Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 7/11/2022: Twitter Wars And More

But first, a cheerful song, because it’s all downhill from here…

Speaking of music, some opening notes are in order:

  • Yesterday was the anniversary of the much-heralded Scopes “Monkey Trial,” a 1925 ethics train wreck that I wrote about extensively last year, here and here.
  • Today, July 11, marks two of the most vivid examples of how random chance changes everything—history, culture, values, traditions– in ways that cannot be imagined. The first was the foolish duel in 1804 between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr that resulted in Hamilton’s premature death (but ultimately in a boffo Broadway musical!). The second was Count Claus von Stauffenberg’s close-but-no-cigar assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler in 1944.
  • Nearer to the present, the apparent collapse of Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter is disappointing, because it would make reporting on various Twitter-Twiggered ethics issues a lot easier if I could start an account again in good conscience, as I was prepared to do once the service got out from under the clutches of its current censorious and progressive-biased masters.
  • I also haven’t felt like participating in Facebook of late, as the Woke Hysteria among my once rational friends there over the recent SCOTUS decisions is too great a temptation–as in “target”— for me. Right now they just want an echo chamber to scream in, and that’s what they have. Someone somewhere on the web opined yesterday that late night talk shows,  “Saturday Night Live” and its ilk were no longer primarily about comedy, but rather therapy sessions for angry and depressed progressives and Democrats, with the shows using mockery and insults to reaffirm their convictions about “the others”—those dumb, evil, racist conservatives. I think that may be a perceptive analysis. “Saturday Night Live” is a particularly vivid example: the show that once reveled in portraying Gerald Ford as a bumbling klutz and George W. Bush as an outright moron week after week while they were in the White House now hesitates to exploit the comedy gold represented by Biden’s misadventures and Kamala Harris in general. It proves that SNL is more interested in hanging out with the cool kids than actually being funny—which is supposedly its mission. This is a conflict of interest, and the producer and writers aren’t even attempting to resolve it ethically.

1. Twitter Wars #1: @Ka1zoku_Qu0d, an idiot of the sort that literally clogs Twitter, posted this: “Hold on I want to make sure I say this carefully. Yeah Anne Frank had white privilege. Bad things happen to people with white privilege also but don’t tell the whites that.” This caused so much static on the platform that “Anne Frank” ended up “trending.”

Far from all the reactions were negative, either. For example, one user who ‘liked’ that cretinous tweet wrote, “Yes, all white people are safe. No one is saying the Nazis didn’t target white people, just that white people can hide behind their whiteness, whereas in Nazi USA black people can’t. Go tell black people the whites got it hard.”

This got me wondering why the race-hucksters object to blackface. They should argue for mandatory blackface, so whites can’t “hide behind their whiteness.” It makes as much sense as anything else in the anti-white racism playbook.

The Anne Frank tweet and its reaction stratified the anti-white racism hoard into “dumb” and “not-so-dumb.” Thus “1619 Project” propagandist Nikole Hannah-Jones was moved to weigh in with: “Anne Frank did not have white privileged in Nazi Germany. Literally wasn’t considered part of the white race.”

Meanwhile, the original tweeter pulled the tweet and deleted his/her/its account. Throw a bomb in a crowd, run away.

2. Twitter Wars #2: Retired Lt. Gen. Gary Volesky, the Army’s former top spokesman, sent a snarky (but apt!) response to a tweet from the First Lady complaining about the Dobbs decision, as she wrote, “For nearly 50 years, women have had the right to make our own decisions about our bodies. Today, that right was stolen from us.”

“Glad to see you finally know what a woman is,” Volesky responded.

Lt. Gen. Theodore Martin, commander of the Combined Arms Center, suspended Volesky as the Army launched an investigation. Volesky, who was in charge of the Army’s 101st Airborne Division, had signed a contract after he retired to advise active-duty officers as a senior mentor.

Well…

  • What’s the investigation for?
  • It is improper for the First Lady to use her position to attack another branch of the government, especially one she apparently doesn’t comprehend. She can do it, but she shouldn’t.
  • It is more improper for a member of the Armed Services to take metaphorical swipes at the family of the Commander-in-Chief. Why didn’t that ethics alarm ring?
  • If Dr. Jill was a class act, as First Ladies (and First Men) should be, she would graciously brush off the snark with a laugh and a clever but friendly reply.

Nah.

