Just Like You
Speaking of crime and punishment, here’s a thread on prison and recidivism.
In short, we’re told – by a civil rights lawyer who claims that “cops and prisons are killing us all” – that neither custodial sanctions nor more lenient attempts at correction have much impact on rates of reoffending. This is then presented, by the same lawyer, as a reason not to imprison the predatory and murderous, who are apparently deserving of our sympathy. Unlike, one assumes, their numerous victims, and future victims.
And so, we arrive at the strange logic that if a person has been arrested many times for behaving like an animal, many times, and has consequently, belatedly, ended up in prison, thereby allowing the law-abiding some relief from his predation, then this is a bad thing. For which, we, not he, should feel bad.
As noted in the discussion, there’s a reliance, not least among progressives, on the notions of deterrence and rehabilitation as being how one determines whether prison is fitting or effective, or even an obsolete institution, something to abolish. But an antisocial moron with poor impulse control is likely to remain so until he dies, or is killed while engaging in criminal activity.
The concepts of punishment and incapacitation – of stopping a monster’s sociopathic activity and sparing others violation and misery, if only for the duration of his imprisonment – don’t seem to figure highly in progressive circles. Where, as we’ve seen, all kinds of contortions are very much in fashion.
Among the replies and linked tangents are some common, if unconvincing, suppositions. For instance, that habitual violent criminals – say, the kinds of creatures who gleefully sucker-punch elderly women because they happen to be of East Asian descent – will somehow be morally redeemed by “affordable housing” and “access to healthcare.”
Oh, and more “theatre” for schoolchildren.
Update, via the comments, where Darleen adds,
In reply to which, pst314 quotes Theodore Dalrymple:
Dalrymple: “Ah, but it does me good.”
Prisoner: “What do you mean?”
Dalrymple: “When you are in prison you are not burgling my home.”
At which point, readers may register that the limited effect of imprisonment – and lenient alternatives – on rates of reoffending could be construed in ways that, shall we say, diverge from progressive orthodoxy. One might, for instance, infer that those incarcerated for serious criminal savagery – and who, on release, continue being criminal savages – are irredeemable, and therefore undeserving of pretentious sympathy. One might even infer that the wellbeing of such creatures is no longer a concern.
Update 2:
In hindsight, this post has become the first part of a trilogy of sorts. See also parts two and three.
Or white.
Don’t forget “midnight basketball”.
See “the knockout game” AKA “polar bear hunting” etc.
My liberal acquaintances have been angrily denying the reality of this phenomenon for decades.
While throwing this together, I considered including links to some video of sucker-punching incidents, but it was all rather revolting and depressing. The point, however, is that if you see footage of such attacks, and the air of glee and triumph that often follows them, or of any other criminal savagery, then the idea that they’re a consequence of not having a nicer home, or not having enough theatre in schools, is rather bizarre.
It also feels vaguely insulting to those of us who grew up in modest circumstances in rough parts of town, and who didn’t encounter much in the way of school theatre, but who somehow managed not to seek satisfaction in brutalising old ladies.
Quite a few years ago, the late Sir Robin Day, a man who many people in power listened to, and was an advocate of the penal system being too strict, and a regular opponent of the death penalty, was mugged on his way home from the BBC studios, and his jaw broken. It was widely reported that, when he was able to speak, his first words were, “If they (the Police) find them, I hope they hang the bastards.”
I would suggest that those who feel that criminals are simply misunderstood, and be treated leniently, will change their minds when they, themselves, become victims.
Hear hear!
Counter example: The notorious New York judge “Turn Em Loose” Bruce Wright, who, after being mugged, announced in court that he would continue his extremely lenient bail policies.
One of the few advantages of attending an American urban public school (comprehensive state school in the UK, I believe) is that you “gain” direct experience with various sorts of lowlifes. What I saw and experienced in school partly immunized me against liberal shibboleths about crime and punishment/rehabilitation.
The moral perversity of many progressives on the subject of crime is sometimes difficult to articulate.
As, for instance, when the belated demise of Mr Ricardo Munoz resulted in outrage and riots, as if he were some saintly figure, and cruelly oppressed, rather than a violent sociopath whose recreational activities included the stabbing and slashing of women and children.
See, Mr Munoz was a jolly chap. Quite lively. And just like you.
A grim thought: Personality is largely fixed by the time one reaches the teens. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that such feral youths can be rehabilitated into responsible civilized citizens.
One might raise the hypothesis that decades of handing out free stuff such as housing, food, healthcare, unearned and unappreciated, to said creatures and their preceding generations, along with the excusing of every bit of bad behavior the spawn of these creatures get up to in school, has evolved these creatures into the form we see today. These assholes come from free housing, they get EBT and SNAP for food (only if Dad is not in the picture, mind you), there are free health clinics all over, and we throw money right and left at what passes for school, yet enforce no standards or in any way ensure that they learn anything. Since LBJ these people have been basically stuffed in zoos, and over time have developed all the tics and problems associated with animals in the zoo, where everything is handed to them and nothing is expected of them.
Well, continual indulgence and continual excuses do not, as a rule, result in gratitude.
What has been shown is that it is not the length of prison terms that deters criminals but the likelihood of getting prison time. Even morons can do some degree of cost-benefit analysis.
The impulse-control thing is key. Thugs will decide to rob someone….who knows them personally! Who likely has a gun! In broad daylight in front of store cameras! The absurdly low clearance even of murder cases these days is due to reduced police ranks, not clever criminals.
The low impulse control is largely due to absent fathers (boys without fathers much much more likely to drop out and do crime) and general social chaos.
This. This. This.
And to amplify the toxic consequences of excuse-making, did you know that there are public school programs for “troubled youths” which actually teach the young thugs that their criminality is the fault of “society” and especially “white supremacy” and “structural racism”? This is virtually guaranteed to ensure that the criminality will continue and become more vicious and cruel.
Also the swiftness of the punishment: If I recall correctly, a far-off spell in prison is far less likely to deter than an equally likely but immediate (even if shorter) sentence.
It used to be said that a conservative was a liberal who’d been mugged. That’s no longer the case – the mugged liberals now advocate for the mugger to demonstrate their high-minded beneficence (and preen mightily while doing so).
California’s 3-Strikes used to be robustly applied. Two violent felonies and any 3rd felony violent or not and it was 25-to-life state prison. Note the 3 strikers had years of criminal activity before 3 strikes took hold. Used to have PC666 Petty Theft with priors – putting career thieves away in state prison for years. These are/were not “getting baby some diapers” stuff, but, in essence, the criminal’s JOB.
3 strikes has been watered down and too many Leftwing DA’s refuse to bring strikes to the table when appropriate. PC666 was wiped out by Prop47 which, de facto, decriminalized petty theft. Add to it “prison realignment” with massive release of state prisoners and it’s a “Well DUH” moment to see the huge uptick in property & violent crime even as Newscum & Co hide it by refusing to prosecute it.
Incarceration may not REFORM or stop any particular criminal from committing crime on the outside, but at least law-abiding citizens will get a break from dealing with him for the duration of his sentence.
“Since LBJ these people have been basically stuffed in zoos, “
For those on the other side of the pond, it’s the US version of “council housing blocks”
It’s an entire culture (almost, but I adhere to Kenneth Clarke’s view – not a “civilisation”) built on nothing more than immediate personal gratification. And very likely the downfall of the west…
(see US State allowing hiring of illegal aliens as police officers. Visigoths?)
That.
Theodore Dalrymple has recounted this exchange more than once:
Prisoner: “Prison doesn’t do me any good.”
Dalrymple: “Ah, but it does me good.”
Prisoner: “What do you mean?”
Dalrymple: “When you are in prison you are not burgling my home.”
Would it be conspiratorial/crazy of me to suggest that perhaps some of these muggings might be of the softer, Jessie Smollett variety? With the purpose being the opportunity to preen and publicly signal one’s virtue? Of course it would. Never mind.
As noted in the quoted thread, the limited effect of imprisonment (and lenient alternatives) on rates of reoffending could be construed in ways that, shall we say, diverge from progressive orthodoxy.
One might, for instance, infer that those incarcerated for serious criminal savagery and who, on release, continue being criminal savages are irredeemable – and are therefore undeserving of pretentious sympathy. One might even infer that the wellbeing of such creatures is no longer a concern.
That’s just crazy talk.
[ Post updated. ]
Also a key I think is a culture of resentment fostered by activists. Blaming society for all your failings leads to the knockout game as revenge. Instead of looking for a way to get ahead, it fosters giving up, anger, tiktoks of stunts and crime.
My friend came to US as a legal immigrant and in high school his parents both died. He lived in his car for a year and really struggled but is now a doctor. My other friend was shot at fleeing Iraq, was penniless when he arrived here and is a dentist. My black neighbor put himself through college as a night watchman–he could study while working. If you focus and don’t “hang with your homies” you can get ahead. In my neighborhood, people have a party a couple times/yr (if that) –not every night.
I recall some students in my school seemed to spend a lot of evenings at parties.
He felt he was being disrespected.
How we get “food deserts” and “drug store deserts” and “hardware store deserts”. (Although liberals will tie themselves in knots denying the obvious.)
A second order effect of people having no children is they start believing this is a good idea. “If they’re out in the middle of the night then give them something safe, fun, and non-destructive to do!”
Meanwhile, everyone who has experience raising kids and keeping them out of trouble has no trouble understanding this is ridiculous. Kids should not be out late at night. Giving them something nice to do in the middle of the night just encourages them to be out late. Play basketball during the day, tire them out, send them home to sleep, and arrest them if they’re out late.
Just like border enforcement in western countries, minor vandalism in NYC, bulk retail theft in progressive cities, and any lawbreaking in Portland, Oregon it doesn’t matter what laws exist if there is no will to enforce them.
The Christian view, of course, is that everyone is redeemable, by God through Christ. Which is not to say that everyone’s behavior can be fixed by the effort of others or the state. And that therefore the consequence is that some people need to be separated from the rest of society for the safety of others. Their eternal souls still matter, and their spiritual welfare is still of first importance, but that does not equal setting them free to predate upon their neighbors.
It’s worth recalling that Dalrymple often says that many criminals give up crime at the age of 40. Crime is a young man’s game.
“He felt he was being disrespected.”
I chuckled. The idea that Spanish speaking folk somehow embrace blacks is fiction. The Missus’ extended family occasionally show a racial animosity that shocks me…
I’ll just put this here for no particular reason.
Not that I give a damn: Feeling “disrespected” is no excuse. And It’s certain that he came into the shop with a bad attitude, unwilling to wait for facts or listen to even the most English-fluent person. (His bad attitude is probably combined with low intelligence or he would not have committed a crime in which he would quickly become a suspect.) Third, if police (and others) shot blacks with as little reason as this thug shot the auto shop worker, American blacks would have a net negative birth rate. Fourth, although the racial animosity might be shocking it is reciprocated by American blacks who tend to hate every race and ethnicity other than their own. This animosity should also alert white people that they should stop feeling guilty about racism, which is essentially universal and which there is organized effort to eliminate only in the West.
… is that you “gain” direct experience with various sorts of lowlifes.
OK, this is one instance where ‘lived experience’ is actually the correct phrase.
“One might even infer that the wellbeing of such creatures is no longer a concern.”
I imagine hearing those words spoken by Bill Buckley.
Zimbabwe was a dress rehearsal.
This is a hard topic for me. My middle son is in prison for murder–committed when he was 17. He is autistic and learning disabled. He fits the definition of a “moron with low impulse control.” He isn’t really a moron, as he grasps complex topics easily and can discuss complicated issues with nuance. He couldn’t learn Spanish and struggled with math–a working memory problem.
He was probably antisocial from birth–there were signs, but despite years of care under a psychiatrist, we were never given that diagnosis. I think marijuana fueled his fantasies of himself as some sort of outlaw.
Nine years on, he has never been violent in prison–but he has been beaten almost to death twice by gangs of … color. He is remorseful and yet has the insight to say he is where he belongs. I think the urges are fading, but I wouldn’t want him free. His brain is broken–it was broken somewhere in utero.
I wish prison were different. I wish he could be given meaningful work–he wants to work, but the civil rights people have ruined that. I wish he weren’t in constant physical peril. I wish the guards, and prison healthcare staff, and the DOC trucks didn’t bring in opiates. I wish he had some hope of one day being released, though I know many would disagree. I wish I knew whether one day, he might be free of his impulses.
Not every criminal is the same. It is a terrible problem.
Many of the personality traits that accompany criminality — low impulse control, lack of future orientation, lack of empathy, lack of respect for rules/authority–are genetic. See Charles Murrays’ book, Human Diversity. You cannot affect these traits very much with parenting or education.
What does work–to an extent–is intensive cognitive and dialectical behavioral therapy. Basically, you have to start at a very early age to teach antisocial children that it is better to fake empathy and parrot normies than to end up in prison. This hasn’t been done because psychiatry does not want to give chikdren what is seen as a diagnosis of despair. There was a fascinating article about this in The Atlantic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/when-your-child-is-a-psychopath/524502/
Very sorry to hear that.
Jordan Peterson remarked, in an interview I recently listened to, that in general such intervention needs to occur before around age 4: Those first few years are when kids need to build the foundations of socialization.
I like to ask the “no incarceration!” advocates whether this policy extends to domestic abusers and rapists.
Evidence that psychiatric hospitals are needed. And there is so much progress needed in mental health; much time has been lost in the last century due to fads and illusions.
Oingo Boingo had this covered 30-some odd years ago.
(IMHO, which is entirely correct and from which no reasoned dissent is possible, Oingo is one of the most musically gifted and creative bands ever. Dan Elfman, the frontman, went on to become a very prolific composer of movie soundtracks.
The song is worth a listen: https://youtu.be/Js4yGcgO6hk
IMHO.)
Not every criminal is the same. It is a terrible problem.
Very much agree. I used to work as a prison psychologist. My role primary role was in suicide/risk of harm assessment and recommendations. Some prisoners are very vulnerable to violence from other prisoners. While I may not have had a lot of sympathy for many prisoners, no one should go through their sentence constantly at risk of getting their teeth stomped into their brain. Also, the perpetrators do not need further reinforcement of their horrific violence and intimidating behaviour by being able to indulge in it in prison – that is bad for everyone when they are released.
The assumption for many people was that I was a ‘rehabilitation, not prison’ person. Not at all. If we could treat/manage antisocial behaviour like we do, say, diabetes then maybe. But what the people who advocate for rehabilitative programs either do not know (or choose not to know) is that we don’t know how to rehabilitate people. I used to also do pre- post rehabilitation program risk assessments for violent and sexual offenders. As well ask risk for reoffending can be quantified, the reduction in risk was minimal, if any. There is no fucking way I would want a ‘rehabilitated’ offender to move in next door to me upon release next door to me. Therefore I can’t advocate for the rehabilitative approach and inflict that risk on someone else.
I can’t seem to find this story on Google, but in looking for it I did come across this about an English Judge, Sir Robin Knowles KC (was QC at the time), who was the victim of a mugging:
Is this the story you were thinking of?
Or was it Sir Robin Day?
Yellow card for Nikw211 for failing to highlight an area of critical importance (certainly as far as this blog is concerned). To remedy this oversight I present the full headline:-
Judge mugged at champagne bottle-point by thief who demanded kiss goodbye, court hears
To paraphrase David “Mugger of note”.
[ Post updated again. ]
And then there’s Warren Zevon’s “Excitable Boy” with the refrain:
I recently had a conversation with someone who was convinced that rehabilitation programs work, and who cited them in response to my comments about the recent increase in muggings, carjackings, and armed robberies. My friend mentioned work-release programs which in America date back to the beginning of the 20th Century. You would think that a century ago Americans would have not yet been infected with the delusions that afflict today’s Smart People, which reinforces my assumption that those laws were not created with violent or hardened criminals in mind. But today we have judges and lawyers who think nothing of releasing vicious thugs back onto the streets.
Also those who are not violent but who are career criminals such as burglars, sneak thieves, fraudsters, fences for stolen goods, etc. Among other factors, people tend to become what they do repeatedly and the longer they do it they less they are able or willing to change.
One of the most insanely delusional takes on crime that I have encountered:
Do you remember the news story about the Somali pirate who used his loot to finance immigration to America? Someone said that we should not call for his deportation because his piracy career showed ambition which would make him a fine citizen.
Well, what any deity makes of those who repeatedly terrorise random strangers for shits and giggles, I leave to others. Mortal forgiveness and goodwill, however, are definitely finite, limited resources, and probably best spent where it matters, on the deserving.
Regarding recidivism, here’s a piece reminding the reader that a small number of incorrigible monsters commit an awful lot of the crime that the rest of us experience, and do it over and over again, until they’re forcibly stopped. Say, by being shot, or banged up in a dungeon. Much to our progressive lawyer’s dismay, no doubt:
In short, before ending up in prison, the vast majority of the perpetrators, our supposed victims, have at least five prior arrests, with almost half having 10 or more, and one in seven, 20 or more:
What’s the phrase I’m looking for? Oh yes. The nature of the beast.
Do you have illustrative stories that you’d like to relate, a la Theodore Dalrymple’s famous essays?
“they found that 1% of people were accountable for 63% of all violent crime convictions, and 0.12% of people accounted for 20% of violent crime convictions.”
I have seen reports that about 5% of the populace commits about 90% of all crimes. Remove that incorrigible 5% from society and the rest of us become much safer.
I have one dark thought, though: We have all seen numerous news reports in which when a thug is killed by his intended victim, numerous friends and family and neighbors publicly express outrage that he was killed. This leads me to think that for every violent thug there are many sympathizers who should also be removed from society. (Much as for every actual communist there are many liberal sympathizers and facilitators.)
Well, I’ve long since lost count of the self-styled progressives who would have us ignore all reality, and any number of contradictions, in order to mimic their own pretensions:
And,
For instance.
I recall when a person from the travelling community was stabbed to death with his own screwdriver during a struggle with his intended burglary victim (a pensioner whose home he had broken into) the response from his family was to proclaim that he was “Too good for this world”.
I recall when a person from the travelling community
And their behaviour in the victim’s street after the event. The real victim, not the chancer who came to grief.
Ding Ding Ding!
But you will never have enough prisons, prison guards, or even helicopters to accomplish this. The simple solution of just removing that 5% or whatever from society would work as a maintenance measure in an otherwise functional society.
What we have now is a much deeper and broader cultural problem that has been allowed (Mrs. Taxis my AP History teacher speaks from the grave, “By whom?”) to grow roots and fester such that more extreme measures will be required. Essentially something nearly equivalent to post-WWII level efforts to reform Japanese society. The broader problem is that we no longer have a functioning rule of law. The legal system at all levels is corrupted with favors for approved groups/classes and punishments for the disapproved ones. This should have been clear to anyone who studied the pandemic and related history that occurred in the third decade of the 21st century. Though many of the signs were there even decades before that.
Folly is one of the few constants in human behaviour. How else to explain the delusion that man is perfectible?
To forgive is divine . . . and therefore not one of my prerogatives.
Mortal forgiveness and goodwill, however, are definitely finite, limited resources, and probably best spent where it matters, on the deserving.
“Forgiveness” is an individual action, not a function of the state, justice is. There’s a reason Lady Justice is blindfolded. Even the Bible admonishes about letting feelings or biases sway one from the path of justice. e.g. Leviticus 19:15
On the general subject, this came to mind, in particular the following:
Seen some years ago, it’s an episode that lingers.
But hey, just like you. So no biggie.
If anything, things have only gotten worse. He din do nuffin!
Scenes like the above, of which there were many, may explain why progressives disliked the series, dismissing it as “copaganda” – a term also used by the lawyer quoted in the post. I suspect the actual objection is not so much, as claimed, that the series portrayed the police in a sanitised or flattering light, as the officers were rarely the focus of the viewer’s attention.
The stars of each episode, if that’s the right word, were usually the lawbreakers. They, not the police, held the attention. They were generally the ones driving events, whether those events were alarming or farcical. And so, the series offered a glimpse into the mindset of the criminals – the recurring patterns of malevolence and selfishness – in their own words and by watching their own actions.
And obviously, we can’t have that. It makes pretentious sympathy much more difficult to muster.
A man can dream, can’t he?
This trap for burglars inexplicably reminds me of the final sentence of Mark Twain’s “The Facts Concerning the Recent Carnival of Crime in Connecticut”:
Isn’t it puzzling how liberal polices that encourage rampant crime will in turn lead normal people to think thoughts they never thought before even in jest?
And note the implication that liberals are not normal people.
In the view of leftists, it is verboten to notice that criminals have volition. One must always portray them as helpless victims buffeted about by chance and “injustice”.
In my former life, when I was a prosecution lawyer, I remember one defending solicitor saying to me “You know, they claim that prison doesn’t work and is not a deterrent. If that’s true, why is it that they all want to be let out on bail?”.
Science!
Busting the myth criminals don’t have agency.
Very much so. My memories of watching the series include just how often the ‘stars’ were authors of their own misery and degradation, to say nothing of their victims’ misery and degradation. That, the utter selfishness, and the failure, or refusal, to learn obvious lessons.
And yet we see endless excuse-making by progressives, who will perform farcical contortions to conjure excuses for the incorrigible, while expecting us to gush with sympathy, or pretend to gush with sympathy, for people who will never be inclined to repay the compliment. And who, given the chance, would fuck us over too.
See also the last item here.
Like the habitual criminals they excuse, the opinionators seem indifferent to just how morally grotesque their own behaviour is.
Re Cops, even back then…what was it, early-mid 1990’s? I was quite surprised that such a show ever got on the air. Of course it was Fox…but that was then-Fox. Even I was taken a bit aback at how many of the cops on the show casually referred to “good guys” and “bad guys”. But that was then-WTP. Not that he was a lefty but he was still much closer to his 20 years of schooling/propaganda/Narrative-ing.
A reason to go to Liverpool.
We started watching in, I think, the early 2000s, but the series first aired in 1989.
The Jewish Bible has no prison system – except as temporary holding before sentencing.
Prison is a complete disconnect from any personal responsibility to the damaged parties and society – it’s basically a suspension of normal socialization and its responsibilities. This is the exact opposite of what must be driven home to the criminal, namely:
-You are responsible for what you do.
-We are not going away – you must accommodate us, not the other way round.
Biblical/Rabbinic law assesses damages in 5 areas:
There is no concept of incapacitation by drugs or alcohol as a mitigating factor.
For major crimes it is typically not possible for the criminal to pay the assessed damages. So they are “sold” into indentured service. Which means:
This system does a much better job of getting those messages through – you are responsible and you must live among us – while providing missed socialization opportunities and lessons.
The system pays for itself, rather than society paying for warehouses that breed more criminality.
There is recompense for the victims.
There is strong, publicly present deterrence and social pressure.
For criminals who progress to murder/manslaughter:
Watched many episodes of US show “The First 48” about investigations of homicides. Number 1 cause of murder: robbery or carjacking. Either victim fought back or they just shot for good measure. Sometimes mugger got killed. No. 2 cause: personal beef, often for no known reason. Then you have drivebys (a beef or turf war) where a bystander gets shot, a woman owes her drug dealer $20, a guy is twirling a gun around, ex girlfriend killed out of jealousy. No remorse. No planning. Race of perp: 90% black, some hispanic, some white.
“You chose to get drunk, knowing what drunkenness can lead to.”
That is true of a very large fraction of today’s criminals, as illustrated by the repeated reminders that it is useless for victims to sue them to recover medical costs (much less pain and suffering.)
But I suppose it would be politically unwise to suggest a reconsideration of the ancient Jewish system.
Wouldn’t be prudent.
Incarceration is a one-person-at-a-time crime deterrent and recidivism prevention strategy.
Reform may, or may not be possible and it depends almost entirely on the individual in question. No studies, no track records, no programs or intervention strategies prove anything but that.
And that’s PERFECTLY FINE with 99% of Americans. It’s a bargain we’d all take, every day.
If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.
Simple as that.
Under the viking system, major crimes could lead to one becoming an “outlaw”–literally outside the law. This meant anyone could rob you or kill you and not be punished. Not sure if murder was in that category.
Let’s not go berserk, now.
Of the hundreds of neighbors, friends, and co-workers I know, not one has ever been to jail or even arrested. There are different cultures involved.
Apparently you don’t that many Americans. Even cops. Cops are far more “Lock it or lose it”. That was their mantra in the town I just left in central Florida. And to a significant degree the town next door to that one that I lived in 10 years prior. I mentioned to a cop that I preferred the old system of “Can’t do the crime, don’t do the time”. He didn’t seem to like my point.
My wife has a bit of a thing about meeting new people. Also when something…interesting…happens to people we know. I don’t like it but…you might be surprised what is available with open records. Though it might be more of a Florida thing. Also… I’m guessing you don’t hang out in pool halls or associate with any poker players.
Science!
Yep, I had a few words to say about Mx Neil.
Likewise nobody I know nowadays: Those I choose to associate are so boringly bourgeois. But I can think of a few that I used to slightly know long long ago: One was black, the child of a first failed marriage, and her parents were not at all criminal so I assume she was tempted by relations from the first marriage. One was an immigrant who decided to supplement his legal income by dealing dope. One was a brain-dead California commie who decided it would be a good idea to break into an Air Force base and try to bang hammers on airplanes for World Peace.
I have commented before on the fools who worship Neil DeGrasse Tyson as if he were an Oracle of All Truths: This reveals a lack of judgment and maturity that is common in the “I F*cking Love Science” (IFLS) crowd.
But I strongly suspect that this fanboy worship is an important factor in Tyson’s steadily increasing arrogance.
And besides, what special qualifications does a mediocre astrophysicist have to comment on biology, human sexuality, psychology, abnormal psychology, and so on?
For instance: Two blacks randomly attack two Muslim women in Milwaukee. And that’s supposed to be a very nice, very safe area. No matter when you write about black racism and violence, there will be a news item about it that very same day.
Immigrant Negasi Zuberi has culturally enriched America by kidnapping a woman and making her his sex slave in a home-made dungeon. But liberals will angrily insist that everyone around the world is “just like us”.
‘I will f’n taze you in the nuts!’ It’s tempting to like, but That Would Be Wrong.
“There ain’t nothing you can do”,
rooftop Koreansbroomstick Sikhs didn’t get the message.Heh. When I worked at a *major defense contractor*, big big engineering firm (cough, cough) I caused a bit of a kerfuffle by making a slightly disparaging comment in regards to NdGT. Nothing nasty, I just implied that I didn’t find him to be, you know, all that. My otherwise good/moderate relationship with a few younger cow-orkers never recovered. It was as if I had denied the divinity of Christ. Actually…If I had denied the divinity of Christ I probably would have been more accepted.
“But I suppose it would be politically unwise to suggest a reconsideration of the ancient Jewish system.”
Now try saying that about Sharia law and see what happens.
Quite. We have an industry geared to the inculcation of pretentious victimhood, not least in schools and universities, and its effects are not benign:
And note the professor’s response, and peevishness, when some students politely demurred and chose not to play along. A professor, by the way, who delights in categorising students as “dark-skinned,” “medium-skinned” and so forth.
Re the above, in the archive you’ll find more vivid examples of the effects.
Jailed in the Bastille for stealing a loaf of bread for their starving sister; or sent to the Wall for stealing a wheel of cheese for same (GRR Martin). Now they’re stealing medicine for their sickly children…
Via @K_Niemietz
https://twitter.com/guardianopinion/status/1687030183319285760
From ftumch’s link
OK, Owen Jones, so the whole thing should be rejected out of hand, but this is just a boilerplate article ignoring the obvious and often stated, the more that is stolen, the more expensive things get, the more they get locked down, the more they are unavailable, rinse and repeat.
The bigger thing is the complete refusal of the left, as has been stated here, to accept that everything is not someone else’s fault, or the fault of powers beyond their control, or to punish obvious offenders. For instance…
Right. Needed to drink and drive a semi. Get thee behind me demon beer.
Right reasonable accommodation for a “disability”. ”First shalt thou take out the Holy 12 Pack. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count and nine is right out…”
The left’s whole approach is the old “better 99 guilty go free than one innocent suffer” on steroids.
Those poor hardworking shoplifters emptying the shelves to sell it all down the pub.
So, according to Mr Jones, expecting persistent shoplifters to face consequences for their actions is now among “the worst instincts of the electorate.” Because shoplifters are “traumatised,” apparently,
If thieving is so easily excused, perhaps Mr Jones would be good enough to publish his home address, the whereabouts of any valuables, and the times when he’s likely to be out. Or does our nasty socialist dolt only disdain other people’s property?