A_map_of_New_England,_being_the_first_that_ever_was_here_cut_..._places_(2675732378).jpg
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Beyond Charlie Hebdo: Freedom of expression besieged in much of the world

  Delphine Halgand, who runs North American operations for the global organization Reporters Without Borders,  gave a terrific talk the other night at the Providence Committee on Foreign Relations.  She, of course, talked about the terrorist murders  in France.   But she also reviewed the condition of freedom of expression and information around the world. Her maps expressed the fragility of  freedom of expression, upon which many other freedoms depend. That fragility includes the United States in some ways, she said.

 

The PCFR, created in 1928 under the aegis of the Council on Foreign Relations, but these days completely independent of the council, has monthly dinners with speakers from  many walks of life. Past and present political leaders,  diplomats, military officers, physicians, historians, theologians and many other fascinating people  from around the world have spoken over the years.

 

Reporters Without Borders, a Paris-based organization perhaps better known internationally as Reporters Sans Frontières,  promotes and defends freedom of information and freedom of the press. The organization has consultant status at the United Nations. Reporters Without Borders has two major activities: one is focused on  censorship, and the other on providing material, financial and psychological assistance to journalists assigned to dangerous areas.

The link to the U.N. is somewhat ironic since so many U.N. members are corrupt dictatorships that enthusiastically suppress freedom of expression, sometimes using imprisonment, torture and murder to do it. Still, we must have something like the U.N.  It's perhaps just a reflecti0n 0f human nature so that so many members are so bad, and hypocrisy so entrenched.

The American abolitionist Wendell Phillips said:

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty; power is ever stealing from the many to the few. The manna of popular liberty must be gathered each day or it is rotten. The living sap of today outgrows the dead rind of yesterday. The hand entrusted with power becomes, either form human depravity or esprit de corps, the necessary enemy of the people. Only by continued oversight can the democrat in office be prevented from hardening into a despot; only by unintermitted agitation can a people be sufficiently awake to principle not to let liberty be smothered in material prosperity.”

The PCFR (pcfremail@gmail.com),  founded in 1928 under the aegis of the Council on Foreign Relations, but these days completely independent of the council, has monthly dinners with speakers from  many walks of life. Past and present political leaders, from around the world,  diplomats, physicians, historians, theologians and many other fascinating people have spoken over the years.

--- Robert Whitcomb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

A hotter and hotter Earth

  As mankind keeps burning fossil fuel at a faster clip, 2014 surpassed 2010 as the warmest year since global temperatures started to be measured in 1880.

Of the large inhabited land areas, only the eastern U.S. and Midwest had below-average temperatures in 2014, with some scientists seeing this as part of a ''polar vortex system'' related to persistent heat in the West.

The New York Times noted that climate-skeptic politicians, fighting controls 0n fossil-fuel emissions,  have used data starting in 1998, ''when an unusually powerful El Niño produced the hottest year of the 20th century.''

"With the continued heating of the atmosphere and the surface of the ocean, 1998 is now being surpassed every four or five years, with 2014 being the first time that has happened in a year featuring no real El Niño pattern. Gavin A. Schmidt, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in Manhattan, said the next time a strong El Niño occurs, it is likely to blow away all temperature records.''

But here in New England, it's cold today.

 

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

More reforms for Gina Raimondo

I used to see Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo (and her communications chief, Joy Fox)  a bit when Ms. Raimondo was the state treasurer, after her highly successful run as a venture capitalist. She got elected governor as a person willing to take on the challenges of structural reform  after having displayed this courageous willingness when she  embraced, as treasurer, the brutally difficult chore of pensi0n reform.  Runaway public pensions have threatened to effectively bankrupt Rhode Island and some of its cities and towns. (Some of the cities are still on the edge.) Now many of us hope very much that she'll join with Common Good and other reform organizations to push to eliminate obsolete laws and to review the  inefficient and costly "system'' of federal mandates on the states. The National Governors Association has a project along those lines.

Changes in these areas would make state governments more effective and cost-efficient and citizens' lives easier and more productive.

To get a sense of what I'm talking about, read Philip K. Howard's The Rule of Nobody. He runs Common Good and is an admirer of Governor Raimondo's work as treasurer.

 

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

A photo-op that would have mattered greatly

It seems obvious to me that even if it had required 10,000 troops and police officers to surround him with security that President Obama, as the paramount leader of the Free World, should have flown to Paris and marched with the other leaders as a side of solidarity against Islamic terrorism. It would have been a photo-op with great resonance. --- Robert Whitcomb

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

William Morgan: In bleakest winter

 bleak
Photo and commentary by WILLIAM MORGAN
A farm house in Berlin, Mass., in the apple-growing country west of Interstate 495 in Worcester County.
Despite the appearance of a thin veneer of wealth created by the odd equestrian stable, towns like Berlin are hardly prospering. Farming in a cold climate  with rocky soil is hard.
Come May, the orchard stock will  wear gorgeous blossoms. But, now in January, the scene is one of bleakness.
Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Neurological analogies

GIPS  

"Thicket of the Mind" (archival inkjet print), by TERRY GIPS, in his show at Galatea Fine Art, Boston, Feb. 4-28.

He says in his gallery notes:

I have been making art about tangled complexities; the process is like playing a game of chess between order and chaos, knowing and not knowing, remembering and forgetting.  I sometimes use grids to structure the chaos, wildness and randomness found in nature.  And I take notice of the parallels between these natural entanglements and those of the mind and the brain and hope that perhaps through these images I can catch a glimpse of the 500 trillion synapses, and the dendrites, axons, and nodes in my brain and nervous system.

 

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

David Warsh: Too early to write history of the 2008 crash

President Obama claims credit for the recent spate of good economic news.   Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says, “The uptick appears to coincide with the biggest political change of the Obama administration’s long tenure in Washington: the expectation of a new Republican Congress.” The argument illustrates an important but little-recognized fact of life. Whenever history is written in haste, political narrative tends to dominate the underlying economic story.  A case in point is Hall of Mirrors: The Great Depression, the Great Recession, and the Uses — and Misuses – of History,  by Barry Eichengreen, of the University of California at Berkeley.

Many people have noted the resemblance between  the “Roaring Twenties,” meaning 1923  to the stock market crash that began in October 1929; and the globalization of the 1980s and ’90s, including the Internet boom and the war years of the Early Twos, culminating in the financial crisis of 2008.

Eichengreen, an authority on the international monetary system — he is  the author of Golden Fetters: The Gold Standard and the Great Depression 1919-1939 (Oxford, 1996) and Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the Dollar and the Future of the International Monetary System (Oxford, 2011) — set out to compare the two crises.

The result is an entertaining chronicle of the two episodes that nevertheless fails to convince.

Eichengreen’s conclusion: that in 2008, the good was the enemy of the best. Central bankers might have prevented a Great Depression, he writes, but “their very success in preventing a 1930s-like economic collapse led to their failure to support a more vigorous recovery.”

If this sounds like the analogies that Obama’s advisers sought to draw  between his administration and that of Franklin Roosevelt in 1933, it is because it differs little from the politically-motivated story that they told.

The two chapters on the panic that began after Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail are especially disappointing.  Sale and repurchase agreements aren’t even mentioned, although a run on “repo” was at the center of events.

More to the point, there’s almost no hint that the worst phase of the crisis had been resolved by the time that Obama was elected.  Much remained to be done, of course, but George W. Bush, working with Congress, and two key appointees — Fed chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson  – stopped the run. Few other Republicans would have done so.

When Eichengreen gave his presidential address to the Economic History Association in 2011, there was reason to hope that he would produce a study employing several different lenses instead of just one.  His topic was a promising one: the use of analogies to shape policy.

Though the Great Depression had become “the dominant base case” in discussions of the 2008-9 crisis, he said, there were other analogies that illuminated various aspects of events:  the crisis of 1873, driven by an investment boom and bust that resembled that of 2007-8; or the 1907 crisis, in which the panic centered on the trust companies, the “shadow banks” of their day.

He didn’t deliver.  If I sound cranky it’s because I am.  It’s too soon to write the history of 2008.  Better to wait for Bernanke’s account of what happened, and the histories that will be written after.

It’s only natural for politicians like Obama and McConnell to construct simple stories of their own great deeds. We look to economists and historians to peer more deeply into past and present.

David Warsh, a longtime economic historian and financial journalist, is proprietor of economicprincipals.com.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Chris Powell: Charlie Hebdo, multicultural immigration and Islamic killers

charlie5
One of the offending Charlie Hebdo cartoons.

Even the mass murder in Paris  last week, Islamic fanaticism's latest assault on liberty, may not be enough to awaken Europe. For the political correctness of the European Union's multiculturalism has already filled the continent with millions of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa who have no allegiance to the countries they now inhabit and only contempt for democratic secularism. Europe has become Eurabia.

Vile as it is, Islamic fanaticism is just 600 years behind what used to be Christian fanaticism, whose own wars devastated Europe for centuries before people began to suspect that God might not be worth such bloodshed and oppression and that government might best be separated from religion. The line between religious faith and superstition, bigotry, and murder is a thin one, because for the self-righteous, God is always available as absolute license.

That is what has made religion such a target for satire, including that of the French political weekly Charlie Hebdo, whose editors and cartoonists were massacred this week by those who see themselves as the soldiers of Islam, though the newspaper often ridiculed not just Moslems but Christians and Jews as well. It just has been a while since so many Christians and Jews rationalized murder in pursuit of religious imperialism.

The murder of the French journalists by the religious crazies will be a monument to the power of ridicule, a power Mark Twain may have described best: "For your race, in its poverty, has unquestionably one really effective weapon -- laughter. Power, money, persuasion, supplication, persecution -- these can lift at a colossal humbug, push it a little, weaken it a little, century by century; but only laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand."

Yet of course this week it was the ridiculers who were blown away while their murderers shouted "God is great" and fear of more such attacks increased as the entire West, not just Europe, began to face the frightening consequences of a policy of uncontrolled immigration.

While the West halfheartedly wages war against the religious crazies in the Middle East, it has allowed entry to many people who, if they have not yet resolved to subvert democratic institutions, are enormously susceptible to such appeals.

The United States is lucky that, unlike Europe, most of its immigrants, legal and illegal, are only Central and South Americans of no particular ideology, merely economic refugees. But the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were largely the result of the failure of immigration law enforcement, a failure that has only worsened. Even now most illegal immigrants caught in the United States are not deported but only given summonses to appear in court -- and the Department of Homeland Security admits that 70 percent fail to report and simply disappear into the country, whereupon states like Connecticut make them eligible for driver's licenses and other benefits, exercising a liberal form of nullification of federal law.

Nullification is what a half century ago Southern states sought to do to to thwart federal civil rights law. That was disgraceful, but somehow liberal nullification has become respectable.

Admitting people who can show they want to live in a secular democracy, who appreciate the country's history and objectives, and who would assimilate into its culture is one thing. Such people likely would become better citizens than many of the native-born. But admitting anyone in the name of multiculturalism is treason.

For defending the country requires fearlessly defending the culture, as the journalists of Charlie Hebdo did, if only inadvertently, even at their most offensive -- especially at their most offensive.

France is being tested now. But our turn is coming.

 

Chris Powell is managing editor of the Journal Inquirer, in Manchester, C0nn.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Watch where you step

stahl  

''What Lies Beneath'' (unique, inkjet print, aluminum, epoxy resin), by LUCIE STAHL, in the "esxatic photo'' show at Samson Gallery, Boston, through Feb. 28.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Llewellyn King: Islamic masses, leaders are enablers of barbarity

A dark shadow passed over Paris, the City of Light, on Jan. 7 .  Well-organized, well-trained killers murdered 13 people in the name of Allah. As Shakespeare said 500 years earlier, about the heinous murder of King Duncan by Macbeth, “O horror, horror, horror! Tongue nor heart cannot conceive nor name thee.”

Indeed, recent horrors in the name of Allah have been so gruesome it is impossible to conceive the mutilated reason, the perverted concept of God’s will, and the unvarnished rage that has subverted the once admired religion.

The killers are ruthless and depraved, but those who inspire them are evil and those who tolerate them are guilty.

In 2005, when a Danish newspaper published 12 cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed and riots were stirred up against the publishers, a meeting was arranged at a community room in the basement of The Washington Times. It was not organized by the newspaper but, as I recall, by an interfaith group. There were several fringe “let’s be nice” speakers before the main event.

The main event was the Danish ambassador and, to a lesser extent, myself. The ambassador spoke about life in Denmark and what the Danish government would do to understand and listen to the concerns of the Muslim community. My role was to defend and explain the Western concept of freedom of speech and the place satire. The overflow audience, which by dress and appearance was dominated by emigrants from Pakistan, was implacable.

I have spoken to some hostile audiences in my time, but this one was special: no compromise, no quarter. Nor interest in cultures other than their own. Ugly and insatiable rage came out in their questions.

They did not want to know about the values of the country that had given their brethren sanctuary, education, healthcare and a decent life. My audience only wanted to know why the blasphemers in Denmark and Norway (the cartoons were reprinted there) were not being punished. For good measure, they wanted to know why the American media was so committed to heresy against Islam. No thought that they had moved voluntarily to the United States and were enjoying three of its great freedoms: freedom to assemble, freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

They wanted absolute subjection of all Western values to the dictates of Islam. They had been fired up and they were angry, self-righteous and obdurate.

In 2009, I was invited to a conference of world religions in Astana, Kazakhstan. There were maybe 100 religions present, but at a featured session the conference degenerated into an Islamic diatribe against sexuality and the treatment of women (mostly in advertising) in the West. No dialogue. No discussion. Absolute certainty.

I mention this because of the reaction to the barbarity in Paris, and to a string of other barbarous murders across the world, from Muslims has been so muted.

Je Suis Charlie” said millions of people in dozens of countries in sympathy with the murdered journalists and with their fight for press freedom. From Muslim leaders in the West, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations in the United States, there were statements of condemnation but no sense of outrage. From the bulk of the followers of Islam there was nothing. There never is. Not when innocent children are shot in their schools, or when aid workers are beheaded, or when or when satirical journalists are executed. The Muslim multitudes have acquiesced to evil.

When will those who believe deeply in Islam take to the streets to denounce the excesses of the few? After the horror in Paris, British Muslims took to the BBC to mildly criticize the murders, but more to vigorously demand a better deal for Muslims in Britain.

The medieval certainty of the leadership of Islam is endorsed by the silence of its congregants. The silence of the millions gives a kind of absolution to the extremists, intoxicated with fervor and hate. It will all go on until the good Muslims stand up and are heard. The guilt of silence hangs over Islam.

Llewellyn King is executive producer and host of “White House Chronicle” on PBS. His e-mail is lking@kingpublishing.com.

 

 

Linda Gasparello Co-host and Gene
Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Joseph W. Ambash: A stunning opening for union-organizing of private colleges

Editor's Note: New England, with its many private colleges and universities, could be much affected by this case. This came via the New England Journal of Higher Education (nebhe.org).
BOSTON

In a stunning and far-reaching decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) opened the door to union organizing among faculty at thousands of private-sector institutions, both secular and religious. The board’s majority decision in Pacific Lutheran University (12/16/14), issued in the face of powerful dissents, will inevitably spark controversy and ongoing litigation both about the legality of NLRB intrusion into the operation of religious institutions and the proper interpretation of the “managerial” status of faculty under the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic Yeshiva University decision.

