The idle musings of a former military man, former computer geek, medically retired pastor and now full-time writer. Contents guaranteed to offend the politically correct and anal-retentive from time to time. My approach to life is that it should be taken with a large helping of laughter, and sufficient firepower to keep it tamed!
My friend, photographer Oleg Volk, alerted me to a tragedy that struck artist Ari Munzer in Minneapolis during the riots there last week. Oleg says, "Back in 1996-97, he was my college advisor, one of two people who saved my educational career. He and I have been friends ever since."
Wearing circular spectacles and suspenders that held up his loose trousers on his bony frame, 90-year-old artist Aribert Munzner stood outside his studio at the Ivy Arts Building in Minneapolis, watching friends, colleagues, former students and strangers carry out paint supplies and soggy cardboard boxes.
The boxes contained more than 60 years of work, damaged in a single night.
In the early hours of May 29, the roof of the Ivy — a 120-year-old building on S. 27th Avenue that once fabricated ornamental iron and now is home to more than 70 artist studios and small businesses — was ignited by sparks from the nearby Hexagon Bar, set ablaze in riots after the death of George Floyd.
Munzner, who goes by "Ari," explained the incident as if it were a scene from a comic book:
"One: Fire torch. Two: Big fire, spark, 150-year-old roof, wooden. Big fire. Fire people come, put out the fire. Big hole in roof. 1,000 gallons of beautiful Mississippi water came thundering down and I was at ground zero," he said, with an accent that sounded like a mix of New York, German and Irish.
. . .
Munzner is grappling with the loss of his many artworks, but his outlook on change is more fluid.
"I'm starting again because that's what I've been doing all my life," he said.
He was only 7 when his Jewish family fled Hitler's Germany in 1937 for Baghdad, where they had a family friend. In their new home, he learned Arabic from a Lebanese Jesuit priest. But when British forces invaded Iraq in 1941 to depose its Nazi-leaning regime, the family took off again, this time to New York City.
Munzner has eidetic memory, also known as photographic memory — "I don't have the ability to play with words — they jump like squirrels," he joked — so when he came to America he taught himself English by reading comic books.
"I learned how to say 'WOW' and 'BANG!' " he said, making explosive motions with his hands. "Superman and Captain Marvel told me how to be an American."
He came to the Minneapolis College of Art and Design in 1955 for a short-term gig. Now he is an MCAD professor emeritus.
"We didn't have GPS back in '55, so I never found my way back to New York," he joked. "I ended up — gladly, actually — in the Upper Midwest."
Here's a video about Ari's work, recorded last year in his now-destroyed studio.
Ari's daughter Tamara has started a fundraiser to help her father recover what he can and rebuild his studio. She writes:
Although money cannot replace any of the finished work or work in progress that was completely destroyed, money can help with the significant costs of damage remediation, replacing materials and tools, and moving into a new space.
Ari is still assessing the full extent of the water and smoke damage.
It's already clear that as part of the damage remediation, many of the finished works will need to be reframed and rematted. The costs of that will be high, his initial estimate is $10K-$20K for that alone.
Many supplies and materials were completely destroyed, as were some of his tools and equipment. The replacement costs could be up to $5K-$10K.
There will be costs associated with temporary storage, moving, and setting up a new studio space. It will be difficult to find suitable space that is as affordable as his previous studio, where he was a longtime tenant with favorable terms.
All funds raised will go directly to him to be used to defray the costs of damage remediation, and of establishing a new studio space. Any amount from you is welcome at any time.
Ari's Work
Another way to support Ari, as always, is through acquiring his work. His web site, http://www.aribertmunzner.com/, documents much of his lifetime output, and includes a list of all currently available major and minor work. We will be updating those pages over the coming weeks and months as the damage assessment and remediation process unfolds; in the meantime, please do contact him to ask about any specific works that interest you.
Because Ari is Oleg's friend, and I'd trust Oleg with my life if necessary, I'm motivated to donate in his support. I'm even more motivated by my admiration for a man of 90 years of age who's prepared to "suck it up" and face the challenge of starting over. I hope I could be as courageous and optimistic if that happened to me so late in life - but I doubt it. The man's a marvel.
I'd like to invite readers who feel sympathy for the victims of the riots, to join me in supporting Ari. Let's help to salvage at least some good out of the evil that was done in Minneapolis last week.
Protesters and demonstrators in Seattle have set up what they're calling the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone around the 11th Precinct police building in Seattle. They've even produced this map of the "liberated" area (clickit to biggit).
As the labels on the map make clear, this is nothing more or less than a far-left-wing, progressive, communist-inspired project. The labels are typical of communist propaganda throughout the world over the past century or more. They leave little doubt as to the ideology behind this farce. It's Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" writ large, on the streets of one of America's largest cities.
Of course, that city - Seattle - is so far left of center in its politics that it's arguably no longer American in its governance and outlook. The occupiers of the "Autonomous Zone" appear to agree. This notice appears on one of the barriers blockading entrance to the zone:
Please imagine, for a moment, that you're a business owner or resident inside the boundaries of that zone. Suddenly your customers and suppliers no longer have free access to your business; suddenly your right to the peaceful enjoyment of your residence is interrupted by radical activists who are controlling entrance to and exit from the zone. You may face demands for access to your facilities at any time, and any refusal may draw accusations that you're "racist" or "reactionary" or (perish the thought!) "conservative". You may be expected to "support the people" by donating supplies to the "masses", whether you like it or not. Refusal is unlikely to be well received.
