Archives for category: Ethics
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Good News! Connecticut Eliminates Religious Exemptions for Vaccines

By dianeravitch
May 6, 2024 //
20

In recent years, religious freedom has been used to undermine public schools and public health. This trend damages communities and endangers children. In the following post, an authority praises Connecticut for eliminating the religious exemption for vaccination.

Dr. Paul Offit is a pediatrician who specializes in infectious diseases and vaccines. He is currently  the Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology, professor of pediatrics at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. He writes a blog where he warns about the dangers of refusing to vaccinate against diseases.

He wrote:

On February 13, 2024, National Geographic published a book I wrote called, TELL ME WHEN IT’S OVER: AN INSIDER’S GUIDE TO DECIPHERING COVID MYTHS AND NAVIGATING OUR POST-PANDEMIC WORLD. For the past few months, I have been writing about various issues discussed in that book.

Between January 2020 and March 2024, the CDC reported 338 cases of measles in 30 US states and jurisdictions. These outbreaks were consistent with a CDC survey showing that more parents are choosing non-medical vaccine exemptions, such as religious or philosophical exemptions, for their school children. Connecticut, however, is standing up to those who, in the name of religious freedoms, are putting children at unnecessary risk.

In 2000, the United States eliminated measles, the most contagious of the vaccine-preventable diseases. Success centered on the enforcement of school vaccine mandates that have existed in all 50 states since 1981. Unfortunately, during the past few years, legislative efforts by anti-vaccine groups have made it easier to opt out of vaccines for non-medical reasons. As a consequence, immunization rates among school children have dropped and measles has come back.

In Connecticut, on the other hand, immunization rates have risen for two straight years, exceeding pre-pandemic levels. During the 2022-2023 school year, more than 97 percent of Connecticut kindergartners were vaccinated against measles, up from 95.7 percent the year before and 95.3 percent the year before that. Why? The answer can be found in a 2021 law that eliminated the state’s religious exemption to vaccination.

Immunization rates of 95 percent or higher are required to provide herd immunity against measles. When rates drop, which is true in many states that now offer either religious or philosophical exemptions, measles comes back. The most dramatic example being an outbreak in Philadelphia in 1991 that centered on two fundamentalist churches that refused vaccines. During a three-month period, measles virus infected 1,400 people in the city and killed nine. All the deaths were in young children.

On its face, the phrase “religious exemptions to vaccination” is a contradiction in terms. All religions teach us to care about our children and our families and our neighbors. Choosing to put our children and those with whom they come in contact at risk is the opposite of a religious act. Further, about 9 million people in the United States, because they are on immune suppressive therapies for their cancers or transplants or autoimmune diseases, can’t be vaccinated. They depend on those around them for protection. Do we have a responsibility to love our neighbor?

Amy Pisani, a Connecticut resident, and head of the national group Vaccinate Your Family, praised the hard work required to counter the efforts of anti-vaccine groups to overturn vaccine mandates. “From the top down, we have incredibly supportive legislators,” said Pisani. “And when you have government agencies that are supportive at that level, it allows our public health officials to do their job.” As measles cases rise this year, and will no doubt return next winter, parents in Connecticut can feel more comfortable that state health officials and legislators have their backs.

Standing in stark contrast to efforts to protect children in Connecticut are those in Mississippi. In July 2023, Mississippi, which had up to that point only offered medical exemptions, became the most recent state to offer a religious exemption to vaccination. More than 2,000 parents immediately chose to exempt their children. The effort was not spearheaded by a religious group, but rather a virulent anti-vaccine group called Informed Consent Action Network. The lawyer who headed that effort paradoxically declared, “Freedom wins again.” Freedom to catch and transmit potentially deadly infections. Hardly a victory for children.

Categories Accountability, Connecticut, Ethics, Health, Science

Florida: Behind the Duelling Decisions About Abortion

By dianeravitch
May 4, 2024 //
18

Since the Florida Supreme Court released dual decisions about abortion, there’s been some confusion. Five of the seven justices were appointed by DeSantis.

