Friday Ethics Forum!

Come into the Light! All are welcome!

…which reminds me: interestingly, the professional listserv where I and another lawyer were reprimanded and threatened for daring to express non-conforming opinions in a forum where the previous president feels it necessary to include “he,him” to his posts went almost silent yesterday, The Day After. There were just three timid offerings as opposed to the usual 15-40 in what is usually a very active platform. Maybe it was a coincidence, but I’m pretty sure what looked like a sudden drop-off in enthusiasm was noticed. Good. Maybe it will spark some introspection from the would-be censors.

20 thoughts on “Friday Ethics Forum!

  1. Jack wrote, “interestingly, the professional listserv where I and another lawyer were reprimanded and threatened for daring to express non-conforming opinions in a forum where the previous president feels it necessary to include “he,him” to his posts went almost silent yesterday, The Day After. There were just three timid offerings as opposed to the usual 15-40 in what is usually a very active platform. Maybe it was a coincidence, but I’m pretty sure what looked like a sudden drop-off in enthusiasm was noticed. Good. Maybe it will spark some introspection from the would-be censors.”

    I certainly wouldn’t hold your breathe waiting for “introspection from the would-be censors” because most of them are tunnel visioned and are no longer capable of such things, it really is all or nothing for those people. How dare those evil deplorable conservatives disagree with the hive minded progressive Democratic Party!

    Only time will tell.

    On that note; yesterday I was invited to a round table discussion over coffee with some acquaintances that live around Madison Wisconsin most of which claim to be a classic liberals and the following statement actually came out of one of the self-proclaimed classic liberals mouth when I stated that the political left has shifted ideologically towards totalitarianism, the red raced emotional response I got back was, and I think I’m quoting this accurately, “I like the USA and our political system just fine but I’d rather live in a communist state than to ever vote for a fascist Republican.” There was agreement from a couple of the other self-proclaimed “classic liberals” at the table. My reply to that statement was “That’s exactly the kind of pure tunnel visioned nonsense that’s enabling the USA to head into the abyss of totalitarianism, people like you are literally enabling the problem.” There were literally audible gasps when I said that. After further discussion, the impression I got from these “classic liberals” was that they literally look at the (D) and (R) after the candidates names on ballots and that’s all they need to know, they vote for whatever has a (D) after it because it’s always better than voting for a Republican, period. That is from people that considers themself to be “classic liberals”. Side Note: a couple of other conservative leaning people were mostly listeners and didn’t rock the boat. I’m going to guess that I won’t ever again be told when and where they have their next round table discussions.

    Rock the damn boat people or your country is doomed.

    • Rock the damn boat people or your country is doomed.


      Yikes! Someone felt comfortable saying that out loud? What an admission!

      The thing is that the comments from me and the other iconoclast weren’t even “conservative” by my lights. I questioned the orthodoxy of stripping the names of alleged racists off buildings and institutions when other facts of their lives were the reasons for the honor—another expressed puzzlement of a long, silly, woke apology “on behalf of the organization”from a former officer for another comment from a third party that was mildly politically correct. Then the preaching and the threatening started.

      • All Democrats, or liberals to some degree or another, subscribe to some or all of the following values:
        1. Authority comes from government, and governmental authority is absolute as long as the party is in power. Once the party is no longer in power, The authority is no longer so absolute, however, once the party is back in power, that authority becomes absolute again.
        2. White, straight men are bullies, cowards, sociopaths, and rapists in waiting. None of them should be trusted, except for a woman’s hand picked partner. Once a woman hand picks her partner, he is obligated to obey her in all things. His role is to bring home the bacon, and give the woman in his life whatever she wants.
        3. People’s value is determined by their value to the party, and that value shifts day to day depending on the needs of the party. People’s value is also determined by their color, their gender, or the gender they are attracted to, with white straight males being disfavored.
        4. Single exception: a powerful man is entitled to any woman he wants, as long as he uses his power in the service of the party and is in favor of abortion.
        5. Those who are successful, are successful either because they are lucky, because they are privileged, or both. They owe something to those who were not as lucky or privileged, and it is government’s role to collect that debt.
        6. Business is tolerated because it is necessary, however, it is business’ role to finance the government and the party in exchange for being allowed to operate. Big business can be partnered with as long as it will stick to the party line. Small business is disfavored, since it enables its owners to be free of the need for government.
        7. A population that can defend itself can also revolt. It is better that weapons be confined to the possession of police and the military, and then only when on duty.
        8. Religion is superstitious nonsense, although it may be necessary to pay lip service to it. Black churches and mosques are favored, however, as long as they support the party.
        9. Politicians can do whatever they damn well please, as long as they vote the right way on a portion. If they do not, then one mistake and they are out.
        10. There should be only two freedoms: the freedom to get an abortion, and the freedom to ask permission to do anything else.
        11. certain thoughts are dangerous if they are expressed. It is government’s role to enforce civility and correct thinking among the populist..
        12. Climate change is a very real and imminent danger, and anything that will stave off this danger must be done without question.
        13. The law is fluid until it reaches the point that the party wants it to be at, at that point it becomes immutably settled.
        14. Guilt is a powerful tool for controlling people. White people especially have a huge amount of guilt. There is nothing that white people do that cannot be somehow found to be racist, and there is nothing non-white people do that cannot be excused.
        16. Police and policing are useful in the service of the party, however, if they are no longer useful to the party, they may be discarded or defunded at will.
        17. Mobs are useful in the service of the party, to destroy public art and send the message that its supporters could be next, to intimidate the opposition, to destroy a small business and clear the way for government partnered big business to come in, and other purposes. However, once mobs are no longer in the service of the party, they are a public danger and must be dealt with swiftly and harshly.
        18. It is better to have a failing City run by the party, than a prosperous one not run by the party.
        19. It is the role of the food and energy producing areas of this country to produce the food and energy, do the paperwork, pay their taxes, and shut up. The coasts and the big cities have governing covered.
        20. Taxes are best used for whatever advances the party’s cause.
        21. It is the role of the news media to make certain that the party’s actions receive favorable coverage, and that other actions are either buried or receive bad press.
        22. it is the role of the entertainment industry to reinforce the party’s values and make other values look foolish.
        23. It is the role of the courts to ultimately act as an unelected Politburo when the party’s control over the legislative and executive branches is not enough to make certain that its values are upheld.

      • Jack Marshall wrote, “Yikes! Someone felt comfortable saying that out loud? What an admission!”

        Considering the “progressive” (yup I know that’s an oxymoron) Dane County Wisconsin bubble that I live in, it came as no surprise to me, it’s what I expected. I’ve been saying that these people will vote for anything that has a (D) after it for quite some time and as far as I’m concerned they confirmed it. They’re Democratic Party sheeple and they will follow the Party over any cliff they lead.

        Additional note: when I asked them if they could describe why they call Republicans fascists their answer was basically nothing more than a drum beat of “Trump, Trump, Trump”. They are completely blinded by their party propaganda.

    • I am not surprised by that response, Steve W in Madison! My long-suffering wife (she’s been married to me for 25 years, so there you go!) immigrated to the US in 1992, obtained her citizenship and later her dental degree/license, and practices here in Houston (she keeps telling me I need all my roots taken out without anesthesia – I wonder why . . . .). She has seen the country collapse over the last 30 years and, up until recently, kept her politics to herself. Nowadays, she sees Biden or Harris or Pelosi or et al and she wants to strangle the.m. She looks at them and wonders why they want to destroy the best country in the history of the world. It physically hurts her to see how degraded the nation’s standing as an economic, political, and ideological standard bearer.


    • Story time:
      I recently met a woman at a fair and we hit it off with the intention of getting together in the near future.
      However, later on she told me that she would not date anyone who voted for Trump.
      I asked her how she thought Biden was doing, and with real sincerity and just a hint of venom she replied, “better than Trump” and I live in a conservative town.
      Madison is densely dem-swampy and damn proud of it!
      You cannot reason with today’s neo-fascist proglibot anymore than you can with a cultist, and unfortunately that is not hyperbole.

      • My doctor told me on Wednesday that she thought that the COVID virus was allowed to spread to eliminate certain groups of people.

        My DOCTOR said that.

        There is no shortage of alarming opinions in this world, it seems.

        At least, she admitted to me that Biden is too old.

  2. Critical race economic theory.

    • That question is loaded with an assumption that so far has been determined to not be true: ‘Gun control laws crush crime.’

      The best that statisticians can tell is no overall effect, but some metrics show increased crime.

  3. I’ve been pondering the “quiet quitting” phenomenon and stumbled across this analysis:

    The author hypothesizes that quiet quitting is a second order consequence to hyperfinancialization and globalization. The weak bargaining power of the labor force combined with disappearing upward mobility opportunities and skyrocketing prices has led to many people giving up on the idea of being successful. If there is no hope of ever being able to afford the lifestyle that you wanted, then it is logical to find some other way to make yourself happy. Forget hard work if hard work is not rewarded. Just have fun.

    I think on the macro level this makes a lot of sense, and it fits well with my personal experience of the work environment. Operant conditioning has a logical flow that makes certain consequences easily predictable. If rewards for a behavior are removed, then behavioral extinction occurs. If hard work is not rewarded, the behavioral extinction of hard work will ensue. I’m still pondering the ethical implications, but I’m not at all certain that quiet quitting is unethical. I think it is actually an obvious consequence of the unethical behavior of the global elites.

    Any thoughts?

    • “If there is no hope of ever being able to afford the lifestyle that you wanted, then it is logical to find some other way to make yourself happy. Forget hard work if hard work is not rewarded. Just have fun.”