Worst of all, to my mind, is that local police deliberately and openly abandoned their own precinct building, opening the way for the radicals to take over. I doubt very much whether police took this decision on their own initiative. I'm pretty sure it was imposed on them by city administrators. Despite claims that the precinct will remain staffed, it's now clear that those staff are not using their own headquarters building, which has been taken over by the mob. Police are patrolling from mobile staging areas instead, and appear to be voluntarily remaining outside the self-declared "Autonomous Zone". What this means for you, if you live and/or work inside that zone, is that you can no longer rely on police protection or assistance. You're on your own.
This means that Seattle has effectively abandoned the rule of law within city limits.
... the mechanism, process, institution, practice, or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law, secures a nonarbitrary form of government, and more generally prevents the arbitrary use of power. Arbitrariness is typical of various forms of despotism, absolutism, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism.
. . .
In general, the rule of law implies that the creation of laws, their enforcement, and the relationships among legal rules are themselves legally regulated, so that no one—including the most highly placed official—is above the law. The legal constraint on rulers means that the government is subject to existing laws as much as its citizens are. Thus, a closely related notion is the idea of equality before the law, which holds that no “legal” person shall enjoy privileges that are not extended to all and that no person shall be immune from legal sanctions. In addition, the application and adjudication of legal rules by various governing officials are to be impartial and consistent across equivalent cases, made blindly without taking into consideration the class, status, or relative power among disputants.
Those conditions no longer apply in Seattle. There, it's now patently obvious that:
Not all citizens are equal under the law. Left-wing protesters and agitators are being handled with kid gloves. Try mounting a right-wing protest, for any cause from free speech, to pro-Second-Amendment, to outright racism like the Ku Klux Klan, and you'll doubtless get handled rather differently. Don't believe me? Why don't you try it, while the rest of us watch? Pass the popcorn, please . . .
Power is used arbitrarily, particularly as regards policing. The police are no longer "protecting and serving" everybody. They're doing so selectively. If you're in a zone controlled by the politically correct, you can expect little, if any, help from law enforcement authorities and officers. Seattle PD's motto is officially "Service, Pride, Dedication". As far as the "Autonomous Zone" is concerned, I see from them little service, nothing to be proud of, and dedication only to surrendering to the mob. It's hard to see how any self-respecting officer can remain in the employ of so pusillanimous an agency.
The Mayor and city administration are abandoning their duty of care towards the city under their control, and pandering instead to pressure groups and extremist ideologies. Those who don't fall into "politically correct" categories are no longer welcome in Seattle. They're on their own.
In a properly administered state, the Governor and/or state authorities would have intervened long since to protect and uphold the rule of law, and ensure equality before the law for all citizens of the city. That's unlikely to happen in Washington, where left-wing progressive politics dominate the state government. The powers that be will adopt a snooty, high-toned, morally bankrupt perspective on the whole thing, and abdicate their responsibilities.
I'm fairly sure this won't be the only such "Autonomous Zone" set up in US cities. Anywhere the radicals can expect compliance from city authorities, they'll try to do likewise. Those opposed to them, or those who object to their businesses and property being turned into political pawns, are going to find themselves S.O.L. as far as the authorities are concerned. It goes along with the "Defund the Police" and "Abolish the Police" narratives currently being spouted by the radicals. By excluding police from "Autonomous Zones", they hope to demonstrate that they're not needed. They may not be needed by the radicals, but they'll sure be missed by those the radicals intimidate, oppress and rob!
Of course, this will only accelerate the inevitable backlash. Don't believe me? Aesop spelled it out yesterday evening in relation to the "Abolish the Police" movement, but what he said applies just as well to radical "Autonomous Zones" (run, as they are and will be, by the same people that want to get rid of law enforcement).
Since ever, the whole thing is a Left-wing con job, exactly like advertising.
Create the need for the otherwise needless; then meet the new "need".
They've just taken ads for dishsoap and popcorn makers to their logical political extreme.
It's a riff on the Mafia's "protection" racket: "That's a nice society you have there; be a real shame if it suddenly burned down."
The only answer to that is to shoot the "salesmen"; and then hunt down and exterminate the guy who sent the salesmen, and all their minions, to the last man, and last child.
Nothing less will suffice.
The Left, whether they realize it or not, is setting the table for an existential war of survival, down to the last side standing.
It's a recipe for civil war on a biblical Armageddon scale. Everyone's families and entire lifestyle are the chips in that game.
Kill all they send.
Then find and destroy the nest.
First one to go ugliest the fastest wins.
Any half measures are a recipe for self-destruction.
Dresden and Hiroshima were a template.
Second place prize is a body bag.
What we're all witnessing daily right now is the Left's Useful Idiots trying to completely upend civilization, to suit their own ends.
Half of them think they can win. The other half would rather burn everything down to try, knowing they cannot win, and not caring anyways.
This is logic via Lucifer: "If I cannot rule everything, I'll burn it all down."
The answer to that, as ever, comes out of the barrel of a gun, and at the point of sword and spear.
This is my greatest fear right now. The more radicals on one side push the limits, the closer they get to the brink, the more the other side will become radicalized and push right back, raising the stakes, "upping the ante" until there's no alternative but to go all in - or lose. That's what's behind terrorism, the ultimate expression of radicalism. It's what we saw on 9/11, but written (so far) in political slogans and biased, one-sided actions rather than in the large-scale shedding of blood. Can it stay that way?
Historically, it hasn't. Historically, extremism has always led to counter-extremism. I think that's what we're seeing right now in the USA. I'm reliably informed that many local movements are forming and organizing right now. They're taking extreme pains to remain "under the radar", not using traceable or interceptable communications, being very careful and selective about whom they trust, and making plans that are not discussed publicly. Some have progressed to the point of coordinating their plans with other groups, through very carefully vetted channels. I won't be surprised to see regional and national networks forming, in due course.
I'm not part of any of those groups. I'm a pastor and chaplain, and have my own perspective on what's happening - which does not involve violence unless in defense of my life, family and property. However, some of those involved are former (and still trusted) colleagues, so I hear a few things from time to time. I'm very worried by what I'm hearing.
I've seen war from the inside. I've been under fire, and I've fired on others. I've been wounded ... and I've inflicted my share of wounds. I've picked up the dead, and the pieces of the dead.
Those aren't the worst aspects of violent conflict. To me, the worst is what it does to the human psyche. You become dehumanized. Your enemies are no longer people - they're objects, things, targets. You aren't shooting at John, whose mother is ill, and who's missing his girlfriend terribly, and who wants to marry her as soon as he can get home to do so. You're shooting at that enemy over there, the one who'll surely 'do unto you' unless you 'do unto him' first. He's not a human being. He's a 'gook'. He's 'the enemy'. He's a thing rather than a person. It's easier to shoot a thing than it is a person.
. . .
You no longer think of civilians as such. They're in enemy territory, or known to be sympathetic to the enemy: therefore, they're 'things', suspects, never to be trusted, never to be treated objectively or with anything other than the forced, mandatory legal definition of 'decency' imposed by your superiors . . . and even that becomes flexible when those superiors aren't around to monitor what you're doing.
. . .
That's the bitter fruit that extremism always produces. It's done so throughout history. There are innumerable examples of how enemies have become 'things'. It's Crusaders versus Saracens, Cavaliers versus Roundheads, Yankees versus Rebels, doughboys versus Krauts . . . us versus them, for varying values of 'us' and 'them'.
. . .
And in the end, the bodies lying in the ruins, and the blood dripping onto our streets, and the weeping of those who've lost loved ones . . . they'll all be the same. History is full of them. When it comes to the crunch, there are no labels that can disguise human anguish. People will suffer in every land, in every community, in every faith . . . and they'll turn to what they believe in to make sense of their suffering . . . and most of them will raise up the next generation to hate those whom they identify as the cause of their suffering . . . and the cycle will go on, for ever and ever, until the world ends.
We cannot 'kill them all and let God sort them out' ... There are too many of 'them' to kill them all, just as 'they' can never kill all of 'us' ... We cannot kill our way out of the dilemma of being human, with all the tragedy that entails.
May God have mercy on us all.
I fear greatly that unless the extremists on both sides come to their senses, those words may yet prove prophetic in these tragically dis-United States in which we live.
Peter
EDITED TO ADD: It seems that yesterday evening, Tucker Carlson basically agreed with what I've said here about the threat from extremists. See for yourself.
The Federalist points out that all those demanding the "defunding" or abolition of police forces might do well to consider the consequences, which are clearly visible in Mexico.
But let’s say these ultra-progressive municipal governments could get their wish and abolish the police in their cities entirely. What would happen? Inevitably, an armed group would emerge and impose a monopoly on the use of force.
If you want an idea of how that works, look to our southern neighbor, Mexico, where over the past decade endemically corrupt police departments in some areas have been supplanted by autodefensas, or local self-defense militias. But before you get too excited about the prospect of paramilitary autodefensas policing American cities, understand that in Mexico these groups are a mixed bag at best—and at worst they’re not much better than the corrupt local police and cartel gunmen they replaced. More importantly, their mere presence in Mexico was and is a disturbing sign of societal decay.
To understand why, a bit of background is needed. The modern autodefensas movement in Mexico arose during some of the most violent years of Mexico’s ongoing drug war. In 2013, a doctor from the cartel-ravaged state of Michoacán, José Manuel Mireles Valverde, organized one of the first self-defense militias to fight against the Knights Templar Cartel. He initially recruited ordinary men, shop keepers and farmers, to hunt down cartel henchmen and drive them out of their towns.
Initially, these ad-hoc militias met with some success, capturing or killing members of the Knights Templar, setting up roadblocks and ambushes, and expanding the number of militias operating throughout Michoacán. But as the violence in the region increased, the militias eventually caught the attention of the Mexican government, which deployed the military against both cartels and autodefensas ... By then, the line between autodefensas and cartels had begun to blur. The militias had been infiltrated by cartel members, including former members of the Knights Templar who knew the cartel was losing power.
. . .
... the autodefensas movement quickly went from being an organic uprising against a vicious cartel to a vigilante free-for-all ... As the government stepped in to control the autodefensas movement, it became increasingly clear that cartel members were joining self-defense militias, especially in Michoacán and neighboring Guerrero state. Sometimes it worked in the opposite direction. Lacking resources and weapons, self-defense militias would turn to drug cartels for financing, and would later be used by drug lords as proxy forces against their rivals.
Today, autodefensas remain active in parts of Mexico but they have largely melded into the ever-shifting patchwork of gangs, cartel off-shoots, and corrupt local police forces vying for power and territory. The fragmenting of Mexico’s criminal gangs and armed groups has helped fuel rising violence in recent years, with this year on track to break last year’s record for homicides. As far as violence and corruption go, things are worse in Mexico now than they were when Mireles formed the first autodefensa group.
That is to say, the rise of self-defense militias in Mexico, no less than the rise of cartels, is a direct result of the collapse of civil authority. Absent a functioning state, militias are no more accountable to the general public than a drug cartel—and no more capable of resisting corruption than the local or federal police.
That was pretty much my experience in large parts of sub-Saharan Africa, too. As the authority of the state and/or local government waned during periods of anarchy and civil unrest, local gangs, tribes or other groups would take advantage of the "power vacuum" to seize control of their own areas. They would levy "taxes" against the people to fund their operations (in reality, organized looting on an ongoing basis), and terrorize anyone who refused to pay, up to and including rape, torture and killing. If the "ordinary people" organized to oppose them, the opposing force would rapidly become corrupted by precisely the same temptations that had attracted their oppressors. Once entrenched, such local power players could only be dislodged by superior force - never by reasoning with them. They were making too much money (by local standards) to be willing to give it up, and nobody else in that impoverished continent had enough money to offer them a bribe big enough to stop.
Another part of that problem was that many merchants and other vendors simply refused to deliver supplies to the region(s) concerned. They became food deserts, with the only exception being foreign aid (mostly stolen by the groups in control, and sold in local markets) or subsistence agriculture. I can tell you right now, if BLM or other groups take over local city suburbs, the big stores in and near them will simply close their doors, rather than be robbed on a daily basis. That will lead to the activists (a.k.a. thugs and looters) trying to extend their activities into areas still well supplied, which will in turn provoke a violent reaction from those in the latter areas, trying to protect what they've got. Since "the best form of defense is attack", to quote a well-known saying, they'll probably take the fight to the activists in their own areas, too. In the absence of effective policing, who's going to stop either side?
That's your recipe for at least a localized civil war, right there. Don't tell me it won't happen. It will. I've seen it before, far too many times for comfort. It'll happen here, too, if we create conditions favorable for it.
I was sorry - and angry - to read this report from Utah.
A man accidentally fired his gun while trying to dismantle it and struck a woman who was three bays over at the TNT Gun and Range on Saturday afternoon in Murray ... The bullet went through both of the woman's legs.
Sgt. Paul Christiansen with Murray Police Department said the woman was in her 50s and is expected to make a full recovery. She was sent into surgery the same day to treat her dual wounds.
All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. (For those who insist that this particular gun is unloaded, see Rule 1.)
Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target. This is the Golden Rule. Its violation is directly responsible for about 60 percent of inadvertent discharges.
Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.
This incident was a clear breach of Rule 2 at the very least, and probably Rule 3 as well. Guns don't just "go off by accident" unless someone's fiddling with them, and it's all too easy to let one's finger stray too close to the trigger. (That's not helped by the design of some pistols like the Glock, where one has to pull the trigger - AFTER UNLOADING THE GUN! - in order to disassemble it. If one hasn't properly unloaded it, loud noises can result.)
Thanks be to God that nothing worse happened. One trusts that measures will be taken to teach the erring gun owner better weapon-handling. I hope he has good insurance, because the medical bills resulting from his goof are likely to be high, and I daresay he'll be held liable for every penny of them - as he should be.
I've been watching for signs of a political backlash against the aggressively "pushy" attempts by Democratic Party legislators to reshape their electoral districts, cities, states, and even the nation as a whole, in a progressive, far-left-wing, socialist image. A good example is Virginia, where despite massive protests and rejection from over 90% of the state's counties, the new Democratic majority government (elected by only a few counties around Washington D.C., with large numbers of people) passed new anti-gun legislation and imposed it on the rest of the population willy-nilly.
Staunton, a usually reliable Democratic stronghold in the conservative Shenandoah Valley, went surprisingly Republican in Tuesday’s City Council elections.
The slate ... took the four seats up for grabs in the 2020 local election, giving the Queen City a conservative majority for the first time in recent memory.
. . .
How unlikely was this conservative sweep? Hillary Clinton won Staunton in the 2016 presidential election, Barack Obama had won the city in the previous two election cycles, and Democrat Jennifer Lewis pulled 56.5 percent of the vote in her 2018 Sixth District congressional race against Republican Ben Cline, who eventually swept to victory, winning 59.7 percent of the vote district-wide.
. . .
The result is a shocker, to say the least, and if people in Richmond are paying attention at all, this one should be a wakeup call times ten.
I'm hearing increasing rumors of a similar, but even stronger electoral backlash following the riots over the death of George Floyd. Many voters acknowledge the problems that exist in our society, and (like me) are more than willing to permit (even join in) peaceful protests to bring about change. However, when thugs and low-lifes take advantage of protests to start rioting and looting, their tolerance (and mine) is at an end. Matters should never have been permitted to get so far out of line. The sight of uniformed police officers "taking a knee" in solidarity with protesters is also a step too far. It's the job of police to maintain law and order - not to publicly adopt political positions or express political opinions. They're supposed to be neutral, "above the fray", impartial.
The result is increasing determination among some of the electorate to make their feelings known at the ballot box in November. I've heard many expressions of disgust, anger and resolve, and I know I'm far from alone in hearing them. Other bloggers with whom I'm in touch report the same things from their audience.
The response from the progressive left, of course, will be additional voter and electoral fraud, as we've posited in these pages in the past. They've become more and more blatant in their efforts to do that, including Congress' recent attempt to impose and fund "ballot harvesting", eliminate state and local electoral protections through national legislation, and other measures. Fortunately, it looks as though their "license to steal elections" won't go any further this year . . . but they'll try again. If they win control of the nation's government in November, look for that to become law next year, just as soon as they can ram it through.
As I've said many times before, I'm neither Democrat nor Republican - I vote for the individual, not the party. Nevertheless, I'm encouraged by the outcome of the Staunton, VA elections. If our politicians give us the metaphorical finger by forcing through legislation, we can return the favor at the polls. Let's hope more American voters do that in November.
The container shipping industry remains in the doldrums thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic. It hammered shipments earlier, as we noted in these pages: and its ongoing effects are creating long-term problems for shippers and their customers. GCaptain reports:
From sportswear maker Puma to mall stalwart Gap , many retailers have been forced to reduce or slow down shipments of new merchandise. Civil unrest in the United States has compounded their problems by further clouding the prospect for a recovery in the world’s biggest retail sales market.
Puma’s Chief Executive Bjorn Gulden, for example, said it was managing some of its excess inventory by stowing it on slow-going ships as stores in the United States and Europe tentatively reopen.
However, at the same time, the shipping slowdown has created headaches for those retailers, from Walmart and Amazon to shoe seller Rothy’s, who have never stopped selling products to homebound consumers, ranging from books and shoes to exercise equipment, much of it sold online.
Now those retailers are fighting for space on the fewer, faster-moving ships on the high seas.
. . .
Slower shipping times also means importers can delay payments made on delivery . . . Shereen Zarkani, Maersk’s global head of sales, told Reuters: “One customer told us: If you make my container go around the world a couple of times that would be good.”
. . .
There does not appear to be any let-up in sight for container shipping companies as their retail clients could still be feeling acute financial pain in July, when they begin placing orders for holiday and winter merchandise.
I've noticed the effects of shipping disruptions in a number of areas. For example, there was a particular part I needed in my ongoing efforts to rebuild some older rifles for friends. I ordered it in mid-April, but found it was out of stock at the time. The manufacturer was waiting on a couple of injection-molded plastic components from an overseas supplier, which they would then build into the finished product. Their supplier had the parts, but couldn't find shipping space to send them. I was notified just this morning that the part I needed is finally in stock, and my order is in the process of being fulfilled. That's a seven-week wait, for a part that's normally available 24/7/365! I know I wasn't their only frustrated customer. It's yet another example of how "just-in-time" manufacturing can grind to a halt if supplies of parts and components don't reach the factory on a regular basis.
The after-effects of the coronavirus pandemic are going to be with us for at least the rest of this year, and probably well into 2022. Be prepared for that.
I have no problem accepting that this country's law enforcement functions have overstepped the mark on many occasions. I've written about some of them in these pages, as regular readers will know, and I support holding officers and agencies accountable when they cross the line. It's also undeniable that American policing has often been about a one-sided enforcement of laws that were designed to benefit some parts of society, but not others. As Matt Taibbi points out:
Basically we have two systems of enforcement in America, a minimalist one for people with political clout, and an intrusive one for everyone else. In the same way our army in Vietnam got in trouble when it started searching for ways to quantify the success of its occupation, choosing sociopathic metrics like “body counts” and “truck kills,” modern big-city policing has been corrupted by its lust for summonses, stops, and arrests. It’s made monsters where none needed to exist.
Because they’re constantly throwing those people against walls, writing them nuisance tickets, and violating their space with humiliating searches (New York in 2010 paid $33 million to a staggering 100,000 people strip-searched after misdemeanor charges), modern cops correctly perceive that they’re hated. As a result, many embrace a “warrior” ethos that teaches them to view themselves as under constant threat.
This is why you see so many knees on heads and necks, guns drawn on unarmed motorists, chokeholds by the thousand, and patterns of massive overkill everywhere ... Police are trained to behave like occupiers, which is why they increasingly dress like they’ve been sent to clear houses in Mosul and treat random motorists like potential car-bombers ... senior officers value police who make numbers more than they fear outrage from residents in their districts. The incentives in this system are wrong in every direction.
The current protests are likely to inspire politicians to think the other way, but it’s probably time to reconsider what we’re trying to accomplish with this kind of policing. In upscale white America drug use is effectively decriminalized, and Terry stops, strip searches, and “quality of life” arrests are unknowns. The country isn’t going to heal as long as everyone else gets a knee in the neck.
Despite Taibbi's undeniable points, anyone with even the most basic understanding of human nature and human interaction will realize that police are necessary. There's a not insignificant proportion of humanity that prefers a criminal lifestyle, and lives it out of choice, not out of necessity. No amount of wishful thinking will change that. Therefore, current calls to abolish or de-fund police are beyond stupid. They ignore reality.
If you're not convinced of that, try working for a few days inside one of America's prisons. Deprived of their opportunity to prey on other citizens, what do the incarcerated criminals do? They prey on each other, and on the officers tasked with keeping them behind bars. There's a lot more crime inside prison walls than outside them, because when criminals are brought together in a small, concentrated space like that, they influence and exacerbate each others' worst tendencies. You could call it a "pressure-cooker" environment. I should know. I spent years as a chaplain, both part-time and full-time, trying to help prison inmates. I've written about it at some length.
In the process, I learned the hard way what works, and what doesn't. I'm here to tell you that appeasement, kind words and wishful thinking don't help as long as those incarcerated aren't willing to change.
There's a group in Minneapolis calling themselves MPD 150. They advocate for the replacement of that city's police force with what one could describe as "community self-policing". See for yourself. (Click the image for a larger view.)
Their agenda, their manifesto, is utterly ridiculous to anyone who has any real-world understanding and experience of criminals. I quote:
The transition to a police-free Minneapolis will require immediate measures to limit the harm routinely inflicted by the police in their normal functioning and steps to address the underlying causes of distress. First responder responsibility and on-site authority in crisis situations, public spaces and schools will be transferred to parties prepared to interact sympathetically and respectfully with the people. Social service functions will be relocated in community-based settings. Military equipment will be sequestered. The police are tasked with enforcing austerity – the extraction of resources and resilience from communities for the benefit of the rich – and controlling people’s attempts to survive, resist or self-medicate under its impact. Dismantling the police will require reallocating their budget and assets to support real solutions to community desperation: good, well-paying jobs, affordable housing, healthy food, empowering education, accessible health care, removal of toxins, etc. Ending the brutal police system is, by necessity, a program for a more just and resilient city.
That's so daft as to be laughable, if it weren't so serious.
"First responder responsibility and on-site authority in crisis situations, public spaces and schools will be transferred to parties prepared to interact sympathetically and respectfully with the people." Oh, yeah? You're a first responder, confronted with a couple of muggers armed with knives. They want to get away with their loot. Kindly explain how you're going to "interact sympathetically and respectfully" with them. While you're telling us, I'll be selling tickets to watch your "interaction". I reckon it'll be a smash hit (literally) on pay-per-view TV.
"The police are tasked with enforcing austerity – the extraction of resources and resilience from communities for the benefit of the rich – and controlling people’s attempts to survive, resist or self-medicate under its impact." Tell that to the average police officer and watch them fall over laughing. "Extract resources and resilience"? "Benefit the rich"? No, not in the least. They're there to stop criminals making themselves rich at your expense! As for "self-medication" . . . great excuse for being a drug addict, isn't it? And when you drive under the influence of those drugs, and kill someone in your zonked-out state, you should be treated with sympathy, instead of as the criminal you are . . . right?
"real solutions to community desperation: good, well-paying jobs, affordable housing, healthy food, empowering education, accessible health care, removal of toxins, etc." I seem to recall that Minneapolis, like most cities of its ilk, had a lot more of those when the city was governed by people who understood the reality of where money comes from. It comes from businesses and individuals offering something to sell that people want to buy. From those sales comes salaries and wages for employees, taxes for the city, state and country, and all the other means needed for a community to sustain and develop itself. Take away those sales and all the economic activity that flows from them, and all you have left is wishful thinking. That's not economically sustainable, no matter how much you might prefer otherwise.
I won't bother going into more examples. These people have no idea about reality - or, rather, they've painted a mental picture of their own rainbows-and-unicorn-farts mental reality, and they're trying to superimpose it upon a physical reality that doesn't in any way match their delusions. I'll leave you to read MPD 150's "10 Action Ideas for Building a Police-Free Future" for yourself - if you can stomach it. It's not worth your time.
Yes, American law enforcement agencies are all too often flawed, with policies and procedures that frequently ignore Sir Robert Peel's fundamental principles for policing. They were the foundation for British law enforcement in the 19th century, and I think offer a perspective that would deal with most of the problems we encounter today. Sadly, even in Britain, their birthplace, they are today honored far more in the breach than in the observance.
The nine principles were as follows:
To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
I think we'd be far better advised to reintroduce and inculcate the Peelian Principles into American policing, rather than seek to abolish it. Yes, that includes "demilitarizing" our police. That should never have happened, and it remains a very serious problem. Take away the weapons of war from law enforcement. That's not their job. If things are bad enough, criminally speaking, that they have to have them, then we don't need police to deal with them - we need the military. The two functions are distinct from each other, with completely different mindsets and approaches, and should not overlap. If they do, we end up with police who behave like armed occupiers rather than peace officers - and that will put us straight back into the mess we're in right now.
I'm obliged to reader Andrew S. from Brisbane, Australia, for sending me the link to this morning's music. He wrote:
"... this guy normally films real estate videos but had some COVID 'spare time' on his hands and decided to see if he could still play the guitar or not. I think he can, and it’s well worth a few minutes of your time if I may suggest so."
In the video blurb on YouTube, the composer, Duane Adam, writes: "Filmed on Kings River in Kingsburg CA during the pandemic because there was nothing else to do." I'm very glad he did! Judge his composition and playing for yourselves.
Andrew, you were right. Definitely worth taking the time to listen! Readers, if you agree, let's see if we can persuade Duane to compose and play more. There's real talent there. Leave your comments at the music video on YouTube, or on the forum discussion (and here as well, of course!).
I've said for years (to the discomfort of many of my listeners) that I'm not interested in hearing what you believe. Words are cheap. One can profess almost anything, but be lying. No, I want to see what you believe: and that means I want to see what you do, how you live, how you behave. The old truism that "actions speak louder than words" remains as valid today as it ever was.
Rudyard Kipling wrote a long poem about that sort of thing. It speaks volumes to our society today, where faith is honored far more in the breach than in the observance, but those breaching it will still argue hotly that they belong to this, or that, or the other faith, because they say they do. The reality is, their actions (or, sometimes, the lack thereof) demonstrate clearly that they have no faith at all.
Now Tomlinson gave up the ghost in his house in Berkeley Square,
And a Spirit came to his bedside and gripped him by the hair -
A Spirit gripped him by the hair and carried him far away,
Till he heard as the roar of a rain-fed ford the roar of the Milky Way:
Till he heard the roar of the Milky Way die down and drone and cease,
And they came to the Gate within the Wall where Peter holds the keys.
"Stand up, stand up now, Tomlinson, and answer loud and high
The good that ye did for the sake of men or ever ye came to die -
The good that ye did for the sake of men in little earth so lone!"
And the naked soul of Tomlinson grew white as a rain-washed bone.
"O I have a friend on earth," he said, "that was my priest and guide,
And well would he answer all for me if he were by my side."
"For that ye strove in neighbour-love it shall be written fair,
But now ye wait at Heaven's Gate and not in Berkeley Square:
Though we called your friend from his bed this night, he could not speak for you,
For the race is run by one and one and never by two and two."
Then Tomlinson looked up and down, and little gain was there,
For the naked stars grinned overhead, and he saw that his soul was bare:
The Wind that blows between the worlds, it cut him like a knife,
And Tomlinson took up his tale and spoke of his good in life.
"This I have read in a book," he said, "and that was told to me,
And this I have thought that another man thought of a Prince in Muscovy."
The good souls flocked like homing doves and bade him clear the path,
And Peter twirled the jangling keys in weariness and wrath.
"Ye have read, ye have heard, ye have thought," he said, "and the tale is yet to run:
By the worth of the body that once ye had, give answer - what ha' ye done?"
Then Tomlinson looked back and forth, and little good it bore,
For the Darkness stayed at his shoulder-blade and Heaven's Gate before:
"O this I have felt, and this I have guessed, and this I have heard men say,
And this they wrote that another man wrote of a carl in Norroway."
- "Ye have read, ye have felt, ye have guessed, good lack! Ye have hampered Heaven's Gate;
There's little room between the stars in idleness to prate!
O none may reach by hired speech of neighbour, priest, and kin
Through borrowed deed to God's good meed that lies so fair within;
Get hence, get hence to the Lord of Wrong, for doom has yet to run,
And...the faith that ye share with Berkeley Square uphold you, Tomlinson!"
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Spirit gripped him by the hair, and sun by sun they fell
Till they came to the belt of Naughty Stars that rim the mouth of Hell:
The first are red with pride and wrath, the next are white with pain,
But the third are black with clinkered sin that cannot burn again:
They may hold their path, they may leave their path, with never a soul to mark,
They may burn or freeze, but they must not cease in the Scorn of the Outer Dark.
The Wind that blows between the worlds, it nipped him to the bone,
And he yearned to the flare of Hell-Gate there as the light of his own hearth-stone.
The Devil he sat behind the bars, where the desperate legions drew,
But he caught the hasting Tomlinson and would not let him through.
"Wot ye the price of good pit-coal that I must pay?" said he,
"That ye rank yoursel' so fit for Hell and ask no leave of me?
I am all o'er-sib to Adam's breed that ye should give me scorn,
For I strove with God for your First Father the day that he was born.
Sit down, sit down upon the slag, and answer loud and high
The harm that ye did to the Sons of Men or ever you came to die."
And Tomlinson looked up and up, and saw against the night
The belly of a tortured star blood-red in Hell-Mouth light;
And Tomlinson looked down and down, and saw beneath his feet
The frontlet of a tortured star milk-white in Hell-Mouth heat.
"O I had a love on earth," said he, "that kissed me to my fall,
And if ye would call my love to me I know she would answer all."
- "All that ye did in love forbid it shall be written fair,
But now ye wait at Hell-Mouth Gate and not in Berkeley Square:
Though we whistled your love from her bed to-night, I trow she would not run,
For the sin ye do by two and two ye must pay for one by one!"
The Wind that blows between the worlds, it cut him like a knife,
And Tomlinson took up the tale and spoke of his sin in life:
"Once I ha' laughed at the power of Love and twice at the grip of the Grave,
And thrice I ha' patted my God on the head that men might call me brave."
The Devil he blew on a brandered soul and set it aside to cool:
"Do ye think I would waste my good pit-coal on the hide of a brain-sick fool?
I see no worth in the hobnailed mirth or the jolthead jest ye did
That I should waken my gentlemen that are sleeping three on a grid."
Then Tomlinson looked back and forth, and there was little grace,
For Hell-Gate filled the houseless Soul with the Fear of Naked Space.
"Nay, this I ha' heard," quo' Tomlinson, "and this was noised abroad,
And this I ha' got from a Belgian book on the word of a dead French lord."
- "Ye ha' heard, ye ha' read, ye ha' got, good lack! and the tale begins afresh -
Have ye sinned one sin for the pride o' the eye or the sinful lust of the flesh?"
Then Tomlinson he gripped the bars and yammered, "Let me in -
For I mind that I borrowed my neighbour's wife to sin the deadly sin."
The Devil he grinned behind the bars, and banked the fires high:
"Did ye read of that sin in a book?" said he; and Tomlinson said, "Ay!"
The Devil he blew upon his nails, and the little devils ran,
And he said: "Go husk this whimpering thief that comes in the guise of a man:
Winnow him out 'twixt star and star, and sieve his proper worth:
There's sore decline in Adam's line if this be spawn of earth."
Empusa's crew, so naked-new they may not face the fire,
But weep that they bin too small to sin to the height of their desire,
Over the coal they chased the Soul, and racked it all abroad,
As children rifle a caddis-case or the raven's foolish hoard.
And back they came with the tattered Thing, as children after play,
And they said: "The soul that he got from God he has bartered clean away.
We have threshed a stook of print and book, and winnowed a chattering wind
And many a soul wherefrom he stole, but his we cannot find:
We have handled him, we have dandled him, we have seared him to the bone,
And sure if tooth and nail show truth he has no soul of his own."
The Devil he bowed his head on his breast and rumbled deep and low:
"I'm all o'er-sib to Adam's breed that I should bid him go.
Yet close we lie, and deep we lie, and if I gave him place,
My gentlemen that are so proud would flout me to my face;
They'd call my house a common stews and me a careless host,
And - I would not anger my gentlemen for the sake of a shiftless ghost."
The Devil he looked at the mangled Soul that prayed to feel the flame,
And he thought of Holy Charity, but he thought of his own good name:
"Now ye could haste my coal to waste, and sit ye down to fry:
Did ye think of that theft for yourself?" said he; and Tomlinson said, "Ay!"
The Devil he blew an outward breath, for his heart was free from care: -
"Ye have scarce the soul of a louse," he said, "but the roots of sin are there,
And for that sin should ye come in were I the lord alone.
But sinful pride has rule inside - and mightier than my own.
Honour and Wit, fore-damned they sit, to each his priest and whore:
Nay, scarce I dare myself go there, and you they'd torture sore.
Ye are neither spirit nor spirk," he said; "ye are neither book nor brute -
Go, get ye back to the flesh again for the sake of Man's repute.
I'm all o'er-sib to Adam's breed that I should mock your pain,
But look that ye win to worthier sin ere ye come back again.
Get hence, the hearse is at your door - the grim black stallions wait -
They bear your clay to place to-day. Speed, lest ye come too late!
Go back to Earth with a lip unsealed - go back with an open eye,
And carry my word to the Sons of Men or ever ye come to die:
That the sin they do by two and two they must pay for one by one -
And. . .the God that you took from a printed book be with you, Tomlinson!"
On his arrival in England in October 1889 Kipling took an instant dislike to the followers of the so-called Aesthetic Movement, who tended to go in for long hair, affectation of speech and manner, and eccentricity of dress. In a poem ("In Partibus") which he sent to the Civil and Military Gazette in the following month he wrote -
"But I consort with long-haired things In velvet collar-rolls Who talk about the Aims of Art And 'theories' and 'goals', And moo and coo with womenfolk About their blessed souls."
Tomlinson is one of these.
I'm obliged to the New Zealand blogger at Bright Darkness for reminding me of this poem. Food for thought, isn't it?
In urging readers to be prepared for emergencies, whether it be in terms of supplies, preparations to get out in a crisis, ability to defend themselves, etc., I've sometimes been accused of over-reacting. There are those who say I'm fear-mongering, trying to worry people unnecessarily. "It won't ever get that bad!"
Sadly, I've seen enough violence, unrest and social instability in my time to be very well aware that it can get that bad. I've seen it in many parts of Africa, and in some US cities too. Others who've "been there and done that" (for example, Selco in Bosnia) can confirm what I say. The reality can be almost infinitely worse than anything I can say in these pages.
The residents of Minneapolis had a relatively mild introduction to that reality a few days ago. Imagine if the destruction pictured below had extended to entire residential neighborhoods. It can all too easily do so. I've seen it.
What's worrying me more and more is that I'm seeing signs, in the growing tension in our society, that there are those who want to create such instability: who see it as the only "solution" to the problems they perceive. Of course, those problems will vary depending on the perspective of the individual, but they all add up to big trouble for the residents of our cities, who are going to be caught up in them if they come to pass. (That's a big part of why, a few years ago, Miss D. and I moved from where we were, in Nashville, to where we are, in north Texas. We've insulated ourselves against many of the problems of big cities by doing so, and we now live in an environment where people are much better prepared to handle such problems if they should arise.)
Don't take my word for it. Read the following articles, and consider the urban reality they describe or foresee. They're all important. Don't just read one or two. Read them all, to get the full picture.
There's a lot of material out there on defending yourself in an urban environment. Read my earlier article on the subject, and follow the links it contains. You'll learn a lot.
Want an even simpler method of disrupting vehicle traffic? Try "Caltrops and Systems Disruption". Anyone can make a caltrop, very easily. If you had a few vans or pickups scattering them on major highways and transport arteries, pretty soon your urban road network would be clogged for hours, if not days.
How easily can violence disrupt normal policing? How about one man disrupting an entire major city's police department? Read about "The Manhunt for Christopher Dorner". Note how the entire Los Angeles-area law enforcement establishment was essentially paralyzed. If one man could do that, what could half a dozen or a dozen do? A score? A hundred?
Do you think the threats I've described so far are unlikely, beyond the capacity of today's rioters? Think again after you read "Bricks, fires, frozen bottle projectiles: the organized tactics of America’s violent rioters". Quote: "Police say the current riots are the most sophisticated and coordinated in years with supply lines, medics and communications." Read the whole thing. Another point: if rioters are that organized, what makes you think anti-riot or counter-riot efforts won't rapidly become just as well organized?
You don't need assault rifles and artillery to disrupt a riot. The humble .22 rifle (available by the tens of millions in homes across America) and a few home-made devices will do just as well, in the hands of those who know how to use them. Read Aesop's fictional scenario "Tomorrow". I'll guaran-damn-tee you there are those planning something like that, right now. (It's not far-fetched, either: real-world riot control in Israel uses precisely the same .22 rifles. It's already a proven technique.)
If you step up to centerfire rifles, the carnage can be that much greater. I've previously referenced Matt Bracken's semi-fictional "When The Music Stops: How America's Cities May Explode In Violence". If you haven't read it before, read it now. I'm as sure as I can be that there are those already planning such a response to the current riots. Let's hope and pray it doesn't happen.
For a real-world illustration of the use of modern rifles in riot control, read "42 Knees in One Day: Israeli Snipers Open Up About Shooting Gaza Protesters". That's current operational reality. It could very easily be employed by civilians, on both sides of a riot. What if they weren't only aiming at knees?
You may think you can rely on first responders to come to your help if things get out of hand - but what happens if the rioters prevent that help from arriving?It happened, just a few days ago. That's just one incident. What if there are a bunch of them? What if there are so many that all ambulances, fire engines, etc. are tied up responding to earlier calls, and you have to wait for them until they have time to get to you? You can't wait inside a burning building - but if you go outside, you may be targeted by rioters. What are you going to do?
I'm not trying to make you panic with those articles and links. I'm trying to show you what may happen, what can happen, and - in some cases - what already is happening. Unless and until we realize how fragile is the cocoon of our everyday urban existence, we won't be prepared to deal with threats to it, and we won't have our own response planned and ready to deploy if necessary.
We live in dangerous times. Be as prepared for them as possible. Have a basic stockpile of emergency supplies, have a gun (preferably guns) for each adult in your family, and be prepared to get out in a hurry (if possible, before trouble arrives) rather than defend what's basically an indefensible position. No matter how emotionally attached you may be to your home, mere property is not worth dying for.
