Anything For A Vote, Ctd

For those of you wondering about the results of the highest profile race decided last week in the unwise election held in Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Supreme Court seat that was up for grabs is being claimed by progressive Jill Karofsky:

Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern:

The Wisconsin debacle provoked considerable partisan wrangling since both sides correctly understood it to be a dry run for November. This debate largely focused on absentee voting, and whether states should make it easier for voters to mail in their ballots. Trump has vociferously opposed mail-in ballots (which he also uses to vote absentee in Florida), claiming falsely that they are “corrupt” and “fraudulent.” Congressional Republicans have opposed Democratic attempts to establish universal vote-by-mail in the next coronavirus package. The president and his allies are also considering letting the U.S. Postal Service collapse, starving it of emergency funds so it cannot reliably transport ballots in November.

But it was never entirely clear that Republicans’ hunch—that Democrats benefit from widespread mail-in voting—was correct.  That suspicion seems to have arisen from the fact that more Democratic states have adopted reforms that expand access to the ballot, including mail-in voting, while conservative states retain a slew of restrictions on the franchise. It may also be rooted in liberal advocates’ staunch opposition to severe limitations on mail-in voting; most lawsuits challenging those limitations were brought by organizations allied with Democrats. But in many states, Republican voters, especially older voters, historically use mail-in voting more than Democrats do.

The Republicans retain a one vote advantage in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, so the victory is about future elections and the electorate. As ever, hotly contested state-wide elections are viewed as bellwethers for the hosting state, and for those who adhere tightly to such a view must be either dejected or jubilant, because this is not only an upset, but currently a six point upset. Assuming it holds, and I would hope that it wasn’t called prematurely, it certainly calls into question the interference of out-of-state forces, which have been engaging in influencing voters for a very long time, but have been becoming more and more brazen in what are truly morally dubious efforts.

More importantly, though, is the effect this failed bet will have on the Republican Party of Wisconsin, as well as the Republican National Committee. Their brand can now be brought under attack by Democrats for forcing voters to choose between good health and voting rights; Republican senior citizens who’ve retained their traditional Midwestern skepticism may leave the Party in disgust, sit out the next election – and possibly even vote Democratic.

All of this must be diluted by the names and reputations of Karofsky and her opponent, Kelly, of course, and I am not conversant with them.

Carrying on, the Republicans, both state and national, are clearly in need of deep reform, although, for reasons I’ve previously stated, it won’t happen until something truly horrible happens to them, electorally speaking.

Democrats now have opportunity, but along with it comes tasks to complete. Quality candidates for the upcoming State Assembly must be recruited and trained, and if they win election, they must come through with sensible legislation.

For Democrats, this victory is only a promise; for Republicans, it’s a warning, and a big one.

Belated Movie Reviews

This suit doesn’t fit right. I suppose that’s de rigeur for a chief of police in a goofy little town.

Studio One in Hollywood” is the name of an old, old TV series (ca 1947 – 1958), featuring hour long episodes of unconnected shows, which I will treat as short movies. We just saw Two Sharp Knives, a pleasingly complex murder mystery which, despite the relatively awful video, intrigued us. The mystery opens with the how and why a man traveling with his daughter to meet his estranged wife for the first time in ten years is found dead, hanging by his neck in a prison cell, where he’d been placed when the local police were notified that the Philly cops wanted him for murder. It’s puzzling that the cop on duty hadn’t noticed a thing, and even his little nap should have been disturbed by the stool being kicked away by the suicide.

But then the chief of police, who is already under political attack by the D.A., discovers the Wanted for Murder poster is a fake, and the coroner, deceiving the D.A., calls it murder. The chief is in a squeeze play now, between a bewildered daughter who believes he did it, and the knowledge that the real players may be leaving soon.

And why?

It’s a well-acted and -crafted tale, and the worst part of it may be the mysterious title. It’s adapted from a short story of the same name by the legendary Dashiell Hammett, and I have to wonder if the part of the story justifying the title was edited out during the adaptation to the screen; I’d be delighted to read the story, as I’ve read (but mostly forgotten) all of his novels.

I won’t recommend it, but it’s not a bad way to spend an hour.

BONUS: You also get the original Westinghouse commercials that went with it!

Keep An Eye On This, Ctd

A while back I commented that one of the side effects of the COVID-19 outbreak might be the collapse of the free trade system that envelops most of the world, as …

Free trade tends to lead to specialization on a national level, as countries who are better at, or have more appropriate resources, concentrate on doing what they do well for export; but other products that don’t fall into that specialization are neglected – after all, you can use your profits from the specialization to buy all that other stuff. Or, more bluntly, those domestic industries who find they can’t compete with the foreign competitors get wiped out, while you wipe out the foreign competitors who can’t keep up with you. This all works out great for those who are in the right industries, or cut sweet heart deals with the government to get bought out as they find they can’t compete. And everyone important is happy in both the public and private sectors.

Right up until economic links are cut for non-economic reasons. While war is a popular reason for terminating those links, it’s also something that we can, with some effort, control, either through negotiation, or by kicking out the obstreperous individuals.

But when it comes to disease, we’re not nearly as much in control. Sure, we can and do work on it, trying to develop vaccines and cures, but none of this is guaranteed, and, barring unexpected miracles, it takes time.

Andrew Sullivan is reporting that national entities are moving along this path in the first part of his weekly tri-partite diary entry for Intelligencer:

The nation-state was beginning to reassert itself before, but COVID-19 has revealed its indispensability. Europeans realized, if they hadn’t already, that a truly continental response was beyond the E.U. Borders were suddenly enforced, resources hoarded by individual nations, and the most important decisions were made by national governments, in national interests. Americans, for their part, saw their own dependence on foreign countries, especially dictatorships, for core needs — like medicine, or medical equipment — as something to be corrected in the future. Japan is now spending a fortune paying its own companies to relocate from China to the homeland.

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out. Economic nationalism as the pendulum swings? Or identification of critical industries, followed by legislation requiring their use of domestic rather than foreign parts?

Will the international shipping industry take a hit? Almost certainly if it’s economic nationalism; it’s not so clear if the impact is selective.

And what will this mean for such countries as Vietnam and India, which struggle to catch up with the more advanced nations? I see free trade as a lifeline for them, a chance to learn how to organize and take advantage of the opportunities that come with cheap labor. If that gets shutdown, what happens to them?

Free trade was advertised as the way to accelerate economic progress and wealth, and I think most economists would agree that it has achieved that. However, as countries are beginning to recognize, it also brings vulnerabilities to those that sup at its table. Is an uncoordinated decision about to be made to slow economic progress in order to better manage world wide natural crises?

Keep an eye out.

Getting To The Next Step: Costs

The Planetary Society’s Casey Drier has released his collation of NASA budgets since 1960, so if you want to see all the financial details of the ladder to the stars, you might wish to start with his publicly available dataset. One of his example graphs:

NASA planetary science spending, by prime destination. Inflation-adjusted using NASA’s New Start Index. Source: Planetary Science Budget Dataset, compiled by Casey Dreier for The Planetary Society (accessible on Google Sheets or downloadable as an Excel file).

Come up with a cool graph? Let me know!

Word Of The Day

Zygodactyl:

Parrots have handedness, or rather footedness. They are zygodactyl, which means they have two toes facing forwards and two facing backwards. Most birds have three going forwards and one backwards. The orientation of the toes makes parrots good at climbing and picking things up and holding them. They often pick up a large piece of food and hold it in one foot while eating it a piece at a time. Most are left-footed. Whichever foot a bird uses is almost always the same. My cockatoo is left-footed. [“The Last Word,” response by Linda Dow to a question regarding handedness in animals, NewScientist (4 April 2020)]

Swing That Pendulum

When COVID-19 made its appearance in Wuhan, China, the first victims literally had no chance. Slightly later victims, however, fell to the virus due to the fear in local officials of reporting the outbreak to top Chinese officials: fear of losing promotion or of losing their current position because of backlash from Chinese officials, who, in turn, fear the consequences of political disadvantage they feared an out-of-control virus might bring to their government. And, because of our advanced travels links, I don’t think we ever had a chance of containing it to Wuhan, unfortunately.

But the rest of the world had advanced warning. Some took advantage of it, such as New Zealand, which appears to be intent on actually burning it out of their country via vigilant quarantine. As an island nation with easily controllable ports of entry, there’s a reasonable chance of achieving the dream, with infected visitors then becoming the threat. Will they put all visitors into quarantine until a mandatory medical test is passed?

A random picture of the moon.

But other parts of the world were slow off the mark. It is commonly accepted this happened in the United States, despite the protestations of the President. His record of comments as kept by the press and even by whitehouse.gov leave him condemned. As this WaPo article notes, those areas of the country that were slow to heed the warnings of the epidemiologists are beginning to own the results of their foolishness; contrariwise, as I noted here, Ohio, led by Governor Mike DeWine (R), responded early and effectively, and are now reaping the rewards. Slavish adherence to an incompetent leader inevitably leads to disaster, and paying attention to experts, instead, leads to creditable behavior.

So, in a year or two, what will be the resultant character of the United States? Suppose the epidemiologists’ predictions are roughly true, and the people who insisted on attending the beaches of Florida and Mardi Gras in New Orleans, who took the warnings lightly in the rural areas or because they were young, end up sick and, more importantly, infecting those to whom they visited before the symptoms manifested themselves.

Are we heading for a nation of introverts, stay-at-homes, avoiding gatherings? Will the pendulum, as it so often does, swing far to the other side as we begin to assess the damages wrought, in part, by the flaws in our behaviors, from a President who simply lives in his own little fantasy land, to the folks who couldn’t believe it might happen to them and their circle of important people, who thought that surely God wouldn’t hurt a worshiper, or was simply too self-centered to pay any attention? Is that good? Bad?


We’ll be off later today to buy some pies, as the Stockholm Pie and General Store (located in Stockhom, WI) is delivering pre-ordered pies to the Twin Cities area (think of it as a mercy run). As we pull up to the pickup station, we’ll pull on our masks, proffer our identification, pick up our pies at arm’s length, and take them home to gobble in the privacy of our own home. Apple for me!

That last bit about eating isolated from our fellow Americans won’t bother us, introverts that we are, but I’m sure there will be a lot of people mourning the loss of fellow gobblers, those who love munching on their pies while eyeing other patrons’ pies, stopping at other tables to ask how their pies are, going back to the counter to order another impulse pie. And another.

It’s a rush of endorphins, getting those impulse pies. I enjoy that part, too.

And will that be a thing of the past? Honestly, and without thinking of the environmental aspects, I hope not. Not as a medical necessity, but as a matter of societal perturbation. But it may happen, as a percentage of the population becomes paranoid about germs and pandemics, and >SIGH< governmental incompetence – and thinks it applies to all politicians. It’s the lazy man’s ploy, They’re all lazy and incompetent and corrupt … which is easier than actually evaluating them.

