Sunday, April 30, 2023

ANS -- Is an Armed Society Really a Polite Society?

This is a short article saying that not only is the saying not true, but that fear of violence is not the right kind of politeness to live with. He also puts the quote in context. Good article.

Find it here: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/202205/is-armed-society-really-polite-society?fbclid=IwAR0Zjus9FCnKKpzLGJOHiMG8sv4CrII8CJeOSK4gz2IizBPvSJ3Q7MSr81M

--Kim

Michael W. Austin Ph.D.

Ethics for Everyone

Is an Armed Society Really a Polite Society?

A flawed argument for the status quo on gun violence in America.

Posted May 4, 2022 | Reviewed by Gary Drevitch

In discussions of the Second Amendment and gun violence in America, sooner or later the claim that an armed society is a polite society is bound to come up. There are two serious flaws with this argument in favor of widespread gun ownership, concealed carry, and open carry. Before we look at those flaws, let's first consider the origins of this quote.

It is attributed to Robert Heinlein. Here's the quote in full:

"Well, in the first place an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. For me, politeness is a sine qua non of civilization. That's a personal evaluation only. But gunfighting has a strong biological use. We do not have enough things to kill off the weak and the stupid these days. But to stay alive as an armed citizen a man has to be either quick with his wits or with his hands, preferably both. It's a good thing."

But attributing this to Heinlein is a bit misleading. It is actually a quotation from a character in one of his works of science fiction, Beyond This Horizon. As Mark Sumner points out, the point of this quote in the novel is to get rid of the genetically inferior members of society who do not deserve to live.

But this is not how the quote is used in the gun debates. Many people who employ this as an argument for the status quo, or for even fewer regulations related to gun ownership and use, have something else in mind. The idea is that the potential presence of a gun acts as a deterrent to impolite behavior, especially the more extreme varieties that include violence. If I think there is a good possibility that people are carrying a firearm, then that shapes how I interact with them. I won't want to do anything that could get me shot. So I'll be polite and respectful. There will be less violence, including gun violence, due to the ever-present threat of violence.

There are two problems with this line of thought. First, there is plenty of evidence that it is not true. Second, even if it were true, we shouldn't settle for this kind of "politeness."

There is evidence that an armed society is not a polite society. During the week of April 25-May 1, there were at least three instances of gun violence related to or in the vicinity of youth sporting events. On April 25 in North Charleston, SC, youth baseball players, managers, and parents fled the field when 50 shots rang out in the vicinity of a game. On May 1, two men were shot at a northern Virginia middle school, where youth football games were being played. That same day, a dad pulled a gun on another dad at an AAU basketball tournament in Boston. Witnesses said his gun jammed, fortunately. The videos of the baseball players ducking and running for cover, and of the gym full of young basketball players and fans running away are hard to watch. It's difficult to reconcile these events, and many more like them in a variety of settings, with the claim that an armed society is a polite society. In fact, it is the case that the presence of guns doesn't reduce violence, but intensifies it.¹There are some interesting ideas grounded in behavioral science that reducing gun violence can happen, if we are more intentional and creative about it.

But even if this slogan was based in truth, we should aspire for more. Our motivation for treating others with respect should not be the fear of getting shot. Even if an armed society were a polite society, it would be a politeness grounded in fear and the threat of violence. Surely we can do better than this. In a nation that ostensibly values freedom, responsibility, and basic human dignity, we should be motivated to treat each other with respect by something different than the threat of violence. Our common humanity should be enough.

article continues after advertisement

References

1. See The Gun Debate, by P. Cook and K. Goss (Oxford University Press, 2014); and Reducing Gun Violence in America, eds. D. Webster and J. Vernick (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014).

About the Author

Michael W. Austin, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Eastern Kentucky University.

Online:

My Website, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter

Saturday, April 29, 2023

ANS -- Here’s the real reason Disney Is defying DeSantis

Here's an opinion piece, from Alternet, about what is really happening between Disney and DeSantis. It basically says both of them are bad. What do you think? I have no idea who to believe (except I wouldn't believe DeSantis about anything.)