One decision upheld a fifteen-week ban on abortion, with the understanding that it would be superseded on May 1 by a six-week ban, already signed into law by Governor DeSantis. A six-week ban is the equivalent of a total ban, since few (if any) women realize they are pregnant at that point. The ban was approved by a vote of 6-1.

The second decision allowed a referendum this November that would guarantee the protection of abortion rights in the state constitution. This decision was approved by a vote of 4-3.

Are these two decisions in conflict? Well, yes. And there is a catch. The state constitution includes a guarantee that “all natural persons’ have a right to life and liberty.” Are fetuses “natural persons?” Some of Florida’s Supreme Court justices think so.

Our reader Democracy espies a scheme behind the scene:

In the oral arguments over the Florida abortion amendment to the state constitution, the chief justice of the Florida Supremes – Carlos G. Muñiz – asked specifically about fetal rights. As Bloomberg reported,

“Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Carlos G. Muñiz asked during Feb. 7 oral arguments on an amendment that would protect abortion in the state whether the Florida Constitution’s guarantee that all ‘natural persons’ be ‘equal before the law’ can apply to fetuses. Muñiz questioned whether justices must first decide this before determining whether the proposed amendment protecting abortion until fetal viability was misleading.”

Meredith L. Sasso, a DeSantis appointee, raised the issue of fetal rights in voting NOT to allow the amendment on the ballot.  Renatha Francis, another DeSantis appointee, did the same.

Jamie R. Grosshans, ALSO appointed by DeSantis, wrote the opinion finding that in Florida privacy does NOT apply to abortion, also said this when voting AGAINST the abortion amendment’s placement on the ballot:

“The voter may think this amendment results in settling this issue once and for all. It does not.”

Is it too cynical to believe that the Florida Supreme Court would approve a referendum that they intend to invalidate?

Categories Cruelty, DeSantis, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, Florida, Gender

Rick Perlstein: Texas is a Fascist State

By dianeravitch
May 2, 2024 //
7

Rick Perlstein writes in The American Prospect about a conversation with a friend who is a journalist in Texas. His friend describes how his native state is run by men who are determined to stamp out every last vestige of democracy in Texas. The Republican Party keeps moving to the extreme and crushing reasonableness and sanity. The result is a fascist state where all power is concentrated in the hands of Gregg Abbott, Dan Patrick, and far-right fascists.

Perlstein writes:

I made a friend a few years back, a young journalist at a newspaper in a smaller Texas city, bored with his work and seeking out conversation on the kind of things I write about. As time went on, however, he just wanted to talk about escape. “A local city I cover, as a matter of habit, appeals every single public records request,” went a typical plaint. “In a state that hasn’t completely lost its mind, maybe the solution is to reach out to the AG’s office. Except in Texas, you’re trying to get an indicted man who might have helped with January 6 to act on behalf of the public.”

At the end of that year, he approached me on the horns of a dilemma: take a job offer as a beat reporter at a daily in a big Texas city, or quit journalism and find some job at a do-gooder nonprofit. The guy’s dog was named “Molly Ivins.” I told him I didn’t think he had much choice. Alas, he took this graybeard’s advice. Things since have been hardly more rewarding.

One day: “Working on a deep dive into how the state of Texas fails to protect intellectually disabled people from predatory guardians. Depressing stuff.”

Another day: “A thing that really irks me about covering conservative dustups is how profoundly dishonest the whole thing is … When it comes time to write, you have two options. Either cut through the BS and call it what it is; then they’ll tell you you’re just biased. Or you can try to finesse it and sound insane.”

Another: “I also just finished a story about how domestic violence homicides are through the roof in Texas (even as overall homicide rates have declined), but we don’t have the infrastructure to really know how bad conditions have become. It turns out when you turn women into second-class citizens and make guns easily accessible, that doesn’t go well.”

A couple of weeks back, he shared with me a dark epiphany: He no longer felt hope. Thought it might be high time to get the hell out of his native state forever. He asked if there was anything out there that gave me hope. Having reached the “Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown” stage of my relationship with the United States (in part thanks to his testimony from the front lines), I had no comfort to offer.

I did, however, have a suggestion. He could tell me about what all this was like. I could let you listen in. Forthwith, an edited and annotated transcript of my conversation with a man I’ll call Lonely Star. Though it’s not so much that he’s lonely; he has manyanguished compatriots who feel the same way. It’s just that they feel like there’s less they can do about it with every passing day.

Please open the link and read their conversation. It’s enlightening and frightening.

Categories Accountability, Corruption, Cruelty, Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Fascism, Texas, Vouchers

Forced Birth Laws Are Religious and Thus Violate the Constitution

By dianeravitch
May 1, 2024 //
10

Florida’s six-week ban on abortion went into effect today.

A reader who calls him/herself Quickwrit posted the following excellent thoughts about anti-abortion laws:

THE NINTH AMENDMENT that gives Clarence Thomas the constitutional right to live in an interracial marriage also gives women the constitutional right to abortion: The 9th Amendment says that rights, like the right to interracial marriage and the right to abortion, do not have to be stated in the Constitution in order to be constitutional rights because The Ninth Amendment says: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The current Supreme Court ruling on abortion not only violates the 9th Amendment, it violates the religious rights of many citizens. The ruling is supportive of the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church to which the six majority Justices belong.

The Bible gives commandments on a very, very long list of more than 600 laws on everything from divorce to gluttony or stealing — yet the Bible says nothing about abortion. Why is that? If abortion was even as important as gluttony and stealing, it would have been mentioned in the Bible.

Out of more than 600 laws of Moses, which includes the 10 Commandments, NONE — not one — comments on abortion. In fact, the Mosaic law in Exodus 21:22-25 clearly shows that causing the abortion of a fetus is NOT MURDER. Exodus 21:22-25 says that if a woman has a miscarriage as the result of an altercation with a man, the man who caused miscarriage should only pay a fine that is to be determined by the woman’s husband, but if the woman dies, the man is to be executed: “If a man strives with a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet there is no harm to the woman, he shall be punished according to what the woman’s husband determines and he shall pay as the judges determine.” So, the miscarriage is treated like the destruction of property, not murder.

There are Christian denominations that allow abortion in most instances; these Christian denominations include the United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian Church USA. The United Methodist Church and Episcopal churches allow abortion in cases of medical necessity, and the United Universalist Association also allows abortion.

Most of the opposition to abortion comes from fundamentalist and evangelical Christians who believe that a full-fledged human being is created at the instant of conception. But that is a religious BELIEF and religious beliefs cannot be recognized by the government under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of our Constitution. Moreover, the belief that a fetus is a human person, complete with a soul, is a Christian interpretation of the Jewish Bible — the Old Testament. But, Jewish scholars whose ancestors wrote the Old Testament and who know best what the words mean say that is a wrong interpretation of their writings.

Christians largely base their view that a fetus is a complete human being and that abortion is murder on the Jewish Bible’s Psalm 139: “You knit me together in my mother’s womb…You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion as I was woven together in the dark of the womb. You saw me before I was born.”

But who better to translate the accurate meaning of Psalm 139 than the Jews who wrote it? And Jewish scholars point out that Psalm 139 merely describes the development of a fetus and does not mean that the fetus has a soul and is a person. In fact, the Jewish Talmud explains that for the first 40 days of a woman’s pregnancy, the fetus is considered “mere fluid” and is just part of the mother’s body, like an appendix or liver. Only after the fetus’s head emerges from the womb at birth is the baby considered a “nefesh” – Hebrew for “soul” or “spirit” – a human person.

The idea that full-fledged human life begins at conception is a sectarian religious belief that isn’t held by the majority of religions, including a number of mainstream Christian religions.

Therefore, any local, state, or federal law that holds that full-fledged human life begins at conception is unconstitutional because such laws are made in recognition of an establishment of religion and violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

THE COURT BENDS THE FACTS: The University of London scientist whose research is cited by the Supreme Court in its ruling to take away abortion rights says that his research has been misinterpreted by Justice Alito and the Supreme Court’s activist conservative majority. Neuroscientist Dr. Giandomenico Iannetti says that the Court is ABSOLUTELY WRONG to say that his research shows that a fetus can feel pain when it is less than 24 weeks of development. “My results by no means imply that,” Dr. Iannetti declares. “I feel they were used in a clever way to make a point.” And Dr. John Wood, molecular neurobiologist at the University, points out that all serious scientists agree that a fetus can NOT feel pain until at least 24 weeks “and perhaps not even then.” Dr. Vania Apkarian, head of the Center for Transitional Pain Research at Chicago’s Feinberg School of Medicine, says that the medical evidence on a fetus not feeling pain before 24 weeks or longer has not changed in 50 years and remains “irrefutable”.

LIFE OF WOE: In its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling upholding abortion rights, the Supreme Court set “viability” — the point at which a fetus can survive outside of the womb — as the dividing line after which some restrictions can be imposed on abortion rights. The pending ruling by current activist conservative majority on the Court will do away with the concept of viability, yet even with all of today’s medical miracles to keep a prematurely born or aborted fetus alive, of all the tens of thousands of cases, 90% OF FETUSES BORN AT 22 WEEKS DO NOT SURVIVE, and data shows that the majority of those that manage to be kept alive live the rest of their lives with a combination of BIRTH DEFECTS that include mental impairment, cerebral palsy, breathing problems, blindness, deafness, and other disorders that often require frequent hospitalizations during their lifetimes.

Categories Ethics, Extremism, Fake, Gender, Religion

Greg Olear: Jared Kushner’s Ties to the National Enquirer

By dianeravitch
April 30, 2024 //
3

Greg Olear noticed Jared Kushner’s new role as a financier and his success at staying far, far away from his father-in-law’s trial in New York City. He also noticed that Jared had replaced Michael Cohen as Trump’s liaison with David Pecker and the National Enquirer. Naturally, he wonders why Jared is not being called to testify.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Character, Elections, Ethics, Trump

Florida: Should These Children Live or Die?

By dianeravitch
April 29, 2024 //
7

Scott Maxwell, columnist for The Orlando Sentinel, wrote about the state’s callous indifference to the neediest of the state’s children. These are the children who are not included in Ron DeSantis’s commitment to “right to life.” He cared about them when they were fetuses but neglects them now. Their lives don’t matter.

Maxwell writes:

Last week, the Orlando Sentinel shared a gut-wrenching story about the parents of some of this state’s sickest children either losing Medicaid coverage or bracing for losses.

Keep in mind: We’re not talking about kids with sniffles and headaches, but toddlers with traumatic brain injuries who need feeding tubes, wheelchairs and round-the-clock care. And kids who are nonverbal with challenges so severe that their parents take days off work just to care for them.

They are Florida’s most vulnerable residents.

The story was depressing, yet merely the latest in a long string of stories about various vulnerable populations. Consider other recent headlines:

https://mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2022/10/31/thousands-of-disabled-floridians-waiting-years-to-get-off-wait-list-for-help

https://www.wfla.com/8-on-your-side/just-help-me-get-my-kid-services-tampa-boy-with-autism-among-460k-florida-kids-kicked-off-medicaid/

https://floridapolitics.com/archives/670068-more-than-22k-children-dropped-from-florida-kidcare-in-2024-as-state-challenges-federal-eligiblity-protections/

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/15/1163617435/florida-is-1-of-11-states-declining-to-accept-federal-money-to-expand-medicaid

That last headline was actually from last year. Now, we’re one of only 10 states rejecting billions of federal dollars meant to help struggling families.

Each of those stories has its own complexities involving different segments of families in need. But I submit the common theme boils down to a single, soul-defining litmus test:

When you see a paralyzed or terminally ill child or an impoverished family, you either believe we have a collective, societal obligation to help them … or you don’t.

I submit this state has too many of the latter in charge. And too many people who just breeze past the dire headlines, because they have the luxury of doing so. Because they aren’t personally affected.

Like many of you, I was dealt a relatively good hand in life. My wife and I are healthy. So are our kids. But I still believe we have an obligation to care for those who aren’t, particularly those who can’t care for themselves.

I think most people agree. On tough issues — like abortion, taxes or the death penalty — reasonable people can reach different conclusions. But throughout time, most civilizations have agreed on this point.

In Florida, however, the state leaves children born with severe disabilities — without the ability to feed themselves or ever live on their own — languishing on waiting lists for services. The average wait is seven to 10 years. Some kids die before they’re served.

Again, either you think that’s OK or you don’t. The leaders of this state haven’t fully funded that Medicaid waiver program since Jeb Bush was in office.

Now, if you’re healthy and wealthy, the term “Medicaid waiver” may be unfamiliar. The health care landscape is littered with a dizzying array of jargon. There are Medicaid waivers, iBudgets, the Medikids program, Healthy Kids, the Children’s Medical Services Health Plan.

It all makes most people’s eyes glaze over. But each program serves a different population and has two common themes: Most are incredibly difficult to navigate. And most leave many people struggling to get the services they need … often by design.

Nowhere is that more evident than in this state’s steadfast refusal to accept federal dollars to expand Medicaid.

The expansion was created under the Affordable Care Act to provide coverage to millions more low-income Americans and hundreds of thousands more Floridians. A slew of organizations and think tanks have said Florida should do so for both moral and economic reasons.

Health care experts say it would save lives. Hospitals say it will create jobs. The Florida Chamber of Commerce says it will boost our economy by tens of billions of dollars.

GOP lawmakers, however, have steadfastly refused — as part of a decade-long tantrum against “Obamacare.” To hell with those who need coverage and for whom the money is there. These politicians say they’re unconvinced the program will work or that the state’s costs won’t rise.

But remember: Florida Republicans are an outlier. The vast majority of states — including dark red ones led by hard-core conservative leaders — have already accepted the money.

“It’s pro-life, it’s saving lives, it is creating jobs, it is saving hospitals,” Arizona’s former governor, Jan Brewer, said when she took the money back in 2013. “I don’t know how you can get any more conservative than that.”

Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said: “We’re a compassionate state, and we’re not going to leave 220,000 people without some recourse.”

Florida Republicans, however, are fine with abandoning those low-income people. And sick kids. And those with profound disabilities. Re-read the headlines.

After reading all this, if you believe this state should do better by its most vulnerable residents, do me a favor, will you? Don’t send me an email telling me you agree. While I enjoy hearing from readers, I’m not the one who needs to hear this.

Send your thoughts to your state legislators. Or to the House speaker or Senate president. (Their contact info can be found at www.leg.state.fl.us) Or use the governor’s website at www.flgov.com/email-the-governor to share your thoughts there.

You can also ask them some basic questions.

Ask them if they believe it’s acceptable for 22,000 families with profound disabilities to face a 7- to 10-year wait for getting Medicaid waivers.

Ask if they believe the state did the right thing by removing 1.3 million people, including families with terminally sick children, from the state’s Medicaid roll.

Or just copy all those headlines above and ask: “Do you really believe all of this is OK?”

I’d like to believe most decent people don’t. But the headlines keep coming.

Categories DeSantis, Ethics, Florida, Health, Special Education

Rick Wilson: The “Both-Sides” Argument is Dangerous

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2024 //
11

Rick Wilson, a Never-Trump Republican and a founder of The Lincoln Project, warns about the danger of normalizing Trump:

I’m seeing a lot of traditional, DC “bothsides” reporting lately, arguing that this is at some level a “normal” election between a center-left Democratic party and a center-right Republican party.


This morning, Axios published a piece by Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei titled “Behind the Curtain: America’s reality distortion machine,” which caused a stir in political media circles.


It leads out with a question: “Here’s a wild thought experiment: What if we’ve been deceived into thinking we’re more divided, more dysfunctional, and more defeated than we actually are?” and proceeds to make some pretty good arguments about why we’re not a dystopian hellscape. I think they missed the big point, and this piece will stand out as a Washington Normalcy Bias exemplar for a long time.


My friend Molly Jong-Fast lit them up on Morning Joe,
She had precisely the right response: “But you understand that the conventional framing elevates the autocrat.”


No, not every American — in fact, not even a majority — is locked in the day to day of political struggle. Yes, there are silos. Yes, the algorithmic hypnosis of social media is real.


I cede all those points. America is a nation filled with hundreds of millions of people who aren’t partisan jihadis, left or right. There really is a desire for basic decency, decoupled from political rage, induced or not.

They’re not wrong to make these points, and the America they describe is one we should crave—not being involved in politics every moment of the day is a luxury only present in stable democracies.


But they ignore the existential issue underpinning this all.


We aren’t in a nation where the sensible center will survive if Donald Trump wins.


Only one side of the political argument wants their president to govern like a dictator. Only one side believes that the President is above the law — if his name is Donald Trump. Only one side of the political equation mounted an armed attack on the United States Capitol.


Only one side has welcomed the “no enemies to our right” philosophy, which means their party winks and nods at the alt-reich, the white nationalists, and the rest of the Daily Stormer crowd. Only one side is banning books, diving deeply into the seas of culture war cruelty and persecution.


Only one side backs America’s enemies abroad and promises to hand Europe over to Vladimir Putin on a plate. I could recite the Bill of Condemnation all day, but you understand the point.


The political movement that embraces the aforementioned horrors is MAGA, and its sole leader is Donald Trump.

Once again, the world is playing chess, and Donald Trump is eating the pieces and crapping on the board, and instead of horror, the reaction is a shrug.


This isn’t a regular election with typical outcomes.


Ordinary people living ordinary lives who think politics doesn’t matter and that the world will go on as it has can’t grapple with what happens in a post-American Presidency. It seems a lot of Washington reporters can’t either.


Normalcy bias is the best friend of authoritarians. If you think the algo-driven bubble on social media is robust, nothing tops normalcy bias. This cognitive bias can play into the hands of authoritarian regimes or leaders in a few ways:


It plays to the natural tendency for people to underestimate the possibility of a disaster, dictator, or disruptive event coming to the fore. It lets people assume that things will continue as normal because they’ve always been that way. (Berlin, 1936, anyone?)


It lulls people into complacency: they assume things will continue as they always have, and like frogs boiling in a slow pot, they may fail to recognize creeping authoritarianism and the erosion of democratic norms and civil liberties until it’s too late.


It makes people—even people reporting on it professionally—miss clear signals that a movement or regime is becoming more authoritarian, even when its leaders lay out their plans in broad daylight.

Once you say, “It can’t happen here,” there’s a high likelihood it’s already happening.
The normalcy bias makes people slow to react and resist authoritarian encroachments because they don’t perceive the seriousness of the threat until it’s too late.


Normalcy bias also rears its ugly head after the damage is done. Authoritarian actions are emergencies, you see. “The Caravan! Antifa! Transing the kids!” demand temporary measures lulling citizens into acceptance of the worst…and the temporary measures seem to last forever.

People convinced that the current system is immutable are less likely to make contingency plans or organize resistance against potential authoritarianism taking root. Trust me, the Never Trump folks screaming into the void for the last decade can tell you all about this one.
It’s tempting to hope that societal inertia in the center will overcome the energy and danger on the MAGA flank.


It hasn’t, and it won’t.

Categories Bigotry, Cheating, Corruption, Cruelty, Democracy, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Fascism, Trump

Bill Kristol: Reject the Mob, Every Mob

By dianeravitch
April 25, 2024 //
89

Bill Kristol is a Never Trumper who writes for The Bulwark. He reminds me of my conservative roots. I have always feared mobs. Once mobs form, it’s impossible to know what direction they will take and who is leading them. In the few times in my life that I inadvertently found myself stuck in a mob, I was terrified and got out as quickly as I could. There is something about a mob that is fundamentally in opposition to rationalism and the democratic temperament. Disagree with me if you wish, but please, be civil.

Kristol writes:

The AP reports on this week’s spring breakdown: 

Columbia canceled in-person classes, dozens of protesters were arrested at New York University and Yale, and the gates to Harvard Yard were closed to the public Monday as some of the most prestigious U.S. universities sought to defuse campus tensions over Israel’s war with Hamas.

