Category: Popular

Categories
ballot access education and schooling folly ideological culture media and media people Popular responsibility

Fiddling with the Franchise

voting age, democracy, elections, adult, maturity

In 2013, Tacoma Park, Maryland, became the first place in the U.S. to allow 16-​year-​olds to vote in local elections.* Now, Washington, D.C., Councilman Charles Allen, “inspired by the high-​schoolers who are campaigning for gun control and filled D.C. streets last month in a massive protest that mesmerized the country,” reports the Washington Post, wants to follow suit.

“It’s pretty hard for anyone to watch the events of the last couple of months,” claims Councilman Allen, “and not understand the pure power and maturity of incredibly young voices.”

Well, they do use adult words.

One has to wonder: would the “maturity” of these young adults equally amaze this politician, were they advocating opinions** with which he disagreed?

But wait a second … wasn’t one of the demands of the “March for Our Lives” to raise, not lower, the age when a person would be deemed mature enough to legally purchase a scary-​looking rifle?

Lowering the voting age seems odd, at best, with society lurching in the other direction — raising the age of adulthood for everything else. Decades ago, the legal age to purchase alcohol was 18 in some places; today it is 21 everywhere. In Virginia, one may still drive at 16, as I could back in the day … but now there are limits on other young people riding in the car unless the driver is 18.

More ominously, facilitation by many public schools of the recent student walkouts and marches present the strongest argument against lowering the voting age: So long as government schools act in a partisan manner, indoctrination and intimidation would be rampant. 

Who wants a captive audience of would-​be voters most? 

Unscrupulous ideologues.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

* Greenbelt and Hyattsville, Maryland, as well as Berkeley, California, have since joined Tacoma Park in allowing 16- and 17-​year-​olds to vote in local elections.

** Term limits, say. Or school vouchers. Or the rights of gestating humans.

PDF for printing

 

Categories
Accountability general freedom ideological culture media and media people Popular term limits

Let There Be Light

Washington Post, Democracy, term limits,

The Washington Post sports a new masthead slogan: “Democracy Dies in Darkness,.”

A story in last Sunday’s Metro section suggests that the editors are yet to fully implement the slogan’s implicit mission — providing impartial, unbiased illumination. “Term limits for Maryland legislators?” reads the headline. “Here’s why that’s unlikely,” it immediately answers.

“Term limits seem highly popular in Maryland,” begin the article. 

Seem?

What produces that elusive sensory perception? I mean, other than every poll ever taken and, as the Post elaborates, “Voters in the state’s two largest jurisdictions, Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, strongly endorsed them at the polls in recent years.” 

Add to that three other counties, which had previously enacted term limits, the paper informs.

Still, the idea is “widely considered dead on arrival.” 

Why? you ask.

“It’s very difficult,” explains Gov. Larry Hogan, “to convince people to willingly give up their power.” 

“People” not as in “the People” but, instead, such as Senate President Mike Miller, a 46-​year incumbent and the Senate boss for three decades running, and Speaker Mike Busch, a 31-​year incumbent and the longest serving speaker in state history.

But wait … why didn’t politicians in those five Maryland counties block term limits like state legislators “likely” will? Did their lack of experience cause them to forget to be self-​serving jerks?

No. Counties in Maryland have a ballot initiative process whereby citizens can petition term limits directly to a democratic vote. Their elected servants simply cannot ignore them. 

The Post piece could have pointed out that very difference — between the democratic outcomes in those counties and an unrepresentative one at the state capitol. 

It did not.

Democracy dies in darkness.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

 

Categories
Accountability crime and punishment folly general freedom local leaders moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies Popular privacy Regulating Protest too much government

The Last Straw

plastic straws, nanny state, fine, crime, California, freedom

How much should we fine waiters who destroy our planet?

For how long should they go to jail?

I don’t know where you would hold such an evildoer after the earth has been destroyed. Or where he’d go when released. But we’re speaking hypothetically. Assume that planet-​destroyers can be imprisoned on the moon, which let’s just say still orbits the earth’s decimated remains. Or assume that after being destroyed, the planet can be reconstructed. After serving his sentence, then, the waiter would be released to a reconstructed earth.

In that case, a maximum $1,000 fine as suggested by Ian Calderon, Democratic majority leader of the California State Assembly, seems only fair. However, a maximum of six months in jail is excessive. In my opinion, planet-​destroying waiters should suffer no more than 100 days in jail.

Calderon has proposed a bill, AB-​1884, to fine and/​or imprison waiters who offer unsolicited plastic straws to restaurant patrons. In response to criticism of his silly and vicious bill, Calderon says hey, it’s “NOT a ban” on straws! Oh, okay. Anyway, “Penalties are based on the code section the bill is currently in, which it will be amended out of,” which sounds like Calderon was prior to the uproar … what, joking?

As long as we’re amending, let me amend my own implication that people who offer, use, make or sell plastic straws* are in fact helping destroy earth. Just kidding!

The earth will survive plastic straws. Will it survive the Calderons of the world? 

Open question.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

* Not that I’m confirming or denying ever using one myself. 

PDF for printing

 

Categories
general freedom ideological culture media and media people Popular

Memed Into the Public Domain?

Matt Furie, meme, Pepe, alt-right, frog, copyright

When the definitive history of the 2016 presidential election is written, the central figure may turn out to be … a frog.

“Pepe,” to be precise.

The cartoon frog with red lips started out as a minor figure in a Matt Furie webcomic, but came to symbolize so much more.

“This iconic amphibian has been labeled a Nazi, condemned by a presidential candidate, and now is at the center of an important First Amendment battle in an era of unlimited replication, imitation, and mutation,” writes Zach Weissmueller in a highly entertaining story in Reason. “It’s a fight that involves the alt-​right, Trump voters, a powerful Washington, D.C.-based law firm, and the anonymous online image board 4chan.…”

Mike Cernovich, the pro-​Trump, anti-​SJW publicity artist, has found himself at the center of the legal controversy. He’s hired a lawyer.

Oddly — or maybe not, politics and culture wars being what they are — the lawyer for Pepe’s creator makes much of the alt-​right/​hate group usages of Pepe:

“You can’t copy other people’s ideas and claim free speech,” says Tompros. “[The alt-​right is] absolutely free to spout hate in some other form. We just don’t want them using Pepe the Frog to do it.”

Contra Furie’s lawyer, you are allowed to copy others’ ideas in a free society. Copyright is something a bit narrower. Trickier.

This fight over the satirical use of a Trickster figure may turn out to be a legal and cultural landmark. “Fair use” could come to mean what Mr. Cernovich’s lawyer argues, ideas “memed into the public domain.”

Meanwhile, to the many causes of Hillary Clinton’s cruel fate in 2016, we can add a cartoon frog.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Categories
Accountability folly free trade & free markets general freedom ideological culture media and media people moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies Popular responsibility

Don’t Think Different

Apple, “vice president of diversity and inclusion,” Denise Smith race, equality, diversity, hiring,

What do we know for sure about the resignation of Apple’s “vice president of diversity and inclusion,” Denise Smith?

  1. She is a black woman who landed in hot water for saying that a group of blue-​eyed blond men can also be “diverse,” because “they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation. Diversity is the human experience. I get a little bit frustrated when diversity … is tagged to the people of color, or the women, or the LGBT.”
  2. An uproar ensued among persons who favor making characteristics like sex and skin color — as opposed to talent, perseverance, intellect — a top priority in hiring. 
  3. Smith then apologized, seeming to disparage her own correct and much-​needed statement defending genuinely relevant diversity. 
  4. She has left Apple.

What outsiders don’t know for sure is whether Apple asked Smith to leave because of what she said. We can be merely 99.99 percent sure that Apple requested her departure for making her excessively un-​same and sane observation. 

Not good, Apple.

Excellence and common sense should never be sacrificed to “diversity.” Sub-​perfect “diversity” has not impaired Apple’s ability to make popular and effective smartphones bought by persons of every description.

Indeed, no company should be in the least concerned with promoting “diversity” if this means trying to increase the proportions of employees of a certain race, sex, weight, height, blood type, timbre, etc. even when such traits are blatantly irrelevant to prospective job performance. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

 

Categories
Accountability crime and punishment folly general freedom ideological culture media and media people moral hazard national politics & policies Popular

Yesterday’s NOW

National Organization for Women, NOW, Toni Van Pelt,, sexual assault, hate speech, Southern Poverty Law Center

Once upon a time, the National Organization for Women winked to President Bill Clinton and scorned his accusers Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, and others. This all came back to me while discussing powerful men sexually harassing and assaulting women, at Townhall yesterday.

NOW’s current president, Toni Van Pelt, spoke with the Washington Examiner regarding recent allegations against liberal Sen. Al Franken (D‑Minn.). Not to be outdone by the group’s partisan or pusillanimous past (take your pick), Van Pelt offered, “We could ask all of the men in Congress to resign, is that what you’re asking me?” 

She added, going all in, “You know that mostly all men do this kind of thing to women. It’s like saying there’s a good airline or a good bank, saying there’s some entity out there that is not sexist.”

Say what?

“That’s gender bias and stereotyping of the most egregious kind,” writes ethicist Jack Marshall at his Ethics Alarms blog. “I just expect the champions of equality, fairness, mutual respect and civility to believe in and live by the principles they claim so indignantly and self-​righteously to be fighting for.”

And not scapegoat all men. 

Yet NOW’s Madame Defarge declares: “They all should resign, every man in every industry.”

Marshall knows how to categorize such talk: “Under the definition of ‘hate group’ used by the Southern Poverty Law Center — ‘any group with beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people’ — Toni Van Pelt, speaking on behalf of her organization, has demonstrated that the National Organization for Women belongs on its list.”

Blaming an entire sex, while excusing the actual abusers … should end NOW.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing