Displaying posts published in

July 2021

Important Reading on the Critical Race Theory in Schools Debate By Dan McLaughlin

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/important-reading-on-the-critical-race-theory-in-schools-debate/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_

Conservatives are on the march in the political offensive against the teaching of Critical Race Theory and related racialist concepts in K-12 public schools, a battle that has moved into state legislatures. I have written about some of the philosophical problems with the “anti-anti-CRT” movement. But it is also the case that the anti-CRT initiatives must navigate a series of political and legal obstacles, and prudent consideration of those is a worthwhile task for those of us who believe in that cause.

Greg Lukianoff, CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), has some thoughts worth reading in a blog post co-authored with three other FIRE staffers. FIRE is, as I have detailed, an essential defender of free speech rights in higher education, without which conservative college and graduate students would be in a much worse situation. As you might expect, Lukianoff is somewhat skeptical of using state laws to limit the teaching of ideas in any school, particularly universities, but he takes a thoughtful approach to the important distinctions: between public and private schools, between universities and K-12 schools, between academic freedom and the power of government to intimidate and indoctrinate students. On the legal and political status of public K-12 education:

The modern view of education as a pipeline designed to carry children from preschool to graduate school tends to obscure the fact that K-12 education had a very different evolution from the university system. Compulsory public education was a project advanced by politicians and enacted by legislatures for a political purpose [as far back as 1794]…[W]hat will become the curriculum in most public K-12 schools is democratically decided by a combination of state legislatures, local school boards, and individual schools. As such, they represent the will of the people, as expressed in local and state elections. The individual schools cannot exceed the scope granted them by their school boards, which themselves derive power and authority from the state…Because K-12 attendance is compelled by the state and, at public schools, funded predominantly by local taxes, it is understandable that the substance of that teaching is subject to democratic oversight, through state legislatures and elected (or appointed by those who were elected) school boards. Legislators are expected to exercise oversight when citizens with children in the schools voice legitimate concerns about curricular matters.

China Continues Crackdown on Companies By Sean-Michael Pigeon

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/china-continues-crackdown-on-companies/

The Chinese Communist Party has tightened its grip over its political and economic system in a number of high-profile moves. From silencing those who mention Taiwan’s independence to quashing Hong Kong’s independence, the CCP is aggressively targeting people and institutions that it deems a threat. A new Bloomberg report finds that the Communist Party will be closing a legal loophole that benefitted Chinese tech companies. This change has worried U.S. investors and politicians who are rightly concerned about whether China is stable enough to invest in.  

The China Securities Regulatory Commission is amending a rule that mandates companies get approval from the Chinese government to list their companies in the U.S. or Hong Kong. Before, tech companies were able to maneuver around this rule by setting up companies offshore. This loophole has been quite lucrative for Chinese firms, which have raised over $75 billion in first-time share offerings in the United States. Despite the financial success of companies that have used this loophole, Bloomberg reports,

The proposed change is the first indication of how Beijing plans to implement a crackdown on overseas listings flagged by the country’s State Council on Tuesday. Closer oversight would plug a gap that’s been used for two decades by technology giants from Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. to Tencent Holdings Ltd. to attract foreign capital and list offshore, potentially thwarting the ambitions of firms like ByteDance Ltd. contemplating going public outside the mainland.

Since the American and Chinese economies are increasingly intertwined, this is not only a problem for Chinese consumers. CNBC reported that the $2 trillion Chinese tech market has been a major object of American investment. This means that any volatility in the Chinese market can deeply affect our own economy. Politicians are becoming more aware of this issue. The Financial Times reported that Marco Rubio said,

“American investors still have no insight into the company’s [DiDi, a Chinese ride-sharing app] financial strength because the Chinese Communist party blocks US regulators from reviewing the books,” Rubio said. “That puts the investments of American retirees at risk and funnels desperately needed US dollars into Beijing.”

All of this volatility is projected to have a negative effect on the Chinese economy because regulating companies hurts growth and stifles innovation. Xi Jinping’s attacks on his own country’s firms show the dangers of a socialized economy. More important, it should serve as a warning to American investors who heavily invest in foreign, state-run economies. America can’t stop the Chinese Communist Party’s authoritarianism from hurting its own economy, and American investors should be careful tying their financial success to China’s benevolence.

Yet Another One Of My UChicago Peers Was Brutally Murdered By A Stray Bullet In Lori Lightfoot’s Crime-Infested City A home is not a home when you’re terrified for your life. Mayor Lori Lightfoot and the CareNotCops organizers should be ashamed of themselves.By Audrey Unverferth

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/07/yet-another-one-of-my-uchicago-peers-was-brutally-murdered-by-a-stray-bullet-in-lori-lightfoots-crime-infested-city/

One of my University of Chicago peers was viciously murdered on Thursday by a stray bullet on a Chicago Green Line CTA elevated train. Like countless other UChicago students, Max Lewis was traveling home after his summer internship downtown, when a bullet came through the train window and struck him in the neck. Lewis passed away after being taken off life support on Sunday. He was 20 years old.

As a rising junior at the University of Chicago, Lewis was excelling. Reading about Lewis’s life, he sounds like the type of person we all hope to be—full of joy, surrounded by friends, and excited for his promising future. He was living in Chicago for the summer to complete a prestigious investment banking internship.

Lewis didn’t have to work in person, but he was such a friendly, dedicated individual that he chose to make the trek downtown. His young life was senselessly cut short when his train ride home was interrupted by yet another Chicago shooting. 

According to the police, Lewis was not the intended target of the attack. The case is still being investigated, and no arrests have been made. 

“Max was a talented student and beloved campus leader and friend who will be greatly missed,” UChicago stated in a university-wide email. “He was pursuing a double major in economics and computer science, treasurer of the Promontory Investment Research RSO, president of the fraternity AEPi, and actively involved in the student community on campus.” 

When reflecting on the loss of his friend and fraternity brother, Zachary Cogan rightly slammed Chicago’s inexcusable violence. “This happens all the time in Chicago,” he emphasized to the Chicago Sun-Times. “It needs to end.” 

It’s Critical Race Theory That Is Un-American, Not Laws Banning It This is not about banning racists from speaking, but in using representative government to deny them the privilege of receiving taxpayer sinecures to help them pursue America’s collapse.By Joy Pullmann

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/07/its-critical-race-theory-that-is-un-american-not-laws-banning-it/

Without breaking a sweat, the New York Times has gone from insisting critical race theory doesn’t exist to arguing state legislatures must let public schools inflict it on kids. Kmele Foster, David French, Jason Stanley, and Thomas Chatterton Williams claim in the Times that “Anti-Critical Race Theory Laws Are Un-American.”

This is exactly backwards. It’s teaching critical race theory that is un-American. The reframed Marxist ideology aims to destroy core American cultural and legal norms, including those these authors claim as the basis of their support for forcing taxpayers to subsidize its racism.

Just to name a few, critical theorists oppose free speech, the consent of the governed, freedom of association, and equal justice under the law. This is not about banning them from speaking, but in using representative government to deny them the privilege of taxpayer sinecures to help them foment America’s subversion and collapse.

CRT teaches not only that people are defined by their skin color but also that paler skin is inherently evil. So this theory is used to justify the insistence that the United States is inherently evil, which is also patently anti-American.

The concepts of “systemic racism,” “white privilege,” “anti-racism,” and “equity [as opposed to equality]” all stem from critical theory. Since this ideology is obviously false and toxic, state legislatures have moved to protect children from being taught it as gospel in the public education systems they directly oversee.

Racists Can Still Speak Freely, Just Not on My Dime

Despite the obvious anti-American racial toxicity of this worldview, here’s the core of the four men’s NYT argument against banning its promulgation in public schools:

They are speech codes. They seek to change public education by banning the expression of ideas. Even if this censorship is legal in the narrow context of public primary and secondary education, it is antithetical to educating students in the culture of American free expression.

New Hunter Biden Disclosures Feature $100,000 Donation Of Former FBI Director Freeh To The Biden Grandchildren !!

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/07/04/new-hunter-biden-disclosures-feature-100000-donation-of-former-fbi-director-freeh-to-the-biden-grandchildren/

We recently discussed the latest disclosures from the laptop of Hunter Biden showing new business dealings leveraging access to his father — and further contradicting President Joe Biden’s repeated denials of any knowledge or involvement with his son’s deals.  Now there is a new disclosure of $100,000 given to the Biden grandchildren by former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was seeking business deals with the Bidens.  As usual, there remains a virtual blackout on the Biden laptop or the mounting evidence of Hunter Biden’s influence peddling. Beyond a couple outlets like the New York Post, voters have to rely on the foreign press for coverage of the disclosures.

Freeh reportedly made the gift in April 2016 to the trust for the children of Hunter’s late brother, Beau Biden, who died of brain cancer in 2015. The donation would well be a humanitarian gesture. However, it was the contemporaneous pitches for business deals with Hunter that has attracted the attention of some. In July 2016, he contacted Hunter and said that he “spoke to Dad a few weeks ago.” He tells Hunter “I believe that working together on these (and other legal) matters would be of value, fun and rewarding.”

Desperate Dems Deny Their Agenda Three Times

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/07/08/dems-deny-their-agenda-three-times-to-avoid-public-crucifixion/

Three of the big issues of the day have the liberal left scrambling to pretend that it’s not a group of outside-the-mainstream radicals: defunding police, critical race theory, and voter ID laws. There should be repercussions for such cravenness.

After spending the better part of the year talking up a “defund the police” agenda, Democrats are now trying to claim that it’s Republicans who want to strip the police of their resources.

Defund the Police: For more than a year, leading Democrats – up to and including President Joe Biden – have talked up the idea of cutting police budgets because local law enforcement is plagued by racism.

During his campaign, Biden was asked, “Do you believe there is systemic racism in law enforcement?”

“Absolutely,” Biden responded.

In another interview, Biden was asked, “Can we agree that we can redirect some of the funding” for the cops.

Biden said, “Yes, absolutely.”

His running mate and now Vice President Kamala Harris said that governments must “reexamine” where their funding is going.

Democrats didn’t just talk about defunding the police. Deep blue cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Austin, Portland, and others acted on it, slashing police budgets. The predictable result was an explosion in violent crime. Over the July 4 weekend alone, more than 180 people were shot to death. Not only that, but ambushes of police grew more than 90% this year.

So what’s the Democrats’ response? To claim that it’s Republicans who are defunding the police.

Pennsylvania Senate Chairman Initiates Forensic Probe of 2020, 2021 Elections By Zachary Stieber

https://www.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-senate-chairman-initiates-forensic-probe-of-2020-2021-elections_3890927.html

A Pennsylvania senator announced on July 7 that he has triggered a forensic investigation of the 2020 and 2021 elections.

State Sen. Doug Mastriano, a Republican, issued letters to several counties requesting information and materials that he said would enable an investigation.

“It’s distinct from an audit or forensic audit. It’s a big deep dive, like we saw in Arizona, but even deeper,” Mastriano told The Epoch Times.

“It takes a hard look at software, machine, scanners, in addition to looking at all the ballots themselves to see if they were hand-filled-in or copied by a machine. So a scientific approach to get to the bottom of what happened, what went right, what went wrong in an election. It takes out all bias.”

Philadelphia County received a letter, as did two that lean Republican: York and Tioga counties.

They were asked to send over hard copies of ballots and other election materials. Mastriano expects a court battle to play out and is ready to go to his committee and request subpoena power if the counties don’t comply or indicate their willingness to comply by July 31.

A deputy for Philadelphia Commissioner Omar Sabir, a Democrat, told The Epoch Times that Sabir believes the elections were run freely and secure. He said that the commissioners are consulting with the city’s law department on the request from the state Senate. Nick Custodio, a deputy for Philadelphia Commissioner Lisa Deeley, a Democrat, said that her office is reviewing the requests.

“We do want to be clear, however, that Senator Mastriano’s letter reiterates claims about the November 2020 election that have been resoundingly rejected by courts. The repetition of baseless claims by elected officials poses a real challenge to our democratic processes. We are committed to continuing the hard work of ensuring that Philadelphians are able to exercise their right to vote,” he said in an email.

A York County official acknowledged receipt of Mastriano’s requests but declined to comment. Tioga County did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

In an op-ed sent to news outlets, Mastriano charged that there’s a strong case for an investigation, noting that 2.7 million mail-in ballots were counted in the 2020 election, compared to just 263,000 in the prior presidential election. He also noted that many of the ballots were counted without signature verification.

More Than 500 Chinese STEM Students Denied Visa to the US By Alex Wu

https://www.theepochtimes.com/more-than-500-chinese-stem-students-denied-visa-to-the-us_3890384.html

More than 500 Chinese STEM students’ visa applications to study at major American universities were recently rejected by the U.S. government over security concerns, Chinese media reported. The news sparked debate on Chinese social media and netizens claim that most of the student visa applicants are from Chinese universities that have ties to the Chinese military.

On July 7, Chinese state-run newspaper China Daily reported that at least 500 Chinese students who are majored in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) were denied visas by the U.S. Embassy and Consulates on the grounds of violating Section 212(f) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act and Presidential Proclamation 10043.

Section 212(f) gives the U.S. president the power to deny entry of aliens or non-U.S. nationals who are deemed detrimental to the interests of the United States. Based on that statute, former President Donald Trump issued Proclamation 10043 on May 29, 2020, titled “Suspension of Entry as Nonimmigrants of Certain Students and Researchers From the People’s Republic of China,” in response to China’s technological theft through its researchers and students studying at American universities and research institutes.

According to China Daily, the visa applicants are all graduate students who have been accepted by American universities—including Harvard University, Yale University, University of California at Berkeley, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Johns Hopkins University—to study for a doctoral or master’s degree in the United States. Most of them are studying engineering, computer science, machinery, chemistry, materials science, biomedicine, and other science programs.

After their visa applications were rejected, more than 500 Chinese STEM students co-signed a letter that circulated on Chinese social media, asking the U.S. government to resolve the so-called “discrimination and suppression” of Chinese students.

Ranked-Choice Voting Is Bad for Everyone It appeals to progressives because it allows them to vote twice—once for show and once for real. By Harvey Mansfield

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ranked-choice-voting-is-bad-for-everyone-11625674248?mod=opinion_lead_pos6

When it comes to counting votes, America’s political parties want to keep or gain their own advantage. The public interest, however, demands a nonpartisan method. No neutral method has yet been devised that merely elicits the people’s will without twisting it one way or another. Ranked-choice voting is an attempt that has its own twist and will make elections worse for both parties.

The idea isn’t new but it has gained favor, mostly from the left. It can be dismissed as too complicated and, coming as it does from professors, too demanding for most voters outside New York City. But I would like to present three deeper faults in it that concern how voters think, for ranked-choice voting is intended to make them think in a certain way.

First, by ranking choices a voter is required to divide his vote between a favorite candidate and some merely acceptable ones. The first choice is what the voter privately wills—the representative who suits him best. This choice is not directed at the common good, which requires that voters consider what others want. In a free country voters should desire a common good superior to the wishes of private individuals to prevail.

Ranked-choice voting makes the common good inferior to each person’s private first choice. The common good of the country typically gets ranked second choice or below for each citizen.

Guilty Until Proven Innocent An FBI raid in Beverly Hills tests the limits of civil forfeiture.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/guilty-until-proven-innocent-11625697428?mod=opinion_lead_pos4

“If the FBI and U.S. Attorney have proof of wrongdoing, bring it on. But the burden for depriving an American of property is on the government to prove guilt, not on the targeted to prove innocence.”

When the FBI raided U.S. Private Vaults in Beverly Hills in March, it did so after the business had been indicted for conspiring to launder money, sell drugs and other crimes. But the FBI also took control of $86 million in cash and valuables it found in the safe deposit boxes of people who haven’t been accused of a crime. Some of these folks have sued, and two weeks ago federal Judge R. Gary Klausner granted a temporary restraining order preventing the FBI from taking permanent legal title of the seized contents of the plaintiffs’ boxes.

The Institute for Justice is representing seven plaintiffs in this case. Their argument is that they have done nothing wrong and should not have to go through the cumbersome civil forfeiture process to prove that their cash, jewelry or precious metals are legitimately theirs.

Judge Klausner seems to think they may have a case, taking aim at the FBI’s forfeiture notice. “This notice, put bluntly, provides no factual basis for the seizure of Plaintiffs’ property whatsoever,” the judge wrote in granting the restraining order.

U.S. Private Vaults is a private safe-deposit company that asks fewer questions than banks, and its boxes could be used to stash ill-gotten cash, drugs or other loot. Even so, the Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to due process before property can be taken.