Why public education?

Do you really want public medicine to replace private options?  Or public housing?  Or public transportation?  Makes you think.  Why public education?  

If you have access to the WSJ, read the article in its entirety.

Is the Public School System Constitutional?

Education consists mostly in speech, and parents have a right under the First Amendment to exercise authority over what their children hear.

Wall Street Journal Opinion By Philip Hamburger. Oct. 22, 2021

Excerpts: 

The public school system weighs on parents. It burdens them not simply with poor teaching and discipline, but with political bias, hostility toward religion, and now even sexual and racial indoctrination. Schools often seek openly to shape the very identity of children. What can parents do about it?

Public education in America has always attempted to homogenize and mold the identity of children. Since its largely nativist beginnings around 1840, public education has been valued for corralling most of the poor and middle class into institutions where their religious and ethnic differences could be ironed out in pursuit of common “American” values.

The goal was not merely a shared civic culture. Well into the 20th century, much of the political support for public schooling was driven by a fear of Catholicism and an ambition to Protestantize Catholic children. Many Catholics and other minorities escaped the indoctrination of their children by sending them to private schools. 

Nativists found that intolerable. Beginning around 1920, they organized to force Catholic children into public education. The success of such a measure in Oregon (with Democratic votes and Ku Klux Klan leadership) prompted the Supreme Court to hold compulsory public education unconstitutional.

The case, Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), was brought by a religious school, not a parent. The justices therefore framed their ruling around the threat to the school’s economic rights. But Pierce says that parents can educate their children outside state schools in accord with the parents’ moral and religious views.

Although the exact nature of this parental freedom is much disputed, it is grounded in the First Amendment. When religious parents claim the freedom, religious liberty seems an especially strong foundation. But the freedom of parents in educating their children belongs to all parents, not only the faithful. Freedom of speech more completely explains this educational liberty.

Education consists mostly in speech to and with children. Parents enjoy freedom of speech in educating their children, whether at home or through private schooling. That is the principle underlying Pierce, and it illuminates our current conundrum.

The public school system, by design, pressures parents to substitute government educational speech for their own. Public education is a benefit tied to an unconstitutional condition. Parents get subsidized education on the condition that they accept government educational speech in lieu of home or private schooling.

When government makes education compulsory and offers it free of charge, it crowds out parental freedom in educational speech. The poorer the parents, the more profound the pressure—and that is by design. Nativists intended to pressure poor and middle-class parents into substituting government educational speech for their own, and their unconstitutional project largely succeeded.

These precedents concern only religion in public schools and the coercive effect on children under the Establishment Clause. But the danger of coerced belief is not confined to official religious speech. Subjecting children to official political, racial, sexual and antireligious speech can be equally coercive. And if public-school messages are so coercive against children, it is especially worrisome that parents are being pressured to adopt public educational speech in place of their own.

In their freedom, the 18th-century schools established a common culture. In contrast, public-school coercion has always stimulated division. It was long used to grind down the papalism of Catholic children into something more like Protestantism. Since then, there has been a shift in the beliefs that public schools seek to eradicate. But the schools remain a means by which some Americans force their beliefs on others. That’s why they are still a source of discord. The temptation to indoctrinate the children of others—to impose a common culture by coercion—is an obstacle to working out a genuine common culture.

There is no excuse for maintaining the nativist fiction that public schools are the glue that hold the nation together. They have become the focal point for all that is tearing the nation apart. However good some public schools may be, the system as a whole, being coercive, is a threat to our ability to find common ground. That is the opposite of a compelling government interest.

The public school system therefore is unconstitutional, at least as applied to parents who are pressured to abandon their own educational speech choices and instead adopt the government’s.

Mr. Hamburger teaches at Columbia Law School and is president of the New Civil Liberties Alliance.

Printed houses

 Curious way to build a house.  Will this make homes more abundant and affordable? Only if government frees up land to build on.  But don’t count on tat happening any time soon. 

In the political establishment’s current climate crisis mode of thinking, single family homes are out, no matter how much people want to own a patch of land and a home of their own.  Climate alarmists demand more compact, dense dwelling units in high-rise urban developments - planners don’t even call them homes any more.  :-(

Best part of the article is the Comment section - see a few below.

3-D Printed Houses Are Sprouting Near Austin as Demand for Homes Grows

Project would be biggest 3-D printed housing development in U.S

Wall Street Journal   By 

 Oct. 26, 2021

A major home builder is teaming with a Texas startup to create a community of 100 3-D printed homes near Austin, gearing up for what would be by far the biggest development of this type of housing in the U.S.