Find it here: https://www.alternet.org/desantis-disney/?utm_source=123456&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=14159

--Kim

Here's the real reason Disney Is defying DeSantis

JERUSALEM, ISRAEL - APRIL 27: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gives a speech during the Jerusalem Post conference at the Museum of Tolerance on April 27, 2023 in Jerusalem, Israel. Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida and an anticipated US presidential candidate, has been visiting several countries as part of a trade delegation. (Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

Sonali Kolhatkar

and

Independent Media Institute

April 28, 2023

Florida's Republican governor Ron DeSantis is eager to cast himself as the new and improved Donald Trump. He has waged a relentless war against what he calls "woke ideology" by attacking the rights of vulnerable minorities to teach and learn history, to read literature, and to get life-saving medical care such as gender-affirming treatment and reproductive health care. Now, his attack on Florida's largest corporation is being cast in the same vein of "good versus evil."

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Except that the DeSantis-Disney war ought really to be viewed as an opportunity to call Republicans out on their slavish devotion to Big Business and dare them to follow through with stripping not just the Disney corporation, but all money-hungry companies of their dependence on public financing. Both DeSantis and Disney are predatory, albeit in different ways.

Disney, a company that has deep cultural sway over Americans for being a purveyor of "magic" and "happiness," has enjoyed a very special and extremely unusual arrangement in Orlando, Florida, where its Walt Disney World Resort occupies tens of thousands of acres named the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Since 1967, the state of Florida has allowed the corporation to govern the area and even to issue tax bonds to residents in order to pay for municipal services while being exempt from certain regulations and taxes.

Rather than viewing Disney World as "the happiest place on earth," Sophie Weiner, writing in Popular Mechanics in 2018, explained that, "Disney World is what it looks like if you give a corporation full control over an area of land as big as San Francisco. It's worked out great for the company, which counts on the park for 14 percent of its $2 billion yearly earnings." Further, in 2021, the state of Florida gifted the company a massive $580 million tax break in exchange for moving about 2,000 jobs from its California locations to Florida.

The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard

But in March 2022 Disney took a stand against the Parental Rights in Education Law, which has been dubbed the "Don't Say Gay" act, prompting DeSantis's ire. A month later Florida's Republican legislature dissolved Disney's special status in a law that is to take effect on June 1, 2023. DeSantis explained the move saying, "I'm just not comfortable having that type of agenda get special treatment in my state." In other words, Disney's special corporate arrangement would not be tolerated if it challenged his homophobia.

Except that Disney had to be pushed hard into taking such a moral stand. For weeks after the bill was announced the company was perfectly content enjoying the largesse of Florida even as activists were demanding it speak out against a law prohibiting teachings that touch on gender identity and sexual orientation to kids in kindergarten through third grade. Disney's own workers protested their employer's lack of courage. The hashtag #BoycottDisney began trending. The company eventually, reluctantly, reacted by suspending all its political donations in the state of Florida to both parties—not exactly the most principled stand.

To his credit, Disney's then-CEO Bob Chapek also made public statements against the bill and offered a $5 million donation to the Human Rights Campaign (which the group rejected).

But earlier this year Florida, realizing that dissolving Disney's tax status would end up dumping a billion-dollar bond debt onto the public, quickly scrambled to restore the special district while muzzling Disney. A new law will allow the governor to appoint leadership positions of Reedy Creek Improvement District instead of allowing Disney to do so.

Representative Anna Eskamani, a progressive Democrat in the state legislature, told the Hollywood Reporter, "The inner workings [of the special district] stay the same. The only difference is Disney won't challenge the governor on anything anymore." The company was initially happy and Disney World's head Jeff Vahle said his company was "ready to work within this new framework."

Testing this new arrangement DeSantis has revved up his culture war, approving a rule change to expand the Don't Say Gay bill to all grades and sending a message to LGBTQ youth that their lives don't matter. But the new board that he appointed to govern Disney's special district voted to nullify a company plan to expand and develop the area. It was only then that Disney filed a lawsuit against DeSantis claiming he violated their first amendment rights over the homophobic law.

Title

Progress Bar

00:00 00:00

Every step of the way Disney was happy to suck up all the tax perks and financial autonomy it could get away with, regardless of whom its host was harming. Only when its financial status was threatened has it claimed to be on the side of LGBTQ communities.

Aside from Eskamani, few Democrats have called Disney out for its hypocrisy and for reaping special financial perks, instead supporting the corporation for being a job creator. Democratic Congressional representative Darren Soto chastised DeSantis, saying, "It'd be nice if he stopped attacking Central Florida's top employer." He added, "We're talking about trying to get [Disney] to invest more money to create more jobs. And this is not helpful to those efforts."

Soto's words suggest that he sees Disney performing a massive favor to the state by operating its resort and parks there instead of the other way around. But the sort of jobs that Disney creates is precisely what has fueled deep income inequality in the U.S. Its presence in Florida has meant thousands of poorly paid jobs that keep Floridians in a hand-to-mouth existence, unable to cope with the rising cost of living. Aubrey Jewett, a University of Central Florida political science professor, told USA Today, "Yes, we have a lot of jobs. But they don't pay very much. And we seem to have lost ground over time, especially when it comes to housing costs."

One Disney worker told the Guardian, "We're grossly, grossly underpaid for the hours that we work," and that "[a] lot of Disney workers are barely squeaking by. You have workers with families sleeping in their car."

Title

Progress Bar

00:00 00:00

Disney heiress Abigail Disney, who is an outspoken progressive, even made a documentary about the poor treatment of Disneyland workers in Anaheim, California, where the company also enjoys special tax benefits in exchange for creating jobs and where it was granted an exception to a voter-passed minimum wage increase. Just as in Florida, Disney's California jobs are worth about as little as the taxes the company pays to the state.

By Day, a Sunny Smile for Disney Visitors. By Night, an Uneasy Sleep in ...

The cost of living is a particular challenge in Orange County, and some employees at Disneyland Resort say they ...

In addition to constantly being granted exemptions for taxes and regulations, corporations like Disney enjoy a mythical status in the U.S. for being so massively profitable that their dollar signs obscure capitalism's ugly underbelly.

Disney should not have control over land, resources, tax regulations, or wages. And lawmakers should not be allowed to trample over the rights of minorities. It's not difficult to oppose both Disney's power grab and DeSantis's dangerous culture wars. Indeed, both positions are fully consistent with progressive ideals of protecting and furthering the rights of human beings.

ANS -- The oldest-ever president is running again? Good

I got this in an email. It's about Biden running again even though he's a bit old. (not much older than Trump, and in better shape.). this guy says It's a good thing. What do you think? Is his reasoning correct?

--Kim

The oldest-ever president is running again? Good

Let's not regret a lack of choice but celebrate a clarity of choice.

It is no surprise to hear that Joe Biden is going to campaign for president for a second term. The wind is fast at his back.

He has accomplished more in two years than any Democratic president has accomplished in my lifetime. He has more reason to run than did Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

What's going to surprise some people is the outcome of the president's decision to make himself clear. That outcome will be in the form of a massive, collective spasm of amnesia by normal Democratic voters.

A majority of normal Democratic voters have been telling pollsters they don't want Biden to run again. Poll after poll has established this view. The press and pundit corps have attempted to rationalize it, usually by focusing on Biden's age. He is the oldest chief executive ever.

This is not to say that a doddering president – and to be sure, Joe Biden does dodder on occasion – is ideal. Of course, it's not ideal. Nothing I have talked about in the last 569 words is anywhere in the orbit of ideal.

But now that Biden has cleared up doubt, these normal Democratic voters is going to forget they ever had reservations. A time horizon has instantly materialized that before today did not exist. On that time horizon, which is less than two years away, is the easiest of decisions.

My point is that politics is contingent.

It depends on time and space, when and where it's happening.

Put politics in an abstract setting, and people will say anything, because why not say anything when politics has been put in an abstract setting?

Put politics in a concrete setting, however, and people come to their senses. Yes, Biden is old. Democratic voters would rather see a new face. They rather see a Republican opponent who isn't Donald Trump.

None of that matters.

Outside a concrete setting, we can indulge our wishes, desires and dreams. Inside one, they seem impractical, because they are. The only politics that matters is practical. Politics is practical only when set in a concrete time and concrete place. Biden has established both. We can forget about everything else. Normal Democratic voters will almost certainly forget – when massively and collectively spasm with amnesia.

But I think there's more going on.

I suspect normal Democratic voters were not telling the truth when they said they were worried about the oldest president running again. I suspect they were not telling the truth because there's something unseemly about saying the oldest president should run again

Why unseemly?