More than 100 pro-Palestinian demonstrators who had camped out on Columbia’s green were arrested last week, and similar encampments have sprouted up at universities around the country as schools struggle with where to draw the line between allowing free expression while maintaining safe and inclusive campuses.

At New York University, an encampment set up by students swelled to hundreds of protesters throughout the day Monday. The school said it warned the crowd to leave, then called in the police after the scene became disorderly and the university said it learned of reports of “intimidating chants and several antisemitic incidents.” Shortly after 8:30 p.m., officers began making arrests.

Here’s a tweet from Jay Nordlinger that’s stuck with me: “There is scarcely anything in this world more terrifying than a mob. It is, frankly, pretty much at the root of my politics: this anti-mob feeling. Madisonian conservatism (or Madisonian liberalism, if you like) has struck me as right from a young age. Popular passions can kill.”

As we say on Twitter: 💯. Or even 💯💯.

Mobs can kill. They can also destroy the fabric of a civic order. They can disfigure the politics of a liberal, representative democracy. And so a healthy society will deter, will tamp down, will reject as much as possible mob action and mob spirit.

Now it’s of course true that there will always be elements of mob spirit in our politics, in our life. Some of the spirit of the mob runs, one might say, through each human soul.

A sound society suppresses that spirit to some extent. And since it can’t be altogether suppressed, a healthy social order also channels it, so it can be indulged and released harmlessly. A liberal democracy can have lots of sports fans.

But of course being a “fan” is the civilized version of being a fanatic.

Even in a healthy society, resistance to fanaticism is always fragile. And once fanaticism is unleashed, once the mob is empowered, it is hard to restore order and civility and decency.

Which is one reason thoughtful defenders of democracy have always feared demagogues, have sought to thwart their emergence, and have opposed them when they do rise.

Demagogues who can stoke mob spirit are dangerous. The problem with Donald Trump isn’t simply his policies, or his personal character. It’s his willingness, or rather his eagerness, to stoke the spirit of the mob. Trump’s posts on Truth Social condition some among us to the mob spirit as much as the hateful chants at Columbia or Yale condition others. MAGA is an expression of mob spirit. The campus encampments are manifestations of mob spirit.

And mob spirit is always nearer at hand than those with a sunny view of human nature would like. The lynch mobs in the South often consisted of respectable citizens, pillars of their communities. Many Berliners who participated in Kristallnacht went back to their normal office and jobs the next day.

So I’m with Jay on this. It seems simple, but it’s important: Be anti-mob. Because resisting and combating mob spirit is central to our political and social well-being.

And not just when that spirit is on the other side politically. Indeed, it’s more important to resist the mob when it claims to be acting for purposes you agree with.

Yes, it’s true that the consequences of the mob spirit taking over one of our two major political parties are greater than those of the mob spirit erupting on some elite college campuses. But lesser evils are still evil, and they can grow into greater ones. And history also suggests that indulging the mob spirit on one side soon enough empowers it on another. The mob spirit must be resisted across the board.

Resisting the mob isn’t all it takes to establish a sound society or a healthy politics. But it’s a necessary start. 

—William Kristol

Categories Democracy, Discipline, Disruption, Ethics, Extremism, Freedom of Speech, Higher Education

Tune in! I Discuss “Slaying Goliath” Tomorrow with Tim Slekar

By dianeravitch
April 24, 2024 //
3

Tim Slekar is a fearless warrior for public schools, teachers, and students. I will be talking to him about Slaying Goliath and the struggle to protect public schools from the depredations of billionaires and zealots.

This Thursday on Civic Media: Dive Back into “Slaying Goliath” with Diane Ravitch

Grab your pencils—BustEDpencils is gearing up for a no-holds-barred revival of Diane Ravitch’s game-changing book, *Slaying Goliath*, live this Thursday on Civic Media. 

Launched into a world on the brink of a pandemic, *Slaying Goliath* hit the shelves with a mission: to arm the defenders of public education against the Goliaths of privatization. But then, COVID-19 overshadowed everything. Despite that, the battles Diane described haven’t paused—they’ve intensified. And this Thursday, we’re bringing these crucial discussions back to the forefront with Diane herself.

This Thursday at 7pm EST on BustEDpencils, we’re not just revisiting a book; we’re reigniting a movement. Diane will dissect the current threats to public education and highlight how *Slaying Goliath* still maps the path to victory for our schools. This isn’t just about reflection—it’s about action.

**It’s time to get real. It’s time to get loud. It’s time to tune in this Thursday at 7 PM EST on Civic Media.**

If you believe that without a robust public education system our democracy is in jeopardy, then join us. Listen in, call in (855-752-4842), and let’s get fired up. We’ve got a fight to win, and Diane Ravitch is leading the charge.

Mark your calendars and fire up Civic Media this Thursday at 7pm Central. 

Categories Billionaires, Budget Cuts, Censorship, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Corporate Reform, Courage, Cruelty, Dark Money, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Ethics, Extremism, For-Profit, Fraud, Injustice, Privatization, Propaganda, Resistance, School Choice, Separation of church and state, State Takeover, Supporting public schools, Teachers, Unions, Vouchers

What Universities Should Do About Hate Speech and Behavior

By dianeravitch
April 22, 2024 //
82

I recently visited Wellesley College to attend the lecture of lawyer-scholar Patricia Williams, who spoke about book banning, censorship and critical race theory. She was brilliant. Her lecture will be posted as soon as Wellesley releases the tape. She spoke as part of the annual lecture series that I endowed.

At the end of her lecture, a student asked a question. The student said that she had sent out a notice to all the others in her dorm denouncing genocide. Now she wanted Professor Williams to advise her on how to respond to an older alumna about genocide in a manner that was respectful and would lead to further discussion.

Professor Williams responded, and I paraphrase, “If you really want to have an honest exchange, don’t use the word ‘genocide.’ It’s a conversation stopper. Genocide has a specific legal definition, and it’s not the right word to use if you really want a discussion.”

Later, I had dinner with Professor Williams and Wellesley President Paula Johnson. Dr. Johnson described what happened when Hillary Clinton, the College’s most distinguished alumna, spoke recently on campus. Students disrupted her speech and denounced her as a war criminal. When her car pulled away from the President’s house, students surrounded the car, shouting obscenities and exercising their middle finger.

Frankly, I was appalled. Colleges and universities must protect free speech, but there are limits. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. There must be other limits. The purpose of a college education is to teach critical thinking, to exemplify the value of reasoned debate, to maintain civility when there are strong disagreements, to be open to learning.

This morning, Columbia University announced that it is offering online classes because the campus is unsafe for learning, especially for Jewish students. This is outrageous. Campuses must be safe places for all students and faculty. Civility matters.

Colleges and universities should, in my opinion, establish clear rules about the speech that stifles others from speaking, about speech that diminishes freedom of discussion, about speech that threatens the physical safety of others, about speech that undermines free speech and civility. And most certainly for behavior that makes the campus unsafe for students and faculty.

Pro-Palestinian students should argue their cause without shutting down discussion and threatening Jewish students. Closing down debate, antagonizing those who disagree, creating a climate in which “academic freedom” is used to negate academic freedom is simply wrong.

There must be clear guidelines about the kind of conduct that is not permitted because it destroys the fundamental purpose of higher education, which is the freedom to teach, to learn, and to debate.

We have heard repeatedly since October 7 that expressions and behavior that are anti-Israel are not anti-Semitic. But the widespread harassment of Jewish students, even Jewish faculty, gives the lie to this claim. Such harassment is anti-Semitic.

I deplore the barbarism of October 7. I deplore the brutality of the war in Gaza and the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. I hope that peace negotiations bring about two states and a just peace.

I deplore the surge of Jew-hatred on American campuses. Jewish students and all other students, as well as Jewish faculty and all faculty, should be able to learn and teach without fearing for their safety.

Colleges and universities must establish rules that promote and protect civility. Students who harass and endanger others cancel the purpose of higher education. They should be warned and if they persist, they should be suspended, and if they continue in their actions, expelled.

Categories Academic Freedom, Accountability, Bigotry, Ethics, Extremism, Fascism, Freedom of Speech, Higher Education
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »