No more “cowardly wokeness” for Tulsi Gabbard

To no one’s surprise Tulsi Gabbard — former Congresswoman, war veteran and Presidential candidate — has left the Democratic Party. She made the announcement during her first podcast in what she hopes will be the Tulsi Gabbard Show. Gabbard’s long list of ills encouraged by the new Democrats is worth noting.

On October 11, 2022, former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard announced she is leaving the Democratic Party. After 20 years in the party, Gabbard said,

I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party. It’s now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue and stoking anti-white racism, who actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms enshrined in our Constitution.

Tulsi Gabbard’s exit does not come as a surprise, since she has often and emphatically pointed to the Democratic Party’s devolution. She made her unsurprising announcement during the first podcast of what Gabbard hopes will be The Tulsi Gabbard Show. She also summarized the features of the new Democratic Party that contributed to her decision.

Before the new left brands her “anti-government” or attaches other customary labels used on non-compliant individuals, Tulsi Gabbard reminded viewers of her podcast of the oath she took as a member of the U.S. Army Reserve (with deployments to the Middle East) and as a member of the U.S. Congress (U.S. representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district from 2013 to 2021). The oath to defend the U.S. Constitution is an oath to defend the principles of individual liberty and God-given individual rights.

As Gabbard sees it, the features of the new Democratic Party are diametrically opposed to the principles enshrined in the Constitution, and she vigorously lists those features in her introductory podcast. Here is a brief summary of the most salient points.

* In the Republic the Founders envisioned, the people through their elected representatives governed for the benefit of the people. The new Democrats want a government by the elites for the benefit of the elites.

* The old Democratic Party was the liberal, live and let live party that stood in opposition to the more conservative Republican Party. The new Democratic Party leads the cancel culture, in which fear rules – conformity is accomplished by fear of losing one’s job, fear of our kids not getting into good schools, fear of being cancelled, fear of violence.

* The rule of law is essential to a peaceful society. The new Democratic Party calls for defunding the police, electing progressive District Attorneys, unduly protecting criminals, questioning the legitimacy of courts when they do not rule according to the new Democratic Party principles.

* The Constitution’s original ten Amendments, referred as the Bill of Rights, are intended to protect the people from government’s restrictions on speech, religion, self-defense, and assembly. It also protects people’s private property and personal affairs. Leaders of the new Democratic Party are comfortable calling for the abridgement of these rights. Prime example is President Joe Biden’s attempt to establish a Disinformation Governing Board. Another is Democrat-supported credit card tracking of purchases at gun shops.

* Title IX of the Civil Rights Act was signed into law on June 23, 1972. The purpose of this act was to give women equal opportunities to those of men in the fields of education and sports. The Biden Administration proposes changing Title IX’s aim from prohibiting sex discrimination to prohibiting gender identity discrimination. If passed, this proposal will settle current controversies. Whether women showering or competing in sports with biological males will benefit from this change in Tittle IX depends on one’s ideology – certainly not on objective truths.

* The denial of the existence of objective truth removes boundaries. Truth becomes whatever those in power say it is.

At the end of her podcast, Tulsi Gabbard suggests that those who are opposed to the ills she listed and opposed to government by and for the elites, act by leaving the Democratic Party.

Party knows no impulse but spirit, no prize but victory. It is blind to truth, and hardened against conviction. It seeks to justify error by perseverance, and denies to its own mind the operation of its own judgment. Thomas Paine, The Opposers of the Bank, 1787.

Perhaps it is better to vote for candidates who understand the value of the legacies of our Founders as well as the Founders’ shortcomings, than vote the Party line.

E Pluribus and More Pluribus

The motto the Founders chose was “E Pluribus Unum” — From Many, One. The “many” were the several states carrying their own philosophies, economies, and customs. The “one” was the new nation governed by one Constitution and one goal of realization.

This 4th of July is a good time to reflect how our country today differs from the nation our Founders envisioned. A handy measure is to compare the national motto the Founders chose vs. how our country behaves today.

What is the national motto.

The U.S. national motto is “In God We Trust.” This phrase first appeared in some coinage during the Civil War, was officially sanctioned as the national motto in 1956 by then President Dwight Eisenhower, but is not the original national motto the Founders chose. Actually, the Founders rejected that and other similar phrases for obvious reasons: they were trying to build a secular nation that acknowledged the blessings of Providence but rejected the supremacy of any specific religion (including Deism, to which several Founders adhered). The subject was important enough to the Founders that they wrote this as the first clause in the Bill of Rights: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The motto the Founders chose was “E Pluribus Unum” — From Many, One. The “many” were the several states carrying their own philosophies, economies, and customs. The “one” was the new nation governed by one Constitution and one goal of realization. Of course, one must acknowledge that the norms of that time and place, which allowed for a more homogenous leadership and electorate, facilitated the transition from many to one. However, the sentiment of E Pluribus Unum could have remained unaltered as our nation grew. It did not. At least it did not to the extent the Founders envisioned.

Sentiments of divide and conquer that permeate the national psyche have webbed and flowed since the nation’s birth. Today, we are on an upward flow. Media, including social media, compartmentalizes everybody into spheres of preference – echo chambers – and turn participants into one-issue zealots. Schools, especially government schools, are indoctrination centers, as are workplaces. When school children and employees are forced to sit through hours of diversity training, it is a good bet that a true preference for diversity (when persons will “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”) is not occurring. Add to that brew, legislators that moved away from an ideological center that allows for rational discussion and compromise.

Happy 4th of July

Enjoy the hotdogs and the fireworks. Take a few minutes to cogitate on the new national motto vs. the old one. If you prefer the old motto, perhaps help turn the tide towards E Pluribus, Unum.

Alternate Media with Cameron Weber

The Just Vote No Blog recommends Hardfire TV with host Cameron Weber for engaging, liberty-leaning discussions.

Thank you to Cameron Weber — economist, historian, and educator — for writing, producing and hosting Hardfire TV. Several of the Hardfire segments are on YouTube.

Dr. Weber and the guests on his show provide the liberal (“liberal” meaning “liberty-leaning”) view on a wide variety of subjects. On December 10, 2021, guests Marcy Berry, John Clifton, and Erik Frankel discussed how government seizes the opportunity of a crisis to expand its power and reach.

20 Years of the USA Patriot Act shows how new laws and changes to existing laws immediately followed the declaration of emergency in the wake of the 9/11 attack. The Patriot Act was not renewed in 2020, but the numerous restrictions imposed by the laws the Act left behind remain.

Guests at Hardfire TV

Mandates v. the survival of our Republic

U.S. workers, many of whom worked to provide us with goods and services at the height of the pandemic, are now being threatened with termination if they refuse to abide by vaccine mandates. Not all are quietly acquiescing.

Yes, we have a pandemic. It does not matter whether the pandemic originated from some spliced bug engineered with the help of the U.S. Chief Medical Advisor or not. We still need to deal with the bug. How we deal with it, though, has become a determinant whether our nation remains a free Republic or a restrictive Fascist state.

To elucidate, a free Republic is what our Founding Fathers envisioned – a nation ruled by a government that abides by the will of its people. A Fascist state is ruled by the will of the unholy alliance of government and corporations. And socialism? Questionable whether socialism is taking hold in the U.S. For starters, true socialism views all citizens as responsible for one another, not one group solely responsible for another group.

Now, back to the subject at hand, mandates.

On September 9, 2021, President Joe Biden directed the U.S. Department of Labor to draft a rule to require all businesses with 100 or more employees to mandate that their employees receive the COVID-19 injection or undergo a weekly COVID-19 test.

On November 4, 2021, Biden and the Department of Labor announced the mandate, including heavy fines for employers that do not comply with the injection or testing mandates.

Big corporations, including pharmaceutical corporations, have been reaping government largess for the last couple of decades. Cheap money courtesy of the Fed has allowed corporations to gobble up small and nascent businesses – their competition – creating the kleptocracy we now have. Big Pharma has joined Big Data in their alliance with Big Government, while we the average Janes and Joes of America lose our individual freedoms, our economic power, and our will to fight back.

The Pushback

But that is not the end of the story. It might be that this nation is still the land of the free and the brave. It might be that some are drawing their line in the sand issuing the same warning as the Revolutionaries did back in 1775,

DON’T TREAD ON ME

Yes, we have a pandemic. Yes, our hearts break when we lose a loved one to COVID-19. But some states like Florida and Texas are not willing to let our Republic die too. Citizens of those states, and brave souls in more repressive states such as California and New York, are willing to let nature and natural immunity take their course. They are willing to take chances on behalf of the survival of our Republic.

Pockets of resistance to decrees from above have been popping up, in spite of mainstream media’s habit of calling resisters to government overreach “anti-government,” in spite of peer pressure calling resisters “selfish,” in spite of loss of jobs for resisting. Here are some high-profile upsets to the status quo:

* Airlines, healthcare, and municipal workers were among the first to protest vaccine mandates.

* On November 2, 2021, Edward Durr, a commercial truck driver won the New Jersey Senate seat over long-standing politician Steve Sweeney. His words,

It’s people told they can’t have a job. They can’t go to church. They can’t go to school. You can’t go shopping. They can’t go and eat dinner. …You cannot continue to tell people they cannot do things when we live in the freest country in the world. Edward Durr

* In Virginia financier and political newcomer Glenn Youngkin defeated career politician Terry McAuliffe in the governor’s race. Youngkin’s platform included private sector creation of jobs and lower taxes. But what prompted his win was his support for parents of school-age children concerned about school closures, mask mandates, and curriculum over which parents exercised little control.

* On November 12, a three-member panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans affirmed its ruling to place President Biden’s on hold.

The public interest is also served by maintaining our constitutional structure and maintaining the liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions according to their own convictions – even, or perhaps particularly, when those decisions frustrate government officials. Circuit Court Judge Kurt Engelhardt

* A slick video, reminiscent of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, landed on DC Patriots website opposing P&G’s vaccine mandate. The video reminds viewers of the byword “our body our choice,” and warns of the results of our allowing politicians and corporations to push producers too hard.

Our company has threatened us with termination in the near future for daring to say “our body our choice.” … When the factories in which we work grind to a halt you will be to blame.

The Real Fight

Children suffocate under masks, workers live under threats of termination, going to work or going to our house of worship now comes with numerous restrictions.

The fight is no longer against a bug. The fight is for the survival of our free Republic.

Picture: New York City firefighters protest vaccine mandates in front of Mayor’s office.

Beethoven’s Eroica: Is Tyranny Voluntary?

Be careful what you vote for, you might get it. Beethoven must have thought something along those lines when Napoleon declared himself Emperor.

Recommended Film

Have you listened to Beethoven’s 3rd Symphony, the Eroica, lately? If not, you might enjoy giving yourself a little break from today’s little tyrannies and watch Beethoven’s Eroica – A film by Simon Cellan Jones – BBC 2003 . It’s free on YouTube, it’s beautiful, and the Eroica is well played.

Here we see in 1804, Prince Franz Joseph von Lobkowitz, a patron, hosting at his Vienna palace the first private performance of the Eroica. We hear discussions between the aristocratic guests, musicians, and servants respectively about the revolutionary musical path Ludwig van Beethoven took with Eroica. And we hear differing views on Napoleon Bonaparte, the original subject of this symphony.

As the symphony’s name suggests, the Eroica creates an audible image of struggle and heroic triumph — Beethoven’s view of Bonaparte.

In 1799, Bonaparte staged a coup d’etat, dissolved the Directory that ruled France and appointed himself first council. In 1804, Beethoven wrote the Eroica and dedicated it to Bonaparte.

Indeed, Bonaparte must have appeared at the time as bringer of order in midst of the chaos first brought about by the Reign of Terror and then by the ineffective Directory.

However, he also gave evidence of being a talented and ruthless opportunist by conquering most of Europe. When Bonaparte proclaimed himself Emperor, Beethoven changed the dedication of Eroica to his patron, von Lobkowitz.

Beethoven was able to turn his back on his former hero. All he had to do was erase Bonaparte’s name from the Eroica’s score and replace it with that of Lobkowitz. But the people of France and later most of the territory Napoleon Bonaparte conquered were not able to get rid of him so easily. His reign lasted until 1815.

Tyranny starts as voluntary

Voluntary tyranny sounds totally counterintuitive. But is it? Some of the world’s notable tyrants enjoyed popular support at the beginning of their careers.

Here are a couple of quotes that might explain the paradigm.

Recognizing a Tyrant To Be, Econlib.org, May 18, 2019

Everything is a matter of degree, and we should say that a ruler is a tyrant to the extent that he consistently favors a given part of the population against another, even if the law allows it.

Thus, recognizing a tyrant is not easy, especially before he has assumed full power. The process can be so gradual that most people may not see tyranny coming; only the last step may be obvious.

John Philpot Curran, The Speeches:

It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.

Be careful what you vote for, you might get it.

In Defense of the Governor’s Partying While We Dine Alone

Politicians often belong to elite circles that thrive in the acquisition of power. Their default modus operandi is “For your own safety and the safety of your neighbors, follow my rules.” There is no covenant that the rule maker follow those same rules.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has issued numerous directives, instructions and guidelines regarding COVID-19, all describing in great detail what residents of the state can and cannot do. One activity specifically verboten is partying indoors by members of several households. One suggestion especially idiosyncratic is wearing a mask while dining — admittedly a difficult scenario to visualize, leaving one to feel obliged to wear a mask between bites.

Therefore, California residents were justifiably confused when news broke that Governor Newsom on November 6, attended a dinner, along with several other guests, in celebration of the birthday of lobbyist Jason Kinney. The venue was the elite Napa Valley restaurant French Laundry.

Enter U.S. Congressman for California’s 4th District, Tom McClintock, a conservative Republican whose libertarian streak is known to liberty-loving communities. On November 19, on the House floor, Congressman McClintock delivered a speech in defense of Governor Newsom’s maskless cozy dinner.

The speech is must-read

Mr. Speaker:

I rise this morning in defense of Governor Gavin Newsom who recently defied his own idiotic Covid edicts as he partied at one of the few restaurants that he has not yet forced out of business. I defend him because he was doing what we all once did in a free society: make our own decisions over what risks we are willing to run and what precautions we are willing to take according to our own circumstances to protect our own health.

Yes, Covid is a nasty bug and a quarter of a million Americans have died while having it. But this isn’t the Bubonic Plague. The CDC’s best estimate is that if you are under 49, your chance for surviving Covid – it you get it – is 99.92 percent. Even for those over 70 the survival rate is 94.6 percent.

Forty percent who get it don’t even know they have it. Yet we have allowed our officials to ruin our quality of life over it – destroying countless businesses, throwing tens of millions into unemployment, robbing our children of their educations and shredding our most cherished rights as Americans.

Governor Newsom’s night of partying should be a wake-up call to every American.

Every time we step outside our homes, the risks we face multiply. A free society assumes that its citizens are competent to assess those risks, balance them against the avoidance costs, and to manage their decisions in a generally responsible way. It’s called common sense, and it’s a necessary prerequisite for self-government and liberty.

The choices of an octogenarian with emphysema might be very different from those of a healthy governor in California. Only a fool would claim the omniscience to make an informed judgment for every person in every circumstance in every community. Sadly, this crisis has revealed that fools abound in public office and that a fool with power can quickly become a petty tyrant.

Which brings us back to Governor Newsom. These government nannies love to tell us that they’re just following the science. What does the science tell us? It tells us that Covid poses virtually no risk to children but can be severe among the elderly. So, what did these lockdown leftists do? They closed all the schools and ordered infected patients into nursing homes!

The science tells us that outdoor transmissions of the virus are extremely rare and that 80 percent of infections occur in people’s homes. So what did these lockdown leftists do? They closed our beaches, parks and campgrounds and ordered people to stay at home!

The science tells us that obesity is a contributing factor to the severity of the disease. So what did these lockdown leftists do? They closed all the gyms and kept the liquor stores open!

These lockdowns haven’t saved lives. The states with the most stringent lockdowns generally have the highest mortality rates from Covid. Utah stayed open while next door, Colorado shut down. Utah currently has half the Covid mortality rate and 3/4 the unemployment rate as Colorado. But the lockdowns have cost countless lives from suicides, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and deferred health screenings and treatments.

Recently, Governor Newsom demanded that restaurant diners replace their masks after every bite, but also minimize the times they take them off. I guess that means take very big bites. Thanksgiving dinners are allowed in California, but only when they are held outside, guests are seated six feet apart, and they last no more than two hours. It’s all right to use the bathroom, but only if it is frequently sanitized. Otherwise, presumably you’ll just have to use the bushes. And for God’s sake – NO SINGING!

I have wondered how much longer the American people are going to tolerate this nonsense?

So let us not criticize Governor Newsom. Perhaps he has just offered us all deliverance from his own folly.

Nor should we criticize the California legislators who ignored travel and quarantine restrictions to junket to Hawaii. Nor should we ridicule Speaker Pelosi for choosing not to wear a mask in a hair salon that was forced to close for the rest of us.

Good for them. They’re demonstrating by their own actions the freedom that every American citizen needs to reclaim from these very same people. The governor SHOULD make his own decisions about running his own life. I only ask that he and his ilk would stop telling the rest of us how to run ours.

Rule Makers Need Not Be Inconvenienced

Congressman McClintock touched upon a truth that must not be ignored. Politicians often belong to elite circles that thrive in the acquisition of power. Their default modus operandi is “For your own safety and the safety of your neighbors, follow my rules.” There is no covenant that the rule maker follow those same rules. Power grows as constituents are rendered increasingly fearful and receptive to obedience in exchange for perceived protection. Rule makers need not be inconvenienced.

(Featured picture posted by Fox News)

Where You Need Antifa’s Permission to Speak

Permission to speak from Antifa and other left-leaning activists is just the beginning.

riot

Some articles succeed in presenting such a vivid picture of events readers feel they are witnessing the happenings themselves. Mimi Soros (no relation) and Catherine Hart wrote one such article, published in the California Political News & Views.

They were trying to attend a College Republicans event featuring Ann Coulter, and were blocked by Antifa and other left-leaning activists. This sad situation happened at the University of California Berkeley campus – once home of the Free Speech Movement – but it could have happened in any progressive-leaning town in the U.S.A.

We seem to be entering an age in which we will all need permission to speak.  Does it stop at speech?  How about needing permission to exercise our religious beliefs, to defend ourselves against intruders or attackers, to travel, what else?

Warnings From a Former Communist

On October 17, GGLR Meetup hosted a presentation from a former Chinese Communist Party member. The speaker had serious warning for America.

Shen Yun

Report from the Trenches

On October 17, Meet Up Group Golden Gate Liberty Revolution hosted speaker June Gilliam, who shared her story with an audience of about 40 assorted conservatives, libertarians, skeptics, and ordinary seekers of truth. Ms. Gilliam called her presentation a Journey From Indoctrination To Awareness: From a Collectivist Mindset all the way to Conservatism, From Chinese Communist Patriotism to American Patriotism.

The presentation had much information about the nature of the Chinese Communist Party, repression of traditional culture and spiritual belief, pervasive indoctrination, and veiled cracks in the CCP’s economic edifice.

However, the main takeaway of the talk was a recommendation that members of the audience acquaint themselves with 4 items. Then spread the word about those items.

* Item 1: The Naked Communist, a book by Cleon Skousen (1958). Central to Skousen’s work are the 45 Communist Goals. A few of the goals might not entirely pass muster with libertarians, but some of the goals highlighted in the presentation are worth noting.

#15 Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
#17 Get control of the schools.
#20 Infiltrate the press.
#22 Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression.
#29 Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step.
#30 Discredit the American Founding Fathers.

Readers can place a check mark “Done!” after the goals they feel have been accomplished.

* Item 2: Shen Yun. The website of this splendid show lists the “9 Characteristics of Shen Yun.” The very first is Reclaiming a Lost Heritage. Heritage, culture, spiritual experience needs to be anathema to any form of tyrannical government. A people steeped in any of these three attributes will more likely fight against tyrannical encroachment into their practices. Beautiful art uplifts the soul whereas tyranny aims to squash it.

* Item 3: Falun Gong. This spiritual practice, unsurprisingly, is also banned in China, for the same reason Shen Yun is banned. Here is a brief description from their website.

Falun Gong is a Buddhist-based practice of meditation and moral living. Although introduced to the public in China in 1992, its roots extend back thousands of years. Tens of millions of people practice in China. Falun Gong is also practiced in over 90 countries around the world.

* Item 4:  The Epoch Times. This weekly publication is both print and digital. It is published in the U.S., but carries a National and a China section. From their website:

The Epoch Times was founded in the United States in the year 2000 in response to communist repression and censorship in China. Our founders, Chinese-Americans who themselves had fled communism, sought to create an independent media to bring the world uncensored and truthful information.

Note: Whether The Epoch Times is published by Falun Gong, is pro-Trump, is banned on social media, or suffers from all the other ills the mainstream media ascribes to it is irrelevant to this present discussion. What is relevant is that the publication contains stories not likely found elsewhere that readers can see and then dig for some more information if desired.

Truth is Available to Those Who Dig For It

June Gilliam’s presentation on October 17 was riveting. Her message is that the acknowledged objective of Communism is global infiltration. In her view the infiltration in the U.S. is pretty much widespread in the guise of progressivism, socialism, democratic-socialism, or green deals.

A Word About Golden Gate Liberty Revolution (GGLR)

This San Francisco-based Meetup that hosted this presentation on Chinese Communism has over 700 members. It started as the Ron Paul Meetup Group in 2008. In those days weekly meetings were packed with folks of all shades of the liberty movement focused on helping garner voter attention for then Texas U.S. Congress Member and Presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Today, the group meets monthly, the room is not packed. But the loyal liberty loving members, many going back to the days of Ron Paul precinct walks, do fill the room when from time to time GGLR presents a guest speaker. It has become an accepted fact that only quality speakers show up at GGLR.

Why Calvin Coolidge

Calvin Coolidge was one of those geniuses ignored by most and respected by a loyal following.

Why Calvin Coolidge?

CoolidgeThese days we certainly hear a lot about Lincoln, Roosevelt, Obama, Trump.  How about Coolidge?

“Silent Cal,” so named because he spoke only when it was absolutely necessary, is admired by small-government advocates and ignored by central planners.  In his address delivered to the Holy Name Society, Washington DC, 1924, Coolidge expressed the ultimate liberty-leaning rule:

Liberty is not collective, it is personal. All liberty is individual liberty.

It is your serfdom or liberty.  It is your choice.  It is your vote.  Your vote puts candidates, good or bad, into office.  Your vote determines the laws under which you live.

Your vote also determines your take-home pay, how much of what you earn is available to purchase and invest by yourself and your family.  Here is another favorite Coolidge quote from his 1925 inaugural address,

The men and women of this country who toil are the ones who bear the cost of the Government. Every dollar that we carelessly waste means that their life will be so much the more meager.


Does Political Correctness Have Limits?

There is a world of difference between political correctness and civility. PC is rapidly replacing civility, to perhaps dire consequences.

The Difference

There is a world of difference between civility and political correctness (PC).  Civility is thoughtful behavior towards everyone.  PC is prescribed, agenda-driven speech and action that applies to some but not to others.  Civility comes from the inside, while PC is prompted from the outside.

Increasingly, PC is taking the place of civility.  PC harshly censors our speech, actions, and even thoughts.  Dare to call for discipline in a classroom, and the label of “privileged” soon follows.  Dare to criticize the work of a self-identified-female employee, the label of “sexist” immediately arises.  Oh, and calling anyone female or male without the qualifying “self-identified” borders on the self destructive.

The Advocates

Advocates of PC say they want to level the playing field, promote equality of outcomes, compensate for privilege.  At first blush, such objectives might even sound laudable.  But the problem is political correctness does not recognize limits.

The Example

Kurt Vonnegut’s short story Harrison Bergeron (1961) paints a world towards which PC advocates might be takings us all, a world in which the new and improved American Constitution prescribes complete equality for all.

In Vonnegut’s dystopian world nobody can be smarter, more talented or prettier than the rest.  Laws force people to wear “handicaps,” such as masks for the beautiful, sound to disrupt thought for the intelligent, and bags filled with lead balls for the strong and/or agile.

Here is Vonnegut’s idea of a domestic dialogue in the age of complete fairness:

“You been so tired lately — kind of wore out,” said Hazel.  “If there were just some way we could make a little hole in the bottom of the bag, and just take out a few of them lead balls.  Just a few.”

“Two years in prison and two thousand dollars fine for every ball I took out,” said George.  “I don’t call that a bargain.”…

“If I tried to get away with it,” said George, “then other people’d get away with it — and pretty soon we’d be right back to the dark ages again, with everybody competing against everybody else…”

The Consequences

And here is a concern related in an article on U.S. News.com about the downward trends of math and English scores as measured by college-readiness tests:

“Much more concerning, however, were readiness levels in math and English, which continued a downward slide dating to 2014.  This year [2018], math scores dropped to a 20-year low.”

“The news reignited concerns over whether there is a mismatch between what students learn in school and what college entrance exams ask of them, whether tests are an accurate barometer of college readiness, and — from an equity standpoint — whether the tests present an advantage to those with more means.”

Rich BoyHopefully colleges will not further waste parents and/or taxpayers’ money carrying out studies on whether “those with more means” have advantages over those without, since we all know that to be the case already.  Such advantages will always exist … that is unless legislators decide to really level the playing field by creating the position of “Handicapper General” as those in Kurt Vonnegut’s story did.


%d bloggers like this: