Sometimes I Wish I Drank

As Tam said, “Et tu, Clarence?”  The Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision basically rubberstamped the Indiana Supreme Court’s Barnes v. Indiana decision, further eviscerating the 4th Amendment’s guarantee of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects in the name of the War on (Some) Drugs™.

And I find that I am in complete agreement with Justice Ginsberg:

The Court today arms the police with a way routinely to dishonor the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement in drug cases.

I’d expect this of Clarence Thomas, not Ginsburg.

I feel a strong urge to get completely drunk and take a long, very hot shower.

One Hundred Years of Public Education

My brother sent this to me tonight.  I think I’ve seen it before, unattributed, but it’s right in most particulars.

The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.

A comment in response to it seen elsewhere, however, puts it in perspective:

I’m not worried about the 1/5 of America that voted for him, I’m worried about the 3/5ths of America that didn’t care enough to vote at all.

And Yet Another

Following up on the previous post, Instapundit links to a piece about playwright David Mamet and his new book on losing his liberal outlook.  Some choice excerpts:

Higher ed, (Mamet) said, was an elaborate scheme to deprive young people of their freedom of thought. He compared four years of college to a lab experiment in which a rat is trained to pull a lever for a pellet of food. A student recites some bit of received and unexamined wisdom—”Thomas Jefferson: slave owner, adulterer, pull the lever”—and is rewarded with his pellet: a grade, a degree, and ultimately a lifelong membership in a tribe of people educated to see the world in the same way.

“If we identify every interaction as having a victim and an oppressor, and we get a pellet when we find the victims, we’re training ourselves not to see cause and effect,” he said. Wasn’t there, he went on, a “much more interesting .  .  . view of the world in which not everything can be reduced to victim and oppressor?”

This is the whole strategy of “critical theory” – the Frankfurt school’s methodology for using the education system to de-moralize (hypen used intentionally) the population. Thomas Jefferson? He can’t be a great man, he was a slave owner and adulterer! Pull the lever!  Writing an essay on economics?  The grader will be a Keynesian, so it had better slant that way!  Pull the lever!

On cognitive dissonance:

“The question occurs to me quite a lot: What do liberals do when their plans have failed? What did the writers do when their plans led to unemployment, their own and other people’s? One thing they can’t do is admit they failed. Why? To admit failure would endanger their position in the herd.”

To admit failure would require them to question their ideology, and that loses them their position in the herd.

In the beginning of Mamet’s conversion, his Rabbi sent him books:

One of the first was A Conflict of Visions, by Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution. In it Sowell expands on the difference between the “constrained vision” of human nature—close to the tragic view that infuses Mamet’s greatest plays—and the “unconstrained vision” of man’s endless improvement that suffused Mamet’s politics and the politics of his profession and social class.

“He came back to me stunned. He said, ‘This is incredible!’ He said, ‘Who thinks like this? Who are these people?’ I said, ‘Republicans think like this.’ He said, ‘Amazing.’ ”

I didn’t have to be converted by Sowell’s magnum opus, but Conflict of Vision‘s effect on me was similar.

And, of course, the article points out the inevitable herd reaction to Mamet’s conversion:

After reading The Secret Knowledge in galleys, the Fox News host and writer Greg Gutfeld invented the David Mamet Attack Countdown Clock, which “monitors the days until a once-glorified liberal artist is dismissed as an untalented buffoon.” Tick tock.

Read the whole piece.

I think I just added another book onto my pile.

An Example of Critical Pedagogy

From the comments to my recent post A Failure of Critical Pedagogy comes this video of a Tucson Unified School District board meeting in which a parent stood up and read from some of the books used in that district’s “Raza Studies” program, which I’ve covered before in Balkanization and Why I Keep Marxadelphia Around.

Watch this video, and listen to what the speaker has to say.  Then listen to the response from the TUSD governing board member.  Is he in denial, or just completely obtuse?

http://static.photobucket.com/player.swf

Do you want that taught to your kids?  How do you feel about it being taught exclusively to students of hispanic descent?

This Blog R 8

Eight years ago today I hit “Publish” on the first post to this blog.  Short and sweet, it went like this:

Testing, testing, testing….

Is this thing on?

Apparently so. Too bad I managed to lose the opening essay it took me an HOUR to compose. Oh well. I’ll reconstruct it and put it back up later.

Welcome to The Smallest Minority, so named because most of the really good names, Eject! Eject! Eject!, USS Clueless, Instapundit, Acidman, and so on were already taken. And while not a Randian, I accept a lot of Ayn Rand’s observations as accurate, and it was she who wrote: “The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”

This blog is about the rights of individuals, that smallest of minorities, so it seemed apt.

More (hopefully MUCH more) to follow.

And much more has followed. According to Blogger I’ve published over 5,000 posts, an average of 1.7 per day.  (Haven’t kept that pace recently.) According to Sitemeter, the site has drawn over 2.2 million hits, an average well over 700 per day (and trust me, it didn’t start out anywhere near that high).

I lost the 40,000+ comments collected by Echo (and before that, HaloScan) over the previous seven years when Echo decided that increasing their fees by a factor of ten was a smart business decision. Oh, I still have the comment archives, but I was never able to successfully import them to Disqus. Dammit. Surprisingly, the old comment threads are still working (like to the Überthread – it’s 574 comments long, so give it a chance to load) but I don’t have links to each and every comment thread for every post – nor do I know how much longer those links will be working.  I’m still seriously bummed by that.

Eight years in the blogiverse is a long time, and I’ve enjoyed most of it, but as I noted in This I Believe, this blog has been an exploration of the core beliefs that guide my daily life.  Some of those beliefs are unpleasant.  But then, reality can be a stone-cold bitch.  While I still believe that the courts will not save us, (further evidence given just recently) I will admit that I was far too pessimistic about what could be accomplished via that path but not at all pessimistic enough about what can still be done to us via that same vector.  I’m even more amazed at what we’ve been able to accomplish legislatively.

I do wish I was less pessimistic about our political “leaders.” Hell, I wish I was less pessimistic about the electorate.

Still, on the whole I’m glad I chose to start this blog and stick with it.  I hope in addition to giving me that place to explore my core beliefs and rant to my heart’s content, it has also provided a service to those of you who visit, read and comment here on a regular basis.  I do this to entertain me, but I probably wouldn’t have done it nearly as long without that feedback.

So, thanks.  Thanks for making all those hours worthwhile.  Thanks for giving me things to think about and things to laugh about.  I think I’ll keep at it, at least for the next couple of years.  The Mayan calendar notwithstanding, 2012 looks like it’s going to be one helluva year.

Barnes v. Indiana

That’s the decision making all the rounds of the gun- and libertarian-blogs right now, in which a 3-2 majority of the Indiana Supreme Court held:

…that there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers.

What part of “unlawful” don’t they get?  OK, I’ll unreasonably resist.

This is a classic example of what a “living Constitution” philosophy eventually leads to.  Also from the decision:

The English common-law right to resist unlawful police action existed for over three hundred years, and some scholars trace its origin to the Magna Carta in 1215. The United States Supreme Court recognized this right in Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 535 (1900): “If the officer had no right to arrest, the other party might resist the illegal attempt to arrest him, using no more force than was absolutely necessary to repel the assault constituting the attempt to arrest.” The Supreme Court has affirmed this right as recently as 1948. United States v. Di Re, 332 U.S. 581, 594 (1948) (“One has an undoubted right to resist an unlawful arrest, and courts will uphold the right of resistance in proper cases.”)

So it’s established Supreme Court caselaw, right? And inferior courts may not tell the Supreme Court it was out to lunch, right?

Nazzofast, Guido. Here’s that “living Constitution” philosophy:

In the 1920s, legal scholarship began criticizing the right as valuing individual liberty over physical security of the officers. One scholar noted that the common-law right came from a time where “resistance to an arrest by a peace officer did not involve the serious dangers it does today.” The Model Penal Code eliminated the right on two grounds: ―(1) the development of alternate remedies for an aggrieved arrestee, and (2) the use of force by the arrestee was likely to result in greater injury to the person without preventing the arrest. In response to this criticism, a majority of states have abolished the right via statutes in the 1940s and judicial opinions in the 1960s.

Really? They did? Under color of what authority? I’m unaware of any Supreme Court decisions post 1948 that established this new interpretation. I’m unaware of any amendments to the Constitution prior to or after 1920 that did so.

To quote Alan Gura from the oral arguments before the Supreme Court in McDonald v. Chicago:

States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional.

As 9th Circuit chief judge Alex Kozinski wrote in his August 2010 dissent to that court’s U.S. v Pidena-Moreno decision, another case involving Fourth Amendment protections:

Having previously decimated the protections the Fourth Amendment accords to the home itself, our court now proceeds to dismantle the zone of privacy we enjoy in the home’s curtilage and in public. The needs of law enforcement, to which my colleagues seem inclined to refuse nothing, are quickly making personal privacy a distant memory. 1984 may have come a bit later than predicted, but it’s here at last.

And I am reminded once again of our complete disconnect from the difference between the citizenry and the police as expressed by Sir Robert Peel’s Nine Principles of Modern Policing, most especially Principle #7:

Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

That stopped when the public became “them” to the police.

One more quote, this one from a TV show, Battlestar Galactica the recent version. Admiral Adama, when asked to place his space Marines in the position of policemen to the refugee fleet demurred with some writer’s very cogent observation:

The police protect the People. The military defends the State. When the military becomes the police, the People become the Enemy of the State.

Our police forces are becoming more and more militarized defenders of the State every day, and rulings like this one are helping that happen.

It’s an Honor Just to be Nominated

Brian of LuckyGunner.com emails:

Glad to see that you’re registered for our upcoming Blogger Shoot! I’m looking forward to seeing you again since the last time we saw one another face-to-face at the GBR in Reno. In conjunction with the Shoot, we’re putting together an awards ceremony called The Gunnies for Saturday night at the Shoot and The Smallest Minority has been nominated for a Gunnie Award in the following category:

* Best Gun Blog – Entertainment

Voting is now open for the next 14 days to determine the winners in each of the 9 categories. It’d be pretty cool if you could announce your nomination for The Gunnies on your site.

