Turning Children into Snitches

This time, it’s Vermont’s Republican governor.

Vermont Governor Phil Scott said during a press conference on Tuesday that schools in the state will include new questions during daily health checks about whether students and their parents attended gatherings outside of their households following the Thanksgiving holiday.

Never mind the carefully high-minded claimed motives for this—it’s trying to get children to denounce their parents to authorities.

This using the Wuhan Virus situation as an excuse to drastically increase government power has gotten ‘way out of hand.

System Racism in America

Shelby Steele had a thought on this. So do I.

Senator Tim Scott (R, SC), Congressman-elect Burgess Owens (R, UT), Herschel Walker, Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron (R) and several others, wrote Steele, all spoke at the Republican National Convention. More, each of them spoke as men and women—individual men and women—they did not speak as spokesmen for their color. In particular, they did not speak as the professional victims of “systemic racism.”

They spoke as persons who are part of a new and growing racial order (Steele’s term):

…we blacks aren’t much victimized any more. Today we are free to build a life that won’t be stunted by racial persecution. …we live in a society that generally shows us goodwill—a society that has isolated racism as its most unforgivable sin.

And

This lack of victimization amounts to an “absence of malice” that profoundly threatens the victim-focused black identity. Who are we without the malice of racism? Can we be black without being victims? The great diminishment (not eradication) of racism since the ’60s means that our victim-focused identity has become an anachronism.

And so on.

But I disagree with Steele to this extent: there is systemic racism in America, say I. It’s just not as broad reaching as those Steele decried claim; it is, instead, confined to the Democratic Party, its replacing evolution the Progressive-Democratic Party, and those entities’ adherents and supporters.

The soft bigotry of low expectations is the upper bound, the most generous and favorable position, of those worthies. Blacks, they hold from this position, just can’t compete and need special treatment. That’s what that Leftist icon, Woodrow Wilson, said to a black reporter who was questioning him about his resegregating the Federal government—that blacks should be grateful for the protections of segregation. And it’s the thrust of the Left’s segregationist identity politics.

The main position, however, of the Democratic Party and Progressive-Democratic Party since 1964, illustrated by Lyndon Johnson’s racist remark about why he passed the Civila Rights Act of 1964 is far worse. This position, overtly extant these last 56 years, is that blacks aren’t even human beings. They’re just crops of votes to be harvested every so often for the political benefit of those Leftist politicians.

Between election harvests, those crops are simply covered in the manure of promises (universally empty and unfulfilled), a few coins thrown at the crops in the form of welfare programs (with carefully designed-in cliffs that trap them in those welfare cages), and “affirmative” action programs that do no more than emphasize the Left’s belief in the, at best, inherent inferiority of blacks.

The view of non-humanness is demonstrated by the utter lack of progress in the economic and political prosperity of blacks, beginning with the openly destructive Urban Removal programs begun (and never finished) in Leftist-run cities. The demonstration continued through the Obama administration, with continuing black poverty, continuing high black unemployment, the Left’s continuing efforts to deny black children access to quality schools through choice programs that would let parents opt out of disastrous public schools in favor of voucher and charter schools, and the ever-widening wealth gap between blacks and…everyone else.

Those latter trends—unemployment, school access, wealth gap—were beginning to be reversed under Republican efforts these last four years. That trend reversal has had two primary effects. One is the reducing poverty rates among blacks.

The other has reduced the political power of the Left, and that has led the Left to be increasingly shrill in their cries of nation-wide systemic racism.

Just Like….

Be snitches, sez the Governor.

Oregon Governor Kate Brown during an interview on Friday supported the idea that citizens should alert authorities when neighbors fail to comply with coronavirus restrictions.
“Look, this is no different than what happens if there’s a party down the street and it’s keeping everyone awake,” the Democrat Brown said. “What do neighbors do? They call law enforcement because it’s too noisy. This is just like that. It’s like a violation of a noise ordinance.”

It’s not at all like neighbors calling the authorities over a too-loud party. That’s neighbors acting on their own initiative.

The other is a head of (State) government actively pushing neighbors to rat out their fellows.

Even the Progressive-Democrat governor Kate Brown knows that. She’s acting just like heads of the governments of other types of nations.

A Thought on Brann’s Decision

Recall that Federal District Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the Trump campaign lawsuit that sought to reject hundreds of thousands of votes in Progressive-Democratic-run Pennsylvania counties because, the suit alleged, changes to State voting rules violated our Constitution’s equal protection requirement.

Brann ruled in part that he

has no authority to take away the right to vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens.

What Brann chose not to consider is that he also has no authority to see the vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens (more accurately, hundreds of thousands; “millions” is his cynical exaggeration), be diluted to the point of meaninglessness by illegally cast or illegally counted ballots.

The Third Circuit has agreed to hear, promptly, the campaign’s appeal. Hopefully, the appellate court will consider both sides of the matter rather than just the convenient side.

An Adjacent Issue

A group wants to paint the message “Black Pre-Born Lives Matter” on a street outside a Planned Parenthood site near Capitol Hill in DC. The city’s government has refused to issue the necessary permit, and police arrested two folks who tried just to chalk the message rather than paint it. The group now has sued in Federal court over the refusal and subsequent prevention of painting; the suit reads, in pertinent part,

Your original decision to paint “Black Lives Matter” on the street is government speech. However, your decision to allow protestors to paint “Defund the Police” opened the streets up as a public forum. You are not permitted to discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in making determinations relating to public assemblies in public fora[.]

That raises the adjacent issue. Government speech wants citizen speech in answer, also, or what’s a First Amendment for?