Many Jews seem conflicted about Jewry

Posted on by
5

The Ashkenazi Jews are a remnant of the Jewish diaspora. A couple thousand years ago, they fled from Judea to Europe, and then were driven east. They did not assimilate, but deliberately kept to themselves to practice a religion and engage in a culture that was persecuted through the ages.

Just in case they had aspirations for integrating into the local population, the locals ensured that they did not. Marrying a Jew was a good way for a gentile to get disowned and disinherited, and vice versa.

DNA analysis suggests that at one point the Ashkenazim dropped to a population of as few as 350 people spread over the European continent. They were very nearly extinguished.

But in some ways, what didn’t kill them made them stronger. They have an inbred vulnerability to certain diseases but a near immunity to others.

Ashkenazim often score high on standardized IQ tests and they’ve succeeded inordinately in science, law, literature and business. In analyzing the reasons for this success, it’s difficult to tease apart the role of their admirable minds from the role of their admirable culture.

It’s a culture that values education, achievement, wealth, power, and – not least – family.

I’ve wailed at the Western Wall, both literally and metaphorically, though I’m not Jewish. Then again, maybe now we’re all Jewish. In a way, everyone with a claim on Western Civilization is Jewish. I claim a heritage from Moses, Jesus, Paul, Freud, Einstein, Spielberg, Oppenheimer, Kasparov, Ben-Gurion, Kissinger, Bellow, Salk, Kafka, Chagall and Dylan – all Jews.

Thus, I’m saddened to see some of today’s prominent Jews equivocate in their defense of the Jewish state of Israel.

No less that the Senator Charles Schumer – the first Jewish Senate Minority Leader – is willing to throw Israel under the bus if necessary to save his job. No less than Rahm Emmanuel, Chief of Staff in the Obama White House and an advisor to Bill Clinton before that, is willing to put Israel back in the Jewish ghetto if it puts him back in the White House.

The Middle East has always been a complicated place. If only all of it were like Israel – largely an arid land with few natural riches. Instead, vast areas are cursed by black gold. The energy dependency of the world requires us to pay attention to this place. To mollify, cajole, bully and beg the barbarians.

It’s easy and habit-forming to blame things on the Jews and to see their oil-rich adversaries as the victims, notwithstanding the appalling atrocities committed in the name of those “victims.”

But as a matter of history, it was the Jews who were the victims. Their persecution for thousands of years culminated with the systematic murder of a third of their population. After the event that put an upper case “H” on the word Holocaust, the Jews swore that they would be victims never again.

In short, the Jews refuse to be exterminated. Should they be blamed for that?

For those who see the Jews as the source of the problem in the Middle East, I have a question: What would you have them do differently?

Are the Jews supposed to give up their ancient homeland, to give up Israel? Are they supposed to go back to the lands of their persecution and victimhood – to Europe, to America, to Russia? Because that’s what the Palestinians demand.

Look at a map. “From the river to the sea” refers to the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea. That’s all of Israel. The slogan chosen by the Palestinians candidly calls for the abolition of Israel. 

The Ashkenazim of Europe were persecuted for a thousand years, but against all odds they maintained their identity, their culture and their religion. In their faith and unanimity, they did well and they did good. If only their American successors could be so united and so brave.

The decline in violent crime correlates to a decline in testosterone levels

Posted on by
1

The Trump administration has heralded a decline in violent crime in the past few years. America is a safer place.

We’re told that this should be credited to Republican policies for greater law enforcement and more vigorous criminal prosecution. That may be so. I’m certainly in favor of both those policies. But maybe there’s also another factor at work.

The graph* above shows a clear correlation between declining violent crime and declining testosterone levels. To be sure, there’s an exception around the year 2020 where violent crime spiked but testosterone levels did not. It’s safe to say the spike in violent crime at that point was due to something other than a spike in testosterone levels.

Gee, what could be the reason for the spike in violent crime around 2020? Oh yeah. There was a worldwide pandemic where the Biden administration and many Democrat-controlled cities shut down law enforcement.

Apart from this Covid pandemic crime spree, the correlation is clear.

Now, of course, correlation does not equal causation. Just because a decline in violent crime correlates with a decline in testosterone does not mean that the decline in testosterone caused the decline in violent crime. Logically speaking, it could just as well be the reverse – that the violent crime reduction caused the testosterone reduction. (Are they still castrating criminals?) Or it could be that both were caused by some other factor (but I can’t imagine what) or that each was caused by different factors.

But nonetheless, we’re left with the correlation.

In this particular case, there are reasons to think that correlation does equal causation. Testosterone is the male hormone that is responsible for dense muscle mass, risk-taking and road rage.

Testosterone is the main reason that males are far more likely than females to engage in mountaineering, car racing, entrepreneurialism, Seal Team 6-ing, boxing, exploration – and violent crime.

The males most likely to engage in violent crime are the young ones, in whom testosterone levels are the highest. And among young men, young Blacks are far more likely to engage in violent crime than young whites. Is it any surprise that young Black men tend to have higher testosterone levels – and incarceration levels – than young white men?

That said, let me also say that I’m a fan of testosterone, despite (or maybe because of) its mucho-macho side. In fact, the phrase “testosterone poisoning” makes me want to punch someone. But I have to admit, there are benefits to having less of the stuff. And detriments.

*The graph was generated at my request by AI using data from the FBI on violent crime and from the NIH on testosterone levels. I should mention that AI does not buy my theory because . . . sociology. In any event, cursory research finds that no one has noted this correlation. The contrarian in me says that proves it’s right. If you disagree, let’s settle it outside.

Eurocrats want to roast and eat the elderly

Posted on by
Reply

Over 100,000 Europeans will die heat-related deaths this summer. That’s up from the usual summer toll.

I’m sure there are worse ways to die but I have this vision of an old man alone in his boxer shorts in his apartment, simmering and sweltering, fanning himself, wishing one of his daughters would call, and finally keeling over from heat stroke.

Days later, neighbors find his rotted remains when the stench wafts down the hallway.

The main reason for this tragic carnage is that Europeans disapprove of air conditioning. They say it uses too much electricity. Producing that electricity requires the burning of fossil fuels which contribute to . . . you know where this is headed . . . global warming.

Too much global warming, and you’re likely to die of . . . you know where this is headed, too . . . heat stroke.

When it comes to heat stroke, the Europeans apparently believe it’s better to die now in the discomfort of your own un-air-conditioned home than later in a warmed globe.

This Luddite loathing of air conditioning means that only about 20% of European homes and offices are air conditioned and habitable during a heat wave. That compares to about 90% in America.

Air conditioning does indeed use electricity, and generating that electricity does indeed burn fossil fuels (though not always – France generates two-thirds of its electricity with nuclear reactors).

But the cost of air conditioning is more than merely a matter of life and death. It also involves money. A recent study found that the productivity of workers during a European heat wave drops significantly. That drop could be avoided if air conditioning were common. In short, air conditioning would largely pay for itself.

Ah, but there’s another big cost to adding air conditioning to homes in Europe, a hidden cost.

About 85% of the heat-related deaths in Europe are elderly people. Think of all the money that is saved by discarding those unproductive old folks. The Eurocrats have certainly thought of it.

In short, Europe’s lack of air conditioning costs lives but saves money. Lengthened life spans for the elderly is a problem. Roasting them is a solution.

Next, they’ll also think of an economically effective use for the corpses. Soylent Green, anyone?

Cambridge has blood on their hands

Posted on by
3

By now, you know the story. A man named Jason Arday was hired by Cambridge to be its “youngest Black* professor.”

Cambridge hired Arday in the wake of the George Floyd death, a tragic death that had as much impact on Great Britain as on Minnesota. What we learned from the George Floyd episode was not that we should treat or incarcerate mentally disturbed, substance-abusing criminals. No, that lesson was too much for those Days of Wokeness.

What we learned instead was that anytime a person dies in police custody, the police must have murdered him – if he was Black.

Just as rebels holler “To the barricades,” the DEI advocates hollered, “To the reparations!”

The reparations were not to take the form of putting the likes of George Floyd into in an expensive institution for treatment, rehabilitation and, if necessary, punishment. The reparations were instead to take the form of putting a person who the DEI advocates view as someone just like George Floyd (to the DEI advocates, they all look the same) into a professorship at Cambridge. Call it the George Floyd Chair.

It didn’t matter whether the Black person was ever a victim of slavery or if his ancestors ever were. What mattered was that the person was Black.

And so, it was no problem that the George Floyd Chair was filled with Jason Arday, even though his parents immigrated to London from Ghana and there is no evidence that he or any ancestor suffered slavery (if they did, it was the Black-on-Black kind).

Arday was a piece of work. Outside the classroom, he bragged that he once ran 600 miles in 6 days. As if that was not enough, he once ran 30 marathons – a 26-mile race – in 33 days. In his spare time, he said, he raised $6 million dollars for charity in the span of a few weeks.

He said he barely spoke until he was 11. He suffered two brain tumors.

Inside the classroom, he was touted as brilliant. Any claims to the contrary were dismissed as “racist.”

Yes, there was much ado about the phenom named Jason Arday. It turned out to be much ado about nothing. I was all lies.

There were no brain tumors. He spoke at the usual age. He apparently ran no marathons, much less 30 in 33 days. The $6 million he single-handedly raised for charity in a short time was actually raised over a long period of time by a charity group he was loosely affiliated with.

The thing that did him in, however, was not his superhuman fabulism. It was his academic fraud. It was discovered that his PhD thesis contained over 100 instances of plagiarism. Some of the plagiarism was page upon page of exact copying.

The initial reaction by Cambridge was of course, “More racism! By racist critics!” Arday himself literally called the police when journalists sent him emails asking for his comment. (The police belatedly dismissed his complaint.)

Despite the stonewalling by both Cambridge and Arday, his plagiarism was too stark to be ignored. Whole pages were cut and pasted, including the grammatical errors. Cambridge finally announced that it was undertaking an investigation.

Arday resigned from his prestigious and tenured position later that day. Cambridge must find another Black man for the George Floyd Chair.

Yesterday, this story went from amusing to bemusing. Arday was found dead in London. Police say there is no evidence of foul play. That’s police talk for suicide. Although I condemn Arday’s fraud and his attacks on critics who sought to point it out, part of me feels bad for him and his family.

Here’s who I don’t feel bad for: Cambridge.  

It is often observed that affirmative action may feel good to the advocates, but it does no favors to the beneficiaries. The beneficiary is put into a position they’re not ready for, a position where they are bound to fail. Indeed, the failure rate for affirmative action Black students is significantly higher than for ordinary white students.

Lies are compounded by more lies. Soon, a little resume exaggeration balloons into “I ran 30 marathons in 33 days!” Soon, the Black person is no longer a person, he’s just Black. 

Cambridge is not full of dummies. The fabulism claimed by Arday was a red flag, and the plagiarism must have been an open secret. Cambridge didn’t care, for they had their Black.

Cambridge’s charges of “racism!” against accomplished academics who raised good faith questions was a coverup, and one that potentially damaged those academics.

All this was for Cambridge to feel good about itself, to fill the George Floyd Chair.

Cambridge, you have blood on your hands.

*Most Black people want an upper case “B” and so that’s what I give them. It costs me nothing. Most white people want a lower case “w” and so that’s what I give them. That, too, costs me nothing. As for the whole ridiculous controversy, I have bigger fish to fry.

Woke — and still crazy after all these years

Posted on by
1

AOC informs us with a laugh that “Woke 1 was crazy!”

Yes, it was. Remember the craziness of DEI, where we admitted kids to college or hired employees based not on the content of their character but on the color of their skin?

Remember when crazed wokesters advocated defunding the police? Or defunding the military? Or opening the southern border?

Recall how they crazily wanted to abolish the prisons or, better yet, to stop prosecuting the criminals?

Don’t forget the crazy new words and phrases that wokesters invented like “Latinx” or “birthing persons” where middle-aged white people mutilate beautiful languages in the name of “inclusiveness.” And don’t forget the crazy new surgical procedures like “gender affirmation” where middle-aged white doctors mutilate the genitals of confused pubescent kids.

AOC wants the wokesters to get a do-over. Call it Woke 2. New “rhetoric” is now required for this new totalitarianism, she says.

But this isn’t a matter of rhetoric. This is a matter of policies.

So, let’s talk about policies. What’s the new policy of Woke 2 on their crazy policy of releasing murderers and other criminals from prison? What about abolishing the military? What about DEI?

What’s the new policy of Woke 2 on crazy words and phrases like “Latinx” and “birthing person”? What about the craze of mutilating the genitals of confused children? What about the crazy opening of the southern border? What about coddling the crazy barbarians of Hamas? What about everyone who got canceled — by crazies — for being out of step with the craziness of woke?

AOC offers no answers, only laughter.

The only change I see between Woke 1 and Woke 2 is the addition of canceling Thanksgiving. And the proclamation that fireworks on Independence Day “sucks,” apparently because it celebrates the birth of the nation.

As for the other things, I suspect that the wokester 2’ers, like the wokester 1’ers, want to do all the same. They just want to do it under a new name with no accountability for the last time.  

“Woke” is now considered a joke. But it’s not funny. These people cost us lives, and cost us trillions of dollars. AOC and the rest of the wokesters can’t laugh that away and get a redo of Woke 1 by just calling it Woke 2. 

There’s an old saying: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Enes doesn’t rhyme with it but he does have one

Posted on by
5

Here’s the latest chapter in the WNBA’s attempt to figure out what the W in their name stands for. A former NBA player named Enes Kanter Freedom has declared eligible for the WNBA draft.

I can’t bring myself to call this person a woman, so I won’t. I’ll instead use plural pronouns. I’d rather be ungrammatical by using a plural pronoun when referring to a single person, than be unscientific by referring to a man as a woman. 

You see, Enes’ name rhymes with “tennis.” It does not rhyme with, well, you what it does not rhyme with. But they do have one.

They also have the size and weight of a person who has one, and then some. They stand about 6’10” fully erect. That stature will of course make them the tallest player in the WNBA. Moreover, they last weighed about 250 pounds which will make their muscle mass about double that of the average WNBA player.

Enes is not a bad player for a man, but they are no longer good enough for the NBA. In the NBA before they retired, they got a few minutes of playing time (and only counted as one player!) and more than a few million dollars of compensation.

But here’s the hickey. Enes was born a male. Enes grew up a male. Enes had the flood of testosterone at puberty of a male. Enes played as a male. Enes played with and against males.

Enes now says they “identifies” as a woman. Hence the WNBA draft eligibility.

This forces the WNBA to put a little gloss on the W in their name, right? And I don’t mean lip gloss. The WNBA will have to decide whether Enes is a W.

My guess is that they (I’m referring to the WNBA) will decide that they (I’m referring to Enes) is not a W. However, their (referring again to the WNBA) grounds for that decision will be rather subjective. They (the WNBA) will let a psychologist say that they (Enes) is not really a W. But meanwhile, the psychologist hired by them (Enes) will say that they (Enes) really is.

There’s more. Now another guy, er, gal, wants to do the same thing. It’s the person shown above alongside Enes. No word on whether they will shave their beard.

Here’s a radical idea. What if we say that “W” means “woman,” that “woman” means a person with two X chromosomes, and that plural pronouns refer to a plurality of people?

In Spain, they don’t say “Push 2 for English”

Posted on by
4
Painting of “The Tower of Babel” by Endre Rozada, 1958

When I call an investment firm or a doctor’s office to speak with a person, it’s bad enough that I have to listen to a voice mail that gives me six options, none of which includes speaking with a person.

But there’s something else that bugs me. It’s “Press 2 for Spanish.” That part of the recording is often in Spanish.

That Spanish part is usually preceded by “Press 1 for English.”

But wait a minute. I already have the recording in English. Now I have to press 1 for some more?

As for option to converse in Spanish with the recording, I have never felt the need for that, and I doubt I ever will. I’m fed up with being given this option. Being fed up is all the worse when I have to listen to the six options, none of which includes speaking with a person. Who speaks English.

 In my extensive travels in Spain and my limited travels in Latin America, I’ve noticed that they don’t return the favor. I’ve never heard a recording in Spain say, “Press 2 for English.” (Or Arabic, even in view of Spain”s recent influx of Moroccans.)

Ah, you say, but what about the people in America who speak only Spanish?

I say, to hell with them. Or more specifically, to home with them.

I dare say that practically everyone legally in America speaks English. The ones who speak only Spanish are invariably here illegally.

The banks and doctors’ offices should not be facilitating the presence of illegals in America. Enough already.

Just give poor people more money

Posted on by
5

Socialists think poor people have too little money, and rich people have too much.

I happen to think the truth is somewhat the opposite. A big problem is that poor people in America have too much money despite their proven inability to manage it.

Poor people consume monster meals and quart-sized sodas at McDonalds, lease gas-guzzling trucks that are too big for the road, buy lousy food that is too much for them to eat, and get 100” TVs even though there’s nothing on.

But for purposes of the discussion, let’s accept the premise: Poor people have too little money.

Let’s start the discussion with the fact that poor people pay hardly anything in federal income taxes, after considering their low tax rates and credits like the childcare credit. In fact, the top 1% of earners pay about 40% of federal income taxes – much more than any honest calculation of their “fair share” – and the bottom 40% pay practically nothing.

So, it doesn’t help poor people to reduce their taxes. You can’t go lower than zero on their income taxes. So, what to do?