It's probably rooted in the liberal vision of the ideal candidate – whose aptitude is elevated enough to meet the elevated demands of the age. We are seeing something similar with respect to Dianne Feinstein, the oldest member of the US Senate. Critics say, in addition to a bout of the shingles that has keep her away for weeks, that she's no longer capable of doing the job. They say she should step aside for someone who can.

SUBSCRIBE FOR THE YEAR TO SAVE 17 PERCENT!

Liberals overvalue aptitude, however, because they undervalue collective action. No one works in a vacuum. Biden is surrounded by people aligned with his views and interests, and aligned with the party's views and interests, such that as long as he can sign his name, he will keep being a champion of liberty and bulwark against despotism.

This is not to say that a doddering president – and to be sure, Joe Biden dodders on occasion – is ideal. Of course, it's not ideal. Nothing I have talked about in the last 569 words is anywhere in the orbit of ideal.

I don't write about ideal things. I write about real things. When it comes to choosing the next president, less than two years from now, the real-thing choice will not be between two makebelieve candidates who satisfy our wishes, desires and dreams. It will be a real-thing choice between two particular people, in a particular place, in a particular time. And because Donald Trump will be the next Republican nominee, short of death, the real-thing choice will be so obvious as to be virtually invisible. You could say that that's why so many normal Democratic voters will forget why they ever worried about Biden.

The press and pundit corps will not see what's in front of them. They will find ways of rationalizing why the parties failed to produce candidates Americans wanted to vote for. It should be the opposite.

Instead of regretting a lack of choice, let's celebrate the clarity of choice. Sure Biden is old as dirt. But he lives here. So should we.

John Stoehr

John Stoehr is the editor of the Editorial Board. He writes the daily edition. Find him @johnastoehr.

Friday, April 28, 2023

ANS -- HCR April 26 or 27

Here is another one from Heather Cox Richardson. It's a good one. About various subjects. If you go to the site, there are lots of comments.

Find it here: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-26-2023

--Kim

April 26, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

APR 27, 2023

[Warning: the third and fourth paragraphs of this piece refer to the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit.]

Well, the Republicans did it. After middle-of-the-night negotiations to include more of the far right's wish list, House Republicans passed a bill agreeing to a short-term raising of the debt ceiling, so long as it is accompanied by massive spending cuts and a rollback of Biden's major accomplishments. The bill squeaked through by a vote of 217 to 215, mostly along party lines. Four extremist Republicans voted no because they believed the measure didn't go far enough to slash spending.

The administration reiterated that it would not negotiate over paying the nation's bills. "In our history, we have never defaulted on our debt or failed to pay our bills," White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement. "Congressional Republicans must act immediately and without conditions to avoid default and ensure that the full faith and credit of the United States is not put at risk. That is their job. Economists have warned that default could spark a dangerous financial crisis, lead to a recession costing millions of Americans their jobs, endanger hard-working Americans' retirement savings, and increase long-term federal borrowing costs, adding to deficits and debt. We are not a deadbeat nation."

"I am here because Donald Trump raped me, and when I wrote about it, he said it didn't happen," E. Jean Carroll said in court today for the former president's civil trial for rape. "He lied and shattered my reputation, and I am here to try to get my life back." Carroll offered a detailed account of what she says was Trump's attack nearly 30 years ago, an attack that warped her life.

While she testified, Trump attacked Carroll on social media. The judge overseeing the case, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, warned Trump's lawyer that his client's statement was "entirely inappropriate," saying he was trying to influence the jury. Any more commentary might open up "a new source of potential liability," Kaplan said. The lawyer said he would do the best he could to silence Trump, but later in the day, Trump posted another attack and his son Eric Trump followed suit.

"I wanted to address my senators, Cruz and Cornyn," Amanda Zurawski told the Senate Committee on the Judiciary today at a hearing on reproductive rights in the wake of the Supreme Court's overturning of the Roe v. Wade decision. Zurawski's water broke 18 weeks into her pregnancy, making it impossible for her fetus to survive. Because of the vague and extreme antiabortion bill Texas lawmakers had passed, her health care providers refused to treat her so long as the fetus had a heartbeat, denying her an abortion. Zurawski developed deadly sepsis and, after giving birth to a stillborn daughter, spent three days in intensive care as doctors worked to save her life.

Zurawski said she wanted the two Texas Republican senators to know "that what happened to me I think most people in this room would agree was horrific. But it's a direct result of the policies they support. I nearly died on their watch, and…I may have been robbed of the opportunity to have children in the future. And it's because of the policies that they support."

Neither Cruz nor Cornyn showed up to hear her. Cornyn later said Zurawski should consider suing her doctors for misinterpreting the law. Zurawski responded: "[M]y physician and my team of health care professionals that I saw over the course of three days, while I was repeatedly turned away from health care access, made the decision to not provide an abortion because that's what they felt they had to do under Texas' law…. And that will continue to happen and it is continuing to happen, and it's not a result of misinterpretation. It's the result of confusion, and the confusion is because [of] the way the law is written."

Today, the Walt Disney Company sued Florida governor Ron DeSantis over his "relentless campaign to weaponize government power" and attack free speech. Disney's former chief executive officer last year spoke out against the governor's law prohibiting teachers from mentioning sexual orientation or gender identity. The lawsuit says that DeSantis's attack "now threatens Disney's business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights."

"For more than half a century," the lawsuit reads," Disney has made an immeasurable impact on Florida and its economy, establishing Central Florida as a top global tourist destination and attracting tens of millions of visitors to the State each year. People and families from every corner of the globe have traveled to Walt Disney World," but that relationship is now in jeopardy, the lawsuit warns. "A targeted campaign of government retaliation—orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney's protected speech—now threatens Disney's business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights."

Meanwhile, DeSantis is overseas on what has been billed as a trade mission.

Tonight, the Washington, D.C., Circuit Court of Appeals denied Trump's last-ditch attempt to prevent former vice president Mike Pence from testifying before the grand jury investigating Trump's attempt to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election. The grand jury has issued a subpoena for Pence; Trump tried to argue that Pence's testimony was barred because of executive privilege. The court of appeals disagreed.

Today, two associates of former Trump ally Steve Bannon were sentenced to four years and three years in prison for soliciting donations for their "We Build the Wall" charity and then pocketing the money. Bannon was also charged in the case, but Trump pardoned him for his involvement in it before he left office.

Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., today, President Joe Biden and President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea reaffirmed what Biden called the "ironclad" alliance between the two countries. They announced a new agreement, the so-called Washington Declaration, to increase cooperation in order to strengthen the message of nuclear deterrence conveyed to North Korea. This deterrence will include military training and exercises, the establishment of a joint nuclear consultative group, and the visit of a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea. "We're not going to be stationing nuclear weapons on the peninsula, but we will have visits to ports, visits of nuclear submarines and things like that," Biden said.

"A nuclear attack by North Korea against the United States or its allies and partners is unacceptable and will result in the end of whatever regime were to take such an action," he added, a public reassurance Yoon was hoping to receive when he arrived in Washington. Nervous about North Korean development of nuclear weapons, a majority of South Koreans want to develop their own nuclear weapons, a stance the U.S. strongly opposes.

This official state visit, the second of the Biden presidency, reinforced the changing political landscape in the Indo-Pacific, where the United States seeks to support Japan and South Korea to counter the growing power of China. Since 2021, Korean businesses have invested more than $100 billion in the U.S., an investment that the White House says will create more than 40,000 new jobs here, while the U.S., in turn, is investing in South Korea. The presidents vowed to continue to work together to secure supply chains, develop clean energy, and cooperate on cybersecurity and emerging technologies.

Biden and Yoon have met four times before, and the mood at the White House after the announcement was friendly and celebratory. At tonight's dinner in President Yoon's honor, the attendees gave the South Korean leader a standing ovation when he sang the first verse of Don McLean's 1971 rock ballad "American Pie."

—

Notes:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/04/26/house-gop-debt-limit-debate/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/04/26/statement-from-white-house-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-2/

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/26/nyregion/trump-carroll-rape-trial-updates

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2023-04-26%20-%20Testimony%20-%20Zurawski.pdf

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1651262879788859392

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/26/1172231546/disney-florida-governor-ron-desantis-lawsuit

https://twitter.com/djrothkopf/status/1651426439969796099

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/28/1089221657/dont-say-gay-florida-desantis

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/26/politics/disney-desantis-reedy-creek-power/index.html

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23789605-disney-v-desantis-complaint