liberty


Book discussion: It Can’t Happen Here   Recently updated !

Sinclair Lewis’s novel of an American dictatorship, It Can’t Happen Here, seems even more timely today than when it was published in 1935. It tells of the election of Buzz Windrip as president, his seizure of absolute power, and how it affects people.

Cover of It Can't Happen Here by Sinclair LewisWindrip is so Trump-like you might think Lewis had a crystal ball looking into our present. He aims for total control while posturing as an ordinary, unassuming person. His platform is incoherent, laced with bigotry while appealing to the “Forgotten Man.” His Cabinet selections are based on personal loyalty. He has a personal police force, the “Minute Men,” to intimidate his critics. He even has an advisor who is smarter and more ruthless than he is.

What make’s Windrip’s success possible is the complacency and indifference of the American people. As he plainly says he’s going to reduce Congress to an advisory capacity, people think he’s just going to fix the country up. The novel’s main focus isn’t on the centers of power but on Doremus Jessup, the publisher of a small Vermont newspaper who’s trying to make sense of it all. This lets Lewis show how people react to Windrip before and after his takeover. Once he’s in office, he immediately suppresses the legislative and judicial branches, which give him no further trouble.

Lewis had seen what had happened in twentieth-century Russia, Germany, and Italy. He knew the USA wasn’t immune. Reading the novel gives a better understanding of what’s happening — and what could happen — today.


Gagging social media in Methuen 4

The city of Methuen, Massachusetts, has adopted a resolution to restrict access to social media on city-owned devices. The announcement states that “City-owned devices and networks in City buildings and City-run youth programs will limit access to social media for minors under 16 whenever feasible.” This would clearly apply to Methuen’s Nevins Library, which provides computers for public use.

The statement has the tone of fanaticism that’s gone so far over the edge that it doesn’t even require yelling; of course every reasonable person will agree with it, won’t you? It’s FOR THE CHILDREN! The council favorably cites Australia’s total ban on use of social media by anyone under 16. The statement expresses hope for nationwide restrictions: “The Council also formally endorsed Mayor Beauregard’s commitment to advocate for state and federal policies that restrict social media access for children under 16 and strengthen youth digital safety protections nationwide.”

It’s the familiar idea that libraries should reject or restrict access to anything deemed “harmful to minors,” where “harmful” has a very broad definition. It’s the same mindset that demands they keep all books on certain topics away from kids’ eyes.

Nevins Memorial Library, Methuen, Mass.On Saturday I went to tne Nevins Library to find out how it’s going to be affected. The people working there said they hadn’t received any direct communication, even though the impact will fall most heavily on them. They don’t know what’s going to be expected of them.

The term “social media” can encompass any Internet service that enables public conversation. Restrictions on using social media are restrictions on discussion. Sometimes these discussions are vitally important to young people, especially if they’re dealing with domestic abuse or have issues they’re afraid to raise with their parents. They can help to get information for personal or educational reasons, and often people make friends from distant places and different cultures.

A lot of basic information is found on social media. YouTube is generally considered a social media site; anyone can upload videos, and most of them are open for comments. Many businesses use their Facebook page as their main Internet presence. Telling kids they can’t use these sites or subjecting them to heavy restrictions will cut them off from a lot of information.

The present situation is reminiscent of panics in which kids had to be “protected” from novels, comic books, rock’n’roll, TV, and video games. Who will protect us from the protectors?


Book discussion: Fighting for the Freedom to Learn

The history of what’s known as “school choice” is more convoluted than I had realized. Fighting for the Freedom to Learn, from the Cato Institute, maps out that history in a set of twelve essays by different authors. Together, they add up to a narrative from the colonial era to modern times in the United States. The book is less polemic than its title may sound, providing a lot of information for anyone interested in the history of American education.

This isn’t an area where I have much knowledge, so I can’t say confidently how accurate it is. I can say that it presents an informational tone, has lots of end notes, and doesn’t say anything that looks obviously suspicious.

Most people today look at advocacy of school choice as an exclusively right-wing issue. (Everything today is a right-wing or left-wing issue.) In the past, though, it’s been complicated. Today we think of public schools as secular institutions, but for much of our history they were tools of nativist Protestant hegemony. I’m old enough to remember being told in school to pray to “Our Father.” In the first half of the nineteenth century,

A crucial factor of the development of the state role in education was an expansion of the concept of the citizen. With increased discussion of alternative forms of political authority, there was a renewed appreciation of Aristotle’s argument that citizens should be shaped by state-directed education to match the form of government under which they would live.

The concern increased along with the growth in Irish immigration, which was mostly Catholic. Senator James Blaine promoted state constitutional amendments, as well as unsuccessfully urging a national one, barring the granting of government funds to religious schools, while insisting that they could “not be construed to prohibit the reading of the Bible in any school or Institution.” By “the Bible,” he meant the King James Bible. The target of the amendments was Catholic schools.

The authors acknowledge that following the Supreme Court’s Brown decision and the Civil Rights Act, many segregationists saw private schools as a way to maintain racial purity, but they insist this is far from the whole story. Public schools with predominantly black student bodies often got a bad deal (and sometimes still do).

Throughout American history, people from all walks of life have sought educational options for a variety of pressing reasons, most of them rooted in freedom. The roots on the left are deep and fascinating. They are found in the centuries-old struggle for educational opportunity in the black experience, in the liberal academics who saw vouchers as a tool in the War on Poverty, in the counterculture dissidents who sparked the “free schools” and homeschooling movements, and even, for 20 years, in the Democratic Party’s national platform.

There’s a lot to learn from this book. I recommend it to people interested in American educational history.


Thoughts on the February 21 Merrimack protest

ICE wants to set up a facility in Merrimack, NH to hold its abductees. Governor Ayotte didn’t notice as ICE communicated with state officials about it, or else she’s lying. Lots of people in New Hampshire are outraged. On February 21, I went to Merrimack for the second time to attend a protest against the plan. I’m glad I did, but my reaction is mixed. The spirit I saw expressed wasn’t as good as the first time.

Man decked out with many US flags at Merrimack anti-ICE protestThere were some inspiring highlights, especially a man who stood on a huge snowbank decked out with many US flags. He looked like a human kite, and I almost worried that the wind would lift him into the air. People were there to oppose the human warehouse, which certainly would follow ICE’s usual standards for ignoring due process and treating people cruelly. Many were angry at Governor Ayotte, a modern-day Pontius Pilate who washes her hands of the whole thing.

I wore a small clip-on body camera and left my phone behind. It can’t track me, it’s inconspicuous, and it wouldn’t be as bad as losing a phone if anyone took it from me. Anyone who regularly goes to protests or observes ICE activity should consider getting one.

The crowd was big, and the atmosphere was friendly. I even ran into another member of my UU choir. At the same time, there were some aspects that made me uncomfortable.

There was a lot of chanting of obscenities. Now I’m aware that many on the left think insults and curses are the best way to win people over, but in practice it doesn’t work. When they don’t persuade people with their curses, they think their curses must not have been nasty enough. But I have to explain this, incredible as it may sound: Most people, hearing someone yell curses, don’t say, “Of course, that makes so much sense!” In fact, they’ve been known think that people who spew curses aren’t worth listening to.

There were lots of references to the facility as a “concentration camp.” It won’t be a “camp” of any kind. A concentration camp houses large numbers of people, usually based on ethnicity or culture, in barracks, makeshift buildings, or tents. In addition to the Nazis’ notorious concentration camps, examples include the British relocation of Boers during the Second Boer War and the United States’ internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The building in Merrimack would crowd abductees to an indoor space with barely something to sleep on. The Germans’ concentration camps were a preliminary step to mass murder; others weren’t, though all were cruel to varying degrees. Let’s call a prison a prison.

The level of cursing and the widespread “concentration camp” terminology were new to me, as anti-ICE and anti-Trump protests go. We’ve heard “Alligator Auschwitz” before, which is wrong for different reasons.

Several signs treated Trump’s felony conviction as an important point. The conviction was for not treating hush money payments as campaign expenditures, which is quite minor compared to many other things he’s done. On the other hand, I didn’t see many references to his having over a hundred people killed at sea in unprovoked military attacks. They’re mass murder, and it hasn’t been stressed enough. People have even debated whether it’s OK to come back and finish off any survivors. That’s like asking whether it was legitimate for old-style pirates to make their captives walk the plank.

In times like these, though, we can’t be too picky about our allies. What’s important is that hundreds of people expressed their opposition to an inhumane government facility in New Hampshire.


New Hampshire libraries and free speech

Writing this makes me nervous. It deals with institutions I’m close to, and it’s one of those cases where both sides look bad. But it’s important to say it, and it might have a positive effect just because I’m so close. These events happened a while ago, but I just learned about them while researching something else. (That happens a lot.)

On one side we have Arlene Quaratiello, a minor New Hampshire politician and librarian who takes a restrictive view on what libraries should carry. On the other side we have the Dudley-Tucker Library in Raymond, New Hampshire, which violated her First Amendment rights. Quaratiello, who lives in Atkinson (which is also Karoline Leavitt’s home; what is it about that town?), wrote to a local news site endorsing two candidates for library trustee. She emailed a Republican Party chapter urging them to run conservative candidates for library trustee positions. Her letter advocated “protecting our children from the increasing amount of inappropriate material available … without sacrificing the intellectual freedom that has always characterized public libraries.”

This is at least worrisome, but it’s her right in the United States to express those views. She expressed them on her own time, using her personal resources. In spite of that, the Dudley-Tucker Library, where she was Assistant Director, terminated her. The reason given was “lack of separation of personal/political values and agendas from DTL policies, procedures, and occurrences” and that she supposedly was “not able to maintain the separation between personal and Library tenets.”
(more…)