The answer is, do go lower than zero. In other words, give them money. It won’t make them happy for long, but at least it beats the alternative.

That alternative is free stuff. Such as free college tuition, free or subsidized housing, cheap food at government grocery stores (but only if you show an ID, which we are told racial minorities don’t possess, and so racial minorities have to starve), fake “work” from home four days a week, three-day weekends on the other days, food stamps, flip-flops in the office, and purple hair with nose piercings.

OK, it’s not clear that society currently subsidizes purple hair and nose piercings. But it’s more than enough that we tolerate it.

However, here’s where it gets interesting. The Left doesn’t want to give money to poor people. Money is too fungible. Next thing you know, they might be spending it intelligently. They might even – shudder! – save it.

Instead, the Left wants to provide free stuff in lieu of money. That serves two purposes. One, it mandates that the poor recipient will use it for the purpose that the left wants, which is usually amusement. Bread and circuses, you know.

I’m reminded of the discount given to “seniors.” I’m part of the richest demographic in the history of the world. Why do they condescend me with a $3 discount for the city zoo? It’s not because I need the discount. It’s because they think it buys my vote. I’m here to tell you, my vote is not for sale for $3. It’ll take at least $5.

Two, and more importantly, it empowers the Left. The Left gets to control who receives the free stuff, the Left gets the credit for the free stuff, and the Left gets its big cut of the free stuff in the form of administration.

Do you think I’m kidding? The administrative staff at America’s colleges has grown by double to quadruple the faculty staff in the last generation. What the hell are all these staffers doing?

It’s a lot like the mafia.

I have an offer they can’t refuse. Cut out all these Lefty administrators and all these attached strings and just give the poor people the frickin’ money.

A tale of two Anthonys; the disgrace of Fauci

Posted on by
1

The two Anthonys are the former Chief Medical Advisor to the President, namely Anthony Fauci, and the former Justice of the Supreme Court, namely Anthony Kennedy.

The story of Anthony Fauci is well documented. He was a respected scientist who started believing – and relishing – his own press in the course of the worldwide pandemic and national tragedy that we call Covid.

If he’d had the money, Fauci would have set up his own Twitter-like social media outlet. As it was, he didn’t need to, because he effectively owned the real Twitter. Back in the pre-Elon days, Twitter embraced any praise of him and censored any criticism of him.

“Embraced” is a good word to use in connection with Fauci. His dairy released by the Senate this week shows a man engaged in self-embrace and self-pleasure. Tony wrote love letters to Tony. Tony gave big hugs for Tony. Tony all but had a Tony fan club, and he was the biggest fan of all. Tony lamented that he didn’t have time to read all of Tony’s press but, paradoxically, Tony had time to write about all the press that Tony didn’t have time to read about.

That alone is unseemly but it is not a crime. Many people like or even love themselves. Their love letters to themselves are embarrassing but not criminal.

What is criminal are two things. First, Fauci misled the American people about the source of Covid. It was apparently a leak from a Chinese bioweapons lab, after all, not a naturally occurring virus that jumped to humans in the “wet markets” of China. Maybe Covid really should have kept its original name of “Chinese flu.” At the time, however, the media decided that naming it the “Chinese flu” because it indisputably started in China, one way or another, would be racist. (Never mind the precedent of “Spanish flu” for a flu that didn’t even start in Spain.)

 Second, Fauci lied to both the American people and the American Congress about the dangers of Covid to otherwise healthy people. The fatality rate actually was on the order of the fatality rate for ordinary flu – well less than 1% and much less than that for people who are young, notwithstanding the masks still being worn by Democrats who are still in solidarity with Fauci. Accordingly, Fauci locked down the country and produced a crisis in education and acculturation that we’re still dealing with six years later.

The lying to Congress is known as the crime of perjury. To avoid yet another count of perjury, Fauci refused to answer over 100 questions posed by the Senate this week. He did get some additional attention in his tiresome invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, but not the kind he relishes.

Viewed generously, Fauci’s lies for the Chinese were perhaps in the interest of maintaining cordial relations with America’s biggest geopolitical rival. In the course of dealing with a worldwide pandemic, we didn’t want to also deal with WW III.

And Fauci’s lies to Congress and other Americans about the dangers of Covid to healthy people might be seen as an exercise in caution. He figured it was better to be extra careful by exaggerating the dangers of Covid than to be reckless and thereby contribute to the extinction of humanity. (Forget about kids’ education and well-being; his allies in the teachers’ unions want more days off.)