      Funny, but my generation, for the most part, responded to such realizations by either (1) adjusting our “lifestyle” expectations to a more realistic level, (2) better equipping ourselves to increase our earning potential in our field, or sometimes working more than one job (3) changing career fields to a more lucrative vocation, or (4) some combination of the first three options. Just giving up was an option seldom entertained by normally thinking people.
      I was raised in a non-materialistic household on a small farm and was taught to view abundance of any sort as a blessing and not a birthright. Through the ups and downs of a life thoroughly lived (I’m about to turn 69) I learned long ago that I can be content with very little, and grateful in either scarcity or abundance. Part of that attitude comes from my faith and upbringing, and part from a life-long effort to be as materially self-reliant as possible. I consider “quiet quitting” as an abandonment of one’s personal dignity and autonomy.

      • What happens when people’s autonomy and dignity have already been stripped away by force?

        Hyperfinancialization and globalization have been skating along on attitudes like what you describe. Over time, as expectations rise on worker productivity and lower on worker rewards, attrition of such attitudes occurs. Treating people like discardable widgets who can be thrown away for the personal enrichment of other people has consequences.

        I get it. Boomers are appalled at the behavior and attitudes of millennials and gen z. I don’t see much introspection going on as to how millennials and genz developed those attitudes, though. Bad parenting? Destruction of economic opportunity? Changes to the education system? Imposing radical philosophies on young people? Tinkering with social norms and experimenting on children with new fangled philosophies has consequences. Consequences that may take decades to show themselves. Blaming the results on the guinea pigs might make the tinkers feel better, but it doesn’t fix the problem.

        Knocking the economic legs out from under future generations to support bloated government social programs for the current generation has consequences. Reimagining the world as a global dystopia has consequences. Operant conditioning doesn’t cease to exist because people wish it away. Mammalian brain physiology is not going to evolve by magical thinking.

        As for adjusting to lower expectations, I think that is exactly what is occurring. People are adjusting their behavior to meet that lower expectation and global corporations accustomed to having all the power in the employment dynamic do not like it.

        Communism does not work. Communism will never work. Operant conditioning precludes the possibility of communism ever working in humans without serious alteration of the human brain on a basic level. The slide into socialism has started to cause noticeable consequences in the global population. People don’t work for no reason. They do exactly as much work as the rewards for work incentivize.

        • Extremely insightful analysis NP and accurate IMHO as well.

          What is sad is that Jim H describes honorable attributes of great value that we are witnessing the undoing of for reasons you explain.

  4. So, the baseball playoffs begin today with the first of what potentially could be four consecutive fourple-headers, under the new playoff format. As I write this, we are one scoreless inning into this always entertaining experience.

    We had a couple of rather exciting home run chases this year, both successful. Interestingly, there is a story today on that Pujols contemplated retirement after an especially dismal month of June this year. Jack, am I correct in thinking that post season homer count in a player’s career totals?

    As you all probably know, I am a fan of the Houston Astros since the birth of the franchise, but the last 30 years or so, I have also been rooting actively for the Texas Rangers. Back in the prehistoric age before, if you wanted to listen to baseball live your only choice was whoever the local radio station broadcast. In West Texas that was the Texas Rangers, rather than the Astros. I quickly fell in love with Eric Nadel’s play by play broadcasts and have been listening to him ever since (after 3 decades with the Rangers, he’s gradually cutting back — he’s my age — but still does maybe 2/3 of the games).

    2022 I look on as both an improvement and a disappointment of a season. The Rangers won 8 games more than 2021, and they are definitely on the road back (spending half a billion prior to the season helps). At the same time, it was an incredibly frustrating season because I could tell that the Rangers were that close to being a good team. They ended up 15-35 in one run games, and also I believe historically bad in close (one or two run) games.

    The Rangers are in the classic position of needing to learn how to win. They need a better bullpen, some starting pitching (but who doesn’t). They also need a manager. Those are interrelated to some degree and will be addressed by management — we’ll see how successfully. I do look forward optimistically to next year.

    For now, it’s time for some October (and November) baseball.

    Play ball!

    • So I found the answer and no, postseason stats do not count for your career totals. Good thing he already got to 700, eh?

      Also, ABC just posted a stat that, since August 14th, Aaron Judge, Albert Pujols, and Mike Trout all had 16 home runs.

  5. Anyone see this story? I have no way to read it beyond a paywall, but what I’m seeing about it seems like an ethics fail on all levels. I was hoping someone could break it down.

    • I just read it. Yikes. It’s a Great Stupid classic. I promise I’ll do a post tomorrow, but here’s the key sentence: “In a dog-loving, progressive enclave, where pushing law and order can clash with calls for social justice, what’s the right thing to do?”

      The right thing to do, you morons, is the same as it would be in a non-dog-loving, progressive enclave. Someone does not get to break the law and hurt dogs and animals because of his clor, mental problems, socio-economic status or “lack of privilege.”

      It’s not hard, or shouldn’t be.

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.