Tagged: news
A Case Study in Context Clues
My friend thinks I am an asshole for insisting that I gave him all the context he needed to understand this snippet.
Accompanying that image, I sent him:
His response:
It’s all there, I assure you. But let’s break it down.
Nobody says “negro” anymore. My adding this was to more assuredly call attention to the time period, geography, and mood of the snippet.
Montgomery and Negroes and 1956 all call to mind Civil Rights time period and events—and to, say, a person who fancies himself a historian—the bus boycott.
On “her employer”: The established time and place makes it near certain that the employer isn’t a negro and the her is. It is also fine at this point to run with the assumption that the employer is a man.
On “tells her”: This Employer-Boss Man-Mister-Master is telling her-negro-woman something to correct her behavior.
On “Everybody is saying”: classic (and classically faulty) passive and indirect approach to admonition.
On “Communists refuse to ride the bus”: here we have confirmation of bus boycott and Alabama. The use of the C-word in the 50s is meant to be so repulsive that any self-respecting Negro would never group themselves by action with the commies.
On “I know you got them told, Miss Lucy”: We have both (a) confirmation that employee is Negro Woman through “got them told” (read: I know you corrected everybody holding this errant belief) and (b) we found out we were wrong on sex of employer. Miss Lucy clearly indicates a woman. And on the whole, we appreciate the setup for the punchline that the Negro Woman just delivered. Compelling stuff.
On “‘Cause you wouldn’t let no communist raise your six chillun”: This is both (a) more confirmation that a Negro Woman is the her, adding specifics of job requirements, and (b) the punchline. The punchline is that the white employer lady—white employer ladies are supposed to be smart—turns out to be a rather grave hypocrite when the plain facts are recounted. This is because a refusing-bus-Negro-servant, whom everybody thinks must needs be communist, cannot possibly be communist, because if she was a commie, then it would mean employer-white-lady-boss would be raising communist children. An thar aint no way in hayell Klan members is commies.
****
As usual, “What is right is not always popular; what is popular is not always right.” Or as Mark Twain puts it, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reconsider.”
So I say again, “Yay truth!”
Did You Know the Victorian Era had a Fad Called “Table Turning”?
It’s true. I first read about it in the Gateway to the Great Books volume on Natural Science.
The renowned physicists of the era actually referenced, with tremendous disdain, the nonsense on their way to explaining how the physical world follows seemingly iron law.
But don’t take my word for it. Just search it up. Victorian era table-turning.
(You’re tired. It’s late. What does this have to do with anything, you ask? Well, it just should be counted as proof positive that there are no bounds to our ability to try to fool each other and to be fooled by each other. There are no extraterrestrial life forms, folks—only terrestrial suckers.)
On Complicity
I’m still stuck on this notion of “complicity” included in the crazy man’s manifesto.
For today, I want to use a phrase from Ezra 7:25 to focus the discussion. We read, “‘And you, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God which is in your hand,..’” (Italics mine.)
This is a phrase from a decree by a ruler. We would be right to call it a form of delegation. “The ruler is delegating his power to Ezra,” we might say. But there is a limit to the power. Ezra doesn’t receive all power from the ruler. What is the limit? The limit is apparently whatever is meant by “the wisdom of your god”, but not just some ethereal or spiritual or emotional (and therefore hopey-changey concept) but a concept that is contained by something that can be placed in Ezra’s hand.
I don’t mean to play read my mind; we’re talking about some concrete way of describing “the written law”. You can hold it in your hand. The ruler has delegated his power to Ezra, but limited Ezra to a written record of the “wisdom of [Ezra’s] your god”.
Back to complicity.
Do our laws suggest that watching a crime is the same as committing the crime?
Surely not.
I can imagine that there may be a law on the books (in our hands) which a bystander can be found guilty of breaking by not helping a victim, but even that law (if in existence) will not mean that the bystander committed the same crime as the attacker.
In short, the crazy man (and I want to be clear: ALL crazy men) are fundamentally unlawful in their thinking and understanding of the law, life, and the passing scene.
You are not complicit in another’s crimes, not according to the law of the land, not according to your standing before the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ—as limited by the Wisdom of Him found in the Bible.
Because Every Christian Should Be Able to Do Likewise Without Blinking
The crazy man said, “Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed… is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.”
Biblical Christianity says: Nope. You answer to your creator for you and no one else.
The crazy man said, “Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” and then discussed rule of law vs rule of personality, and concluded that the Law should always be followed.
Biblical Christianity says: Yup. The Law should always be followed. I’m not sure where he thinks his reasoning is different. (This is sarcasm as we all know he actually meant to argue that the Law enforced by men who don’t follow the law themselves does not count.) To be sure, Biblical Christianity has always believed that murder is wrong.
Why Is AI So Slow?
Anyone else having this problem?
I’m sitting here, trying to illustrate Genesis, chapter 37, exactly as my well-informed mind’s eye sees the scenes, and after I finally input the prompt, it’s like the time-space universe reverts back to 1996 and dial-up.
What gives?
Seriously, when I want 18th century BC grain sheaves to bow, and in the style of Gustave Doré, I want it now! And I don’t have time to waste.
What gives?
How can AI be sped up?
Anyone know?
Is anyone working on the problem?
Anyone?
Bueller?
In War, Winning Matters
On repeat, we’ll soon hear incessant debate, masquerading as reporting, about who has war powers and whether “orange man bad” has lost his mind in a way that is impeachable etc.
That’s expected.
But never for one moment lose track of what matters: in war, winning matters. Not the future, not principles, but winning. And here is how we know that we’re winning: no American cities are being attacked.
Once American cities are receiving fire, the winning-losing continuum becomes slightly broader.
But until then, there is nothing to get your panties in a twist about.
“Let him take your garment also.”
A tip for the communists: your favorite verse for the current scene in Minnesota is “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your garment also.”
That’s much more difficult teaching for the White Christian Nationalists to deal with than the temple cleansing incident.
You’re welcome.
What Fascism Looks Like When Carried Out By Mankind
Faithful readers and new readers alike: The point of sharing lists of how many deportations past presidents and administrations carried out is not the illustration that both political parties have done what Trump is doing. Neither are the lists particularly indicative of the character of past politicians. In other words, it isn’t news that politicians change their policies or blatantly lie at times.
The point of the lists is to definitively give absolutely conclusive and damning evidence that Trump and his administration are not behaving like fascists while they enforce the nation’s—every nation’s—established Laws.
For a glimpse of fascism, read this blurb from back in October of 1938. Pay careful attention to the twin facts regarding there being (a) a new agreement and (b) no protection.
To be sure: Trump et al are not enforcing some new law. And there is no law (being enforced or left unenforced) in which protection is withheld or unconsidered.
Current events across the land are not evidence of fascism. Not even close.
Self-Imposed Curfew
Just jotting a few thoughts on topic of Minnesota.
- For people acclimated to the cold, IE Minnesotans, Dakotans, Montanans, etc, standing outside in the cold is not an indicator of anything. (For Somalis, on the other hand, standing outside in the cold reveals them to be stupid.)
- I happen to have watched videos of officer involved shootings before the last couple weeks. They are never “clear cut” or have some obvious flow or escalate linearly. Hollywood et al should not be relied on for how an officer-involved shooting should look or feel. Go look up other videos and see for yourself. They are all utter chaos. That’s why law enforcement exists in the first place.
- My visceral reaction to this morning’s shooting is “These dumb motherfuckers (meaning the lefty whites) just normalized ICE-involved shootings. It now feels just like school shootings. ‘Another one? When will people learn?’”
- I want the Law (meaning all people who act as our Law, legislature, executives, and enforcement) to know I support them, not the protesters. I think the best way I can do this is stay inside, not counter-protest etc. Let the morons and rabble who only want destruction self-identify and be the only ones out on the streets. That will make it easier for the Law to do their job.
They Do Not Conceal Like I Would
It is surprising to me, and seems to surprise most of us, that the bad guys self-identify so strongly.
I am currently reading GW’s biography. There have been parallels to today which are difficult to ignore, even as they aren’t 1:1. For example, I have to admit that had I been British back then, I would probably have been surprised that the colonists were so blatantly identifying as enemies. I would have thought, “Don’t they understand who they are up against? Maintaining neutrality, even as a feint, seems the stronger play.”
But no. When a fight is brewing, the two sides declare themselves.
I think the matter can be put plainly: When you’re on the side of those with the guns, it is surprising that the people without the guns would fight you—but it shouldn’t be.
These contemporary secessionists in Portland, Minnesota, and elsewhere have not yet declared independence. I would say, on most levels, they are miles away from being organized in any sense like those who declared independence back on July 4, 1776. But I will not be teaching my kids that it is surprising that stupid people unabashedly announce the side they’re on.
Captain’s Log 