Pacific Lutheran University case

The question before the NLRB in Pacific Lutheran University was whether a local of the Service Employees International Union could represent a unit of nontenure-eligible contingent faculty members employed by the university in Tacoma, WA. The university argued that, as a church-operated institution, it was exempt from NLRB jurisdiction and that its full-time contingent faculty were managerial employees excluded from representation under the Supreme Court’s 1980 decision in Yeshiva University.

In reviewing the decision of its regional director, the NLRB took the opportunity to solicit amicus briefs about the broad issues of jurisdiction over all religious institutions and the proper analysis of managerial status of all faculty at private higher education institutions. In its decision, the board articulated new, more stringent, standards that will make it difficult for religious institutions to claim exemption from the National Labor Relations Act and for all private institutions to claim that their faculty are exempt from union organizing. It held that the contingent faculty in question were entitled to organize.

Difficult new test

In Yeshiva, the Supreme Court ruled that the faculty of that institution were “managerial employees” excluded from collective bargaining because they “formulate and effectuate management policies by expressing and making operative the decisions of their employer.” Controversy had existed in applying the Yeshiva standards in the 34 years since that case was decided. Reviewing courts and others had criticized the NLRB for creating confusing standards that gave poor guidance to litigants. Despite these concerns, the overwhelming majority of private-sector institutions in the country have relied on the principles of this case to maintain union-free status among their faculty.

In the Pacific Lutheran case, the board stated its new rule as follows:

  1. Where a party asserts that university faculty are managerial employees, the board will examine the faculty’s participation in the following areas of decision-making: academic programs, enrollment management, finances, academic policy, and personnel policies and decisions, giving greater weight to the first three areas than the last two areas.
  1. The board will then determine, in the context of the university’s decision-making structure and the nature of the faculty’s employment relationship with the university, whether the faculty actually control or make effective recommendations over those areas. If they do, the board will find that they are managerial employees and, therefore, excluded from the act’s protections.
  1. The board interpreted the term “effective recommendations” to mean that those recommendations “must almost always be followed by the [college or university’s] administration,” and that they must “routinely become operative without independent review by the administration.”

In his thoughtful dissent, NLRB member Harry I. Johnson III pointed out the virtual impossibility of satisfying this new standard:

… by increasing the burden of proof for what the board considers to be “effective” recommendations, and by failing to consider the actual, diverse processes of university business operations and governance, the board has raised the bar for establishing managerial status of faculty to an unattainable height, one beyond the reach even of Arete̕̕̕.

Johnson pointed out that the new requirement, that to be effective, recommendations “must almost always be followed by the administration,” is an “overly onerous standard,” which will result in fewer board decisions conferring managerial status on faculty.” In addition, Johnson criticized the board majority’s holding that faculty recommendations are not effective if they are subject to independent review. He pointed out that discounting internal review “seems to utterly disregard the realities of decision- and policymaking in complex organizations.”

The dissent’s observations underscore the uphill battle nearly any college or university will have in demonstrating that its faculty are “managerial” and therefore not subject to collective bargaining.

Jurisdiction over religious institutions

The board also ruled that it will exercise jurisdiction over religious institutions–and hence allow faculty organizing—except where:

  1. The college or university first demonstrates that it holds itself out as providing a religious educational environment.
  1. Once that threshold requirement is met, the college or university must then show that it holds out the faculty members it seeks to organize as performing a religious function. This requires a showing by the college or university that it holds out those faculty as performing a specific role in creating or maintaining the university’s religious educational environment.

As Johnson pointed out in his dissent, the board’s new standard, which requires a religious university to prove that it “holds out” its faculty “as performing a specific role in creating and maintaining” its religious educational environment, necessarily involves the government in the process of evaluating religious beliefs and practices, thereby improperly intruding into the Religious Clauses of the First Amendment. This is particularly true because the majority decision requires a showing that faculty are required to serve a specific “religious function”—something that, of course, can vary widely from religion to religion. In Johnson’s view, if the Pacific Lutheran standard is eventually appealed to the D.C. Court of Appeals, it will be overturned.

Take-away for all private higher ed institutions

The NLRB’s decision—unless and until it is reversed or modified—will force nearly all private-sector institutions to reevaluate their vulnerability to union organizing among their faculty. For institutions that view their faculty as truly “managerial” and not subject to organizing, the decision injects a new era of uncertainty about the fundamental relationship between faculty and administration.

Institutions should audit their administrative structure to determine the extent to which their faculty (whether regular or contingent) make “effective recommendations” which are “almost always” followed by the administration, without review. This standard may be unattainable in the era of modern higher education. Institutions who wish to maintain union-free status among their faculty should also train their administrators how to respond to organizing activities by understanding how union organizing works under the National Labor Relations Act, recognizing organizing activities, and educating faculty to the pro’s and con’s of collective bargaining.

Religious universities likewise should audit their administrative structure to determine whether they “hold out” their faculty as serving specific religious functions.

All institutions should carefully monitor ongoing developments in this critical area.

Joseph W. Ambash is managing partner of the Boston office of Fisher & Phillips LLP, a national labor and employment firm representing management. He has extensive experience representing colleges and universities. He wrote this for the New England Journal of Higher Education, part of the New England Board of Higher Education (nebhe.org), on whose advisory board the overseer of New England Diary, Robert Whitcomb, once sat.

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

Irreverence is the bedrock of humor

  sunflower

On the Charlie Hebdo massacre on Islamic terrrorists:

I share  the sadness of all France, and as an American writer, I stand with you in support of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press!

Satire breaks through rigid, unquestioning thinking. Absolute irreverence is the bedrock of humor, and humor relaxes and opens the mind. How many of us as children found Mad Magazine a portal to new ways of seeing? The National Lampoon, George Orwell, Twain... Feel free to add to the list. Virtually every writer has, at one time or another, employed satire to help the reader see.

-- Charles Pinning

www.charlespinning.com

Read More
Commentary Robert Whitcomb Commentary Robert Whitcomb

More Islamic murders

  charlie

Photo by WILLIAM MORGAN

La Nouvelle Angleterre est Charlie.

Christophe Deloire, who runs  the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders, will no doubt address the latest Islamic terrorist murders of journalists when he speaks next Tuesday at the Providence Committee on Foreign Relations (thepcfr.org). (See link  to Charlie Hebdo cartoons  and to Reporters Without Borders petition below.)

 

Meanwhile, for those who say the problem is not Islam itself: A violent, bigoted and misogynistic strain of Islam goes right right back to Mohammed.  Read about it in the Koran and other Muslim writings, which  have plenty of savagery used as an excuse by today's Islamic murderers.  Indeed, Islam spread across much of the world through violence.

There are also peaceful, kindly and highly charitable strains of Islam -- most notably the Ismailis, part of Shia Islam. The vast majority of the violence is perpetrated by Sunni Muslims.

There's an old, violent and bigoted strain of Christianity, too, but nowhere near the strength  anymore of Islam's. The still besieged Jews,  whence came the other two religions, long ago cast off most of their Old Testament love of violence against their enemies.

Concessions to Islamic threats just embolden the terrorists further. The West must show more backbone in defending its values, which are so fundamentally more alluring than other cultures' that the West is where people still most want to come. Many Muslims risk life and limb to escape the corrupt dictatorships that characterize most of the Muslim world and move to Europe, where, sadly, some of the more perverse and deranged of these immigrants seek to destroy the very refuge that has protected them.

More profiling is needed at the borders, and considerably more controls on immigration from Muslim nations, lest Western culture be overwhelmed. As Llewellyn King noted of a group of Pakistanis in Washington: "They did not want to know about the values of the country that had given their brethren sanctuary, education, healthcare and a decent life.'' And freedom.

 

See  some Charlie Hebdo cartoons  in this link. They are  copyrighted so we can't just put whole cartoons up on this site.

Here is  a link to a Reporters Without Borders petition.

 

 

 

Read More