’, a word that has been expanded to include mostly anything but roads and bridges. What exactly is so liberal about the farmworker paying $5 a gallon for gas to commute to the fields, the small contractor doing a remodeling job with plywood at $80 a sheet or the young couple whose loan qualification is always a month behind the soaring price of a new home?

Our people’s military

Americans during this entire descent in madness sighed, ‘Well, at least there is the military left.’ By that, I think they meant John Brennan had all but wrecked the CIA, while James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Kevin Clinesmith, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, et al. had weaponized the FBI. But the military was still a bastion of traditional, nonpartisan service, whose prime directive was to defend the country, win any war it was ordered to fight, and to maintain deterrence against opportunistic enemies. It was not envisioned as a ‘people’s army’. It was not a revolutionary Napoleonic ‘nation in arms’. And it was not a ‘liberation army’. The Constitution, 233 years of tradition, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice all reassured America of its wonderful defense forces.

And now? We are in the process of a massive reeducation and indoctrination campaign. The revamping not only draws scarce resources away from military readiness, but targets, without evidence, the white working class and defames it as insurrectionary — the very same cohort that disproportionately died in Afghanistan and Iraq.

If only Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Michael Gilday, chief of naval operations, had been as animated, as combative, and as fired up in congressional testimony about winning in Afghanistan or deterring the Chinese in the waters off Taiwan as they were in defense of their recommended lists of Marxist-inspired critical race theory texts!

One purpose of the Uniform Code of Military Justice was not to prevent retired top brass from attacking beloved presidents or even blasé ones. Its aim was to remind the country that it is the business of civilians, not pensioned retired military subject to recall in times of crisis, to galvanize opinion against loudmouth unpopular presidents like Harry Truman, Richard Nixon or Donald Trump.

The reason why the ‘revolving door’ became a bipartisan worry was that four-star officers had mastered the navigation of Pentagon procurement. They possessed a rare skill easily — and hugely — monetized upon retirement, and thus its use was to be discouraged wholeheartedly.

And now?

The code is a mere construct. The revolving door is an advertisement for advancing to high rank. Policing the thoughts of American soldiers is apparently more important than fathoming the minds of our enemies on the battlefield.

Keep Cuba Castroite?

What was so hard about understanding that Cuba since 1959 has been a communist gulag, antithetical to human freedom and consensual government? What was so difficult about conceding that Cuba had been an ally of the nuclear Soviet Union, always egging it on to war against the United States?

Yet here we are with protesters against a failed, evil state in the streets of Havana, and our own government, media, and professional classes are worried that ossified communism in Cuba may fall.

After opening the US southern border to pseudo-political refugees, the Biden administration is terrified that thousands of real ones might come to Miami in the fashion it invited millions to storm into Texas. The Biden administration, and the left in general, finally revealed what many of us have known: it had no real ideological view on illegal immigration. Its immigration policy was entirely utilitarian and hinged only on whether illegal immigration altered the demography of the electorate in the correct way.

The United Nations über alles

Finally, almost all Americans used to agree that the US Constitution was unique and guaranteed personal freedom in a way the United Nations charter could not. Dozens of fascist, communist, totalitarian, and authoritarian regimes, usually the majority of governments on earth, ensured that any General Assembly or UN committee ruling would parrot the views of its illiberal and corrupt members.

Not anymore. Biden’s secretary of state, Antony Blinken, has invited in the UN to assess whether the United States meets global standards of justice or, in fact, is racist and in need of global censure: ‘I urge all UN member states to join the United States in this effort, and confront the scourge of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia,’ he said last week.

That is like asking Libya in 2001 to assess whether our airline pilot training met proper standards or having China adjudicate the conditions in US prisons.

America went from the freest country in the world in December 2019 to a repressive, and frightening place by July 2021. It went not so much hard-left, as stark-raving mad.

That abrupt descent, too, is not workable and millions will collectively decide they have no choice but to push back and conclude, ‘In the 233rd year of our republic, we tens of millions are not going to cede freedom of thought and expression to thousands of Maoists. Sorry, no can do.’

Victor Davis Hanson