Will The Guardians of The Narrative Win? We watch the unfolding of an unedifying spectacle By Roger Kimball

https://amgreatness.com/2023/12/24/will-the-guardians-of-the-narrative-win/

Much that is happening in the spectacle of America’s legal-political  life today reminds me of some pages in Johan Huizinga’s great book Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (1938). In a chapter on “Play and Law,” Huizinga distinguishes the unfolding of legal proceedings in advanced cultures, where strict adherence to process and abstract notions of right and wrong prevail, from the situation in more primitive cultures, where the ultimate criterion is victory. “Turning our eyes from the administration of justice and highly developed civilizations,” Huizinga writes, “to that which obtains in less advanced phases of culture, we see that the idea of right and wrong, the ethical-juridical conception, comes to be overshadowed by the idea of winning and losing, that is, the purely agonistic conception. It is not so much the abstract question of right and wrong that occupies the archaic mind as the very concrete question of winning or losing.”

In this sense, I submit, Special Counsel Jack Smith, District Judge Tanya Chutkan, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and the rest of the anti-Trump legal confraternity perfectly epitomize the atavistic persistence of archaic impulses in the law. People like me are always going on about “the rebarbarization of civilization.” The peculiar legal assault against Donald Trump is one instance (among many) of that phenomenon.

It’s been going on for quite a while. The 2020 election, for example, took place during the period of eagerly embraced Covid hysteria. That hysteria provided a justification or, more accurately, an alibi for the numerous violations of the law in the conduct of the election. The Constitution of the United States stipulates that state legislatures are in charge of determining voting procedures. But various governors and secretaries of state, from blue states mostly, swept that Constitutional provision aside in their eagerness to assure the appearance of a Biden victory. Such anomalies were noted and commented on at the time but somehow never got traction. Why? Because the media, that great tool of The Narrative, determined that it oughtn’t to get traction.

In subsequent months, the public has been treated to an efflorescence of similar and even more extreme anomalies as Donald Trump can barely turn his head without being indicted for something or other. I do not think that the public at large grasps how bizarre the quartet of indictments, proceeding in tandem in four separate jurisdictions, really is. It is unprecedented, yes, but it is also surreal. It is also a travesty of the legal process. The aim is not justice but the grubby partisan goal of removing a popular political rival from the field. The Attorney General of New York, Letitia James actually campaigned on the promise that she would “get Trump.” How is that OK? What has happened is that the law—or, more precisely, the paraphernalia and accoutrements of the law—is simply the weapon of choice, all else having failed. Those who point out that the effort to transform a political rival into a pariah is tantamount to banana republic tactics are right. But to say that is not yet to do justice the breathtaking situation in which a former president who happens to be, by a wide margin, his party’s favorite for the presidential nomination is treated worse than a common criminal. Common criminals, as a rule, are not subject to gag orders for trying to defend themselves.  “Shut up, or you might convince people you are being unfairly persecuted!” What a blow against “Our Democracy™” that would be.

Artificial Intelligence—Learning Panacea or Progressive Trojan Horse? “In an age of artificial intelligence, they are creating artificial stupidity.” by Loyd Pettegrew

https://www.frontpagemag.com/artificial-intelligence-learning-panacea-or-progressive-trojan-horse/

Barak Obama’s Administration first reported on the future of Artificial Intelligence in an October 12, 2016 summary. A new battle is being enacted against our conservative way of being. At the center of this battle is the widespread support for and increased use of artificial Intelligence (AI). Its intrinsic values are myriad but nonetheless secreted. James Giodano, Chief of the Neuroethics Studies Program and Scholar-in-Residence in the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics at Georgetown University cautions that “The brain is the battlefield of the future.” He believes that neuros are weapons that can be used “against humans in directional ways that can be harnessed for what’s called dual use medical purposes, the ethics of those individuals who may be competitive if not combative to us, so in other words, this can also be weaponized against others and this is where we get into the idea of novel neural weapons.”

For example, after the Arab massacre of Israelis on October 7th, there has been a concerted effort to polarize through AI’s visual propaganda functions targeting especially the younger generation using photorealistic, generative artificial intelligence. Such visual propaganda, on its surface, appears authentic but was created by a machine to use against Israel and its supporters. This effort is based on the belief that AI learning is the suasory equivalent of a second educational coming. In fact, Gruetzemacher and Whittlestone argue that AI is presently having a genuinely “transformative” effect on society at large, but in clandestine and unobvious ways.

The Foundation of AI

Stanford University’s Hoover Institution provides a succinct and useful definition of AI: “Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a computer’s ability to perform some of the functions associated with the human brain, including perceiving, reasoning, learning, interacting, problem solving, and even exercising creativity. In the last year, the main AI-related headline was the rise of large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 (Generative Pretrained Transformers), on which the chatbot ChatGPT developed by OpenAI, and its most recent derivatives [the soon to be released GPT-5] are based.” The same article cautions that even the most advanced AI today has many failure modes that can prove to be unpredictable, not widely acknowledged nor easily fixed; inexplainable, but capable of leading to harmful unintended consequences.

The U.S. Military is Not Woke, But the Woke Threat is Real The potential Achilles’ heel of our military. by Jesse Petrilla

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-u-s-military-is-not-woke-but-the-woke-threat-is-real/

I remember the day vividly, standing in formation in the hot Kentucky sun at Ft. Knox. “Look to your left and to your right,” the sergeant said. “You are all wearing the same uniform, you all bleed the same color blood. There is no color here other than green.” But by the end of my career, there were directives coming down from Washington D.C. telling us that some of our service members were somehow different, as was the case when we were told we should counsel some of our soldiers letting them know they can change the gender on their ID cards. I wasn’t about to single out a soldier, and I doubt very many did in any branch of the services.

But aside from causing a few eyerolls, woke policies in the military are more of a distraction at this point than anything else and are thankfully being largely ignored other than service members being ordered to sit through the regularly occurring death by PowerPoint. However, that in no way diminishes the very real threat it poses.

The United States military remains the most effective fighting force on the planet, and although wokeness has not yet significantly infected the military, the woke cancer continues to grow, threatening the cohesion of America’s fighting forces. Every hour that a service member wastes sitting through unnecessary woke briefings, is an hour lost that should have been spent on warfighter training, leaving us less prepared for the next war.

Woke policies, unnecessary political correctness at the expense of readiness or the success of a mission, have been and continue to be pushed at the behest of politicians inside the beltway. But the problem with their efforts to change the way our military operates is that it doesn’t need changing. The military is one place where true diversity has already been achieved.

More Bad News For Biden: Just 34% Of Americans Say They’re Better Off Than Four Years Ago: I&I/TIPP Poll Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/12/26/more-bad-news-for-biden-just-34-of-americans-say-theyre-better-off-than-four-years-ago-ii-tipp-poll/

Despite a multi-year campaign by the White House and its allies to convince the public that the economy is booming, the vast majority of Americans say they’re worse off today than they were four years ago. And despite claims that partisanship is driving the public’s sour mood, negative views about the economy and President Joe Biden’s performance are almost universal.

That’s according to the latest I&I/TIPP poll of likely voters, which finds that 58% say they aren’t better off than they were four years ago – before the COVID-19 pandemic – while only 34% say they are.

Meanwhile, a mere 23% of those surveyed say Biden is doing an “excellent” or “good” job handling the economy, including fewer than half of Democrats.

The I&I/TIPP Poll asked 1,464 Americans two questions related to the economy: “Comparing your situation today to what it was four years ago, are you better off now than you were four years ago?” and “How would you grade President Biden’s performance handling the economy?” The poll, taken from Nov. 29-Dec. 1, has a margin of error of +/-2.8 percentage points.

The question about whether people are better off than four years ago – famously asked by Ronald Reagan in 1980 before his landslide election over Jimmy Carter – is clearly weighing on minds at the White House.

AL GORE-NEVER AT A LOSS FOR INANITY

QUOTE: https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/12/24/al-gore-without-climate-action-we-could-lose-our-capacity-for-self-governance/#disqus_thread

Gore said, ‘The scientist who has warned us of these mega-storms and the floods and mudslides and droughts and the ice melting and the sea level rising and the storms getting stronger and the tropical diseases and climate and migrants crossing international borders in large numbers. They were dead right when they warned us about this, and so we need to pay more attention to them now.’

He continued, ‘Here is one thing they say: if we don’t take action, there could be as many as 1 billion climate refugees crossing international borders in the next several decades. Well, a few million have contributed to this wave of populist authoritarianism and dictatorships and so forth. What would a billion do? We can’t do this. We could lose our capacity for self-governance.’

Happy Plessivus: Democrats celebrate the holidays with separate-but-equal policies by Jonathan Turley,

https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/4374248-happy-plessivus-democrats-celebrate-the-holidays-with-separate-but-equal-policies/

For some, it seems, Christmas is so last century, and “Festivus” is so last decade.Happy Plessivus, the new rage in politically correct holiday celebration.

Now, as we approach the 70th anniversary of the rejection of Plessy v. Ferguson and the concept of separate-but-equal with the Supreme Court’s 1954 landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, many people seem to be embracing racial segregation as a public good.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu offered just such an alternative with a holiday party that excluded guests on the basis of race. Wu was criticized after her staff mistakenly sent the entire city council an invitation to the party at the city-owned Parkman House. However, the invitation told white city council members that they could not attend due to their race.

It was not exactly what most of us think of as being in the spirit of the holidays. Yet, it is precisely what Wu wanted to capture for a racialized holiday theme with a hefty helping of identity politics.

It seems that, today, the three kings would be told by the angel to just drop off the gold, frankincense and myrrh at the door of the stable if they were not the right race.

What was most striking about the controversy is that Wu’s office apologized — but not for the racially exclusive policy. It apologized for sending the invite to white city council members.

Despite the criticism, Wu proudly posted a photo of all the attendees at her “electeds of color” holiday party. Six of the city’s 13 council members are people of color.

An Ex-Democrat’s Case for Trump When enough is enough. Sasha Stone

https://sashastone.substack.com/p/an-ex-democrats-case-for-trump

“Are you a Trump supporter now?” is the question my friends, acquaintances, and colleagues sometimes ask me. I know the answer to that question could end our relationship. So do they. Most of the time, they just don’t ask. They quietly assume that I might be, but what they don’t know can’t hurt them.

Since 2016, being labeled “Trump supporter,” has given most people the green light to cut ties, publicly humiliate, attack, and dehumanize at will. What you will rarely see on the Left is empathy. What has become all too common is unfiltered, bottomless hatred. In too many cases, physical violence, and destructive protests, all justified and encouraged by the ruling class.

2020 was the breaking point for me. I could no longer go along with it, especially after getting to know Trump supporters, and watching enough rallies to know the truth about who Trump really is.

And now, after the Colorado decision to throw Trump off the ballot, there has been a terrifying escalation in how they plan to deal with Trump and MAGA. What started as “cancel culture,” where due process was tossed in favor of trial by mob has spread to the government, infecting it like a parasitic fungus that ultimately kills its host.

From censorship to their treatment of the political protesters of January 6th, to what they’ve done to this country’s Justice Department, much of its culture, its universities, and the minds and bodies of children, it’s time to say ENOUGH.

It was already enough when the sitting President of the United States was banned from Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. It was enough when they raided Mar-a-Lago when they convicted Trump in a show trial on primetime television that idiots on the Left now seem to believe counted as a real trial.

The four indictments are ENOUGH. Two impeachments are enough. Scaring the public every day, whipping up mass hysteria just for clicks, just for engagement, just for ratings is ENOUGH. Robert DeNiro’s ongoing freak-outs are enough. Stephen Colbert’s unfunny jokes are enough. A culture that has destroyed itself over an imaginary monster they invented is enough.

Move the United Nations to Gaza Patriots will be on hand to cheer its departure Don Feder

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/dec/22/move-united-nations-to-gaza/

What a great idea and make John Kerry our ambassador to the UN….rsk

Since the United Nations is anti-American to its rotten core, wouldn’t it be happier somewhere else? The war in Gaza is the perfect opportunity to relocate the world body to a more congenial clime.

Of course, the ideologues masquerading as diplomats will miss the five-star restaurants and high-class hookers they enjoy in Manhattan.

But real estate in Gaza City is dirt cheap, thanks to urban renewal by the Israel Defense Forces. And it would give the U.N. an opportunity to truly express solidarity with its favorite victims. It’s practically part of Hamas as it is.

Don’t misunderstand me. As a connoisseur of hypocrisy, I appreciate the hollow chest-beating that goes on at the whorehouse on the East River.

Where else can we be lectured about human rights by people who treat women as property, on tolerance by states that make antisemitism their official policy, on climate change by nations that make a killing from fossil fuels and on peace by states that subsidize international terrorism?