3. What Sri Lanka teaches those of us who care about reality:

  • Now that’s an insurrection. I added three more news sources to my black list the past weekend after they casually referred to the Jan. 6 riot as an “insurrection.” That’s signature significance for a  media source. It’s not a description or an analysis, its partisan narrative indoctrination.
  • A major factor in the nation’s collapse was the government banning fertilizers, pesticides and other agricultural tools in pursuit of “sustainability.” Though the president was warned that this course was risky, the climate change-motivated madness went forward, and 85% of Sri Lanka’s crops failed. On the positive side, there’s a chance that the measures may prevent a .0001 rise in global temperature over the next 20, or 50, or a hundred years or so, depending on which model you use, but who the hell knows.

4. Twitter Wars, #3: 74-year-old Horror King Stephen King tweeted to his more than 6.7 million followers, “DeSantis signs bill requiring Florida students, professors to register political views with state. I. Can’t. Even.”

[Stevie writes better than that when he’s doing novels.] His “news” was fake: even  PolitiFact, which will usually twist facts and logic into weird formations to bolster a leftist trope, had to call foul, writing, “Florida not requiring professors, students to register political views with the state.”

King had been taken in by deliberately false characterizations of  Florida House Bill 233, which requires the states’ public colleges and universities to “conduct an annual assessment of the intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity.” To be fair, he wasn’t alone, and anyone who gets their political news from a cranky, ultra-progressive horror novelist is asking to be horrified by what turns out to be fiction.

Ground Zero for the false claim was a June Salon article. The Lincoln Project, MSNBC contributor Claire McCaskill, former Obama campaign staffer Jon Cooper, OccupyDemocrats executive editor Grant Stern, activist group MeidasTouch, and many journalists also spread Salon’s fake news. King pulled his tweet and wrote, “I regret having posted the headline without being more confident the story was correct. Salon is usually more reliable. Twitter is a constant learning experience, and I will try to do better.”

Translation: “I have a learning curve a flat as Kansas.” Salon is “more reliable” only to those as biased as it is. Saying Salon is usually reliable is like saying that MSNBC or Adam Schiff are usually reliable. And the easy lesson to learn from Twitter is that it lowers your IQ and lures you into making a fool of yourself.

Oh…did I neglect to mention that Twitter did nothing to King or his account for spreading “misinformation”? I’m sorry.

5. If it had been on Twitter instead of TikTok, this would be Twitter Wars #4: An Army medic posted a three-minute video on June 24 freaking out over Dobbs, expressing regret over extending her contract with the U.S. Army, and generally making comments about her country that are a whole lot more inappropriate than tweaking Jill Biden. Such as…

“How am I supposed to swear to support and defend the Constitution and a country that treats its women like second-class citizens? How am I supposed to do that with pride? How am I supposed to do that with love and honor? How am I supposed to wake up every day and put on a frickin’ uniform that says ‘United States Army’ when the United States doesn’t even give a rat’s ass about me? It gives more of a rat’s ass about the guns they’re allowed to buy that kill the children that I’m forced to give birth to.”

She added that the overturning of Roe v. Wade would “greatly lessen the retention of women in the ranks of this military” and “ruin some women’s careers,” complaining that  she has “extremely limited access to birth control” and she “can’t get an ultrasound without traveling off base.”

Did the regulations regarding recruits having sex with each other and getting pregnant while serving change without my noticing? I’d also like some explication of the “second class citizen” theory. As I understand it, under Roe only women had a right to kill their unborn children, except for licensed male abortionists.

And isn’t hearing someone in the military objecting to the Second Amendment a bit…chilling?

 

11 thoughts on “Morning Ethics Warm-Up, 7/11/2022: Twitter Wars And More

  1. Yeah, well Anne Frank is trending on Twitter and Ms.Project 1619 herself has joined the fray. She agrees that Lil Annie wasn’t white under Nazi rules, so she didn’t have much white privilege at the time. If she had survived Nazi genocide, who knows. This dedicated Wells follower seems to know:
    Replying to
    @Errr_Wut

    @nhannahjones
    and 3 others
    “Whiteness is a power play” that all people who aren’t American Blacks, revere & yearn for. Italians, Irish, Polish & any other group of yt people who immigrated here & was treated like crap (including Jewish ppl)…
    7:05 AM · Jul 10, 2022·Twitter for iPhone
    1
    Like

    and:

    Jason Gibson
    @_jjbuildings
    Replying to
    @_jjbuildings

    @Errr_Wut
    and 4 others
    jumped at the opportunity to be in the yt group & became Anti-Black. Anytime WASP needed to recruit man power against Black Americans they opened the door to the next closest yt looking group. And they all jumped at the opportunity. Including Jewish ppl. Not all, but most.
    7:08 AM · Jul 10, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

    You, know. Morons.

    jvb

  2. Well, nice to see woke proglibots are serving in our military.

    This woman would benefit from a long lunch with MermaidMary.
    Of course the lunch is just a pretext for the land dwelling mermaid to explain how pathetic the victim mindset comes across when said out loud and how equally disempowering.
    Instead of leaving a tip Mary will leave a copy of her latest (COTD) comment on the subject.

  3. 5. Yes, indeed, regulations have changed.
    There is a story, perhaps apocryphal, that back in the 1980s, an Army general told his troops that if any became pregnant, they should abort or get out.
    Now, the recently updated Army regulation makes a number of provisions for those who become pregnant – special treatment with regard to the Army Body Composition Program, a Pregnancy Postpartum Physical Training (P3T) program which (obviously) is different from the regular PT program, authority to wear uniforms that accommodate pregnancy, deferment from continuous duty events that would exceed one normal duty day or shift, and a host of other accommodations. For those who give birth, many of the special accommodations persist for up to 365 days postpartum.
    That is not to say the Army encourages pregnancy, but that it understands that pregnancy happens and those who are pregnant can provide valuable service. Within limits.
    There are prohibitions in the Uniform Code of Military Justice against adultery and wrongful cohabitation, but, in general, not against consenting adults having a sexual relationship.

    • Ugh.
      And pregnancies don’t just “happen”.
      Having intimate relations in an army is exactly as organizationally destructive as having them in a private sector staff.

      The woman at issue seems to regard sex as a primary concern during her service. That seems more than a little bit warped, priority-wise.

      • There is no question that the soldier in who made the video is in the wrong occupation.

        There are many couples in the military where both are active duty and many where the wife is active duty and has a civilian husband. That pregnancies “happen” in these women is not unexpected in the natural course of events. I don’t see how these relationships and the pregnancies that result are “organizationally destructive.” This has been the case since women have been allowed to serve in the military. In the past, the regulation was that a woman service member who became pregnant had to be discharged. I’m not sure when that was changed but I believe it was still in effect in the 70s when I was enlisted. When that regulation changed, provision had to be made for pregnant service members in terms of what duties they could perform and other issues such as PT and uniforms. As late as 1992, a pregnant service member could request being discharged. I don’t know what the current regulation is on that.

        There have always been regulations that forbid fraternization between officers and enlisted members. There also exist regulation similar to civilian sexual harassment policies that make it illegal for the senior member in the chain-of-command to use that position for sexual favors. Service members are permitted to date and have relationships as long as they are not otherwise prohibited by regulations. In many situations, such as remote deployments, the only opportunity a member has for a relationship is with another service member. When I deployed to Oman in 1992, sexual relationships among the deployed troops were strongly discourage but of course occurred. When I deployed to Egypt in 1993, I worked in the clinic where condoms were available to anyone who would just come in and pick them up.

        As Johnny mentions, Article 134 of the UCMJ (known to enlisted members when I was in as the Uniform Code of Marsupial Justice) does address adultery and cohabitation. Like any offense there are specific elements that have to be met so an individual simply engaging in one or the other is very likely not going to meet the criteria that would result in being charged. I agree that two service members in the same unit having an intimate relationship may likely be “organizationally destructive” but unless other regulations are broken, such as those regarding fraternization or sexual harassment, it in and of itself is not prohibited. If it becomes prejudicial to the discipline and good order of the unit or brings discredit on the military, then UCMJ action is likely.

        Abortion rules in the military have not changed. Military medical treatment facilities are prohibited from performing abortions except in the very rare case where termination of pregnancy must be performed to immediately save the life of the mother. Military insurance does not cover abortion except for cases of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother.

  4. #5: How are you supposed to swear to support and defend the Constitution when you don’t understand the document, its foundational principles, or its basic functions? How are you supposed to swear to support and defend the Constitution when you clearly haven’t even read the damn thing?

    This is the quality of soldier our Army is composed of, and they keep lowering the standards further to meet recruiting goals, and promoting unqualified personnel ever higher to meet “diversity” quotas. The future is not bright for America’s military effectiveness. If this is the best we can recruit into the military, it might be time to scrap the standing federal army and return to our state militia roots. It would be likely just as ineffective, but at least it’d be cheaper.

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.