When Ethics Alarms Don’t Ring, Schools Don’t Teach And Brain Cells Die From Under-Use: The San Antonio City Council

The city of San Antonio has passed a resolution outlawing words associated with the coronavirus that it deems to be racist or xenophobic.

The resolution states: “The City of San Antonio denounces antisemitism, anti-Asian bigotry, and all hateful speech, violent action and the spread of misinformation related to COVID-19 that casts blame, promotes racism or discrimination or harms the City of San Antonio Asian and Pacific Islander, Jewish, immigrant or other communities.”

According to reporter Jaie Avila, Councilman Jack Finger was speaking against the resolution when his mic was cut off. Well, that figures, right? One form of censorship is as good as another.

Councilman Manny Pelaez reportedly said that “hate speech is more dangerous than the virus itself.”

I think that brilliant assessment calls for another favorite Ethics Alarms movie clip:

The city council also proclaimed  that “all persons are encouraged to report any such anti-Semitic, discriminatory or racist incidents to the proper authorities for investigation.” The city council  unanimously voted in favor of the resolution 11-0.

Any effort to enforce such an unconstitutional provision would be struck down, of course, and the resolution is grandstanding, virtue-signalling and ignorance on parade  to an epic degree. The martyrs at the Alamo placed themselves in the path of a ruthless dictator’s army for this?

Mayor Ron Nirenberg, who proposed the resolution, said that the First Amendment violating thing was “really about standing in solidarity with all the members of our community.”  China’s a member of the San Antonio community? I did not know that!

Senator Ted Cruz properly chided San Antonio’s leaders with a tweet:

Bingo.

_______________________________

Source: The Blaze

 

22 thoughts on “When Ethics Alarms Don’t Ring, Schools Don’t Teach And Brain Cells Die From Under-Use: The San Antonio City Council

  1. I wonder if the city counsel is equally stupid or just absent.

    Portland OR councel meetings are fun because the city counsel is regularly informing them “you can’t do that” throughout the meeting.

    • In all fairness to Portland’s city council, citizens do interrupt them quite a bit. I should know, I did it once myself years ago.

  2. Kinda, slightly off-topic, I’m continually amazed at how Murder By Death has just fallen off the cultural radar.

    The 1970s were a great revival of Golden Age Detective Fiction and films based on it (Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile, Sleuth, Ellery Queen on television, etc…). Murder By Death was a stellar (and beautifully shot) send-up of the whole genre. But, despite its all-star cast (Peter Sellers! Maggie Smith! David Niven! Peter Falk!), no one seems to have heard of it, let alone remember it!

    A little Sidney Wang always makes my day.

    • Well, let’s see. Neil Simon is wildly out of fashion. The running joke about Sam Diamond being gay is politically incorrect (and was criticized at the time). Sidney Wang is an ethnic stereotype some regard as offensive as Mickey Rooney’s turn in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” The deaf mute maid/blind butler was also deemed offensive.(It was awfully silly). The movie was roundly hated by most critics, but was a surprise success. Peter Sellers hated the script so much he was the only star not to take a % rather than a flat fee, and lost several million dollars as a consequence.

      I think of it as third rate Simon with a few great gags and as an example of how great talents (Falk, Coco, Guiness, Lancaster and Sellers are especially good) can (sometimes) save weak material.

    • First saw it when I was part of a little classic movie club. Never heard of it before, and yeah it is criminally underrated.

  3. Whoa. Well . . . not really. Most big cities in Texas are run by Democrats so this doesn’t surprise me. I do wonder, though. Is “White Privilege” a racial epithet? If not, why not? Does that come from the perspective that “people of color” are not really part of the power structure, which solely exists to support white domination over other races? So, People of Color can’t be racist? Let me know. I don’t understand.

    See, the other day, I was following a colleague’s Facebook posts and I began to wonder if his brain simply turned off. He was talking about the Georgia shooting of an unarmed Black man in February of this year. He and his echo chamber were screaming, “Come witness the violence inherent in the system” when it was revealed that one of the shooters (well, actually, the shooter was his moron of son) is a retired Georgia police officer and prosecutors in that county (?) recused themselves from the case because of their relationship with the former police officer – an action mostly justifiable in my mind. An independent prosecutor has been appointed and the two people involved have been arrested and charged. (That seems reasonable, but the reporting states that the charges were brought in response to “public outrage.” Is that the new standard?) There is a TMZ video circulating online that shows what happened. It is gruesome and depressing, and doesn’t lend itself to a claim that the Black man was the aggressor to justify use of deadly force.

    My colleague and his echo chamber screamed (I guess typing in all capital letters constitutes shouting, yelling, or something . . . .) that these two people have been charged because of their white privilege. I stated, curtly, that their position was based on male bovine excrement. I was shouted down as I was clearly demonstrating MY white privilege. Jerks. I maintained that accusing me of “white privilege” was nothing other than shutting opposing viewpoints down and was tantamount to thought control. Cue the howls of outrage, rushing bands of vigilantes chasing me with pitchforks and torches.

    jvb

    • I hear you. Got into an FB showdown yesterday. You would have thought I was the second coming of Hitler. And yet my friends were the ones who were pro-censorship, pro-government lockdown, pro-you can’t say that, watch that, do that, because we just want to be spoon fed pablum and told how righteous we are.

      I deactivated my account; until I find something else that irks me and decide to stir up a hornets’ nest.

    • An independent prosecutor has been appointed and the two people involved have been arrested and charged. (That seems reasonable, but the reporting states that the charges were brought in response to “public outrage.” Is that the new standard?) There is a TMZ video circulating online that shows what happened. It is gruesome and depressing, and doesn’t lend itself to a claim that the Black man was the aggressor to justify use of deadly force.

      I researched this for a couple of hours this afternoon. They were not charged for two full months until the tone of outrage caused a change. The law in that state says that one can pursue and arrest someone if your see them commit a crime or have strong evidence that they committed a crime. That was the case. Calls were made to 9/11 that a man had entered private property and was seen running away.

      The man who died, who indeed had prior weapons violations and a mug shot that the media won’t show (for obvious reasons) charged at the man who confronted him and tried to take his weapon from him. That led to the tragedy of him losing his life.

      But what is important here is to notice the way *the media* are framing this. Those men who confronted him — the father and son — may have been stupid to have done so but they were not outside of the rights defined by law in that state. To attack a man and try to take his weapon is, in fact, highly illegal. Though I guess it could be suggested that he had some right to resist or to fight those who confronted him. A murky area nonetheless.

      The larger stupidity — and there is also evidence of mental unbalance and mental health issues — is with the man who charged at another man holding a shotgun. In that situation the one holding the gun does not have many options.

      This fellow deals with the issue in a fair way, at least it seems so to me: [ https://youtu.be/cKj3rxOW5r0 ]

  4. And they’re against anti-Semitism? So it’s the Jews who visited the coronavirus on us? You learn something every day. Maybe there’s a Chinese-Jewish “community” (God, I hate that word) in San Antone?

  5. The resolution seems totally ineffective. For anyone to order investigation, there has to be a crime. Wrongthink, even in San Antonio, is not an actual crime. Hell, it’s not even a crime in San Francisco. One has to wonder if having “San” in your name has some kind of link to the crazy, because it sure is strong with these two.

    So this strikes me as silly grandstanding, almost worthy of the Obama “Beer summit.”

    Mayor Ron Nirenberg, who proposed the resolution, said that the Firts [sic] Amendment violating things was “really about standing in solidarity with all the members of our community.” China’s a member of the San Antonio community? I did not know that!

    Oh, well, that explains it then. We all know that emotionally supporting community members who might somehow contrive a reason to be offended trumps that pesky old Bill of Rights anytime. After all, it was written by dead, slaveholding white guys, and needn’t be considered in a city that’s on the “right side of history.”

    This is the same city that has spent over $300,000 in legal fees trying to keep Chick-Fil-A from opening a restaurant in the SA airport because they don’t like who Chick-Fil-A gives its charity to.

    Taken together, this seems to me to make SA crazier than almost any American city outside of Chicago, New York, and San Francisco.

      • I guess, Jack, we are faced with the same sort of virtue-signalling that we have been watching over the last decade or so.

        I think the driving force behind most of this is social media. It’s so easy for the “mob” to encourage elected officials to “stand up” for disadvantaged groups like LGBTQYZ#%#$+ by taking stands like this, even if they are largely symbolic and/or flagrantly unconstitutional. Even if a court acts to restore rationality, the “mob” will laud the effort.

        Somewhere, in the feelings-trump-fact world of social media, we decided that futile or empty gestures in the right direction were preferable to the alternative, I suppose.

      • I feel you. I just typed a long comment, proofread it twice, and still found two or three really dumb grammar goofs or typos.

        You don’t have a corner on that market, let me tell you! 🙂

        • Forget the Hyde Amendment. Why aren’t high school students more familiar with the Firts Amendment? Grovesnor Firts was one of the great Americans of the early 19th Century!

    • Especially ironic, considering that, like those who ‘stand with the Native Americans,’ they’re grandstanding not so much to get Jewish or Asian voters, but frantically signaling their virtue to those who get offended on behalf of Jewish or Asian voters. Like women, black people, or handicapped people, sometimes they just can’t be counted on to get outraged on their own behalf. Someone has to do it for them! It isnt for the minorities, it’s for the do-gooder crowd, who want to feel good about doing good without having to actually, you know, do anything. A powerful voting block is just a thumbs up away!

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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.