PM Ethics Shadows, 4/12/2022: Civil War Memories, Crazy Climate Change Terrorists, Someone Figures Out That BLM Is A Scam, And More [Corrected]

The Civil War started on this date in 1861, as Southern forces fired on Fort Sumter in South Carolina’s Charleston Harbor. That’s about all that needs to be said. All wars are ethics nightmares, but none has had more ethics ramifications for this country, from the lives sacrificed to end slavery, to the war crimes of Andersonville, and the total war tactics of Sherman, to the myriad instances of astounding courage, cruelty and incompetence on the battlefields and the ongoing debate about how best to glean the right ethics lessons from them. (Tearing down statues is not it, though.) The Civil War took away our greatest POTUS, Lincoln, and gave us Presidents Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Harrison and McKinley, Civil War veterans all. The one non-veteran in the sequence, Grover Cleveland, is an ethics controversy himself because of it: Grover paid someone else to take his place in the draft. And yet….try asking the nearest college grad to give you the dates of the Civil War. I asked a Cornell law grad and former associate of one of the most prestigious law firm in the nation once.
She guessed “Somewhere in the 1930s, right?”

1. I’ll take “Unethical environmental fanatic nutballs, Alex!” Adbusters, a self-described “international collective of artists, designers, writers, musicians, poets, punks, philosophers and wild hearts” posted instructions on how to deflate the tires of “rich people’s” gas-powered vehicles. [Pointer: JutGory] “Wedge gravel in the tire valves, leaflet the SUV to let them know the tires are flat and why it was done, and walk away. It’s that simple,” the group said in a tweet. The group cautioned “to avoid targeting vehicles with disabled stickers or hangers.” That’s considerate of them…

This is what climate change hysteria does to people who lack ethics alarms. Here’s what they want you to leave on the windshield when you disable a car:

2. Good. Now what took you so long? On the Huffington Post, progressive opinionater Stephen Crockett authored a rueful essay bemoaning the fact that Black Lives Matter is apparently a racket. (Please note that this space figured that out years ago, and it wasn’t hard.)

He writes,

There have been stories, several of them, wondering where all of the donations have gone. In 2020 after George Floyd’s death shook the nation to its core, the Black Lives Matter foundation took in $90 million. There have been questions surrounding what the money was spent on, if anything, and how that helps the community the organization has mined. And then there was a bombshell dropped earlier this week that the foundation took some $6 million of donation money to secretly buy a mansion…What is telling here is that somewhere between the fight for Black lives and the pull of celebrity, things changed, lines got crossed, and accountability and transparency got skewed… whenever confronted with questions about finances, or really anything for that matter, …it works like this: You either fully accept everything happening within the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, which apparently includes filming a cooking show using the mansion’s kitchen, or you are a tool of white supremacy being used to shut down one of the largest Black organizations fighting for Black life.

What was your first clue, Sherlock? I knew BLM was a scam from the moment it started misrepresenting Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown on its website. Now I want to hear from Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters, D.C.’s mayor Muriel Bowser, all the toadying corporations, the NBA, the NFL, the Boston Red Sox and so, so many others who have enabled these racist, destructive frauds.

And that idiot neighbor of mine who STILL has a 4X3 foot painted BLM sign on her lawn, being held up by a suit of medieval armor holding rainbow flags…

3. BLM’s response: Hilarious! The group was moved to post this response on Twitter:

Bernie Madoff couldn’t have said it better.

An exit question: Is deciding that BLM is a corrupt, racist, phony organization a “conservative position,” or is it just an “I’m not so gullible and woke that I can’t see what’s right in front of me” position?

4. And THIS is why teachers must not be allowed to explain matters of sex and gender to young children (or maybe any at all): A trans first-grade teacher at Brooke Charter Schools in Massachusetts on a Zoom call with students in kindergarten told them,

When babies are born, the doctor looks at them and they make a guess about whether the baby is a boy or girl based on what they look like. And most of the time, that guess is 100 percent correct. There are no issues whatsoever. But sometimes the doctor is wrong. The doctor makes an incorrect guess. When the doctor makes it correct. Yes, that’s when a person is called cisgender. When the doctor guesses wrong, that’s when they are transgender.

Shut up, and you’re fired.

5. Gotta have an IIPTDXTTNMIAFB! Joe Biden continues to spit out  IIPTDXTTNMIAFBs, the convenient Ethics Alarms initials for “Imagine if President Trump did X that the news media is accepting from Biden,” like Ford plants turned out war planes during WWII. This is especially true with Biden’s lies, delusions, misstatements, or whatever they are. See, President Trump lied all the time, and it was unbearable. Biden’s just being Biden.

Here’s a good’un…During his announcement yesterday of a new regulation requiring a background check and serial numbers for certain manufactured firearms, Biden said,

“It’s going to sound bizarre, I support the Second Amendment. But from the very beginning, the Second Amendment didn’t say you can own any gun you want, as big as you want. You couldn’t buy a cannon when in fact the Second Amendment passed and certain people from the very beginning weren’t allowed to purchase guns. There’s nothing new, it’s just rational.”

Not only is his assertion untrue, he’s been told it’s untrue, and he keeps saying it anyway. This isn’t the first time. Moreover, any non-idiot who knows anything about history or has a teeny-tiny bit of common sense should know it’s nonsense. There were no “illegal weapons” at the time of the Revolution, including cannons. One more time, an elected official is depending upon or reflecting the rotten education system in this country. (I wonder what that lawyer I mentioned above thinks are the dates of the Revolutionary War? I’d be afraid to ask.)

During his 2020 presidential campaign, Biden told Wired Magazine, “You weren’t allowed to own a cannon during the Revolutionary War as an individual.” Who told Joe this? Did he dream it? Even the partisan factcheckers wouldn’t cover for him on the crazy assertion, no, not even PoliticFact. The Washington Post gave the same claim by Biden four Pinocchios in a June 28, 2021, piece, pointing out that there were no laws about the types of guns citizens could own and that private citizens owned cannons at the time of the nation’s founding.

“Some readers might think this is a relatively inconsequential flub. But we disagree,” occasionally non-partisan Glenn Kessler wrote. “Every U.S. President has a responsibility to get American history correct, especially when he’s using a supposed history lesson in service of a political objective. The President’s push for more gun restrictions is an important part of his political platform, so he undercuts his cause when he cites faux facts.”

Ya think? Of course, this was before the Post and the mainstream media started circling the metaphorical wagons.



12 thoughts on “PM Ethics Shadows, 4/12/2022: Civil War Memories, Crazy Climate Change Terrorists, Someone Figures Out That BLM Is A Scam, And More [Corrected]

  1. 2. Re: the six million dollar mansion. I saw a report the other day that the house was purchased from a guy of color who’d bought it for about three million a month or so earlier. Sooooo, I’m guessing the purchase was a way to launder about three million and kick it back on the sly to the BLM fraudsters, er, founders.

  2. 1. That’s a good example of turmoil: people trying to coerce others through force, sabotage, threats, et cetera… anything that doesn’t involve rules. Turmoil is one of the two failure modes that can happen when people try to resolve conflict without ethics, corruption being the other one. The climate guerrillas couldn’t figure out how to make the ethical options work, so in their general mindset of desperation and panic they skipped to the unethical options.

    They would do well to read my new article on how conversations about climate change should go. That will show them how they be much more effective at expressing their concerns, and how they can address the concerns of their opponents. (Naturally, it does the exact same thing for people from the opposing side.) Only by establishing some level of mutual understanding and trust can we move forward with anything constructive.

      • I left this comment on the blog post.

        To give you an idea: Saxton calculates that it would require over 400 million megatons of energy, equally distributed over the surface of a planet, to melt its entire crust to a depth of 1 meter. Now, as a comparison: 100 megatons is enough to wreck the Earth and cause nuclear winter (see Carl Sagan’s “The Nuclear Winter”), and the total US and Soviet arsenals during the height of the Cold War was somewhere around 400,000 megatons (give or take a hundred thousand), enough to completely obliterate every human on the planet several hundred times over.

        – quoting

        All it takes is one hundred megatons to send enough smoke and debris into the air to “generate an epoch of cold and dark “, to quote Carl Sagan.

        100 megatons to create climate paradise.

        Why has this not been done yet?

        • I am confused by your question. If you are asking why climate activists have not attempted to use an enormous quantity of explosives to spread ash and dust into the atmosphere to cool down the planet, I imagine that the reason is because that plan would also kill crops and other plants due to lack of sunlight. That would cause many people to starve and damage the ecosystem to boot.

          That actually happened back in 1816, the Year Without a Summer, although that was due to volcanic activity:

          Most people don’t want to cause widespread plant death, regardless of what they think of anthropogenic climate change. To call that outcome “climate paradise” is a strawman. I’m not sure how you got there from “nuclear winter” and “epoch of cold and dark.” If I interpret your question that way, it’s the equivalent of, “If people really want to save money, why don’t they stop buying food?”

          On the other hand, maybe you’re saying that this ash-and-dust plan isn’t possible because if it were, some psychopathic dictator would have done it already?

          I haven’t run the numbers, but I strongly suspect that detonating a nuclear bomb underground in the right place would have the described effect, even assuming people could not assemble a sufficient quantity of non-nuclear explosives. However, I think anyone who controls that much explosive power has other plans for it. They evidently realize that anyone who blots out the sky isn’t going to come out better than they started. Maybe they saw Dr. Strangelove.

          Does that answer your question, or did I misunderstand?

    • Have you ever asked yourself this question?

      Why does this sort of thing only happen with climate “science”?

      Why has no one ever suggested deflating tires in the name of Fermat’s Last Theorem?

      Or evolution?

      Or string theory?

      Or the Goldbach Conjecture?

      Why only climate science?

      Could it be that the very concept of climate science is a fraud?

      • Those other scientific theories and hypotheses don’t predict anthropogenic disaster. Nobody’s panicking over the implications of string theory. Therefore, nobody is desperate to get the general population to subscribe to it, nor are they engaging in turmoil against people who don’t take it seriously.

        However, just because a hypothesis predicts that humans are causing problems, that doesn’t make it wrong or a conspiracy. Remember asbestos? Radium? Leaded gasoline? Would you agree that the people calling for society to remove toxic materials from household use had a good idea and were honest? In those cases, the people with the conspiracies were trying to keep things the same.

        The answer here isn’t “scientists are lying when they tell us we should stop something right now.” Will a real conspiracy push a hypothesis that (when combined with humanity’s values) calls for a change in behavior? Yes, often–unless the conspiracy profits from the status quo. Either way, not all hypotheses that call for behavioral changes are conspiracies. That’s why I’m helping people have conversations about the reasoning. Those conversations will reveal the difference between honesty and trickery.

        What do you think?

  3. President Biden claims that no one could own a cannon when the 2nd Amendment was made; cannons existed at the time, but Joe said no one could own them.

    I have a friend who makes real cannons without a serial number (ghost cannons!). Shockingly, in California, fully functional cannons without serial numbers are completely legal to own, manufacture, and sell intrastate.

    The climate change warriors all seem to lack the ability to foresee the probable. If I came out to find all of my tires flat, I’d have to call a flatbed truck to take my car to a tire shop. Those flatbeds consume fuel at a much higher rate than any SUV. The climate warriors net more fuel being burned and a net increase in air pollution.

    You know, morons.

    • That’s the dumbest part about Biden’s assertion: in most of the US, you can own a cannon like the ones he’s taking about right now, with no permit, serial number, permission slip, hall pass, or any other such nonsense. Not only were they not regulated back then, they aren’t today (in most states).

  4. 1. Our SUV (a late-model Nissan Rogue) gets 30+mpg regularly. It’s not quite as good as a bike, but still way more than most SUVs…and a good many passenger cars.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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.