In the heady days following World War II, America made the tragic mistake of taking the lead in organizing the United Nations. One of the U.N.’s first acts was to approve a partition plan for Palestine, then a British Mandate, which led to the creation of the state of Israel. Now, it is dedicated to the annihilation of Israel.

When the U.N. was established, a majority of its members were Western democracies. Today, the General Assembly is dominated by totalitarian states, theocracies and nations on the brink of extinction due to dramatically declining fertility.

The U.N. has a history of antisemitism stretching back decades. Half of all resolutions passed by the Human Rights Commission target Israel.

While assuring us that gang rape, genital mutilation and baking babies alive are not cool, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres insisted that the Oct. 7 atrocities “did not happen in a vacuum.” In other words, how dare Israel fight for its survival.

World’s Most Dangerous Combination: China and Russia by Gordon G. Chang

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20257/china-russia-dangerous-combination

China and Russia are more than just working together. They are forming the core of a new axis. Around this core are proxies and proxies of proxies, such as Iran, North Korea, Algeria, and a host of terrorist groups.

The Chinese and Russian leaders are forming this grouping because they believe the United States, the final guarantor of the international system that frustrates them both, must be taken down. Xi, by, among other things, declaring a “people’s war” on America, has made it clear that the U.S. must be destroyed and Americans exterminated. Putin is less ambitious, only wanting the U.S. out of his way as he recreates the Russian Empire at its greatest extent.

“Washington has little leverage over Russia. There are no carrots to offer to Putin, and the sticks haven’t worked.” — Rebekah Koffler, author of Putin’s Playbook and former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst, to Gatestone, December 2023.

In other words, China and Russia are preparing to go to war together. As no country threatens either of them, they are undoubtedly thinking of perpetrating more acts of aggression.

Republican presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy knows how to end the greatest threat to American national security. That threat would be the combination of the world’s two most dangerous states: China and Russia.

“I would freeze the current lines of control,” the candidate told Fox News’s Jesse Watters during his prime time show, referring to the battlefields in Ukraine. “I would further make a hard commitment that NATO will not admit Ukraine to NATO. That’s enough to get Putin to do the deal.”

“But I would require something even greater in return, Jesse,” Ramaswamy said. “Russia has to exit its military alliance with China.”

Putin will take the deal, the charismatic candidate assured Watters: “He’s gonna say, ‘Ok’ because I’m going to say, ‘We’ll reopen our economic relations with Russia and further, we’ll end the Ukraine war and also make sure NATO never admits Ukraine.’ “

Claudine Gay Update — Now It’s Allegations Of Data Falsification Francis Menton

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2023-12-24-claudine-gay-update-now-its-data-falsification

It was less than three weeks ago, December 5, when the name of Claudine Gay, President of Harvard University, suddenly burst into the news. That was the day that she, along with the Presidents of Penn and MIT, testified before Congress — and could not give a clear answer as to whether it was against the policy at their schools to call for the genocide of Jews. All three women attempted to use the occasion to paint themselves as defenders of free speech, particularly important in such extreme cases.

Manhattan Contrarian readers already knew that Ms. Gay was the opposite of a defender of free speech. In a post on December 16, 2022 with the title “Goodnight, Poor Harvard!” — written on the occasion of the announcement that Ms. Gay would become the next President of Harvard — I reviewed her record on the subject. My conclusion, based on multiple examples mostly from the work of independent journalist Christopher Brunet, was that Ms. Gay was “the enforcer-in-chief of wokist orthodoxy at Harvard.”

In the few short weeks since December 5, the news as to Ms. Gay has gotten worse and worse, seemingly by the day. First, some big donors ramped up threats to pull their funding. Then came a handful of allegations of plagiarism found in a few among Ms. Gay’s small number of academic papers. On December 12 the New York Times reported that the Harvard Corporation had appointed a special committee to investigate the allegations of plagiarism, and that the committee had cleared Ms. Gay. Then it emerged that a source had given the allegations of plagiarism to the New York Post back in October, and the Post had sent them to Harvard for confirmation — only to get in return a threatening letter from the Clare Locke law firm (the same firm that had recovered over $700 million from Fox in the Dominion Voting case) asserting that the accusations of plagiarism were “demonstrably false.” Then (December 19 in the Washington Free Beacon) there emerged a new dossier now with some 40 instances of alleged plagiarism — almost four for each of Ms. Gay’s eleven academic articles — many of the new allegations much more serious than the ones that the special committee had just deemed minor.