Common Sense

It don't make much sense that common sense
don't make no sense no more.

— John Prine

My keyring holds two identical looking keys. 

One unlocks the front door; the other, the back.

Murphy's Law governs my keyring.

No matter which door I'm hoping to unlock, I always choose the wrong key.

That defies common sense.

But common sense is passé, anyway.

Today, we're "structurally stupid."

Or are we?

When I use my housekey, I do so in the firm belief that it will open the lock.

Even though it never does the first time, I believe it will.

I presuppose that turning the key will unlock the door.

Why do I believe so?

Experience. 

Know-how.

Trial and error.

The very same trial and error that underpins science.

I have an inductive means for making judgements about cause and effect in the real world.

Those means aren't perfect, but they're good enough to get me into the house.

They go by the name “common sense.”

No, we're not structurally stupid.

Some of us just prefer to be assholes.

The Forgotten Lem Boulware

Ronald Reagan's insane policies helped create today’s Gilded Age.

— Ben Gran

They are ideologues. I hate ideologues. 

— Philip Roth

Historians credit Ronald Reagan's antediluvian notions of "big government" to the influence of the right-wing ideologue Barry Goldwater.

They've forgotten the more important influencer: Lem Boulware.

Boulware was GE's head public relations man in the 1950s. 

While on the job, Boulware gained a national reputation for extolling laissez-faire, bashing Washington bureaucrats, and bullying labor leaders.

Nothing should be allowed to stand in the way of raw capitalism, Boulware insisted.

Nothing.

Boulware's libertarian influence on American businessmen was so pervasive that it endures today, when a nonnegotiable stance—such as the price of a new car—is called an instance of Boulwarism.

The paranoid Boulware believed that American workers, abetted by New-Deal era intellectuals in Washington, posed a mortal threat to the business-owning class—and made no secret of it. He rang the reactionary's alarm bell at each and every opportunity, using GE employees like Ronald Reagan as his shill.

Reagan had befriended Boulware while the Hollywood actor served as the weekly host of "General Electric Theater," one of the nation's top TV shows for over a decade.

As they toured the country hosting press junkets, Boulware took it upon himself to "tutor" the dimwitted actor (Christopher Hitchens once called Reagan "as dumb as a stump" and his deputy chief of staff Michael Deaver told me that he "babysat" the puerile president).

Like a sponge, Reagan absorbed Boulware's Hobbesian views.

America, Boulware preached, was the land of opportunity, private ownership, free markets, and low taxes. 

Anyone who wished to call himself an American accepted those qualities—plus the fact that prosperity trickled down from the "beneficent" 1%. 

Resistance meant you were a goddamn Communist.

Boulware's Gilded Age views were known in Chamber of Commerce circles as the "philosophy of private enterprise."

The gullible Reagan, while traveling with the wily PR man, would listen to his teachings and swallow them whole.

The actor wasn't the only one of GE's 190,000 employees to imbibe Boulware's Kool-Aid during the '50s. 

Tens of thousands did.

The PR man made sure of that by circulating right-wing books among management and publishing four in-house magazines that explained the philosophy of private enterprise; arranging continual in-house workshops on the topic; and deputizing supervisors throughout the company to act as his mouthpiece.

To prepare GE's supervisors to carry his message, Boulware also circulated reprints of articles by the arch conservative William F. Buckley.

Boulware viewed his task as one of re-educating the serfs.

The simpleminded star of Bedtime for Bonzo was merely one of them.

Report No. 32-04 VD

Ukraine's tragedy may be America's blessing.

The sudden spotlight on Putin may open the eyes of Trump fans to his treachery.

They might come to realize what the rest of the world knows: Trump is Putin's bitch, which doesn't quite recommend 45 for reelection.

Excerpt from Report No. 32-04 VD

With luck, that spotlight will land soon on a Kremlin document leaked last July, Report No. 32-04 VD.

While America's mainstream media slumbered all that month, reporting only on the Tokyo Olympics, Europe's media headlined the document's leak.

Report No. 32-04 VD, dated January 14, 2016, is a Kremlin brief that was discussed by Putin in a meeting of Russia's national security council a week later.