Lennar Corp. and construction-technology firm Icon are poised to start building next year at a site in the Austin metro area, the companies said. While Icon and others have built 3-D printed housing before, this effort will test the technology’s ability to churn out homes and generate buyer demand on a much larger scale.

“We’re sort of graduating from singles and dozens of homes to hundreds of homes,” said Jason Ballard, Icon’s chief executive.

If 3-D printing succeeds at this more ambitious level, it could offer a response to America’s chronic shortage of homes for sale, especially in the affordable price range. Mortgage-finance company Freddie Mac estimated that the national deficit of single-family homes stood at 3.8 million units at the end of 2020.

Icon’s 3-D printed houses use concrete framing instead. Its 15.5-foot-tall printers can build the exterior and interior wall system for a 2,000-square-foot, one-story house in a week, Mr. Ballard said. The printer squeezes out concrete in layers, like toothpaste out of a tube. The machines can print curved walls, allowing for more creative house designs, he added.

Comments:

Homes will be sold for market price, no matter what they cost to build. That means,  in Austin,  they will NOT be 'affordable.'  Think for just a minute,  why a market like Austin was chosen in the first place. The biggest reason 'affordable' housing is in short supply, according to numerous WSJ articles,  is government regulations...another reason a red state was chosen.

Pricing for new construction will still depend upon the cost of buildable land.  Politicians, planners and environmentalists have kept vast amounts of land locked up and out of reach to home builders for years forcing lot prices into the stratosphere.  Despite the fact that most home buyers want a detached, single-family home in the suburbs, their betters want them to live in dense, compact dwelling units, preferably mixed-use high-rise. In walkable, vibrant neighborhoods.  That disconnect comes at a steep price.  Do home purchasers understand how much the market has been manipulated by bureaucrats to keep them out?  

actually, home buyers are kept out of neighborhoods by existing homeowners. Bureaucrats do what their constituents tell them to. 

From my experience, politicians are more likely to listen to bureaucrats like city administrators and planners and developers far more than mere citizens.  The residents who want to preserve large lots are being out-voiced by those who want to cram in more dwelling units per acre. Unfortunately their dream of lower housing costs does not materialize because the market sets the price and the supply of land - even by chopping up the suburbs- isn’t going to offer enough supply to meet demand.  Only when the older generation dies in greater numbers will there be relief.  

ESG: Another elitist guilt trap

 If feeling guilty about being prosperous makes you feel good - if you are a corrupt billionaire seeking redemption - or if you are just an ordinary masochistic, then you will love ESG - the latest thing to take the sting out of traditional American capitalism.  The Leftist Marxists have been trying for eons to persuade us that capitalism is all about greed and exploitation of the working class.  The failure of our educational system to adequately teach the benefits of the free market is a tragedy that allows things like ESG to flourish with little pushback.  Don’t be lured into playing this creepy mind game.  Educate yourself and others around you about why this new-fangled term for old-fashioned wealth redistribution will leave everyone (except the elites who push the concept) worse off.  

What is ESG?  ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL & GOVERNANCE for investments.  To learn more, listen to this 5-min. discussion of  ESG on this Prager U podcast:  

                          ESG: Woke To Broke

Better yet, watch Andy Puzder give his short talk on a video on the Prager U website:

ESG: Woke to Broke

5-Minute Videos  ⋅  Andy Puzder  ⋅  October 18, 2021  

What’s more important for a company: to make a profit, or to do “social good?” More and more companies seem to be focusing on the latter. But is that a good business strategy? And, what does that mean for the economy, for you… and your bank account?

WHOSE TREES? Yours, Mine or Ours?

 

We’ve been here before, but things keep getting worse.  As time goes on, homeowners may be forgiven for believing that the government government or their neighbors or the general collective owns the trees on their property.  It doesn’t matter if they purchased the trees, planted them, water them, prune, fertilize and nurture them, there is a creeping sense of power and control outside entities are claiming over our private property rights.  We may own the land and the house, but do we really own the trees and plants on the lot?  

Next Saturday, October 30, there is another Lake Oswego Tree Summit — A conference about the importance and rights of trees in OUR urban forest. The summit is sponsored by the Lake Oswego Watershed Council and the Lake Oswego Sustainability Network - two of a number of environmental groups in our area claiming primacy over public opinion and environmental morality.  No matter that this (or any) group doesn’t reflect the feelings and thinking of a majority of the residents and property owners in the city, theirs will be the voice that is heard above the silent populace that don’t even know they exist and wouldn’t agree with them even if they did.  Most people don’t have the time to be activists and want to be left alone to enjoy their lives and their property unmolested by busybodies and politicians with a burning desire to save the world, starting at home - usually  someone else’s home — yours and mine.  

Notice how many times the Tree Summit sponsors refer to the trees in the city as OUR urban forest and a level of hubris about who is supposed to be resilient and responsible or reciprocate (how and for what?) regarding trees that may belong to other people. What level of control over public or non-public trees are they after? What regulations are in store for private property owners?  Notice too that the City of Lake Oswego is involved in this Summit, so any conclusions resulting from the discussions, regardless of how one-sided, will be heard by the City Council and interpreted as a “community” consensus about OUR urban forest.  BS.

If you haven’t read the LO tree codes lately, settle in for a long, depressing slog — another single-sided community effort to control other people’s trees.  

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

2021 Lake Oswego Tree Summit

Sustaining Our Urban Forest:

Resilience, Responsibility and Reciprocity in a Changing Climate

As stewards of our urban forests, you are invited to attend and participate in the third annual Lake Oswego Tree Summit, a free, community-led event to learn more about the trees in our community. Registration is required.

The Tree Summit will include discussions on climate threats to our urban forest and ways we can steward the urban forest from soil to canopy.

Join us in this interactive Tree Summit to find out how trees can be a significant part in addressing climate change, to enhance your arboreal knowledge and learn about science-based stewardship practices to promote the ecological health of our urban forest. The latest LiDAR scan of the city's tree canopy coverage will also be shared by the City of Lake Oswego.

And then there’s old Beaufort.

 

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 

The Beaufort Wind Force Scale

The Beaufort scale, officially known as the Beaufort wind force scale, is a descriptive table. It depicts the force of wind by a series of numbers from 0 to 12. Actually, the Beaufort scale goes all the way to 17, but the last five numbers only apply to tropical typhoons. These numbers are only used in the areas around China and Taiwan.

The Beaufort scale is useful for estimating wind power without wind instruments.

0: Calm and still — Smoke rises vertically.

1. Light winds at 1-5 kph (1-3 mph) — Smoke drift shows wind direction.

2. Light breeze at 6-11 kph (4-7 mph) — Wind can be felt on face, flag ripples.

3. Gentle breeze at 12-19 kph (8-12 mph) — Flag waves.

4. Gentle breeze at 20-28 kph (13-18 mph) — Paper and leaves are scattered.

5. Fresh breeze at 29-38 kph (19-24 mph) — Small trees sway, whitecaps form on waves.

6. Strong breeze at 39-49 kph (25-31 mph) — Umbrellas are hard to use, large branches on trees move.

7. Moderate gale at 50-61 kph (32-38 mph) — Trees sway, walking in the wind is difficult.

8. Fresh gale at 62-74 kph (39-46 mph) — Twigs and branches break off of trees.

9. Strong gale at 75-88 kph (47-54 mph) — Roof tiles blow off buildings.

10. Whole gale at 89-102 kph (55-63 mph) — Trees are uprooted.

11. Storm at 103-118 kph (64-73 mph) — Widespread damage to vegetation and buildings, nearly no visibility at sea.

12. Hurricane at 119-220 kph (74-136 mph) — Category 1 hurricane, Category 1 tornado. Widespread destruction.

Hurricane Warning
Hurricane warnings are issued when winds reach 12 on the Beaufort scale. But actual hurricane categories are determined by different factors. A 12 on the Beaufort scale is a Category 1 (lowest level) hurricane, but a 13 on the Beaufort scale is not Category 2 it’s  actually much, much stronger.

It’s a blustery day out there!

 Just how blustery is it? 

Sailflow website is for sailors in the Portland area. Click on the Ink below 

to see what the wind is doing now. 

https://www.sailflow.com/spot/589

Gusts today are up to 33 mph!

“Demand destruction”

 A new term for an old way to control the masses: instead of allowing a free market to provide goods and services people want and need, government can regulate a commodity so severely that it becomes too expensive for consumers to purchase.  

This form of social engineering is practiced by a number of ideologically-driven groups - Climate Change activists and Degrowthers chief among them.  If they can limit supplies of fossil fuels, they congratulate themselves for saving the Earth regardless of the negative impacts on humans. 

Diehard activists rarely consider the unintended consequences of their ideas, and if they do their end goal justifies any means necessary. For many of these folks, the idea of mass starvation, increased poverty or societal upheaval is an acceptable price to pay for the damage humans have caused to the planet.  People be damned! The Earth will be better off with fewer humans.  

Be prepared for the rise of the Climate Warriors. There is an entire generation of indoctrinated Millennials and more in the pipeline who can’t possibly know what destruction and misery looks like, or in what ways human nature will ultimately prevail over their Utopian fantasies.  

 The rising price of fossil fuels is a political decision.  It is purposeful and it is cruel.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Natural-Gas Sticker Shock Is Coming to Your Dinner Table and Commute

Expensive natural gas is having all sorts of cascading effects, some of which may only show up next year 

Wall Street Journal  By Jinjoo Lee, 10/25/21 (Excerpts)

High nat­ural-gas prices to­day mean your elec-tric­ity and heat­ing bills will likely be ex­pen­sive this win­ter. Next year, it could mean you will end up pay­ing more to eat and to fill up your car.  

In Eu­rope, where nat­ural gas is al­most six times as ex­pen­sive as it was a year ear­lier, fer­til­izer com­pa­nies—in­clud­ing Nor­we­gian com­pany Yara, as well as BASF and Bo­re­alis—have an­nounced cur­tail-ments as a re­sult of ex­pen­sive gas. Fer­til-izer pro­duc­tion in the re­gion has dropped as much as 40% as a re­sult of tight sup­plies, ac­cord-ing to CME Group. Nat­ural gas can ac­count for up to 85% of the pro­duc­tion cost of am­mo­nia, a key in­gre­di-ent for many fer­til­iz­ers, ac­cord­ing to es­ti­mates from the U.S. De­part-ment of Agri­cul­ture.

The ef­fect on food might not end there. High nat­ural-gas prices al­ready have made ni­tro­gen-based fer­til­iz-ers more ex­pen­sive, with both am­mo­nia and urea prices in the U.S. roughly tripling com-pared with a year ear-lier, ac­cord­ing to data from ICIS.

Adding to the rally, China, one of the world’s largest fer­til-izer ex­porters, is said to be im­pos­ing curbs on ship­ments, ac­cord­ing to a re­port re­leased last Tues­day on Bloomberg.

High fer­til­izer prices would have rip­ple ef­fects. Any­thing that makes corn ex­pen­sive could show up in the prices of pantry sta­ples such as ce­real and cook­ing oil, not to men­tion meat be­cause corn is the main in­gre­di-ent in live­stock feed.

More­over, it could in­crease prices at the pump if it raises ethanol prices; most gaso­line sold in the U.S. to­day con­tains some ethanol as a re­sult of Re­new­able Fuel Stan-dard reg­u­la­tions. In Eu­rope, fur­ther cur­tail-ments of fer­til­izer plants would also im-pact the sup­plies of an ex­haust fluid known as Ad­Blue that is used to help neu­tral­ize diesel emis­sions.

In­dus­trial de­mand for nat­ural gas seems dis­pos­able un­til it starts af­fect­ing food sup­plies. It is also a re­minder of just how in­ex­tri­ca­bly the world’s in­dus­tries—even those that help curb emis-sions—are still tied to fos­sil fu­els.

This win­ter’s big chill could be felt far, long and wide.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Man-made famines have ravaged our world for centuries - unnecessary suffering designed by elites to further their notions of a perfected society, climate or political control.  What is the fate of America if those currently in control continue abusing their power?  

  

  

Uh Oh!

 

Monkey see, monkey do.  

If Seattle (King County)has a bad idea, how long before Portland (or Oregon) follows suit?  

If single-party California or any of its deep blue cities have a bad idea, how long before someone in Oregon notices and tries to one-up them as more woke-than-thou with crushing new regulations?   

Oregon cannot keep digging a deeper hole of government overreach that  buries our individual freedoms. Let’s hope a vaccine passport is not introduced here.  I would be encouraged if the Oregon legislature banned them altogether. Are they brave enough to stand for freedom?  Or continue lemming-like racing toward for the anti-American cultural cliff? 

PS: I will not be visiting or stopping in Seattle or any place that requires vaccine passports. Time to start undoing our regulatory morass instead and become free Oregonians again.  

Here's what you need to know about King County's COVID vaccine or test requirement starting Oct. 25

Alec Regimbal, SeattlePI

Oct. 5, 2021Updated: Oct. 23, 2021

Starting Oct. 25, patrons entering most indoor businesses in King County will be required to show proof of being fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or submit a negative COVID test. 

King County health officials and elected leaders announced the order last month, saying it was a logical next step in combating the spread of the coronavirus — 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Places that BAN vaccine passports:

Newsweek

The U.S. States Where Covid Vaccine Mandates Are Banned and Allowed

BY ED BROWNE ON 10/20/21 

And a total of 21 states ban 'vaccine passports' to some extent according to NASHP, though the extent to which this is enforced will vary. These states are Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Arkansas, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Alaska, Mississippi, Indiana, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina.

Some states have gone in the other direction. In New York City, for example, everyone aged 12 or above is required to show identification and proof of at least one vaccine dose if they want to access establishments for indoor dining, nightclubs, coffee shops, and bars.

This also includes gyms, movie theaters, and music venues. It's called the Key to NYC and also means employees at these establishments must be vaccinated.

Passports are also in place in Hawaii and California, according to NASHP.

Freedom! Yum!

 Fight government overreach - support businesses that support freedom.  Tastes good, feels good too! 

American Thinker

October 24, 2021

Resistance with a side of fries

By Dave Matthews

As destiny would have it, America's grand champion in the fight against vaccine mandates emerged recently from an unexpected place: In-N-Out Burger.  Not only is In-N-Out Burger empirically a good meal at a great price, but the restaurant appears more than willing to put its beliefs into action. Indeed, in one of the bluest areas of the bluest of states, one brave In-N-Out Burger refused to be the "vaccine police" and was shut down for its convictions (note: it has since re-opened).

Shortly after In-N-Out Burger made its stand, news started coming out that Chick-fil-A was also taking a stand, with signs appearing nationwide in its stores stating that it would "not discriminate against unvaccinated, religion, race, sex, vaccinated, maskless, mask" and that "all neighbors are welcome."

Why meritocracy matters

 Current demands for racial equity in all facets of American economic and cultural life can only end in mediocrity or worse.  The path to real progress, excellence and fairness rests with rewarding and elevating individuals based on merit.  Our medical care is now at risk of plunging into chaos and a lowered level of care from the American Medical Association itself as it veers heavily into CRT.

The concept of using logic and objective measures to determine what works, and valuing excellence and achievement appears to be disappearing, replaced by some dopey, emotional, racist ideology that has nothing to do with reality.  I don’t know about you, but the fact that so many people are falling under the spell of this illogical Marxist garbage is very scary. 
Here are a couple of articles you will most likely not see in the mainstream media that should scare your socks off!  I have posted excerpts, but you should really read both articles in their entirety.

From American Thinker

June 4, 2021

'Woke' medicine is coming to a hospital near you

By Andrea Widburg

 According to Katie Herzog, writing at Bari Weiss's Substack blog, Critical Race Theory is aggressively intruding on physicians' ability to treat patients, do research, or train the next generation of doctors.

Herzog's "What Happens When Doctors Can't Tell the Truth?" examines a world in which doctors are silenced for fear that they will be destroyed professionally should they run afoul of the Critical Race Theory infecting medical care across America and in which young doctors, imbued with "anti-racist" zeal, have the whip hand.  Herzog begins her article by describing a super-secret Zoom group of a dozen physicians across America, who serve as a support group for each other as they navigate the totalitarian world of woke medicine:

This dogma goes by many imperfect names — wokeness, social justice, critical race theory, anti-racism — but whatever it's called, the doctors say this ideology is stifling critical thinking and dissent in the name of progress. They say that it's turning students against their teachers and patients and racializing even the smallest interpersonal interactions. Most concerning, they insist that it is threatening the foundations of patient care, of research, and of medicine itself.

"People are afraid to speak honestly," said a doctor who immigrated to the U.S. from the Soviet Union. "It's like back to the USSR, where you could only speak to the ones you trust." If the authorities found out, you could lose your job, your status, you could go to jail or worse. The fear here is not dissimilar. 

 As another example of the generation gap, an ER doctor on the West Coast said he sees providers, particularly younger ones, applying antiracist principles in choosing how they allocate their time and which patients they choose to work with.  "I've heard examples of Covid-19 cases in the emergency department where providers go, 'I'm not going to go treat that white guy, I'm going to treat the person of color instead because whatever happened to the white guy, he probably deserves it.'"

The only way to stand up to what's happening is through collective action.  Woke people, drunk with power and the urge to avenge wrongs that predate their births, quickly form mobs that surround and destroy anyone who offends them.  The only way to end them is to out-mob them — and every American institution had better act quickly, or soon America will look like China at the height of its bloody Cultural Revolution.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

From The American Mind

Woke Medicine’s Critical Harm

Kenin M. Spivak

The American Medical Association has fallen into Marxist lockstep with Critical Race Theory.

