Boxing Day Ethics Boxes, 12/26/2019: The Washington Post, Bad And Not Quite As Bad; Moore’s Racism And Warren’s Lies

Happy Boxing Day!

To be open and honest, for the longest time I thought the name referred to the fact that on the say after Christmas, houses tended to be littered with opened boxes that had previously contained Christmas gifts. The name really refers to the British tradition on the 26th, when postmen, milk men, and servants expected to receive gratuities or a “Christmas box” in appreciation for their labor during the year. It is still celebrated as a holiday in parts of the old United Kingdom, but “Gratitude Day” never caught on in the U.S. Here “Boxing Day,” if anything, refers to the all the boxes mad shoppers are buying in post-Christmas sales.

1.Law suit update! Well, the plaintiff’s latest motion to reconsider the appellate court’s rejection of the plaintiff’s defamation suit against me (for bouncing him off of Ethics Alarms and being mean to him in the process) was rejected. New motion to reconsider the reconsideration coming in 10…9….8…7…

2. A late entry in the Ethics Alarms “Asshole of the Year” title… Michael Moore told Rolling Stone interviewers in part,

I refuse to participate in post-racial America. I refuse to say because we elected Obama that suddenly that means everything is ok, white people have changed. White people have not changed.

Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street towards you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them.

Comments:

  • No, ironically enough, electing and especially re-electing Obama is one strong reason things are NOT OK, since he deliberately exacerbated group divisions for narrow political advantage.
  • Moore does not seem to grasp that judging anyone negatively based solely on their race is the essence of racism, and thus his statement is the mark of a racist, and a stupid one.
  • Then there is the fallacy that a voter’s character can be fairly assessed based on his or her vote.
  • Moore also promotes the current, and batty, progressive theory that beliefs and opinions that one finds objectionable make one unsafe. Of course, it’s not a real fear; it is a contrived one to justify censoring non-conforming opinions.

3.  Why isn’t Moore afraid of Senator Warren? We know the former Harvard Law prof lied for years about her ancestry, and used it to advance in academia. That’s not the extent of her lying however: check out the Elizabeth Warren tag on the blog. Now she has been caught speaking with forked tongue again: in a video she tweeted out this week, she tells a high school, “By the time I graduated high school, my folks couldn’t even afford a college application—much less four years of college.”

This is deceit, because she never mentions that she did go to college, George Washington University,  on a  scholarship. Though she is now, like most Senators, a millionaire, Warren is manipulating her background to play working class hero.

Last month, she tweeted,

“I got my degree thanks to a quality public college where tuition was just $50 a semester. That kind of opportunity doesn’t exist for students today. I’m fighting for universal free public two year, four year, and technical college so that every student can live their dream.”

Again, deceit. She could have graduated from George Washington on her scholarship, but chose to quit after two years to get married. Her story here also contradicts her narrative at the high school. She could have afforded to go to that public college, the University of Houston, originally.

4.  Guess what the Washington Post editors thought was the “true meaning of Christmas”? Come on, guess! Here is the paper’s Christmas day editorial. The real meaning of Christmas, apparently, is that the President of the United States sucks. The fact that the second most respected newspaper in the U.S. couldn’t hold back on Trump bashing for a single day—nah, there’s no mainstream media bias—explains a lot. (The Post also says that “Christmas is the tale of a family driven from place to place by imperial decrees and the irrational fears of an unsettled ruler.” Is that what the religious and spiritual message of this season is? The problems of displaced people?

Well, that and the fact that the President sucks.

I’m trying to think of what would be a similar dishonest spin on the Christmas story from conservative perspective. How about “Christmas is the tale of a single mother who decided not to abort her child despite looming personal hardships, and how that child grew up to bring joy, love and hope to the world”?

5. To be fair, the Post has its moments of clarity, like  the essay, “It was the year of ‘OK boomer,’ and the generations were at each other’s throats.” Not that it isn’t isn’t facile and misleading, because it is. Which side of the political spectrum has spent the last decade or more declaring that the problem with America was that it has been led by “old white men”? This was a progressive theme, echoed by, among others, Barack Obama, until Democrats had to face the fact that their candidate in 2020 might be an old white man. The ageism wielded against John McCain when he ran against Obama was a constant theme, bolstered by the news media. Dividing the generations didn’t come to the fore this year; it was just part of the scheme of societal divisions—black against white, male against female, married women against single women, religious against non-religious, gay against straight, wealthy against poor, and more—that Obama and Democrats weaponized deliberately.  2019 was the year that the Democratic party embraced radical socialist ideas, and rejected much of the value system created by our founding documents. Might that have something to do with the generational divide—you know, those old enough to appreciate the nation they have lived in versus those who condemning it without experience or perspective? You’d never guess it by reading the article.

Nor does the discussion of cross generational tension note that there are real, practical reasons why there are legitimate weaknesses among Boomers as well as Millennials. Individuals of an advanced age and declining skills shouldn’t seek or hold  demanding  jobs when they know, or should know, their abilities have declined.  Those who are under 40 often lack the maturity, wisdom or knowledge to be as certain as they often are that they have all the answers. Nobody knows this better than the Boomers, who generally made asses of themselves in the Sixties and Seventies.

The Post is right about one thing, though. “Age-based prejudice is the last acceptable form of prejudice,”  New York University’s Michael North, who studies ageism in the workplace, is quoted as saying.  “People are making age-based generalizations and stereotypes that you wouldn’t be able to get away with about race or background. Insert some sort of racial or ethnic group, or ‘OK Woman,’ and it wouldn’t go over too well.”

Hmmm. Well, age and being male are the last acceptable forms of prejudice. No wait: age, being male, and being a Christian are the last acceptable forms of prejudice. Cage, being male, and being a Christian are the last acceptable forms of prejudice. No, no, wait: age, being male,  being a Christian, and being successful and wealthy…and being a  a conservative! That’s still not quite right…it’s age, being male,  being a Christian, being successful and wealthy, being conservative and not hating the President of the United States are the last acceptable forms of prejudice. There. Got it.

Come to think of it, this is a manipulative, dishonest article after all.

15 thoughts on “Boxing Day Ethics Boxes, 12/26/2019: The Washington Post, Bad And Not Quite As Bad; Moore’s Racism And Warren’s Lies

  1. I found out about Boxing Day on an old episode of MASH where the crew was introduced to the British military’s version of it – officers and enlisted men trading places for a day.

    1. Hang in there. It will end eventually.
    2. I wonder how a person determines which two of the three guys to avoid?
    3. Oh, come now, Elizabeth Warren is okay by Moore because her husband didn’t tell her to vote for Trump like all the other white women’s husbands did. At least, that’s one of Hillary’s many excuses anyway.
    4. And Christians just love non-Christians telling them what Christianity is all about, too.
    5, Maybe white and/or straight should be in there, too. But I’d agree with the idea that those are just automatically assumed to be included.

  2. No wait: age, being male, and being a Christian are the last acceptable forms of prejudice.

    God help those who are all three and still smoke.

    • Let’s not leave out happy and married and monogamous and a father and grandfather living in the suburbs or exurbs and self-supporting? Could probably add: and drawing his social security and Medicare benefits?

      Reminds me of the bumper sticker: “Work hard, be happy, annoy a liberal.”

  3. Off topic, but not totally unrelated. John Podhoretz, on why he quit Twitter:

    But Twitter has an oversoul now, and the oversoul is poisonous. It ­rewards bad rhetorical behavior, it privileges outrage of any sort over reason of all sorts, and it encourages us to misunderstand each other. It’s the devil on our shoulder.

    I’ve always said Twitter is the Devil. At least one person agrees.

  4. 1. I grieve with thee.

    2. Open letter to Michael Moore: Sod off, swampy.

    3. Warren thinks that she can get away with the same dishonesty she accuses Trump of.

    Good luck with that, Liz.

    4. WaPo

    The real meaning of Christmas, apparently, is that the President of the United States sucks.

    Because when TDS infects your brain, everything bad is because Trump, and since Trump is still prez, everything is bad, including Christmas.

    This is a straight-line logical conclusion fallacy typical of the Left. Of all the publications, the WaPo is the least self-aware about the depth and breadth of their bias.

    5. WaPo II

    That’s still not quite right…it’s age, being male, being a Christian, being successful and wealthy, being conservative [,white] and not hating the President of the United States are the last acceptable forms of prejudice. There. Got it.

    Not quite. But I fixed it for you.

  5. 25 years ago I worked with a guy that likes to say “I’m a middle age, short, fat, bald, heterosexual, Christian, white male smoker. I am the target for any acceptable form of discrimination.”

    25 years later and the story hasn’t changed since. Great guy with a great sense of humor.

  6. “…anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street towards you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you.”

    I think Michael Moore just says that because he needs to have the entire sidewalk to himself.

  7. Michael Moore wrote:

    I refuse to participate in post-racial America. I refuse to say because we elected Obama that suddenly that means everything is ok, white people have changed. White people have not changed.

    Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street towards you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them.

    A few different things have to be pointed out here. One is that you have to avoid *surface* when examining what he says and why he is saying it. I think that Jack provides the surface reading — and so do many who write here and who describe themselves as ‘conservative’. In this surface reading, which is an enforcement of a certain view on reality and in a sense against reality, a primary error is committed. That error is to believe — to genuinely believe or so it seems — that race and all that attends race is not real, and not *determining*. Therefore, there is a will not to see reality in realistic terms and to assert, against it, a false-narrative. This is a critical and a devastating error. “Race is real; race matters” must be reestablished as a normal and even an ethical factor in understanding & interpretation. And what will result from that is a stronger and more cohesive ‘group identity’.

    The game that Moore plays is in this sense an inversion of a necessary and proper *identification*. I mean of course Whites who can and do identify as Whites and who literally band together to defend their selves, their attainments, their capabilities, against that which is assaulting them. Moore is using the tools of *assault* and I suggest that anyone who might wish to understand these tools, and who might wish to block, neutralize and defeat them, could very easily do so: except that they inside of themselves are susceptible to the tool that Moore wields. I say this because I genuinely think that it is true.

    Michael Moore performs to a white audience unless I am mistaken. Unless I am mistaken his *product* is consumed by White liberals. Since this appears to be so the question — the task — is to break it down through analysis, to take it apart, and to see if it is possible to neutralize *it*. What is *it*? It is a poison and a very deadly and effective poison that eats away at a good, necessary and proper identification! You see? Michael Moore has you in his grip and you cannot get out of it. You pretend to and yet in that bizarre rehearsal you actually are forced to serve his view. You retort against him: “Michael you are a racist!” But that is only a reversal, and a weak one, of what he sees you as.

    The quickest route out from under the power of this Terrible Tool is to embrace the accusation, not to shy away from it, and not to cower in front of it. What this entails is a comprehensive unmasking of the Liberal ‘multi-cultural’ project; the revisionism of it. The entire construct can be examined, is being examined, and is being counter-proposed and opposed.

    You are going to have to learn all over again how to be the racist they accuse you of being! But you are going to have to do this as a decent, a thoughtful and a fair and balanced person. You are going to have to do this ethically. I assure you that this is within the realm of the possible. I will further suggest that undertaking and completing what I am suggesting is part-and-parcel of a Project of Regeneration not just of your self but of your community and at a final point of your culture and your civilization. Seen through this *lens* (the lens I am describing) a fantastic assault has been leveled against *you* and also your culture and civilization. But it is so large — so much larger than one individual — that it is entirely difficult to *see* it unless one can access *meta-political tools*.

    David Brooks interestingly enough has an Opinion article in today’s Times where he uses the term ‘epistemic’ and — I find this amazing — throws in the phrase only used by the Dissident Right: “demographics is destiny”. He wrote:

    For reasons I don’t understand, we’ve had an epistemic explosion over the past few decades. Different American regions and subcultures now see reality through non-overlapping lenses. They make meaning in radically different ways. Psycho-social categories have hardened.

    But let’s work on arriving at ‘clarifying understanding’ rather than remaining within a disempowered, *mystified* state. I assert that it can be done though I also assert that it amounts to the most difficult task for any person who now lives under the present *regimes of thought* that have — here I must say this with respect and beg forgiveness — infected so many of *you* and so many of *us*. We have to break out of this Regime of Thought!

    The solution though is not to dissolve categories! That is what *you* do principally: you deny categories as being real. You refuse to see the world in real terms. You enforce & inflict erroneous anti-categories on your own perception lenses and you call this ‘ethical’ and ‘moral’. You hoodwink & bamboozle yourself just as Michael Moore is hoodwinked & bamboozled.

    As a spiritual task I assign to you the responsibility of lynching Michael Moore in the idea realm. You have to beat him down. You have to destroy anyone who expresses an interest in destroying you and certainly if they undertake such a project. The same sort of apocalyptic and blind violence that your nation uses against its outside enemies is the violence that must be reclaimed here & now within the idea-realm.

    That destructive project is ‘the war against whiteness’. It is unfortunate that it is expressed in that incomplete way because it is more than a ‘war against whites’. But one has to work with the sort of tendentious language and the binary concepts which are the terms-of-the-day.

    Well, at least *you* see where my thought on these matters tend: absolute & profound distrust for the *Cathedral* and the Regime-of-Ideas that controls perception in our present. The Cathedral refers to a structure so large, so encompassing, that the average person sees no alternative to it. And it also refers to a Current of such power that it is nearly impossible to counter-propose to it, to resist it. And also The Cathedral refers to the entire system that has been developed to both create and to manage ‘the world’ that we now live in, that world which is on the threshold of being managed by AI and ‘algorithms’. I also have to add that this *confrontation* can only occur through application of Christian principles, which must appear almost a psychotic idea! The ‘world’ that is enclosing in around us is, after all, a manifestation of *anti-Christ*.

    So, let’s just say that you have a lot on your plate today! 🙂 Get working!

  8. Just for full disclosure, I’m still wrestling with the “Ethics of Wasted Money” piece…I have been since I first read it. Good stuff!!!

    Ok…

    1. Imagine the plaintiff’s outrage should he discover that you’re allowing someone with my (lack of) intellectual prowess to post here instead of him.
    2. I tried something interesting…well, maybe not that interesting. I switched “Trump” and “Obama” in the text and replaced “white” with “black”. A person who did that and then ran with it would probably get in a heap of trouble.
    3. I feel sorry for Senator Warren. All of her recent ads are about corruption in Washington, but I think she’s really ambivalent (or maybe self-deceived) about the corruption in her own world. One of my favorite singers – Bryan Duncan – had a song years ago called “Lies Upon Lies” and it immediately came to mind. Oh what tangled webs we weave…
    4. & 5. Yes and yes.

  9. 2. I thought Michael Moore had already retired the Asshole of [you name the time] award. Don’t they all bear his name on the trophy?

    3. She graduated high school. Why do people say that? Particularly Harvard Law School faculty? What ever happened to the use of the preposition “from?”

  10. On 1, his website actually says that the case is over; “So: This is the end of this case. It proves that the U.S. States judges/courts (some of them, and probably all) are just as corrupt/unaccountable, institutionally, as the Federal judges/courts.”

    Petty, but heck, you might be done.

    • I’m a relative newcomer, but it still amazes me that readers get banned from here. The rules might be more extensive than many sites, but they are available for everyone to see and they are crystal-clear and easily understood. Dissent, even strong dissent, is allowed. Most of the time, you get a warning or two – and a chance to make things right – when you screw up…try and get THAT in the mayhem that is Twitter. And if one has questions, the head of the place has provided an email to ask about something offline.

      To get banned…and then to try to take legal action…? Yikes!

      • Walt is fascinating in a slow-moving disaster kind of way, if you have a minute to read some of his website, it’s darn near entertaining.

        When he got into a workplace disagreement with two of his supervisors, he immediately called his supervisor a liar, when he was subsequently shuffled away from that supervisor, he called that discrimination, and then as his relationship with the people he worked with continued to deteriorate, he took the reasonable action of going on short term disability, citing PTSD, and used that time to pen a combined total of 300 pages in a complaint to his employer about the two supervisors, which he had said that he worked on and I quote: “22 hours a day for two or three weeks”

        Because that seems healthy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.