Will we figure out how to work together to get over this hump in the road? Or will the political polarization continue and strengthen as the subtle message Don’t trust your political opponents, they’re evil idiots! keeps floating through our communities? I see it on both sides; but the stress of a plague that threatens the most vulnerable members of our society may force us back together.

Times are interesting. Stay safe and healthy, everyone. And have a piece of pie.

But For Age …

If Governor Mike DeWine (R-OH) were ten years younger, I’d guess he’d be the next Republican nominee for President, regardless of Trump’s failure or success in 2020, based on his demonstrated competence in directing the response to the COVID-19 outbreak in Ohio. This is based on this WaPo article. NPR has a lovely visual model of peak cases of COVID-19, and when. Ohio ranks as one of the best responding states.

By comparison, here’s New York, which has been hard hit despite determined leadership from Governor Cuomo (D):

And, since I live here, Minnesota, led by Governor Walz (D):

Making such comparisons is, of course, dangerous without knowing all of the factors for which adjustments must be made, from the average health of the residents to population densities to factors of which I’m not aware of – at least not at midnight. Just think of New York City’s status as a global crossroads, while Ohio and Minnesota are relative backwaters.

Insofar as Governor DeWine goes, at 73, he’d be running at age 77. I doubt we’ll be seeing that. I expect in four years we’ll see a bunch of much younger candidates running – Rubio, Klobuchar, Harris, various Republican governors, etc.

I’m not sure who else in the Republican Party is showing good leadership skills at the moment. Glancing at his profile, I’m not sure I’d agree with him on much, but you have to give him props for his work on this crisis.

The Free Market And The Food Desert

A few days ago, Mark Sumner of The Daily Kos surveyed the data concerning travel in the era of shelter-in-place and its kin, and makes an interesting connection at the prompting of Christopher Hale:

How miles traveled has changed in the era of COVID-19. Red isn’t good.

But there’s another reason that the red states are also “red states” when it comes to their travel distance. As former Obama White House official Christopher Hale points out, these maps correspond closely to areas that are “food deserts,” where the nearest grocery story requires making an extended trip. “Food deserts” is a term that is often applied to urban neighborhoods where good nutrition is outside of walking range, but these are counties where it takes an extended auto trip to find any kind of nutrition, even bad nutrition. Why? The simple answer is Walmart. These areas represent locations where big box retailers like Walmart have annihilated local grocers, and where the quest for an apple or a box of Pop-Tarts means crossing the county to a store that also sells tires, televisions, and potting soil.

And it’s not as if the Army comes in, kicks out the mom ‘n pops, and installs Walmart. The traditional answer is that Walmart outcompetes the locals and then reaps the rewards, which, given the Walmart resources, is not entirely accurate, but will do for here.

How big is the area that a Walmart normally drains and picks over? I don’t know offhand, but I had never thought about this in the context of the pandemic. The Walmart phenomenon is clearly an example of centralization, and while centralization, much like specialization, has its advantages, it also has its vulnerabilities.

Take this Internet thing you’re on right now. It’s a prime example of decentralization. Pieces of it are farmed out all over the place, especially critical pieces such as directories. The Internet is designed to keep multiple copies of important information available in case the primary becomes unreachable, and to flow around unpredictable holes in the network.

Walmart, designed or not to kill off all the local competitors, by being all things to all shoppers that prices everything cheaper (typically by selling cheaply made crap) and making it up on volume, becomes a centralization point in non-urban areas; by contrast, the mom ‘n pop shops, perhaps more expensive and not carrying everything in the world, are / were examples of decentralization by providing duplicate resources, made shopping more convenient and, incidentally, gave more entrepreneurial opportunities to those so inclined.

I’ve never cared for Walmart. From the awful atmosphere and unhappy workers to the bottom of the barrel products and the crappy way the vendors were treated, I really didn’t want to have anything to do with them. I made a conscious decision decades ago that saving money means spending it up front to get quality. That means Walmart is out.

One can say, But when they’re the only game in town … and why is that? My experience with the previous generation to me (I shan’t say mine) is that they were obsessed with quantity over quality. How much food will $5 get me, and can I get it all down my throat? In the end, quality didn’t seem to matter.

So Walmart shoveled it down their throats, and today they still do. I can’t help but wonder, if this happens two or three more times, will Walmart be publicly identified as inimical to the safety of the citizens of the United States? Or will the Federal government look into breaking them up?

Word Of The Day

Sycophancy:

Sycophancy is defined as the overly fawning behavior of a suck-up.
When a kid sits in the front row, answers every question and always brings the teacher an apple every day, this behavior is an example of sycophancy. [Your Dictionary]

Noted in “New Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany could do the impossible: Make us miss Sean Spicer,” Margaret Sullivan, WaPo:

By now, we’ve come to accept that spin is part of the job description for White House press secretaries. It’s a tactic and talent that has been on display in every modern presidential administration.

But race-baiting? Dangerous bluster on topics of public health? Blatant sycophancy?

Heaven Forbid The Truth Be Revealed, Eh?, Ctd

The Administration’s bid to manipulate CNN/Business has fallen through:

Vice President Mike Pence’s office reversed course on Thursday afternoon, after declining for days to allow the nation’s top health officials to appear on CNN and discuss the coronavirus pandemic, in what was an attempt to pressure the network into carrying the White House’s lengthy daily briefings in full.

After this story was published, Pence’s office allowed for the booking of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Robert Redfield for CNN’s Thursday night coronavirus town hall. Dr. Anthony Fauci was also booked for Friday on “New Day.”

Kudos to CNN for not becoming another Trump thumb puppet. Real-time fact-checking the President, whether they be Democrat or Republican, has become a critical part of the journalist’s craft, and getting the results out as soon as possible strengthens the audience’s perception of honesty of the candidate, whatever that perception may be.

It’d be something if Fox News did the same thing. Competently.

Just Like A Fox News Viewer, Ctd

I take no great pleasure in noting this, but for future reference, especially by bar-stool blowhards, it’s time to call Robert Epstein to account for rank amateurism. I recently noted that he predicted the max death count in the United States would not exceed 5,000, and world-wide deaths at 50,000 with less than 1 million infections total.

World wide infections are 50% over Epstein’s predictions, and that’s if we’re generous in interpreting his words. Worldwide deaths have exceeded his predictions by nearly 100% His prediction for the American death count has been exceeded by New York City alone, and based on recent counts, it’s probably off by 200%.

And we’re not near the end of this challenge. Will Epstein try to defend his effort, or will he admit he was outside of his zone of expertise?

Fortunately, based on the Administration’s actions, I think they discarded Epstein’s predictions early on, and for that we can be thankful.

So what’s left to do? To observe Epstein’s failure as an amateur, and remember it. The experts are often wrong as well – this is a tough, knotty problem, after all – but at least they know the general parameters, and will use this experience for the next time.

And remember the Administration is mostly composed of amateurs. Do we really want them running things?

Heaven Forbid The Truth Be Revealed, Eh?

CNN/Business is faced with an unpalatable choice:

Vice President Mike Pence’s office has declined to allow the nation’s top health officials to appear on CNN in recent days and discuss the coronavirus pandemic killing thousands of Americans, in an attempt to pressure the network into carrying the White House’s lengthy daily briefings in full.

Pence’s office, which is responsible for booking the officials on networks during the pandemic, said it will only allow experts such as Dr. Deborah Birx or Dr. Anthony Fauci to appear on CNN if the network televises the portion of the White House briefings that includes the vice president and other coronavirus task force members.

On the face of it, it sounds like Pence is demanding equal face time for himself. But I don’t think so:

CNN often only broadcasts President Donald Trump’s question and answer session, which sometimes includes the health care officials, live on-air.

After Trump leaves the podium, CNN frequently cuts out of the White House briefing to discuss and fact-check what the President had said. A CNN executive said that the network usually returns to such programming because of the extensive length of the full briefing that includes Pence, which can run in excess of two hours.

My bold. It appears to me that the Administration would prefer not to have the President fact-checked by one of the bigger cable news sources around.

Also note the length of Pence’s part of the briefing – two hours! Time on any live news source is going to be at a premium, so perhaps VP Pence should squeeze it down to 45 minutes, or even less, and accept that he’ll be on a tape delay while the real-time fact-checking – or humiliation, if you will – of his boss takes place.

Belated Movie Reviews

In The Night Of The Hunter (1955) there are two themes, one hiding under the other. The first has to do with the dangers of the naivete of the religious, how the bold rogue can use religious sensibilities to insinuate themselves into a community. In a sense, it’s taking advantage of Turchin’s concept (borrowed from the Muslims) of asabiya, which is communal trust extended to strangers outside of typical geographical and cultural boundaries, anchored by one or more shared things, such as religion, common existential enemies, and the like. The bold rogue, speaking the lingo of the community, thus labels himself a member of same, inherits the extended trust, and, with no true anchor to the community, takes advantage of that trust to reap a windfall.

But below, and supporting the first theme, is the second theme: the consequences of deceit. This is both of others and of self, and while the delicious snarkiness of watching the religious, in their humility-based confidence, being mislead has a certain satisfactory zeitgeist for the non-believer (or at least those not of the Christian fundamentalist community), it’s the second, underlying theme that brings some real punch to this story.

It’s the 1930s, and the Reverend Harry Powell is a regular one-man crime wave. He kills, particularly women to whom he’s married, he thieves, he watches porn to get it on – and he cries out the word of the Lord all the while, his strong baritone voice bringing authority and pushing the buttons of all who’ve grown up on such performances. In particular, his tattooed hands let him give impressive performances of Biblical stories, a real hook into the shared experience of the community.

And, in some obscure way, he really believes he’s doing God’s will.

But when he’s caught with a stolen car, he’s shocked to receive a short prison sentence. However, God works in mysterious ways, so it’s really no surprise to Powell that he rooms, for a short while, with a condemned man. Ben Harper, fed up with the banks’ abuse of the little man during this time in the Great Depression, robbed a bank and killed two men during the escape. He rushed home with the loot and hides it, making his children, 8 year old John and 4 year old Pearl, swear to never reveal its hiding place; his wife, Willa, isn’t present to witness the hiding. The cops show up and arrest him, but never find the $10,000.

And to Powell he reveals nothing, but Powell knows the money was never found. He’s no fool!

Harper goes the way of the condemned man, and Powell takes his honey voice down the Ohio River to Harper’s home. It’s a great place for Powell: good God-fearin’ folks with whom he fits right in, or so it seems. In particular, the elderly ice cream store owner Icey Spoon, pillar of the community, or know-it-all bully, depending on how you look at these things, sees in Powell just what she wants to see: a preacher full of the spirit of God, but lacking a wife.

