Mad Dog

John Bolton's departure from the White House last week (we don't know if he quit or was fired) brought me a measure of relief.  While Bolton's realism was a voice that should be heard, particularly with respect to the nature of the Iranian regime, having him in a position to actually make important decisions was a bit too much.  Bolton is much too quick to employ a military option to every problem.

Mattis was a different story, however.  I felt that his departure was a loss for this administration.  His was a sober voice, bolstered by decades of service on the ground. 

I had an opportunity to hear Jim Mattis speak last week at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs last week.

He did not disappoint.  Two aspects of his talk immediately earned my respect (as if my respect for Mattis needed much bolstering).

First off, he did not talk about Trump much at all.  He spoke of a "duty of quiet" and said there is a long military tradition whereby military officers don't pass political judgments.  No such restraint, however, is owed with respect to past administrations and he was critical of the Bush administration's lack of post-combat planning in Iraq and Obama's inaction when Iran attempted an assassination of a Saudi diplomat on our soil-- a clear act of war.

Second, he took ownership of his mistakes. He took responsibility for Osama bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora.  He had a well conceived plan in place to net him, but did not communicate his vision up the chain, used local troops, and never got the authority to get the 9/11 perpetrator.

His silence regarding Trump (I am skeptical whether Bolton will follow suit) and his willingness to accept responsibility speaks to his integrity.

His criticisms of Trump were oblique.  He was generally supportive of the Iranian nuclear deal although admitted the timelines were too short and that the inspection regime needed to be "tightened up."  But said, "The world never comported itself to my satisfaction" and the regimen was functioning "well enough."   Mattis is always good for a memorable quote and as to Iran, he said, "The Iranians haven't won a battle in 500 years and haven't lost a negotiation in its history."

He also indirectly criticized Trump for his neglect in nurturing our relationships with our allies. "The only thing worse than going to war with allies is going to war without them.  Yes, they are a pain in the neck.  We could have said to them 'We're done with you' after our second intervention in 25 years.  But instead we helped them get back on their feet with the Marshall Plan and pledged the lives of 100,000,000 Americans to defend them."  He reminded us that "Good ideas come from other people too."

With regard to his view of the greatest threats to us, he divided it into internal and external threats.

North Korea remains a problem and is a nuclear power that is a declining nation.  Terrorism is an ambient threat but cannot change our way of life.  China and Russia can.   Our premises-- that if we opened up trade and liberalized commercial relations with China--were not correct.  But he also said there is no Thucydides Trap (as Graham Allison has posited).

Mattis instead focused more on the internal threats and quoted Lincoln that if we were to die it would be by suicide. 

We are loading up our younger generation with an unsustainable debt load.  "You young people should be mad as heck about it."  "No nation can keep its liberty without its financial house in order."

Second, he is very troubled by the contempt Americans are showing for each other.  The lack of civility and friendliness "worries me a lot."  "I don't mind a good name calling election, but when it's over, we come together."

Finally, Mattis spoke about and gave advice to young people.  He said he loves being around young people and it's "the only reason I stayed around in this low paying outfit."

His nuggets of advice:
-Make sure you spend most of your time defining the problem.
-Stop being so hard on each other.
-And above all, stay humble.

90 minutes with Mattis was time well spent.

Voices to be Heard Part 2

My list of interesting thinkers and people that have something to say of last week was incomplete. There are a few others that I think warrant attention and are worth your while.  Again, I rank them in no particular order, but include them for their clear-eyed and/or novel thinking or writing.

Deirdre McCloskey

McCloskey is an unusual talent.  She was transgender before it was chic, a brilliant University of Chicago trained economist and historian.  She is a highly skilled writer and her tome Bourgeois Equality, while long, is an indispensable read for anyone that wishes to understand the evolution of capitalism in a historical context.  I had the pleasure of having lunch with McCloskey last summer at the Printers Row Lit Fest and it was a real treat to interact with a brilliant mind that has a handle on so many disciplines.

What makes her special:  An ability to merge the quantitative with the historical along with excellent literary skills.  Who else could write an economic history book and bring up Willa Cather and Fyodor Dostoyevsky?   She also is able to make a compelling argument as to why capitalism is more compassionate than the alternatives and why it is consistent with her Christian faith.

Quotes:

“My Marxist friends, they walk by the evidence, the evidence of reason, the historical evidence, the economic evidence.”

“Righteous, if inexpensive, indignation inspired by survivor’s guilt about alleged ”victims” of something called “capitalism” and envious anger at the silly consumption by the rich, does not invariably yield betterment for the poor."

"Betterments require disobedience, creative destruction, an overturning or remaking or redirecting of what already exists, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates challenging Big Blue, autos replacing horses—not a bigger centralized computer or a faster horse.”

Deficiencies.

I don’t know that I would call them deficiencies, inasmuch as I see them as things that McCloskey has had to overcome.  Gender reassignment, especially at the time she did it, would have been a difficult thing, and it apparently alienated her family.  She also stutters and that would have been a difficult hurdle to overcome for a person that made a living in part by lecturing.

Pat Condell

Pat Condell is a brilliant comedian that fearlessly defends the West and its culture with his YouTube videos.  Sharp, witty and biting, Condell, like Jordan Peterson skewers the postmodernists, the EU and the culture of grievance mongering.  Lambasting political correctness, globalism and multiculturalism, he takes the gloves off in his defense of Western values.  His passionate advocacy for free speech and America’s 1^st Amendment leaves me embarrassed that there are no Americans that can support our own Constitutional protections so eloquently (His solilioquy The Anti-American Dream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Uz19w7tf1U) is among his best.

What makes him special.  His wit, courage, and bluntness puts him head and shoulders above any other cheerleader for Western values. 

Quotes:

“Freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of identity.  This is my Holy Trinity, each one an intrinsic aspect of my god: Freedom, the Holiest of Holies.”

“Suspicion of, or dislike of Islam is not a phobia.  It’s an honest, healthy reaction to the evidence that has been provided.”

Deficiencies.

Condell, I think, sometimes goes overboard with Islam and does not distinguish between Islamism and Islam.  But, in his defense, he is contemptuous of all religion and has often poked at Christianity, too. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk4AJ1BgQX8)

Raghuram Rajan

I like Rajan mostly because of his even-handedness.   He is fiercely nonpartisan and if you listen to him, it would be impossible to know where his vote would be cast.  No mere academician, Rajan has a truly global view and has real policymaking experience.  He worked at the IMF and  his most recent post was as head of the Reserve Bank of India.  His book on the Great Recession, Fault Lines was among the best of its kind.  Rather than finger point, Rajan took the view that the crash was caused by systemic problems, that all actors were, in fact, acting rationally.  I have just begun to read his current book on the crisis of community, The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind. 

What makes him special.  Rajan tries very hard to be a neutral observer without an agenda to push.  When asked about the rise of Trumpian populism, he responds by saying that there is plenty of populism on the left as well.  His diagnoses are very accurate and incisive.

Quotes:

“In India, we say one thing, and we do something else.”

“The more that everyone has access to the same educational opportunities, the more society will tend to accept some receiving disproportionate rewards. After all, they themselves had a chance to be winners.”

Deficiencies. 

Like his colleague, Randy Krozner, who I also like and respect very much, Rajan can be a little dull.  He is a good, but not great writer, and a good, but not great speaker.  And because he is so technically proficient, this can translate into a little dullness if you are not an aficionado for wonky policy stuff.

o, that’s my list of interesting voices.  There were others that could have made it.  Peter Theil, for instance. But McCloskey, Condell and Rajan are a good start.  Rajan’s new book is out now and I eagerly await McCloskey’s new book, is due out October 15, Why Liberalism Works.  Condell posts periodically on YouTube and his own site patcondell.net.

Voices to be Heard

Over the next few weeks I am going to highlight some current thinkers and writers that have something important to say.  This is not to suggest that I am, in each case, an acolyte, but they are interesting people with an unique point of view, which necessarily means that each is a bit controversial in his or her own right.  But it’s good to remember that you can buy their ideas a la carte; you don’t necessarily have to buy the whole package.  Also beware that I do have a bias in favor of people that I have actually met and interacted with.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Nassim Taleb gained prominence with his work The Black Swan, which has been called the most influential book since WWII by the Sunday Times.  Taleb is a Lebanese immigrant and former trader that is now a mathematician and essayist.  In addition to The Black Swam, Antifragile was an excellent book..  

Quotes: 

“True equality is equality in probability.”

“People whose survival depends on qualitative ‘job assessments’ by someone of higher rank in an organization cannot be trusted for critical decisions.”

What makes him special:  Taleb is very skilled at mixing quantitative concepts and anecdotes and making risk and probability accessible to non-quant jocks.

Deficiencies.  Taleb can be extremely arrogant and dismissive.  He claimed that Nobel Laureate Richard Thaler was “very ignorant of probability” and labelled him a “creepy interventionist.”  While I disagree with Thaler on some things, and got into a Twitter exchange with him over the 2^nd Amendment, I do not like the name calling.

Daniel Pipes

Daniel Pipes, the son of Reagan advisor Richard Pipes is a Middle East expert that came to prominence after 9/11, after warning the world for years about militant Islam.  Pipes runs The Middle East Forum, an “activist think tank” in Philadelphia.  Pipes is one of my intellectual mentors and I had him when I was an undergraduate in his first year of teaching, when he co-taught a class with the great William H. McNeill.  This does not mean I always agree with him, however.  I was, for instance, supportive of Netanyahu’s decision not to permit Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar entrance Israel to use his country to advance the BDS movement.

What makes him special: Pipes has deep historical knowledge of the Middle East and has the courage to call out the darker side of Islam, call for Israeli victory in the Middle East and has been supportive of the nations of Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland (those nations he calls “Civilizationists”) in their rejection of Islamic immigration.

Quotes:

“Ultimately, there is no compromise.  Westerners will either retain their civilization, including the right to insult or blaspheme or not.”

“Diplomacy in general does not resolve conflicts.  Wars end not due to a peace process, but due to one side giving up.”

Deficiencies.  This is easy.  Pipes is too soft spoken.  He is so soft spoken that even when you are in a small room with him in a small group, you have to strain to hear him.  His ideas are worth a megaphone, and they sometimes get lost because of his shy demeanor and quiet voice.

Camille Paglia

Camille Paglia was mentored by the great Harold Bloom and it shows in her writing.  Paglia has great range in the topics that she can write about authoritatively.  She is at her best as an art and film critic, and her recent book, appropriately entitled Provocations was a delicious potpourri of essays.  Paglia defies categorization, is a self-styled feminist, calls herself transgender but is wholly supportive of capitalism.  Her positions (anti- third wave feminism) earned herself a petition from the uber progressive students at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia to have her removed from the faculty (the school’s administration stood behind her).  The controversy was recently written about in the Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-feminist-capitalist-professor-under-fire-11567201511).  

What makes her special.  Paglia has an incredibly wide range-- culture, art, politics, and more. Paglia has one of those wonderful minds that cause you to think differently with every essay she writes.

Quotes:

“Leaving sex to the feminists is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist.”

“Pursuit and seduction are the essence of sexuality.  It’s part of the sizzle.”

“I say the law should be blind to race, gender and sexual orientation, just as it claims to be blind to wealth and power.   There should be no protected groups of any kind, except for children, the severely disabled and the elderly whose physical frailty demands society’s care.”

Deficiencies.  Like Pipes, Paglia is a better writer than a speaker.  She speaks with a very quick cadence and sometimes staccato voice.  Again, like Pipes, she is worth the effort to listen to, and some of her podcasts and YouTube videos are real treats.  Paglia’s resistance to categorization lends itself to contradictions—she claims to be a capitalist but voted for Bernie Sanders.

Jordan Peterson

I wrote a post on Peterson after seeing him live last May (http://commonsense-mark.blogspot.com/2018/05/jordan-peterson.html) and believe that Peterson can be one of the most influential writers and thinkers of the West. His fierce attacks on post-modernism and political correctness are intellectually courageous.  His passion for his core message is evident– finding meaning in life through taking on responsibility – and is a message that needs to be heard by young people.  He is Jungian and pulls symbols from religious texts, film, fairy tales and literature.  My personal favorite lecture on his view of oppression is available on YouTube ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XvI6Y5Yq8o) and I have seen it multiple times.  If he has staying power, Peterson can be a powerful figure in our culture.

What makes him special.  Peterson is an engaging speaker, quick on his feet, and, like Paglia, has a tremendous breadth of knowledge.  His experience as a clinical psychologist sets him apart as he has experienced the real world and is no mere academic.  He has been unafraid to take on the citadels of government and academia.

Quotes:

“It’s in responsibility that most people find the meaning that sustains them through life.  It’s not in happiness.  It’s not in impulsive pleasure.”

“I don’t tell people, ‘You’re okay the way you are.’  The right story is, ‘You’re way less than you could be.’

Deficiencies. Peterson sometimes engages with people that are not intellectual peers and/or have checkered reputations like Milo YIannopolis and Ben Shapiro.   Engagement with them does not enhance his reputation.  He also said that Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh should have resigned as soon as he was confirmed, which would have been an awful mistake.  So Peterson is not immune from occasional lapses in judgment.

Taleb, Pipes, Paglia and Peterson are interesting thinkers and people worth watching.  But wait, there’s more. Next week I will have another installment of Voices to be Heard.

A Little Hope

In keeping with my summer writing semi-sabbatical and my vow to steer clear of topics concerning politics, economics and international affairs for a few weeks, last week I wrote a short piece recommending a wonderful memoir that would immerse you in nostalgia for an American society that has almost disappeared.

This week, I want to write about hope, and I want to draw on a couple of personal experiences this week that gave me some hope for the future.  Much is being written about our divided country.  The MSM and social media would lead you to believe that we are nearly at each other’s throats much of the time.  Twitter mobs and Antifa marches and the clash between CNN and FoxNews portray a fraying country on the brink of becoming unglued.

But on the ground where it counts we most often see an entirely different picture.  This week I personally observed a couple of incidents that told me (to paraphrase Mark Twain) that reports of the demise of American society have been greatly exaggerated.

On my way to an industry group golf outing, I stopped at a gas station and convenience store to fill up and pick up a few small items.   The fellow at one of the two registers was a young Indian man and we engaged in a brief conversation about where he was from.  He apparently was from Bhuj, a town near the Pakistan border.   Then pointed to the other fellow that was working the other register and said that he was from Karachi, directly across the border in Pakistan.   He said they should have never partitioned India and Pakistan.   He took a step over to his fellow employee, put his arm around him, smiled broadly and said, “See, we go home and we fight.   We come back here and we best friends.”  Had I been a little more aware, I would have whipped out my cell phone of these two guys working together and grinning and clearly enjoying working together.  And he is correct.  In another context, these guys might well be taking potshots at each other.

And then later in the week, I stopped by the Chicago Botanic Garden to enjoy the scenery and listen to some evening summer music as the season winds down.  I stopped by the beer garden to get a glass of wine and the bartender was a young African American woman. 

“What would you like, sir?”

“A cabernet, please.”

“A glass or a bottle?”

I laughed, “Given the week, I could probably use a bottle, but the police get mad when you do that, so a glass will be fine.  I’m driving.”

She laughed and then motioned over my shoulder and said, “I really hate to see that.”

I turned and there was an old woman picking through the trash bin and pulled out a basket with some potato chips left in it from a previous patron.

The young bartender immediately went to the back, filled a basket with nacho chips, sour cream and salsa to bring out to this woman. 

I took the chips, and said, “Just wait on your customers.  I will take them to her.”

I brought them out and offered them to the bag lady and said, “These are on the house.  If you want a hamburger or something else, I’m buying.”  

She refused me and said, “These are plenty for me, thanks.”

I tried again but she wasn’t having it.

Despite her refusal though, I was moved by the actions of the young black woman that was working the bar.  She cared enough to pay attention to this woman and try to do something about her plight, and at least relieve the woman’s hunger for one day, a person that was a total stranger to her.

This is the America I love.  People from different cultures, different races, and sometimes from places where they would otherwise be sworn enemies working together and assisting each other. 

Ironically, I had just this week started reading Raghuram Rajan’s new book, “The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind.”  Rajan is one of the thinkers I follow closely and he is deeply concerned about the erosion of community in our society.

I am too, but this week I saw some tangible evidence that it is not quite dead yet, and it gave me some reason to hope.  Does bigotry and racism exist?  Sure. But in our day to day lives the proportion of acts of compassion, empathy and kindness to acts of bigotry runs overwhelmingly in favor of compassion, empathy and kindness.

Summer's End

There is so much going on in the world worthy of commentary.  Last week I wrote about the Jeffrey Epstein “suicide.”  There is a trade war going on in China and protests in Hong Kong and Moscow.  Many economists are predicting a recession by the end of 2021.   Antifa is acting up again.  A couple of weeks ago, we had two mass shootings and another swell of calls for gun control legislation.  Child climate change advocate Greta Thunberg took a boat to the U.S.   Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar were banned from entering Israel. 

Lots to write about.

But I will have none of it.

I’m taking a break. Until Labor Day, I’m not going to post about politics, economics or international affairs and I’m staying off social media (except to return messages).   It’s my digital detox.   A mental health break.   A brief respite from a world that seems to have gotten knocked off its axis.  My Twitter sabbatical went pretty well today.  I only slipped once and peaked at a couple of posts while I checked messages.  I'm going to pivot to other topics.

This week I’m going to make a book recommendation—not a full review --- but a strong recommendation.

I loved Lake of the Ozarks: My Surreal Summers in a Vanishing America by Bill Geist.   Geist’s memoir of his teen summers takes us back to a time and a place that no longer exists—a more innocent time (sort of) in his life and in America.  It was a time before cell phones, texts, and the internet.  Before #metoo and summer sports camps and before overstructured teen lives.  It was a time when kids actually HAD summer jobs (at last survey in 2016, only 35% of teens had summer jobs). 

Geist probably had as much fun researching and writing this book as I did reading it.  It’s pretty clear that he found some of the teens that he spent those summers with at the resort to interview them and refresh his recollections (at the end he returns to the site, and alas, the resort itself is gone). His character sketches and descriptions of some of the events are vivid and alive.  There are places in which I laughed out loud.   Those summers must have been a wonderful combination of work duties, freedom from school, vacation and teen hormones. 

Adding to its authenticity is the location.  The summers he recalls center around a resort is in the Lake of the Ozarks and not the Hamptons or Martha’s vineyard.  It is smack in the middle of ordinary America much like Wisconsin Dells farther north (which we used to refer to as the “Polish Riviera”).   It recalls a time when working class America actually had some money to take a vacation.

The book resonated with me personally.  My grandparents bought a farm in central Wisconsin in the mid 60’s and I spent my entire summers in that farm community with long, languid days of fishing, walking in the woods, and hanging out with the neighbor kids (some of whom had jobs in the local resort). 

Perfectly timed, Kim Brooks wrote a thoughtful op-ed in the New York Times on Sunday entitled, We have Ruined Childhood https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/opinion/sunday/childhood-suicide-depression-anxiety.html?).  Our hyper, overstructured culture has led to alienation, an increase in suicide rate and an explosion in opiod use among kids.  In it, Brooks asserts, “For youngsters these days, an hour of free play is like a drop of water in the desert.  Of course, their miserable.”

Geist’s book, much like the film, “Field of Dreams” takes us back to a healthier time for kids, filled with more fun and laughs.  It is the perfect end of summer read.  Don’t miss it.  I promise you won’t be sorry.

Oops, They Did It Again

This one smells to high heaven.

Next to KSM, Jeffrey Epstein had to be the highest value prisoner in our entire system.  Running a pedophile and sex trafficking ring, Epstein apparently shuttled some of the rich and famous in politics, business and academia to his private island.  Escaping a long sentence with a plea bargain the first time around, Epstein was charged again and faced an extended period in the clink.  Bill Clinton took at least a couple of dozen excursions to Pedophile Island with him, flight logs show.

But a funny thing happened on the way to trial.  This billionaire sex trafficker, who was placed on suicide watch after his attempted suicide a couple of weeks ago, turned up dead.

The internet exploded with conspiracy theories, memes and jokes in bad taste.

Within hours of the reports, I received several emails and texts asking what I thing happened.

In an era of fake news, I have learned not to react to initial reports, but it appears that Epstein was taken off suicide watch on the recommendation of the prison warden and a psychiatrist.  Other reports are that the prison staff violated protocol by not checking in on him every 30 minutes.  Another report said that there was a “surveillance camera malfunction.”

I’m no Alex Jones but none of this adds up.

The Wall Street Journal tweeted out this headline yesterday afternoon:  The death of Jeffrey Epstein leaves unanswered questions and diminished hopes for a full accounting of his wrongdoings.

Duh.  I think this was probably the point.

Epstein’s death has Clintonian fingerprints all over it.  

First, both of the Clintons are very, very skilled at obfuscation, and have a long history of having absolutely no inhibitions about straightforward falsifications.  From “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” to BleachBit and smashed Blackberries, the Clintons have acquired “a particular set of skills,”  telling bold lies and then covering it up, muddying the waters and throwing enough dust in the air to string out the investigative process, and then saying “oh, that’s old news.”  They are experts at layering defenses, throwing underlings under the bus, and changing stories as investigators get close to the truth.  They are world class operators.

The chances that the warden took the risky step of taking Epstein off suicide watch AND protocol was violated on this high value prisoner without outside influence or instruction is very very low.  This was no Podunk jail in some South Carolina one horse town housing the town drunk.  This was no job for Barney Fife.  

Second, the method matches the Clintons.   It has become a national joke that anyone with dirt on the Clintons ends up committing suicide.  Except it’s not a joke anymore.   Killers have patterns and favored methods.  If a political opponent of Vladimir Putin’s ends up with poison in his system, who jumps to mind as the responsible person?   If there are simultaneous bombings in 3 London cities and bearded young Middle Eastern are reported to have yelled “Allahu Akbar” at the sites, what is the first thing you think of?   Someone close to the Clintons ends up “suicided” and you think, hmmmm.   These people think we just fell off the turnip truck yesterday.

Third, and most troubling is that as a consequence of Obama’s weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and IRS, we have lost faith in the ability of those agencies to investigate fully and fairly.  The arrogance of hyperpartisanship of Jim Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe have left us with little confidence that the agencies charged with unbiased investigative powers will deliver the truth.  The fact that we still do not have answers to the Las Vegas shooting is disturbing, to say the least. 

Was Epstein’s death a result of massive incompetence or was it something much darker and more sinister?

We may never know.  And the Clinton Syndicate will make certain of it.

They've been at this game for a long time.

A Gun Problem- Or Something More?

The mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton last weekend have elicited more howls for gun control.  These are terrible occurrences and provide a convenient and emotional appeal to put constraints around our Constitutional rights.  The “solutions” posed by Democratic contenders range from enhanced background checks, banning “assault weapons,” government buybacks, and “red flag” laws.  The more authoritarian and frightening liberals like Kamala Harris announced that if Congress won’t act within 100 days (of her inauguration), she will act by executive order.  Beto O’Rourke announced that he would be receptive to “mandatory” buybacks.

The more the Left talks openly about flouting your Constitutional rights, and using government force to deprive you of them, the more tightly you should hold on to your weapons.

As they spew these “solutions” to mass casualty events, protesters in Venezuela, Hong Kong, and Moscow are at this very time wishing they had the same rights as you do to counter government thuggery.  

Ironically, liberals, who are fond of attacking “root causes” when discussing other social maladies dismiss “root causes” when a mass shooting occurs and go straight for your Constitutional rights.

Here are my four biggest reasons for being very skeptical about the Left’s push for gun control:

·        Learn from the experience with abortion.  For years, the Left has been repeating the mantra of “common sense gun control,” arguing that they just want to have protections against people that should not have access to firearms, such as those with sever mental illness or a long criminal history.  And that’s how they get you on board.  Who could be against a denying a deadly weapon to someone with severe paranoid schizophrenia? 

The Left has learned that with sacred things, you have to go slow.  Life is sacred, so the Left argued for years that abortion was to be “safe, legal and rare” and limited to the first trimester.  Who would countenance going back to the days of unsanitary back alley abortions?   Visions of some scared 16 year old girl ending up in a garage with some fat, hairy pseudo-doctor with a cigarette dangling from his mouth and unsterilized utensils is a powerful persuader.  But then, all of a sudden you wake up an New York and Illinois legislatures are cheering and smiling as they approve of abortions up to the moment of birth and the governor of Virginia is talking about a live baby placed in a tray and the mother has “a decision to make.”

How do you get a piano off the third floor?  You disassemble it first, silly.  And that’s what they will do.  Chip, chip, chip.  They will persuade you that each of these little measures they have in mind don’t materially infringe on your rights.  Until one day you wake up and the 2^nd Amendment isn’t there anymore.  They’ve disassembled it in pieces.  Denying social security recipients that get help with their finances.   Denying people that end up on no fly lists (notoriously error prone).  Squeezing gun manufacturers by denying them financing.  Limiting magazine size.  And now red flag laws (who gets to decide, that’s the rub—the American Psychological Association that just decided toxic masculinity needs to be treated?)  Drip.  Drip.  Drip.

·        They Left has explicitly told us where they are going.  The New York Times is a must read for all conservatives and libertarians because, through its choice of editorial content will tell you in no uncertain terms where the Left is headed.  Last year, the Times published an op-ed by Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens entitled: Repeal the 2^nd Amendment (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html?searchResultPosition=19).  It doesn’t get more explicit than that.  The Left wants the 2^nd Amendment gone.

·        Despite the fact that the El Paso shooter was from the extreme right, most of the political violence and countenance of political violence is from the Left.   Rand Paul is having part of his lung removed.   Castro doxxed Trump donors.  Antifa prowls the streets of Portland.  AOC has urged social unrest.  Maxine Waters encouraged physical confrontation with Trump supporters.  Reporter Andy Ngo was severely injured by an Antifa mob.  In an era in which bitterness and rancor has become pervasive and the threat of mob violence is growing, the last thing you want to do is to leave yourself exposed and vulnerable without protection.

·        Finally, they are solving the wrong problem.  The Leftist narrative is that there is a growing white supremacist movement.  I see little evidence that it is a  burgeoning movement and that it represents a greater threat to social cohesion than Islamist supremacism, Leftist supremacism (Antifa) or BLM.  There always have been fringe kooks around and the white supremacists couldn’t get their act together to gather up more than a couple of dozen people to do a second rally at Charlottesville.

I do think these mass shootings are symptomatic of a society that is not healthy right now.  And it is only one of the symptoms.   Dozens of our children are dying every day from opioid overdoses across the country.  Every weekend in Chicago is a bloodbath on the South and West sides, so much so that last weekend a hospital had to stop taking in gunshot victims.  Our birthrates are at the lowest level in over 30 years.   Taken together, these pathologies suggest that something is going on that merely taking away a chunk of 2^nd Amendment rights won’t fix. (Hint: I will be reading Raghuram Rajan’s new book about the crisis in community, The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind for his insights