Consider it done, though I think you’d have a hard time arguing that TSM is an entertainment site.

There are a bunch of other categories and nominees, so if you’re interested in voting, go here.

Bloggered

I haven’t used the “blogger sucks” tag in quite a while, but it appears at the moment that Blogger has eaten my last post from Thursday. Hopefully they’ll be restored at some point (I’m fearing that Blogger’s last backup has been corrupted), but I’m not counting on it.

Thankfully, one post I have in draft survived whatever happened yesterday. It’ll be going up tomorrow, assuming that it doesn’t get bloggered before then.

Oh well, anything free is worth what you pay for it.

UPDATE:  It’s back.  That’s good.

Really, for a free service, Blogger started off sucky but it’s gotten a lot better over time.  This is the first major problem I can recall in the last couple of years, and Blogger is hardly the only platform to have problems.  As noted in the comments to the post Busy below, Doc Russia is having issues with his host, and his blog Bloodletting has been unavailable for some time now.

A Failure of Critical Pedagogy

Unix-Jedi emailed me a pointer to this piece at Coyote Blog: Scenes From My Son Studying For His AP Exams. If he’ll forgive me, I’ll quote in full because it’s short and it’s important:

Scene 1, History AP: My son asked me how WWII ended the Depression. I said that the draft soaked up a lot of excess workers, which reduced unemployment, and British buying for the war helped our economy but that the war generally destroyed rather than created wealth. He said, “Dad, you can’t tell it to me that way. The guy grading the AP is going to be a Keynesian.” So we talked multipliers and aggregate demand.

Scene 2, Spanish AP: My son hands me a list of Spanish words he is trying to learn. They are the Spanish words for things like “social justice,” “poverty”, “exploitation”, etc. I told him it was an odd selection of words. He said that nearly every Spanish essay in every Spanish textbook he had ever had were about revolution and stopping the rich from exploiting the poor and fighting global warming. So he wanted to be prepared for a similar topic on the AP. After the test, I remembered this conversation and asked him what the essay was. He said the topic was “show why the government of poor countries should give free bicycles to the poor to fight global warming.”

These two short paragraphs are chock-full of everything I’ve been saying since I started this blog about the American education system and more.

In the first paragraph we see that the system is pushing a particular ideology, but it also illustrates two three crucial things: 1) the parent’s involvement is critical, 2) bright kids paying attention understand bullshit when it’s being spoonfed to them, and 3) they know how to game the system.

In the second paragraph the particular ideology being pushed is easily identified as the Leftist one promoted by Paolo Friere known as Critical Pedagogy. Note this again:

He said that nearly every Spanish essay in every Spanish textbook he had ever had were about revolution and stopping the rich from exploiting the poor and fighting global warming.

That’s what they throw at the general population. Here in Tucson the Tucson Unified School District has what is called “Raza Studies” – a program directed exclusively at Hispanic students, which I wrote about in Balkanization. By some accounts this class doesn’t stop at talking about “stopping the rich from exploiting the poor and fighting global warming.” Oh no!

The basic theme of the curriculum was that Mexican-Americans were and continue to be victims of a racist American society driven by the interests of middle and upper-class whites.

In this narrative, whites are able to maintain their influence only if minorities are held down. Thus, social, political and economic events in America must be understood through this lens.

This biased and sole paradigm justified teaching that our community police officers are an extension of the white power structure and that they are the strongmen used “to keep minorities in their ghettos.”

It justified telling the class that there are fewer Mexican-Americans in Tucson Magnet High School’s advanced placement courses because their “white teachers” do not believe they are capable and do not want them to get ahead.

The former Arizona Superintendent of Public instruction (now Attorney General) has been trying to kill the Raza Studies program for years now. The last two public meetings with the TUSD board have been canceled because of organized student protests, which tells you about all you have to know concerning what the Raza Studies program is actually teaching.

Critical Pedagogy is not limited to Spanish language instruction and “Raza Studies,” but goes throughout primary and secondary education.  The Keynesian economics bit is just another example.  But again, the key thing here necessary to counter it is parental involvement, and my belief is that such involvement is getting very thin on the ground. After literally generations of this relentless indoctrination, a declining number of kids escape it unscathed and grow up to raise their own children to recognize it for what it is, and that means we’re vastly outnumbered.

Last year at the invitation of Rob Allen I fisked a high school graduation speech by a perfect example of a kid who did not receive the kind of parental involvement that this man’s son receives. No, in that graduation speech it was apparent that an intelligent young woman had been taken in hand by one of Gramsci’s disciples, been shown the “one true way” – and had fallen for it, hook line and sinker because no one had shown her anything different. She’d gone through twelve years of subtle (and by all evidence, not so subtle) indoctrination in preparation for what she received the last year or two of her education. The field was tilled, sown, and the harvest was ready to be reaped.

But kids like Coyote Blog’s son?

Tough little weeds. We need more of ’em.  A LOT more.