But aren’t both of those justifications for Fauci’s lies beyond his pay grade? Aren’t they matters for a boss to decide – like a President? Or, better yet, aren’t they issues for the American people?

Memo to Fauci: We can handle the truth.

Then there is the other Anthony, the one called Justice Anthony Kennedy. He was Ronald Reagan’s second choice for a vacant Supreme Court seat, after the great jurist Robert Bork had been, well, borked by a Senate Judiciary Committee headed by a man who went on become senile (if he wasn’t born senile) named Joe Biden.

Justice Kennedy, it is rumored (but I have this on good authority), was known to ask his clerks to scour the newspapers each day to retrieve any press clippings that mentioned him. They were to leave the clippings on his desk so that he could read all about himself.

Kennedy, mind you, putatively was not a politician. He was a Supreme Court Justice with life tenure.

Kennedy’s most famous Supreme Court opinion was the 2015 case giving gays the Constitutional right to marry one another. I personally have no quarrel with a gay person marrying whomever or whatever he or she or they or it wants, so long as I’m not required somehow to recognize it as a matter of my religion.

But I think the Court was amiss in this decision. The states and the people were rapidly coming to my point of view. Why not let things play out in the court of public opinion on this matter of cultural norms that has no legitimate legal loadstar, rather than letting lawyers argue it in the highest court?

Why not, you ask? Because that would preclude Kennedy from being the hero, that’s why. There are those press clippings he had to worry about, you know.

I don’t mean to suggest that Justice Kennedy’s self-aggrandizement was equivalent to Fauci’s embarrassing self-pleasuring or criminal deceit. The two are of different orders, and I strongly doubt that Justice Kennedy ever committed a crime.

But I do mean that public servants should serve the public. Their first priority should be the public good, not their so-called legacy.

DSA is the best thing to happen to the GOP since Jimmy Carter

Posted on by
3

Jimmy Carter the peanut farmer was great, OK?

His 4 years of ineptitude gave us 12 years of Republican rule in the form of Ronald Reagan and his successor, George H. W. Bush. (It would have been at least 16 years, if not for Ross Perot taking many of Bush’s votes to be re-elected in 1992.) And arguably, that 12 years of GOP rule produced another 8 years of GOP rule through the prodigal son, George W. Bush.

I love Jimmy Carter. (I hate Ross Perot.)

There is a chance we’ll see something similar in the midterms this fall. The Democratic Socialists of America, or DSA, has been winning Democratic primaries. It turns out that Democrats love socialists.

Or they think they do. Democrats’ support for the idea of socialism is quite different from their support for socialism itself. For example:

One of the DSA policies in its platform is to abolish prisons. That’s right, convicted murderers and rapists would go free. But only 27% of Democrats support that policy. (You have to wonder what those 27% are smoking, but, still, that’s only a little more than one in four.)

Another DSA platform position is to abolish the U.S. military. If China invades, we’ll rely on guys with shotguns. (Oops, we’ll have taken away everyone’s gun, too.) Democrats in general disfavor that policy by about a two to one margin.

Another DSA position is to grant amnesty to all illegal immigrants. Democrats actually favor this policy by a plurality(!) but still only 44% favor it.

Here, it gets interesting. Another DSA platform is to abolish the Presidency and the Supreme Court, replacing both with arms of Congress. Only 30% of Democrats agree with this proposal.

While we’re abolishing sacrosanct branches of government established by the Constitution, DSA would also abolish the Senate. The problem with the Senate, they say, is that it serves as a check on pure democracy. Even the Democrats mostly oppose this abolition.

In short, the DSA would make us a lot like the Soviet Union (which failed, by the way), the Eastern Europe Soviet client states (ditto), Cuba (which will soon fail), and North Korea (ditto). It’s been tried many times, and the absence of checks and balances always results not in democracy, but tyranny. Assigning a word like “fair” to such a system will not make it work. It’s a trap.

DSA should have kept its trap shut about its trap. It should have just said, “We’re socialists, isn’t that wonderful?” Instead, they told us what it means to be a socialist. It’s not wonderful; it’s idiocy.

The media, of course, will try to hide the DSA platform because Orange Man Bad. They will not be successful, however. The DSA is quite proud of it, and intends to promote it.

Between now and the midterms in November, the American people will discover this platform. I anticipate they will soundly reject it.

Of course, the wild President is a wild card. He might find a way to prove me wrong. Or right.