As part of the American Medical Association’s (AMA) equity plan to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), the powerful lobbying group is sponsoring 100 virtual screenings of Black Men in White Coats. The thesis of this film—which improbably boasts the U.S. Army and Navy as “corporate sponsors”—is that blacks will “continue dying” unless there are more black doctors.

The AMA apparently believes there is a link between the underrepresentation of blacks among physicians, and the capacity of doctors of other races to care for black patients. Whites are also underrepresentedamong physicians. Yet, neither the documentary nor the AMA view this disparity as cause for a similar concern.

Black Men in White Coats is emblematic of how America’s oldest and most prestigious professional organization has adopted a radical agenda that places health care at risk by subordinating merit, individual empowerment, professional standards, and the Hippocratic Oath to “first do no harm.”

Achieving optimally equitable solutions requires disruption and dismantling of existing norms, collective advocacy, and action across sectors and disciplines.

In sum, the AMA intends to remake the 18 percent of the U.S. economy comprising its health sector by imposing a Marxist, racialized vision of a pure society.

The AMA has ruthlessly suppressed any debate of its policies.

Who Will be Permitted to Become Doctors under the AMA Plan?

In order to achieve the equality of outcome envisioned by the AMA, major changes will be required in medical school admissions and health care employment. These changes will be painful for many and the side effects even worse.

Only ONE kind of education allowed

What goes on in university academics trickles down to college students who take their education into future lives and jobs.  And some of those students become teachers who feel a righteous entitlement and maybe even moral imperative to pass on the DEI ideology they have internalized.  Is it too late to stop this train wreck?  Intimidation can be subtle, but we all know how powerful the social pressure to conform is.  How much of this groupthink is going on in our local schools?  

Jonathan Turley, himself a law professor at Georgetown University, tells of the fear and intimidation experienced by anyone who questions the prevailing ideology on college campuses nationwide. 

From Jonathan Turley’s blog:

Berkeley Physicist Resigns After Colleagues Block UChicago Professor from Speaking at Science Event

We recently discussed the cancelling of Dorian Abbot, an associate professor of geophysical sciences at the University of Chicago, who was prevented from speaking at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The reason was not the merits of his scientific work but his opposition to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs. Now, a climate physicist at Berkeley has resigned in protest of his colleagues also blocking Abbot from speaking. Professor  David Romps said in a Twitter thread that he resigned as director of the Berkeley Atmospheric Sciences Center rather than participate in such censorship of a fellow academic. With many academics fearful of the backlash over supporting free speech or academic freedom, Romps’ resignation was an increasingly rare profile in courage.

In August, [Dorian] Abbot co-authored a column in Newsweek headlined “The Diversity Problem on Campus.” He and his co-author Ivan Marinovic, an associate professor of accounting at Stanford Graduate School of Business, wrote “DEI violates the ethical and legal principle of equal treatment. It entails treating people as members of a group rather than as individuals, repeating the mistake that made possible the atrocities of the 20th century.”

There was a time when such a public declaration would have received widespread, if not universal support from any faculty. There was a time when free speech and academic freedom were the touchstones of higher education. This is not that time.

Academics today work in an atmosphere of intolerance for any opposing or dissenting views on subjects ranging from DEI to police abuse to social justice campaigns. Those who speak out are often targeted by cancel campaigns. The threat is that dissenter will lose everything that academics need to be active intellectuals.

“Enlightened despotism” vs individual rights

If you can’t do it yourself, get someone else to do it for you.  Keeps your hands clean but still gets the dirty work done.  The end justifies the means - in our quickly evolving totalitarian world.   

If one is publishing a point of view, how can that be “misinformation”?  He who controls language - the meaning of the words we use -  controls thought and action.  

 From Johnathan Turley’s legal blog —

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks

..Increased Corporate Controls to Protect Citizens From Their Own Dangerous Curiosities 

Two centuries ago, rulers sought to convince subjects that they should embrace the notion of “enlightened despotism,” living without rights under the beneficent watch of overlords. Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II summed up the idea with the maxim “everything for the people, nothing by the people.”

Today, we seem to be living in an age of enlightened corporate despotism, where social media and technology companies watch over what we read and what we discuss to protect us from ourselves.

Once considered unAmerican and authoritarian, censorship has become a rallying cry from the left. Indeed, a new poll shows roughly half of the public supports not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.”