Our Revolution’s Logic Angelo Codevilla

In 2010, Angelo Codevilla reintroduced the notion of “the ruling class” back into American popular discourse. In 2017, he described contemporary American politics as a “cold civil war.” Now he applies the “logic of revolution” to our current political scene.https://americanmind.org/essays/our-revolutions-logic/

The primary objective of any people who find themselves in the throes of a revolution is to find ways of diverting its logic from its worst conclusions.

Prior to the 2016 election I explained (After The Republic) how America had already “stepped over the threshold of a revolution,” that it was “difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate how it might end.” Regardless of who won the election, its sentiments’ growing “volume and intensity” would empower politicians on all sides sure to make us nostalgic for Donald Trump’s and Hilary Clinton’s moderation. Having begun, this revolution would follow its own logic.

What follows dissects that logic. It has unfolded faster than foreseen. Its sentiments’ spiraling volume and intensity have eliminated any possibility of “stepping back.”

The Democratic Party and the millions it represents having refused to accept 2016’s results; having used their positions of power in government and society to prevent the winners from exercising the powers earned by election; declaring in vehement words and violent deeds the illegitimacy, morbidity, even criminality, of persons and ideas contrary to themselves; bet that this “resistance” would so energize their constituencies, so depress their opponents,’ that subsequent elections would prove 2016 to have been an anomaly and further confirm their primacy in America. The 2018 Congressional elections are that strategy’s first major test.

Regardless of these elections’ outcome, however, this “resistance” has strengthened and accelerated the existing revolutionary spiral. We begin with a primer on such spirals, on the logic of mutual hate that drives them, and on their consequences; move to a general description of our evolution’s driving logic, describe the 2016 elections as the revolutionary spiral’s first turn and the “resistance” thereto as the second. Then we examine how the “resistance” affects the other side, and how this logic might drive our revolution’s subsequent turns.

The Cycle and Us

Corcyra’s revolution in 427 BC, the fifth year of the Peloponnesian War, is a paradigm of revolutionary logic. Thucydides tells us that the citizens’ divisions had been of the garden-variety economic kind. Its Assembly had taken an ordinary vote on an ordinary measure. But the vote’s losers, refusing to accept political defeat, brought criminal charges against their opponents’ leader. By thus criminalizing differences over public policy, by using political power to hurt their opponents, they gave the revolutionary spiral its first turn. The spiral might have stopped when the accused was acquitted. But, he, instead of letting bygones be bygones, convinced the assembly to fine those who had brought the charges. After all, they had to be taught not to do such things again. The assembly approved the fine. But the second use of political power to hurt opponents gave the revolutionary spiral its second turn. Had the original wrongdoers paid up, the problem might have ended right there. Instead, outraged, they gave it the third push, bursting into the Assembly and murdering him. That ended all private haven from political strife. Civil war spiraled into mutual destruction, until the city was well-nigh depopulated.

Smiling at Corruption Democrats try to save Bob Menendez months after his bipartisan admonishment. Kimberley Strassel

https://www.wsj.com/articles/smiling-at-corruption-1539903902

Democrats have failed all year to find a cogent midterm campaign theme, but one appears to be attaching to them all the same: Listen to what we say; ignore what we do.

Nowhere is this truer than in blue, blue New Jersey, where Sen. Bob Menendez is suddenly struggling. Businessman and Republican nominee Bob Hugin has spent months educating Garden State voters on Mr. Menendez’s adventures with a now-convicted criminal. The more the voters learn, the tighter the race becomes. Recent public polls have awarded Mr. Menendez a 6- or 7-point lead, though a new internal Hugin poll claims the gap is now less than 2.

Democrats are alarmed enough that the Senate Majority PAC this week decided to reroute a precious $3 million to bolster Mr. Menendez with television advertising. The decision is extraordinary, given the number of Senate seats Democrats are already struggling to defend, many in states President Trump carried. But it is even more extraordinary for the statement—campaign theme, if you will—Democrats are rolling out with this ad buy. Namely, don’t believe us.

This is the party that claims to be running against a Republican “culture of corruption.” Democrats have highlighted the conviction of Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and introduced anticorruption bills in Congress. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in August even provided her members a “toolkit” for talking about supposed GOP misdeeds. They present the Trump White House as some mix of the yakuza and a drug cartel.