And she sees Willa Harper, now a widow and a single working mother of two children. Willa works for Icey, and under her influence, Willa permits Powell to court her as a preacher might, and soon enough win her. But the illusion she had built up of Powell over just a few days is stripped away the first night: no sex, and a brutal psychological put down. One illusion exchanged for another, and in the following weeks she becomes the lead in the little dramas they’re putting on for the townsfolk, admitting to outlandish lusts, titillating the audience, and satisfying their religious proclivities to the point of riot.

All the while, though, Powell’s building his own illusion: that the money Harper stole and hid should be his. This illusion shreds any other illusion for Willa’s son John, who remembers his promise to his father and refuses to reveal its whereabouts, first to indirect approaches from Powell, and then refusing direct orders.

But young Pearl, she is less coherent, less devoted to promises, and John worries.

The family discord rises and rises, and one night, what with John’s misbehaviors and Powell’s psychological abuses, Willa summons the courage to rip the illusion from her eyes and see the man she has married: cold, hateful, spiteful – and looking for money. She accuses him, and, in a hint of what’s to come, when he draws a knife in rage, she neither fights nor screams: its kiss is not horror, but sweet surcease for her troubled life, and she leaves with scarcely the expected murmur.

The next morning, Powell spreads the word that she has left him, that he had been denied sex, that she had given in to her unnatural lusts and was on the road. Now John and Pearl must survive on their own, and Pearl lets slip that she has the money. Before Powell can relieve her of it, though, John arranges for the sky to fall on him. Opportunity has arisen, and they are out the door and soon, barely out of Powell’s grasp, on a skiff, floating down the Ohio River.

An adventure or two later, John and Pearl are brought under the brusque care of Rachel Cooper, a woman with three children already under her dominion – none of them her’s. She’s been through illusion and its dispersal, as she mentions the loss of a son to worldliness, but she’s found a role, taking care of children who would otherwise be a burden on working mothers, or have no parents at all, and John and Pearl find she’s strict but caring.

Powell, though, is relentless, and finds where they’re located. He comes slinking along, but now he’s found someone who has had enough of illusion, of her own, her children, and those she cares for: Rachel Cooper. Caught in a lie or two, Powell still believes it’s his game to win until Cooper taps him between the shoulder blades with a shotgun.

But, you know, God is on Powell’s side, and not only does he return in the night, he discards the dated approach of sneaking, and instead serenades Cooper and her little family from the front lawn. Is he demonstrating his Godliness? Or his manhood? Cooper is having none of it, singing her own version, and then that old shotgun turns out to be loaded and accurate. Again, as with Willa, an atypical reaction: Powell, crying out wildly, runs for the barn. He’s not badly injured, except perhaps in the psyche, as he has been hit, and through the agency of … a woman.

But this story isn’t over just yet. When State Troopers show up the next morning at Cooper’s call, Powell stumbles from the barn and is easily taken – and then John cannot stand to see Powell arrested and assaults the officers, and now it’s Pearl that must try to rescue John. Later, at trial, John cannot testify, overcome as he is with this misplaced loyalty to his persecutor.

But it doesn’t matter, as Willa’s body, the slit throat negating any assertion that she drowned, testifies mutely to Powell’s guilt, as does his history of other incidents with now-dead wives. Powell is incoherent and bewildered.

And the townsfolk, led by Icey herself, husband right behind her, arrive after sentencing, shrieking Lynch him! Their hate-twisted faces, their abrogation of the tenets of their faith, are a testament to the consequences of their own illusions concerning men who appear spouting those God-fearing verses. It’s not their naivete to point at, but the absolutely infernal rage to fear – these are not God-fearing Christians, no, not when their illusions are pierced and they are shown to be such fools that a women is dead and her children endangered.

In this situation, they can either change themselves to lessen the chances of it happening again, or take bloody vengeance, and by God the latter is easier, because they shouldn’t have been wrong in the first place, because God is with them.

Right?

Anchored by a script with a wonderful ear for dialog, strong performances by top actors, excellent pacing, authentic staging, and some interesting cinematography, it’s hard to find fault. The worshipful viewer may not enjoy it, and even I found it dark enough that I put off watching the second half for a few days until my mood had brightened.

But Recommended. This one is worth your time.

Call It What You Like

In The Atlantic Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule has published a description of what he hopes will become the next big trend in judicial philosophy – common-good constitutionalism:

But originalism has now outlived its utility, and has become an obstacle to the development of a robust, substantively conservative approach to constitutional law and interpretation. Such an approach—one might call it “common-good constitutionalism”—should be based on the principles that government helps direct persons, associations, and society generally toward the common good, and that strong rule in the interest of attaining the common good is entirely legitimate. In this time of global pandemic, the need for such an approach is all the greater, as it has become clear that a just governing order must have ample power to cope with large-scale crises of public health and well-being—reading “health” in many senses, not only literal and physical but also metaphorical and social. …

Assured of this, conservatives ought to turn their attention to developing new and more robust alternatives to both originalism and left-liberal constitutionalism. It is now possible to imagine a substantive moral constitutionalism that, although not enslaved to the original meaning of the Constitution, is also liberated from the left-liberals’ overarching sacramental narrative, the relentless expansion of individualistic autonomy. Alternatively, in a formulation I prefer, one can imagine an illiberal legalism that is not “conservative” at all, insofar as standard conservatism is content to play defensively within the procedural rules of the liberal order.

There’s a lot of feel-good words here, not least of which is the title which he’s labeled this philosophy with – common-good constitutionalism. But as I read I became more and more negative, because he’s using words not of precision, but words over which a good fight can take place. For example:

Common-good constitutionalism is not legal positivism, meaning that it is not tethered to particular written instruments of civil law or the will of the legislators who created them. Instead it draws upon an immemorial tradition that includes, in addition to positive law, sources such as the ius gentium—the law of nations or the “general law” common to all civilized legal systems—and principles of objective natural morality, including legal morality in the sense used by the American legal theorist Lon Fuller: the inner logic that the activity of law should follow in order to function well as law.

Common-good constitutionalism is also not legal liberalism or libertarianism. Its main aim is certainly not to maximize individual autonomy or to minimize the abuse of power (an incoherent goal in any event), but instead to ensure that the ruler has the power needed to rule well. A corollary is that to act outside or against inherent norms of good rule is to act tyrannically, forfeiting the right to rule, but the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to “protect liberty” as an end in itself. Constraints on power are good only derivatively, insofar as they contribute to the common good; the emphasis should not be on liberty as an abstract object of quasi-religious devotion, but on particular human liberties whose protection is a duty of justice or prudence on the part of the ruler.

So what does [Common-good constitutionalism] is not tethered to particular written instruments of civil law … mean? It sounds a lot like … the law is what I say it is right now.

Or … but instead to ensure that the ruler has the power needed to rule well. Yeah? Is this pre-defined or are we, or far more likely this ruler of which he speaks, going to be defining it as each crisis – each pseudo-crisis – is encountered? Does that sound silly? Does “border wall” ring any bells for you, and the accompanying fake crisis?

But perhaps what bothers me the most is a perceived, and perhaps real, hubris emanating from this article. One of the implicit principles of the Constitution is that of paucity of certain knowledge. In a sense, many of the clauses in the Constitution is an acknowledgement that we just don’t know, so we’re going to leave that point open for further debate and individual actions. Which religion is true? We don’t know. What’s the perfect tax rate? We don’t know.

Who should be ruler? If we knew, we wouldn’t NEED a democracy, now would we?

Vermeule doesn’t reference the concept, and I’m not sure it’s ever occurred to him that the Constitution is more about what we don’t know than what we do. So as much as this is a high-falutin’ article, referencing people and concepts with which my knowledge is either non-existent or miniscule, and I should be shrugging and moving along, I cannot help but say that I deeply mistrust these assertions. They speak of someone tired of the ceaseless arguments, who has forgotten the importance of compromise in a world of uncertain knowledge, who wants to get on with the ruling part, without knowing just how to proceed.

It’s my observation that the continuing flaming shitshow that is the Trump Administration is a reflection of just the hubris that Vermeule appears to be exhibiting in this article, and it seems quite likely to me that it may result in the same incompetent results.

And if he cries April Fool’s!, I’ll just note this was published on March 31st in a serious magazine.

Anything For A Vote, Ctd

A number of writers have explained the motivations of the RNC in the matter of the Wisconsin vote yesterday. Here’s Eric Levitz of New York Intelligencer:

In the next year or two, Wisconsin will redraw all its electoral maps to comport with the new Census. And Evers will have the power to veto any gerrymander the legislature enacts. But Republicans could reject that veto, and bring a lawsuit claiming that the legislature has sole authority over redistricting. And if the conservative majority on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court buys that argument — just as it bought the GOP’s case for the constitutionality of voter-ID laws and union-busting measures (that together likely cost Hillary Clinton the Badger State in 2016) — then it will be game over. And Democrats will be all but incapable of governing Wisconsin before 2030. …

All of which is to say: Wisconsin Republicans are disenfranchising voters by holding an election mid-pandemic (while blocking measures that would allow all interested voters to safely cast ballots from home) so as to preserve their ability to disenfranchise voters through an egregious partisan gerrymander — and also, potentially, a voting-roll purge.

As election law expert Rick Hasen recently observed, “only 38% of voters who had requested an absentee ballot in heavily Democratic Milwaukee County had returned one, compared with over 56% of absentee voters in nearby Republican-leaning Waukesha County.” In other words, the GOP has reason to believe that it has banked a solid lead in the absentee vote, and therefore has nothing to gain — but potentially, a State Supreme Court seat to lose — by allowing an extra week of absentee voting.

This will also continue the polarization of left and right in Wisconsin, unless a large number of voters die. That will not happen, I very much hope, so I think Wisconsin’s going to remain a bubbling cesspool of toxic-stupid politics.

The Potential For The Rise In Food Prices

Amidst news that grocery store workers are starting to suffer losses comes just what you’d expect – a reluctance to work in an environment where you can die:

Industry experts say the rise of worker infections and deaths will likely have a ripple effect on grocers’ ability to retain and add new workers at a time when they’re looking to rapidly hire thousands of temporary employees. Walmart, the nation’s largest grocer, is hiring 150,000 workers, while Kroger is adding more than 10,000. Many are offering an extra $2 an hour and promising masks, gloves and hand sanitizer. But finding people willing to work on the front lines for little more than the minimum wage could be an increasingly tough sell, according to supermarket analyst Phil Lempert.

“One of the biggest mistakes supermarkets made early on was not allowing employees to wear masks and gloves the way they wanted to,” he said. “They’re starting to become proactive now, but it’s still going to be much tougher to hire hundreds of thousands of new workers. We’re going to start seeing people say, ‘I’ll just stay unemployed instead of risking my life for a temporary job.’ “ [WaPo]

It’s one thing to think of it as a low-skill job, but when the danger index rises from fairly low to suddenly mid-range – or more – people are going to demand higher wages, and that demand will linger even after COVID-19 has been controlled, because, despite what some people think, it won’t be forgotten for at least a generation, if not more. Between the many premature deaths, the quarantines, and the outrage that some people think they are exceptions to the quarantine rule, it’s going to leave a mark in the minds of most.

And as long as we remain overpopulated, we’re more likely to see more such pandemics & plagues, reinforcing the lesson. While I don’t see how the risk farmers face every day as part of their vocations will be increased by COVID-19 and most hypothetical plagues, the requirements of the grocery store do increase the danger.

If you note in a year or two that food prices remain elevated, compared to the year prior to COVID-19, I think you can blame it on the pandemic, and how it was compounded by the retailers who were slow to realize that corporate profits come second to their workers lives – or they can do their own damn bagging at their supermarkets.

And Then There’s The Illegal Activities

What does COVID-19 mean for illegal activities? Vanda Felbab-Brown discusses this on Order From Chaos, and finds it depends on the category:

As street life has decreased in Europe, North America, and much of South America, predatory street crime appears to have decreased considerably. There are simply no people on the streets to mug. And with people at home, burglaries and home invasions have become more difficult. …

With more people in the West and Asia at home and bored and access to street prostitution severely curtailed, there is also a chance that online prostitution sites that feature trafficked and enslaved women (as opposed to those who give informed consent to sex work) may see a rise in online trafficking, perhaps stimulating efforts to entrap more women. More time online inevitably means more potential exposure to recruitment by nefarious entities, such as jihadi groups or doomsday cults, portraying COVID-19 as a portend of a forthcoming apocalypse and a justification to purify the land through violence, crime, and fraud.

Understandable, although it didn’t occur to me that enslavement could go up because bored Internet users lacked access to significant others or prostitutes. But then Felbab-Brown surprised me, not so much for suggesting a rise in another class of crime, but recognizing it’s morally, if not legally, a crime:

In 2019, China muscled the World Health Organization (WHO) to include a chapter on traditional Chinese medicine in WHO’s International Classification of Diseases, a highly influential compendium of medical conditions for diagnosis and treatment, influencing also what illnesses and procedures insurance companies pay for. As memories of COVID-19 wane like they did with SARS, and when an effective COVID treatment become available, the powerful traditional Chinese medicine industry will again pressure China and East Asian governments to promote their unproven and often nefarious wares. Before that, some of those desperately ill with COVID-19 and unable to obtain proper medical treatment will be seeking to buy traditional Chinese medicine. Already, to treat COVID-19, the government of China is promoting the use of bear bile, a potion barbarically collected from caged bears or poached ones without a shred of evidence of its curative effects.

It’s the unethical preying on the weak, sad to say, and has happened from time immemorial. Remember that next time you want to tell a friend how ground up rhino horn cured your rheumatiz (it didn’t, as you find out the next week), or how acupuncture is a miracle cure.

But Felbab-Brown’s conclusion, even if she doesn’t use the actual word, is all about evolution in action[1]:

In other illegal economies, such as the illegal drug trade, the COVID-19 disruptions will be even more ephemeral. After temporarily wreaking havoc with some types of crime and enabling others, the coronavirus will leave behind the smartest and most adaptable criminal groups.

This may be turned into a vivid analogy to a drug, ironically played in this scenario by COVID-19, sweeping away the weaker inimical entities, in this case weaker or more brittle criminal gangs, while, as she says, the most adaptable will continue, only stronger and uninhibited by the weaker.

Notice that weaker is a situational adjective. Just as in the medical situation, a gang will have strengths and weaknesses, and it may find itself suppressed by other gangs, or (medically) other cells, that, once they are removed, permit the “stronger” and more difficult to remove entities to flourish and, at least medically speaking, damage or kill the host. This is, at least as I understand it, why cancers that recur after chemo has forced them into remission are no longer sensitive to chemo – the surviving cells that constitute the new cancer are those that are, by definition, not sensitive, and they’re the ones that reproduced after the initial cancer was killed.

For those living in areas that are prone to crime, or near them, this might be something to keep in mind.


1 Another example of Janet Factor’s lovely statement that evolution is substrate-neutral.

Stronger Than Satan’s Temptation!

Well, was he effective?

https://youtu.be/s0IzJaicTi8

No, people are still dying. Or … the news outlets are lying through their teeth. For those readers who are inclined to such a belief, I suggest a visit to a big city hospital, preferably in New York City, and see if it looks like they’re lying.

Maybe all the bodies are just actors. Bring a pin with you and start sticking them.

All snark aside, the real question is whether any worshiper who saw this and believed it decided to leave the faith – or at least Copeland’s congregation – upon discovery that he didn’t have the desired effect. And the answer, of course, is no. That sense of belonging is far more tempting than any real truth, partly because it’s so much easier to belong and nod along with everyone else in the sect than figure out what the truth might be.

Because that’s hard. Just ask any physicist. Pinning down truth, pinning down reality, is damn hard. Much less creatures that don’t appear to exist. It’s easier – and more beneficial – to nod with the crowd, have the post-service lunch, thank the preacher for his performance, agree he’s very effective, so some social networking, and maybe get a job next week through that networking.

Truth? Sometimes, I’m sad to say, it’s not that important.

And, theatrically speaking, I wasn’t all that impressed with Copeland. The pointing of the finger and the furrowing of the brow? Son, the old-time preachers did more than that. Why weren’t you wrestling with the devil himself up there?

At least the other dude, whoever he is, had the grace to look a little embarrassed.

Just For Fun, A Chance To Exhibit Your Hidden Superstition, Ctd

Remember Comet Atlas, and how the superstitious thought comets brought doom upon all who saw them?

I guess we stared at it a little bit too hard:

As it loses coherence.
Source: The Astronomer’s Telegram

Comet ATLAS (C/2019 Y4), what are you doing? New data from astronomers around the world show that the once-promising comet is beginning to fade. For Karl Battams of the Naval Research Lab in Washington DC, it could be a classic case of “I told you so.”“Quoting myself from March 15th,” says Battams, “‘I wouldn’t be surprised to see Comet ATLAS start to fade rapidly and possibly even disintegrate before reaching the sun.’ I very much hope I’m wrong, but Comet Elenin did something similar several years ago, holding lots of promise and then just… fizzling.” …

On April 6th, astronomers Quanzhi Ye of the University of Maryland) and Qicheng Zhang of Caltech reported new images of Comet ATLAS, in which the comet’s core appears to be elongating–“as would be expected from a major disruption of the nucleus,” they wrote in an Astronomical Telegram. …

Recent measurements of the comet’s position also point to trouble. Battams explains: “The comet’s orbit is now being influenced by ‘non-gravitational’ forces. These forces are the result of gases lifting off the comet nucleus and causing the nucleus to move very slightly in the opposite direction–sort of like a jet engine. Most active comets experience this to some degree, but ATLAS’s non-gravitational forces have kicked in very abruptly and are quite strong. This supports a narrative of a small nucleus being pushed very strongly by extreme outgassing, possibly along with fragmentation.” [SpaceWeather.com]

The doom redounded on it, and that was all. So much for any fun for me!

Is Private Justice Just?, Ctd

For some people, like me, “private justice”, which is the use of arbitration clauses to deprive consumers from access to the court system when something goes wrong with a product or service, strikes me as injustice. But for others, no doubt smarter than I, it’s an opportunity to continue class action lawsuits in, I should say, a dispersed manner – using the corporate weapon against the corporation:

Teel Lidow couldn’t quite believe the numbers. Over the past few years, the nation’s largest telecom companies, like Comcast and AT&T, have had a combined 330 million customers. Yet annually an average of just 30 people took the companies to arbitration, the forum where millions of Americans are forced to hash out legal disputes with corporations.

Mr. Lidow, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur with a law degree, figured there had to be more people upset with their cable companies. He was right. Within a few months, Mr. Lidow found more than 1,000 people interested in filing arbitration claims against the industry.

About the same time last year, Travis Lenkner and his law partners at the firm Keller Lenkner had a similar realization. Arbitration clauses bar employees at many companies from joining together to mount class-action lawsuits. But what would happen, the lawyers wondered, if those workers started filing tens of thousands of arbitration claims all at once? Many companies, it turns out, can’t handle the caseload.

Hit with about 2,250 claims in one day last summer, for example, the delivery company DoorDash was “scared to death” by the onslaught, according to internal documents unsealed in February in federal court in California. [The New York Times]

Little weapons are sometimes big weapons that just haven’t been properly evaluated yet. I am simply chortling inside (only inside, so as not to startle my Arts Editor, not to mention the cats) at the innovative spirit of Lidow and Lenkner.

So DoorDash discovered they had to pay their arbitrator up-front for starting the process on all the claims, tried to change arbitrators, got their hand slapped, and, well, I think they’re in mid-process now, and not happy about it.

Gotta love alternative thinking.

Anything For A Vote

And if that means sacrificing your own base, well, what of it? Today, neighboring Wisconsin is holding an election in which the seats of judges, including a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Presidential primaries, school board seats. This, despite multiple examples of other states delaying elections, the Governor ordering a delay and a lawsuit decided in the favor of the plaintiffs. The “intervening defendants,” the Republican National Committee, appealed to the Supreme Court, and, 5-4, it overturned the District Court. Here’s the dissent of Justice Ginsburg’s concluding paragraph:

The majority of this Court declares that this case presents a “narrow, technical question.” That is wrong. The question here is whether tens of thousands of Wisconsin citizens can vote safely in the midst of a pandemic. Under the District Court’s order, they would be able to do so. Even if they receive their absentee ballot in the days immediately following election day, they could return it. With the majority’s stay in place, that will not be possible. Either they will have to brave the polls, endangering their own and others’ safety. Or they will lose their right to vote, through no fault of their own. That is a matter of utmost importance—to the constitutional rights of Wisconsin’s citizens, the integrity of the State’s election process, and in this most extraordinary time, the health of the Nation.

And quite right. It appears that her dissent stung the majority right wing that agreed with the RNC that voting should occur as ordered, come hell … well, that’s what’s coming:

The Court’s decision on the narrow question before the Court should not be viewed as expressing an opinion on the broader question of whether to hold the election, or whether other reforms or modifications in election procedures in light of COVID–19 are appropriate. That point cannot be stressed enough.

It may be more accurate to say the conservatives were terrified of actually stepping forward and saying lives are more important than voting on time. After all, this is not about denying voting, but merely delaying a deadline for voting until mail-in ballots arrive.

The funny thing is … if the Wisconsin conservatives go trudging off to the polls now, isn’t this going to endanger their lives? And their families? Did the RNC just throw its base under the bus?

Or are they so confident that the conservatives will all vote by mail?

I must say, my sense of the surreal demands that all Wisconsin voters refuse to vote.