At the end of the meeting, Putin directed three spy agencies to begin "all out" disinformation campaigns to help then-candidate Trump win in 2016. 

The spy agencies were to "alter the consciousness of the masses, especially in certain groups."

Putin believed a Trump White House would disrupt and weaken America, his longtime nemesis.

"A Trump victory will definitely lead to the destabilization of the US socio-political system and will see discontent erupt," the report says.

The document also assesses the mind of then-candidate Trump.

"Trump is an impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual suffering from an inferiority complex.”

Report No. 32-04 VD confirms the Kremlin had blackmail materials from "previous unofficial visits by Trump to the territory of the Russian Federation." 

No doubt, those include the infamous "golden showers" video.

Should Trump resist the Kremlin's intervention in the presidential election, Putin would remind the candidate he could ruin him.

So as you witness Ukraine's tragedy unfold, remember what mom used to say.

"Behind every cloud there's a silver lining."

Or at least a golden shower.

True Ignorance

True ignorance is not the absence of knowledge,
but the refusal to acquire it.

— Karl Popper

I rarely encounter a fatuous opinion that's based on knowledge.

They're almost always based on bullshit.

Knowledge has never been as easy to acquire than it is today.

And yet ignorance remains rampant.

Our polity is a disaster today because, while we test citizens relentlessly—for Covid-19, alcohol, cholesterol, illegal drugs, math skills and driving skills—we don't test our citizens for ignorance. 

We let it go unchecked.

People who are ignorant counter knowledge by labeling it opinion, as if there were no difference. 

"Well, that's your opinion."

But there's a vast difference, which has been understood for 2,500 years.

The Ancient Greek philosophers called opinion doxa; knowledge, episteme.

The former is hearsay; the latter, science.

Episteme, the philosophers taught, had privilege over doxa because it was rational (or what we'd call "evidence-based").

To label episteme as doxa—to say, "Well, that's your opinion"—is to conflate the two forms of knowledge. 

In short, to pile ignorance on top of ignorance.

But some ignorant people want to double down even on that. 

When cornered by unwanted evidence, they label it fake news, as Trump labeled Covid-19 in October 2020—despite the detection of 69,000 new cases every day.

Insisting there's fake news is worse than ignorant; it's psychotic.

It's the cranial condition Karl Popper described as "true ignorance."

Ignorance that won't seek self-help.

Millions of our citizens share this psychosis—incurably, I'm afraid.

But that's nothing new.

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been," science writer Isaac Asimov said in 1980.

"The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

"All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence," Mark Twain said in 1887, "and then success is sure."

Quousque Tandem?

For how much longer, Catiline, will you abuse our patience?

— Cicero

Fox News cut off Trump last night when he attributed Putin's invasion of Ukraine to the "big steal."

"Putin was going to be satisfied with a peace, and now he sees the weakness and the incompetence and the stupidity of this administration, and as an American, I'm angry about it, and I'm saddened by it, and it all happened because of a rigged election."

Interviewer Laura Ingraham cut off Trump at this point and jumped to another story. She returned to Trump minutes later, only to get into an argument with him.

We can only hope media companies—even propagandist ones like Fox News—have lost patience with Trump's bullshit.

It would not be the first time a popular figure was silenced by broadcasters.

In November 1938, radio stations nationwide banned Father Charles Coughlin, a Nazi-sympathizing Catholic priest with 30 million avid American listeners, after he denied during his weekly broadcast that Kristallnacht had hurt Germany's Jews. (He claimed it only targeted Communists.)

The stations insisted the airwaves could not tolerate Coughlin's intolerance—an abuse of the freedom of speech. Without a platform, the Nazi-loving Coughlin soon vanished from the public forum.

In November 63 BC, Rome's consul Cicero convened the senate in order to lay before it a plot to overthrow the Roman Republic.

The plot's leader, the corrupt Senator Catiline, sat in the gallery as Cicero delivered his First Speech against Catilina, one of history's greatest political orations. It opens:

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? Quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia? 

For how much longer, Catiline, will you abuse our patience? How much longer will your madness make playthings of us? When will your unbridled effrontery stop swaggering?

Quo usque tandem abutere, Trump, patientia nostra?

Heroes

A Hero of Liberty is a person who either promoted freedom, faith, or family values.

— Heroes of Liberty website

A new publisher of kids' books hopes to combat wokeism in grade schools with a series of books that glorify so-called "Heroes of Liberty," including John Wayne, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Amy Coney Barrett.

Fox News has called the series, written for second grade readers, "phenomenal," failing to recognize that it's above the reading-skills of 99% of Fox News' viewers.

As right-wing Supermoms move to ban classics like Maus, Animal Farm and Fahrenheit 451 from curriculums and school libraries nationwide, the Delaware-based publisher has released its first title in the series, John Wayne: Manhood and Honor.

House editor Bethany Mandel, formerly a staff writer at the Heritage Foundation, thinks John Wayne: Manhood and Honor can rescue kids from the wrongs of feminism.

She told Axios the book "counters the narrative that 'masculinity is toxic.'

"Boys are conditioned to behave like women," Mande said. "We wanted to give boy readers a glimpse of a positive male role model who doesn't apologize for being manly and masculine."

While she wants the "Heroes of Liberty" series placed in school libraries, Mandel also wants "inappropriate" books removed.

You can guess what those books might be.

For my part, the only heroes I want to celebrate are the sandwiches that go by that name.

I want to see them removed from federal watchlists and made a standard menu item in every school cafeteria. And I want to see September 14 made a national holiday.

Which is why I recommend Delawarean Vince Watchorn's A Meal in One: Wilmington and the Submarine Sandwich.

A Meal in One tells the story of how the foot-long gut-bomb first came about—and why. It's an enthralling book about poor immigrant laborers and the small-time entrepreneurs who kept them fed.

You want to talk about "family values?"

There are more family values packed between two halves of an Italian roll than than in all the bombast ever spewed by Wayne, Reagan, Thatcher, or Barrett.

None other than President Biden wrote, in the foreword to A Meal in One, "I frequently stop in one of Delaware’s established sub shops to pick up lunch, dinner or a late-night snack without thinking twice about the role the sub played in putting Delaware on the culinary map.

"I must give credit to the Italian-Americans who settled in Delaware’s Little Italy and developed and popularized the culinary creation Wilmingtonians simply and affectionately call the 'sub.'

"I give further credit to Vince Watchorn for publicizing this relatively little-known fact about our proud city to everyone who loves good food."

John Wayne may know a thing or two about manliness, but I prefer my heroes to come with capicola, sweet peppers, and an extra dab of mayo.

Values: Masturbatory Marketing

 Greed is not a financial issue. It's a heart issue.

— Andy Stanley

Spotify's unconscionable decision to keep Joe Rogan and drop Neil Young proves what I've long thought about tech corporations' self-professed "values."

They're pure, unadulterated snake oil.

Spotify's video on values includes a Latino marketing manager claiming "we do not approve any sort of campaign that we don't believe in."

How's that for masturbatory marketing?

Obviously, her statement is bullshit—or, worse, Spotify believes in Joe Rogan's relentless antivaxxer messaging.

Let's stop the "values" marketing malarkey and get back to basics. It may play to Millennials, but it's bullshit.

The hard truth is: Spotify believes in one thing and one thing only.

Profit.

Pure and simple.

HAT TIP: Neil Young deserves everyone's thanks for spotlighting Spotify's horrendous hypocrisy. Thank you, Mr. Young.

POSTSCRIPT, JANUARY 29: Since Neil Young's ultimatum to Spotify, his greatest hits album has rocketed into the Top 5 on Apple Music, and Spotify has lost $4 billion in market value."

POSTSCRIPT, FEBRUARY 3: Neil Young has been joined in his boycott of Spotify by Crosby, Stills and Nash.

POSTSCRIPT, FEBRUARY 7: Spotify's CEO confirmed the company won't "silence Joe," even though he spouts the N-word as well as disinformation.

Day of Infamy

A malicious arson attack.

— Suzanne Scott

It seems the brutal War on Christmas came to Fox News this week when a vagrant torched the company's "All American" Christmas tree on New York's Avenue of the Americas.

Caught off guard, company executives immediately compared the incident to Pearl Harbor, even though police said the arsonist had no political motive.

In a memo to the staff, Fox News' CEO Suzanne Scott described the attack as "deliberate and brazen."

"This act of cowardice will not deter us," she said, promising a new All-American Christmas tree would be erected where the old one stood.

Within a day, one was.

At the relighting ceremony, on-air personality Jacques DeGraff told reporters, "These colors don't run," referring to the red, white and blue decorations.

Conflating Christmas with the 4th of July is classic Fox News.

But why network executives should get upset when a citizen then stages a fireworks show makes no sense.

Strawman

There is a strange interdependence between
thoughtlessness and evil.

— Hannah Arendt

I'm tired of Conservatives' relentless use of the strawman.

A "strawman" is an argument that substitutes an opponent's statement with a distortion thereof, in order to "disprove" it.

A strawman is fallacious. It takes its form in this manner:

Liberal: Black lives matter.

Conservative: My opponent says Black lives matter, but White lives don't. I'm sorry, all lives matter. He's dead wrong.

The Conservative in this case has distorted the Liberal's claim by assuming (1) it excludes all lives but Blacks' and (2) that to "matter" means to "prevail."

To prevent use of a strawman, you need to present a steelman.

A "steelman" is an iron-clad argument. It makes the strongest possible case for a claim and prevents your opponent from distorting your position.

It might take this form:

Liberal: Blacks suffer from systemic racism in this country. Our entire way of life devalues Black lives, and puts Blacks at a material disadvantage—socially, economically, and politically. Without conscious effort, we thwart Blacks' attempts to live peacefully and well, and treat them as if their God-given lives didn't matter. But, in their own eyes at least, they do matter.

Conservative: So, you're saying the system is rigged?

Liberal: Bingo!

A steelman grants the opponent the benefit of the doubt and assumes his intentions aren't evil.

Sadly, that's not always the case. And so you often hear debates like this:

Liberal: Blacks suffer from systemic racism.

Conservative: Blacks don't suffer racism—that's ancient history. They just want preferential treatment. The whole idea that there's systemic racism is Marxist hogwash.

Telegraphic counterarguments like the one above betray both the evil intentions and shallow-mindedness of their makers, two common qualities of Conservatives today; qualities that put persuasion out of reach.

As philosopher John Stuart Mill said, "He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of it."

If he only had a brain!

Villany vs. Stupidity

You have attributed conditions to villainy
that simply result from stupidity.

— Robert A. Heinlein

As we sail toward Columbus Day, Madrid's “Trumpista” president Isabel Díaz Ayuso took advantage of an interview in New York this week to bash Critical Race Theory.

Díaz Ayuso warned that the theory is a "revisionist, dangerous, and pernicious" ideology that will lead to "cultural regression." 

She also lambasted the Indigenous movement, calling it a "dangerous current of communism" and an "attack against Spain." 

Díaz Ayuso called New York's recent decision to rename Columbus Day (now Indigenous People's Day) "fatal."

"Why are we revising the history of Spain in America," she asked, "when all it did was bring universities, civilization, and the West to the American continent?"

Her remarks echo Steve Bannon's 2014 Vatican remarks, in which he described Europe's past exploits as the foundation of a "civilization that really is the flower of mankind"

The day after the interview, Díaz Ayuso denounced Pope Francis for apologizing for the Catholic Church's support of the conquistadors.

Why vilify Spain, she asks, when the conquistadors merely made a few mistakes?

Real America

WARNING: Content may be offensive to some audiences.

Rep. Jim Jordan retweeted video from a Wisconsin football game yesterday with the comment, "Real America is done with Covid-19."

The phrase "Real America" is Jordan's equivalent of ein Volk, a phrase popularized by Adolph Hitler in the 1930s.

It's best defined not by what it means, but by what it doesn't.

Real America is not...

Real America is not Civilized America—those pain-in-the-ass weirdos who insist on wearing masks.

Real America is not Immuno-compromised America—those annoying wimps who worry they'll catch Covid-19. 

Real America is not Black America—those whiney, dangerous, hip-hop lovin' ingrates.

Real America is not Latino America—those lazy, foreign, Catholic beaners.

Real America is not Asian America—those creepy gooks who want our jobs.

Real America is not Indigenous America—those all-time champion losers.  

Real America is not Gay America—those unrepentant degenerates.

Real America is not East Coast America—those latte-sippin' socialists.

Real America is not West Coast America—those tree-huggin' communists.

Real America is not Jewish America—those overeducated loudmouths.

Real America is not Muslim America—those people who're worse than Jews.

Real America is not Poor America—those welfare-squanderin' weaklings.

Real America is not Homeless America—those whack jobs who foul the land beneath our beautiful freeways.

Real America is not Disabled America—those embarrassing feebs. 

Real America is not Old America—those wrinkled, funny-smelling people.

Real America is not Female America—those witchy pretenders to equality.

Real America is not Expert America—those Commies with doctorates from fancy-pants universities.

Real America is not Liberal America—the true enemies of Real America. You know, Democrats.

My advice to Jim to is simple: grow a toothbrush mustache. 

You'll complete the outfit.

NOTE: Fascism is hardly new in America. Learn more.

Slap Happy

 

Best remembered for the "slap heard round the world," General George Patton was perhaps the least woke leader in the history of the US military.

Grandson of a Confederate, Patton paraded his contempt for minorities for the whole world to see.

Citing the general's saltiness, Donald Trump yesterday asked the crowd at a GOP rally in Alabama, "Do you think that General Patton was woke? I don’t think so. I don't think he was too woke."

Trump kicked off the rally by playing a six-minute clip from the opening of the 1970 movie Patton, in which actor George C. Scott gives "The Speech," an oration the real-life Patton delivered repeatedly throughout World War II.

Trump said the clip was appropriate, given his listeners' intelligence. 

Trump went on to give his own 90-minute speech, in which he lambasted “woke generals," blaming them for losing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“We’re getting tired of the woke generals that we have, right?” Trump asked. "Do you think that General Patton was woke? I don’t think so. He was the exact opposite."

Patton most vividly displays the general's anti-woke urges in the soldier-slapping scene, when he shows no pity for a PTSD-afflicted private:

Patton: What's the matter with you?

Private: I guess I just can't take it, sir.

Patton: What did you say?

Private: It's my nerves, sir. I just can't stand the shelling anymore.

Patton: Your nerves? Hell, you're just a goddamn coward. [Slaps private. Turns to doctors.] I won't have a yellow bastard sitting here crying in front of these brave men who've been wounded in battle. [Slaps private again.] Shut up! [Turns to doctors.] Don't admit this yellow bastard. There's nothing wrong with him! I won't have sons of bitches who're afraid to fight stinking up this place of honor. [Turns to private.] You're going back to the front, my friend. You may get shot, you may get killed, but you're going up to the fighting. Either that or I'm going to stand you up in front of a firing squad. I ought to shoot you myself, you goddamn bastard! [Turns to doctors.] Get him out of here! Send him up to the front! You hear me? [Turns to private.] You goddamn coward! I won't have cowards in my army!

I wonder how Patton might have reacted had he encountered the then 22-year-old Donald Trump at the draft board in 1968:

Patton: What's the matter with you?

Trump: I guess it's my heel, sir.

Patton: What did you say?

Trump: It's my heel, sir. I have a bone spur.

Patton: This is the fifth time you've used that bullshit excuse! Hell, you're just a goddamn coward. [Turns to doctors.] Admit this yellow bastard. Nothing wrong with him. [Turns to Trump.] You're going to Vietnam, my friend. You may get shot, you may get killed, but you're going to Vietnam. Either that or I'll stand you up in front of a firing squad. I ought to shoot you myself, you bastard! 

Trump: But I have a note from my doctor!

Patton: Shut up! [Slaps Trump.] What do you take me for, you gutless, malingering goddamn sissy? One of those woke generals?

Trump: You woke? I don't think so.

Patton: [Slaps Trump again.] Shut up!

No Matter How You Slice It

No matter how thin you slice it, it’s still baloney.

— Al Smith

A series of interviews with literary agents about their pastimes in the current edition of Poets & Writers has convinced me college educators have stuffed everyone's head with baloney.

I arrived at this conclusion when one of the agents, self-described as "passionate about creating spaces for those from historically marginalized communities," mentioned she was using her free time to ponder whether or not "to cling to one's own marginalization."

Another, self-described as "queer," said she was using her free time to study the "rise of the feminist anachronistic costume drama."

A third, self-described as an avid foodie, mentioned that she was using her free time to "exchange tweets with a BIPOC travel blogger" while she studied "decolonizing veganism."

WTF?

These are bright, educated, well versed people.

Why do they think and speak in these patently silly terms, leftover scraps from French philosopher Michel Foucault's lunch?

Teachers are to blame—and what conservatives call the "absence of intellectual pluralism" in colleges. 

Teachers have allowed '70s-era jargon to substitute for thought, and identity for virtue.

Ask yourself: before you can "decolonize" veganism, you have to "colonize" it in the first place.

But how do you do that?

Do you sail a ship full of conquistadors to the New World and take over a vegan coop by storm? Do you loot and pillage the kale section and enslave all the stock boys? Do you seize all the kale, repackage it as Swanson's Cheesy Spinach, and ship it back to Spain? Do you cite divine rights to justify all this?

Possibly.

I had a logic teacher in college, a Brit, whose Cambridge training prohibited him from ever telling a student that his or her comment in class was inane. 

He'd just listen politely, smile, and reply, "Possibly."

After a couple of weeks in his course, you understood he was saying, "That's utter nonsense!"

While I have nothing but admiration for queers, feminists, vegans, BIPOC, and literary agents, I cringe whenever I hear one of them say she wants to "decolonize" something or "open a space for the marginalized" (lest we be "uncritical" and "non-inclusive").

A voice inside me—with a British accent—says, "Possibly."

Because, no matter how thin you slice it, it’s still baloney.

Taken for Granted

I don't want politicians deciding what's exciting in my life.

— David Hockney

Last year I was elected to the board of directors of our HOA by the residents of our development.

Although a thankless job, my involvement has taught me something fundamental about people.

No one wants her needs taken for granted.

That fact, I now see, forms the eye of our nation's political storm.

I've been trying for nine months, along with the other board members, to advise a group of 20 neighbors about the peril their homes face.

A commercial developer is about to build a nursing home uphill of them that will cause their properties to flood during rainstorms.

They don't care.

Not a single one of them has responded to the board's many recommendations for a course of action, nor even acknowledged the repeated emails and letters we have sent them.

They don't care.

We have been reading them wrongly.

We've been assuming flooded yards and basements would represent an inconvenience; and that they ought to worry their homes' sale prices will fall.

They don't care.

I see clearly, as a result, the dilemma every politician creates for herself by taking others' needs for granted.

As board members, our duties (which stem from state law) include the "duty of care," which means we must do our homework and make prudent decisions.

We try always to do so.

Where we went wrong in this case was to neglect to ask the 20 homeowners affected if they cared their homes will flood.

They don't care.

Imagine how peaceful the public forum would be if the politicians from both parties ceased taking our needs for granted.

Imaging if they quit deciding for us what concerns us; what we care about and need.

Imagine if they asked every constituent:

Do you need oil wells and coal mines?

Do you need to carry a gun? 

Do you need your own bathroom? 

Do you need to protect kids from 1619?

Do you need to shelter Jeff Bezos' taxable income? 

Do you need to incarcerate every criminal?

Do you need to turn back every immigrant?

Do you need to deny an abortion to a woman you'll never meet?

Do you need to guarantee that food costs less in Cuba, that Palestinians can find jobs, or that Afghanis can read Teen Vogue?

Do you need the federal budget balanced?

Just imagine if the politicians asked us those questions.

They'd find out, like the owners of the 20 homes in my HOA, we don't care. We have totally other needs.

What a wonderful world this would be.

Smokescreen

The correct use of propaganda is a true art.

— Adolph Hitler

Petitions are a standard lead-capture tool for fledgling nonprofits, which is why David Brog's digital agency recommended one this week.

Brog's petition-of-the-week targets fellow racists who want to ensure people of color know their place.

But propriety won't let him be completely up front.  

He requires a smokescreen.

The smokescreen he uses consists of, believe it or not, an internal report produced by the National Archives.

The report is innocuous. 

But if you believe Brog, it conclusively proves people of color are about to replace all Whites.

Brog is a busy DC lobbyist and lawyer who pays himself handsomely to generate panic among uniformed and stupid people. The kind of panic that leads them to open their wallets.

A Zionist, Brog believes Wokeness threatens Israel. 

He keeps company with other ultranationalist loonies like Steve Bannon, John Hagee, Yoram Hazony, Tucker Carlson and Josh Hawley.

Brog's new nonprofit—he runs no less than three—is the Emergency Committee for America. 

To pay his super-size salary as the group's executive director, he needs donors—lots of them.

To line his pockets, he's happy to engage you and tell you that people of color will replace you.

And as they do, they'll bring an end to civilization as we know it, take over our government, and impose Sharia law and Chinese-style one-party rule in its place.

Brog preys on you while he lines his pockets, even resurrecting the Nixonian phrase "Silent Majority" to imply he speaks for a whole bunch of Americans.

The gist of his message this week goes like this: 

The Marxist revolution will begin any hour. It kicks off not with a bread riot, but a performance-art piece. Self-respecting whites must stop the revolution and the  "desecration of the National Archives." Okay, I'll stop it, if you can't—but first I need your money. All major credit cards accepted.

A simple answer to a complicated question. 

And pure hooey.

But that's what clever propagandists are all about.

They cynically transform complex questions of social and economic justice into violent dramas involving mysterious forces out to victimize you; and they do it in ways that disguise their true aims. 

For Adolph Hitler, the smokescreen was the Sudetenland. The mysterious forces were Jews. His aim was power.

For Joe McCarthy, the smokescreen was the Department of State. The mysterious forces were Reds. His aim was fame.

For David Brog, the smokescreen is the National Archives. The mysterious forces are people of color. His aim is wealth.

Beware all propagandists.

How Could They?

Have not other nations found great benefit from the use of slaves in repairing high roads, making rivers navigable, draining bogs, and erecting public buildings, bridges, and manufactures?

— George Berkeley

Happy Juneteenth! 

What better day than today to ask, how could White Christians have enslaved Blacks and still believe they were practicing Christians?

I think it's smart to look for answers in the writings of the most thoughtful Christians of the period.

One was the Irish philosopher George Berkeley.

A brilliant and outspoken Anglican bishop (and a slave-owner, as well), Berkeley shared the belief with many of his White contemporaries that obedience to God demanded you support slavery, because it was good for the slaves.

Berkeley was as conservative as they come, and not much different from today's conservatives in believing some people are bums. 

Skin color didn't much matter to Berkeley: bums in the 18th century were all the same. God made them that way.

Berkeley worried a lot about poverty and unrest in his native Ireland and in 1735 wrote The Querist, a book in which he asked, who's to blame for the fact that Ireland is poor?

His answer was clear: the bums are to blame.

Bums represented to Berkeley a dissolute, drunken, cynical, lazy and antisocial form of life. 

Forcing bums to participate in infrastructure projects was better than leaving them at liberty to wallow in their own filth. 

Forcing them to work would, in fact, give them dignity and guarantee their personal development.

If compulsory labor made them slaves, so be it. Slaves, as the Bible made clear, are just servants. Turning bums into servants served the public good, stimulated the economy, and was the "best cure for idleness and beggary." Forced labor, in fact, was a bum's way of demonstrating his or her "Christian charity."

Berkeley could justify an institution we find repugnant, because he valued an orderly Christian society—one that curbed some individuals' liberty, when that liberty hampered self-improvement.

We might call it charity under the lash, or self-help at the barrel of a gun. Whatever you call it, you know Berkeley's argument is weird and deeply flawed.

But it sounds hauntingly familiar.