Yet here Democrats are intervening on behalf of the one federal lawmaker to have been definitively judged by his peers as corrupt in recent years—to have abused his office, to have scorned ethics rules, to have brought “discredit” on the Senate. A bipartisan letter from the Senate Ethics Committee in April “severely admonished” Mr. Menendez, finding that for six years he had “knowingly and repeatedly accepted gifts of significant value” from his close friend and Democratic Party donor, Florida ophthalmologist Salomon Melgen. The gifts included luxury private-plane flights, soirees in Paris hotels, and free accommodation at a Dominican Republican villa—where Mr. Menendez stayed not once or twice but 19 times. CONTINUE AT SITE

Nazis old and new: Douglas Murray

http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/7278/full
So far as I know there was only one public statue erected in Europe after the war to commemorate a Nazi. And on a recent visit to Dublin I finally managed to visit it.

During the 1920s and ’30s while he was a senior figure in the IRA, Sean Russell cosied up to almost anyone he could in order to gather arms and allies for the war against the British. In the ’20s he headed to the Soviet Union and America looking for support. It took till the late ’30s for him to find his truest ally. Sure enough, in 1939 the IRA declared war against the British on the side of the Nazis. In the mind of people like Russell the ultimate defeat of the British would mean an Irish Republic without partition. I suppose they imagined they were thinking big at the time.

The IRA began its campaign of bombings in English cities just before the Luftwaffe took its turn. The IRA-Nazi pact did so well that in 1940 Russell went to Germany on behalf of the IRA Army Council to be trained by the Nazis’ intelligence service.

It was Russell’s personal tragedy to die on the German U-boat returning him to Ireland, meaning he never managed to put his new bomb-making skills to use. His statue was erected in Fairview Park, Dublin, after the war, and has remained there ever since.

It has suffered intermittent bouts of vandalism. An arm was removed quite early on by a group complaining that its posture suggested Russell was a communist rather than a fascist (presumably the vandal’s own preferred side). Then during the decade before this one the statue was decapitated by an anonymous group professing opposition to the mass murder of millions of Jews, homosexuals, Roma and others by Sean Russell’s friends.

This should have been the perfect excuse for the Irish authorities to end the embarrassment and permanently remove the statue. Amazingly, in 2009 they commissioned a fresh one, this time cast in bronze, so as to deter further vandalism.

U.S. Closes Jerusalem Consulate Serving Palestinians Israel cheers move, while Palestinian officials call it another blow to aspirations for an independent stateBy Felicia Schwartz

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-closes-jerusalem-consulate-serving-palestinians-1539882780

TEL AVIV—The Trump administration said it would merge its Jerusalem consulate responsible for relations with the Palestinians into its newly relocated U.S. Embassy there, another symbolic blow to American-Palestinian relations.

The consulate in Jerusalem has functioned essentially as an embassy to the Palestinians. It was separate from the operations of the U.S. Embassy, which stewarded relations with the Israelis from Tel Aviv until May, when President Trump moved it to Jerusalem to fulfill a campaign promise.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday said the consulate closure was aimed at efficiency and wasn’t a policy change. He said a newly created Palestinian Affairs unit will operate out of the old consulate building, conducting reporting, outreach and programming with Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem.

Michael Oren, Israel’s deputy minister for diplomacy and a former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., welcomed the move on Twitter, calling it a great day for Israel, Jerusalem and the U.S.

Senior Palestinian officials called it another blow to their aspirations for an independent state.

“The Trump administration is making clear that it is working together with the Israeli government to impose greater Israel rather than the two-state solution on the 1967 borders,” said Saeb Erekat, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s secretary-general. “The U.S. administration has fully endorsed the Israeli narrative, including on Jerusalem, refugees and settlements.”

Palestinian officials have cut off contact with the Trump administration since December, when Mr. Trump said he would move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Hungary Cuts Taxpayer Funding To Inane Gender Studies Departments There is an intra-academic war to control the academy, and the reason is simple: control of institutions like media and academia is essential for a social revolution. By Sumantra Maitra

http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/18/hungary-cuts-taxpayer-funding-inane-gender-studies-departments/

“Gender studies challenge existing structures that are perceived as natural and enduring, and in doing so, they directly challenge the ideological commitments of the radical right,” thundered an obscure British teaching fellow named Megan Armstrong in an op-ed for openDemocracy.

Armstrong argues that Hungary’s lurch toward the right is essentially an attack on open inquiry at universities, as shown by the latest hardline move of “banning” gender studies classes from Hungarian universities. This, she argues, is an effort to “curtail academic freedom.”

Why? Because “gender studies, for all its rich interdisciplinarity, is critical. Students who undertake a gender studies course are trained to think critically, and to engage critically with the world around them.” You get the idea.

Gender studies is an interdisciplinary field that combines feminism, Marxism, race, and gender. It became vogue around the late 1980s and posits that sex isn’t biological, and gender, like everything else in life, is completely performative. In the words of social theorist Simone de Beauvoir, “one is not born a woman, but one becomes one.”

The field is heavily influenced by post-structural ideology and suggests that there’s no objective, scientific, or biological truth. Over time, with the rise of interdisciplinary journals that are often ideological echo chambers, this ideology has spread into other fields and subjects, with an overall sinister motive. Gender studies academics essentially act as Soviet commissars, and try to dictate debate in academia and policy, which has resulted in severe intra-academic conflict on transgenderism, workplace gender gaps, how sex differences function in the military, and policies on gender in general.
Is Hungary’s Bold Move Worth Emulating?

Democratic Operative Arrested For Allegedly Attacking Female GOP Campaign Manager By Bre Payton

http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/18/democratic-operative-arrested-allegedly-attacking-female-gop-campaign-manager/

A Democratic operative was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada on Tuesday night after he allegedly grabbed and shoved a female campaign manager for Republican gubernatorial nominee Adam Laxalt.

Witnesses say 50-year-old Wilfred Michael Stark III, of Falls Church, Virginia, grabbed Kristin Davison by the arm, pushing her into a room, and would not let go. He yelled and shoved a camera and his body at her and Laxalt, according to The Associated Press. The altercation left her with bruises on her arms and neck.

Davidson was arrested by The Las Vegas City Marshals and charged with misdemeanor battery. He was released Wednesday on $1,140 bail, the AP reported. Laxalt’s campaign said Stark works for American Bridge 21st Century, a political group founded by David Brock and funded by George Soros.

This is not the first time Stark has been arrested for his behavior as a political operative. In March, he was arrested for allegedly shoving an aide to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke — an incident American Bridge said Stark “adamantly” denied, Fox News reports.

He also reportedly followed Rep. Devin Nunes around Capitol Hill in June, prompting the Republican congressman to tweet a photo of what appears to be Stark standing nearby holding up a cell phone.

ELECTIONS ARE COMING: MISSOURI #SHE TOO (D) CLAIRE McCASKILL VS. (R) JOSH HAWLEY

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/claire-mccaskill-demands-investigation-into-exposure-of-her-planned-parenthood-ties/
McCaskill Demands Investigation into Exposure of Her Planned Parenthood Ties By Jack Crowe

Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri has demanded that a special prosecutor be appointed to investigate a sting operation that exposed previously secret alleged ties to Planned Parenthood and various gun-control-advocacy groups.

McCaskill’s campaign manager David Kirby called on her Republican Senate challenger Josh Hawley, the sitting Missouri attorney general, to appoint a special prosecutor to launch an investigation into the video-surveillance operation that captured her staffers discussing tactics used to conceal Planned Parenthood’s financial support for their campaign.

“We have reason to believe that fraud has been committed against our campaign,” Kirby told reporters Wednesday. “There’s no question that the videos were captured under false pretenses and misrepresentations, which under Missouri law is fraud.”

McCaskill accused Hawley of participating in the sting operation during a Tuesday television appearance.

“It is startling that Josh Hawley would be part of fraudulently embedding somebody in my campaign,” McCaskill told KOLR-10 in Springfield, Missouri on Tuesday.

Hawley, who previously denied participating in the operation, dismissed the notion of a possible investigation in a response posted to Twitter Wednesday.

In the secretly captured surveillance video, released Wednesday by the controversial right-wing investigative group Project Veritas, McCaskill campaign staffer Nicholas Starost explained that Planned Parenthood secretly funnels donations to the senator to avoid the scrutiny of Missouri’s conservative electorate.

“They go through other means to get us that money,” Starost says while being recorded on a hidden camera. “They specifically will not donate to us.”

ELECTIONS ARE COMING: TEXAS GOP TED CRUZ VS. DEMOCRAT BETO O’ROURKE

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/beto-orourke-media-coverage-embarrassing-spectacle/
The Embarrassing Spectacle of Betomania By Heather Wilhelm

It’s enough to drive even the most mild-mannered Texan crazy.

Attention, journalists of America: Time is running out! You have under three weeks left to publish your last batch of over-the-top pre-election puff pieces on Texas Democrat/cross-country liberal sensation/wing-and-a-prayer Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke!

It is here that we must face the difficult truth: Barring a GOP-related disaster of some sort, O’Rourke — he of that ineffable “cool factor” and “special sauce,” at least according to easily impressed columnists at the Washington Post — is likely to lose big. According to the latest polls, Senator Ted Cruz leads him by anywhere between seven and nine points. Tuesday’s debate between the two, meanwhile, was so mismatched that O’Rourke’s best moment might have involved a random deer-in-the-headlights story in which he described how he “got to meet this blind squirrel who is slowly regaining its sight.”

In summary, this year’s Betomania — a somewhat weird phenomenon, as we’ll explore in a bit — seems set to disappear from view just as quickly as it arrived, at least in the Lone Star State. On one hand, this possibility warms my heart, given that in my neck of Texas, it has grown rather exasperating to have to wade through 15,000 blaring BETO yard signs when I’m simply trying to get a breakfast taco or four. On the other hand, I also feel a tinge of melancholy and regret about all of this, given that I never got my act together enough to print ironic t-shirts with the following brilliant slogan I made up all by myself: “You BETO vote for Ted Cruz.”

Anyway, back to the matter at hand. I’d like to further discuss the debate between O’Rourke and Ted Cruz, and also actual policy issues, and also perhaps the fact that many people in politics seem to be slowly going insane. But first, can we talk about how embarrassing Betomania is? Friends, I am deeply concerned for our culture. When you look at a middle-aged establishment politician as an icon of “rock star” cool, you’re doing something wrong.

Why is Germany beefing up its military? Jonathan Marcus

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45863448

In the face of new challenges, Germany is recommitting itself to the Nato alliance. But what will playing a more central military role mean to a country that has often been accused of reluctance about its armed forces?

It was an unseasonably mild morning as the Sun rose slowly over the training range at Pabrade in Lithuania. This is effectively Nato’s eastern front. Belarus is just a few kilometres away, with Russia beyond.

Lurking just outside the perimeter wire loom several Leopard battle tanks of a German armoured battalion.

So what are the Germans doing here and what is the significance of this deployment for Berlin and for the Atlantic alliance as a whole?

Germany commands the Nato multinational battle group in Lithuania, intended to reassure a small ally in the face of a more assertive and aggressive Russia.

Other countries command similar formations in the two other Baltic states – Estonia and Latvia – and in Poland, the whole mission being known in Nato-speak as an “enhanced forward presence”.

Here in Lithuania, Germany is the so-called framework nation, providing the headquarters and a significant proportion of the troops. Other smaller Nato countries also provide troops for the German-led force.

Currently there are contributions from Belgium, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Norway and the Netherlands. The whole German battle group then forms part of a larger Lithuanian brigade.

Harvard’s Discrimination Isn’t ‘Likeable’ By David Randall

Harvard President Lawrence Bacow just sent out a letter to Harvard’s alumni and donors to reassure them that there’s no merit to Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. Students for Fair Admissions argues that Harvard discriminates against Asian-American applicants. Bacow, however, is confident that “The College’s admissions process does not discriminate against anybody.” After all, “The Supreme Court has twice ruled on this issue and has held up our admissions process as an exemplar of how, in seeking to achieve a diverse student body, race may enter the process as one factor among many in consideration.”

What Bacow means is that the Supreme Court licenses racial discrimination so long as it isn’t too obvious, and that Harvard has been sufficiently discreet. In any case, Harvard has never before had to defend its admission policies in Federal court. It received honorable mention in Justice Lewis Powell’s eccentric 1978 opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, but no other justice concurred with Powell’s view on the subject. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in her 2003 opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger endorsed Powell’s view. That’s the foundation of Bacow’s claim—which seems awfully close to wishful thinking.

How wishful? Harvard uses ugly tactics to get the “diversity” it wants—where “diversity” looks remarkably like the “race quotas” that the Supreme Court said are illegal. Harvard uses “personality” evaluations to help it decide which students to admit, but it appears that “Harvard consistently rated Asian-American applicants lower than others on traits like “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being ‘widely respected.’” Harvard admissions officers didn’t even have to see the Asian-American applicants to know they weren’t likable enough.

A 2013 internal review by Harvard concluded that just accounting for extracurricular and personal ratings reduced the Asian-American share of the Harvard class by one sixth, from 31% to 26%. “Demographic” imperatives, which increased the number of admitted African Americans and Hispanics, reduced the number of Asian Americans by another third, down to 18% of the Harvard class.

18%. Which is a remarkably familiar number. Asian enrollment at elite universities has stabilized at around 18% for a generation, even as the proportion of Asian Americans in the population has risen substantially. Harvard’s Rube Goldberg admission procedures just happen to achieve the same result that you would have gotten by a simple racial quota—of the sort that once kept down the number of Rube Goldbergs at Harvard.

It’s no wonder that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has come out in support of the plaintiffs against Harvard. “Harvard has failed to carry its demanding burden to show that its use of race does not inflict unlawful racial discrimination on Asian-Americans,” said the Justice Department. CONTINUE AT SITE