民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录The American Conservative http://www. Fri, 05 Jun 民彩网官网 01:40:42 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=5.4.1 民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录The Secret Recipe for Dynamite Urban Parks http://www./urbs/the-secret-recipe-for-good-urban-parks/ http://www./urbs/the-secret-recipe-for-good-urban-parks/#respond Fri, 05 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:40 +0000 http://www./?post_type=urbs&p=262377 New York's Bryant Park was once an outdoor drug market. Now it is a textbook for flourishing public spaces.

The post The Secret Recipe for Dynamite Urban Parks appeared first on The American Conservative.


, Andrew Manshel, Rutgers University Press, 302 pages

In the 1980s, Bryant Park was an uninviting place, according to essentially every observer. It was rundown, and visibility was poor. The only vibrant thing about it was the drug trade. Its reopening in 1992 and transformation into the well-populated oasis that it is (or was until recently) seemed inconceivable and left many shocked. 

Recent months of Corona lockdown have provided a potent reminder that it’s not generally an active security presence but simply normal urban hustle and bustle that keeps you safe. Busy urban spaces seem safe, while empty ones often do not. The 1990s rehabilitation of Bryant Park might seem a moment from a distant century amidst the recent urban chaos. But Andrew Manshel’s Learning from Bryant Park is a useful blueprint for how public spaces can be made inviting, accessible, and safe again—even after currents of pandemic and protest have passed. 

Manshel knows a thing or two about this. He was associate director of the Bryant Park Restoration Corporation for ten years (starting in 1991) and later vice president of another Business Improvement District in Jamaica, Queens.

Today Bryant Park is an elegant space, one more reminiscent of many European plazas than even handsome American parks, but one repeat stress of Manshel’s is that its turnaround, and the turnaround of any similar public space isn’t about particular design elements—flagstone walkways or London Plane trees, or Beaux-Arts restrooms or French bistro chairs—and rather about close attention to just how citizens used the space.

Bryant Park, 1973 (Wikimedia Commons)

Design is of course important: eliminating seven-foot Boxwood parterres that largely blocked the park from street view and creating broader and more frequent entrances was important. Many parks and public spaces feature expensive or meritorious designs when they open but what’s most important is what happens afterwards. Manshel writes “Our success was based on close observation of how people behaved in the park once it was reopened.” It’s not an initial plan, he attests but operations, maintenance, and successful programming that make all the difference in terms of how a space is used.

A crucial early effort with Bryant Park was simply providing events to ensure that the park would be populated at a variety of times. An HBO-sponsored comedy series was one early program, as were a variety of concerts, and eventually the summer film series. The key to these is reliability. It must be known that such events are happening and that they will be occurring in the future. Occasional events will generally prompt even more occasional visits; reliable fixtures in the schedule undergird much more.

One impressive testament to Manshel’s thesis about the importance of frequent changes is his litany of things that went wrong (or not quite well enough) at Bryant Park and were accordingly changed or ended. Fancy early planters were easily damaged and abandoned. Lawn soil was initially overly sandy, liable to be overly dry or swampy; a different mix heavier in clay was eventually adopted. Soil aeration to prevent compaction became a routine practice. Early gravel paths were often a mess and prompted a return to simple dirt. Some music programming was difficult to hear or didn’t draw crowds (after runs of moderate length) and was accordingly changed. Outlets were inadequate in the park in its early years. The placement of a stage was a repeat quandary until a more easily adjustable frame was found. Other things could still stand to be improved: the absence of permanent concrete footings for temporary structures is a continued problem and additional stress on the lawn. He encourages others to implement ideas inexpensively and to test them gradually, “New ideas for capital investments need to be put into place as incrementally as possible, observing how they work in the real world and then adjusting plans accordingly.”

One droll such story: “One day in the spring of 1994, [their PR rep] got a phone call from a reporter at the New York Daily News who was working on a story, based on a tip from an animal vet, that BPRC was poisoning the Bryant Park pigeons, which we sort of were.” Pigeons were a problem for plants in the park, and they had turned to a poison to make an example of some of these ruffians. “The bad part was that the death of those birds was visibly dreadful.” This avian slaughter was eventually averted with new flowerbed nets, to the benefit of everyone involved.

What’s more important than luxe items is that any fixtures should be visibly and rapidly maintained. (Manshel cites Broken Windows principles repeatedly). The important thing is not any initial expenditure but the maintenance of whatever you’ve put up after that. Broken items send a signal of inattention. A particularly welcome park amenity is intrinsically ephemeral: the park’s flowers. It required trial and error to determine ideal flowers for the space. The lovely Pink Impression tulip was eventually a highlight. “The very presence of the flowerbeds transmitted to people that someone cared about the space.”

There will be problems. Some flower thefts are inevitable. The key was simply to keep an adequate supply of flowers to replace any that end up stolen, damaged, or dead such that beds never look empty or haggard. 

民彩网官网Ed Yourdon/Flickr (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Attention to the space was important in other ways, especially in the park’s earlier years. The Bryant Park restoration corporation made a sustained effort to ensure that park employees were highly visible, a sign that the space was being tended to and observed, and a deterrent to nefarious behavior. He argues that unarmed personnel are more helpful than armed security in this sense, removing the sense that deadly threats might prove imminent. 

Restroom attendants are permanent at the park’s two historic restrooms, unquestionably more important than their physical condition; everyone has used historic restrooms that seem to harbor every moment of odor from their lifespan before in public spaces. It’s constant care that sets these apart. 

Security is occasionally necessary in any location, but they rapidly found that attracting a crowd mainly resulted in drug-dealers and similar characters leaving on their own accord without any force necessary. “Bad actors don’t want to be around positive social behavior.” Actions by 民彩网官网less persons are an occasional problem but Manshel stresses the importance of repeat trained outreach. It’s not adequate to ask someone occasionally; it’s better to have trained staff inquire about their well-being and offer help frequently. They also established a 民彩网官网less drop-in center and made strong efforts to connect these persons to resources.

One core of activity that flourishes today was quite difficult to launch: the Bryant Park Grill. Today the ninth-highest grossing restaurant in the country, it didn’t turn a profit for five years. Today it’s a great urban asset. Manshel explains that food kiosks are an even riskier financial proposition. Commerce in parks has long spurred philosophical debates about appropriateness, but Manshel argues strongly for some amount of commerce as extremely helpful in generating park activity. He does caution that there are limits, “An excess of private activity can turn a public place into an exclusive reserve for those who can afford it—which is the antithesis of what a park should be.” This seemed to be the definition of hosting fashion week in the park before its move to Lincoln Center. It’s welcome to see Manshel agreed (although it also generated substantial revenue for the park, another part of such tradeoffs).

The book also offers a strong argument for Business Improvement Districts (BID) as a tool for improvement both for parks but of utility in many situations. He argued strongly against accusations of elitism in these BID situations, making the case that these are intrinsically highly local (There are now 70 across New York City, mainly in locations far less luxe than Bryant Park). In the case of Bryant Park and other parks, they also free city parks dollars to be used elsewhere.

Manshel’s work with the Greater Jamaica Development Corporation offered a somewhat different challenge of coordinating a variety of local institutions for good. Some retailers objected to trees as they might obscure their signage, despite benefits of generating a more pleasant pedestrian environment and very likely increasing foot traffic and business.

Much of this work anywhere comes down to assembling a critical mass of activity, or tweaking that mass to ensure that it occurs for more of the day and night. This can be harder to effect in some locations but Manshel’s set of principles is worth applying anywhere. He points to public spaces that haven’t applied such lessons. An esteemed design in Pershing Park in Los Angeles failed to generate activity; Cleveland’s recent Public Square redesign remains empty. This is not fated and can be changed. 

Smaller towns might have more of an uphill climb, though even small business districts can benefit from such tactics, he explains repeatedly. The overwhelming key is not a one-time intervention, but sustained management over time. “We can’t just make recommendations and go 民彩网官网.”

Manshel’s credo is an extremely valuable one, just as useful for repopulating public spaces in the post-pandemic future as it was for filling them beforehand. “Plans for a public space have to be based on how real, living, breathing human beings interact with the physical and programmatic aspects of a park or plaza and not on some abstract political, philosophical, or aesthetic principle.” 

Anthony Paletta lives in Brooklyn.

The post The Secret Recipe for Dynamite Urban Parks appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./urbs/the-secret-recipe-for-good-urban-parks/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录Continued Isolation Will Kill More Elderly http://www./articles/continued-isolation-will-kill-more-elderly/ http://www./articles/continued-isolation-will-kill-more-elderly/#respond Fri, 05 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:22 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262370 Is endless quarantine really the best we can do for our loved ones?

The post Continued Isolation Will Kill More Elderly appeared first on The American Conservative.

It is now consensus that what we owe our elderly during this pandemic is extended quarantine. On May 20 in the New York Post, for instance, in an impassioned op-ed, titled, “End New York City’s Lockdown Now!” David Marcus argues that the lockdowns are killing New York and need to be broken immediately. “It needs to end. Now.” But what of the elderly, the chief victims of the pandemic, what do we hope for them? Marcus offers one sentence: “The elderly and infirm can continue to be isolated.”

I assume Marcus wants the best for America’s elderly. But, no. No, they cannot continue to be isolated. 

Endless isolation is inhumane and deadly. It is a method of torture. A punishment inflicted upon the most depraved. It dehumanizes and is the essence of monstrosity.

“I am an unfortunate and deserted creature,” says Mary Shelley’s monster when abandoned by Dr. Frankenstein; “I look around and I have no relation or friend upon earth.” So, the creature takes revenge on his maker by murdering his loved ones, turning the scientist into a being just like him—alone, inhuman, monstrous—by casting him into the outer darkness of total loneliness.

Is endless quarantine really the best we can do for our loved ones?

One can understand the impulse. Contact with the virus is ravaging our elderly. Cuomo’s scandalous mishandling of nursing 民彩网官网s tells the tale.

But that puts us in a bind. Isolation might preserve our elderly from death by COVID, but it will destroy them on its own. If you don’t trust your gut, heed the studies. It increases the risk of by 30 percent. It is equivalent in to hard alcoholism or smoking 15 cigarettes a day, and causes twice the harm to one’s mental and physical health as obesity (which was previously considered the greatest health crisis afflicting our country).

And if loneliness doesn’t kill you, it ruins you. It , making one more susceptible to illness. It increases blood pressure, putting one at risk of . It causes ; increases the potential for ; stirs and anxiety; and drives suicide. As Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults (民彩网官网), a new 316-page study by the National Academy of Sciences, , social isolation is as much of a risk to one’s physical wellness as any other widespread health problem we face today.

This shouldn’t surprise us. For it strikes against the heart of who we are. Long ago, Aristotle marvelled at our natural togetherness and, so observing it, called us zoon politikon (“political animals”), by which he meant that it was fundamental to who we are—it was the achievement of our own purpose—for us to live, deliberate and act together to achieve common goods. Our togetherness, as Aristotle saw it, is not the product of a primordial negotiation between absolute individuals who come together to preserve themselves and their rights. Rather, it is fundamental to who we are as animals. Today, theorists adapt Aristotle’s insight in modern terms, calling us “social animals,” a much loser concept but which nonetheless keeps the core insight intact. We flourish in society, the sociologist observes, and we flounder when alone. 

This is why extreme isolation is punishment—because it attacks our very nature. And this is why it cannot conceivably be considered a humane solution to the problems facing our elderly during the pandemic. 

Still, we must keep them from the virus. So how do we do it?

By boldly confronting immediate and long-term problems. As I’ve said and in these pages, the key to breaking the total isolation in long-term care facilities is the rapid test. Rapid testing machines should be installed at every long-term care facility across the country. They should be used to screen caregivers and other employees as they enter to ensure the safety of residents; but, reaching higher, they should open the door to visits by family and friends. Families are being starved of their elderly loved ones, who are languishing without visitors and dying alone. It is only right to restore to them the relationships they hunger for.

State governments, to be clear, do not have the resources to accomplish this. The federal government must help. Let there be a fifth round of legislation. Using new resources provided by congress, President Trump and the governors should outfit our long-term care facilities with any supplies they need going forward and do so with the same urgency with which they prepared our hospitals. For, as we’ve been told time and again, the very reason for the lockdowns is to save our elderly. Our leaders should do what it takes to accomplish the mission they set for themselves. Otherwise they will have failed our loves ones and have sacrificed so much for so little.

The long-term answer is more complex and, as the high death toll has revealed, necessarily more comprehensive. Long-term care facilities are underfunded, overpopulated, old and in decline; and staff are poorly trained, at times neglectful, and underpaid. These issues all need addressing. Long-term care facilities will only grow in importance over the coming decades as Baby Boomers advance in age. We are simply not ready for them.

Still, wherever possible, we should depopulate these facilities by helping families provide in-民彩网官网 care. The cost of elder care is extraordinary and is a for most households which, despite their love and desire, lack the time, knowledge, and skill. We should support in-民彩网官网 care directly with a generous subsidy that covers the lion’s share of costs and, through , give families the flexibility to be 民彩网官网 when sickness demands it. Furthermore, three-generation living should be made more affordable, through zoning reform, tax breaks and other means of reducing the costs of building 民彩网官网s that bring the very old and very young under a single roof. This short list of measures is not exhaustive, but nonetheless can help relieve the escalating pressure on nursing 民彩网官网s and give many older Americans the power to live—and die—with loved ones at their side. 

When the dust settles from the protests, our elderly will still be dying in nursing 民彩网官网s at catastrophic rates and still be locked down without hope of reprieve—like beasts stripped of friendship, love, and kin. This unnatural isolation should break our hearts and make us cry for action by our leaders. 

No, continued isolation is not an option. As the Bible says, “It is not good that the man should be alone.”

Michael Toscano is executive director of The Institute for Family Studies.

The post Continued Isolation Will Kill More Elderly appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/continued-isolation-will-kill-more-elderly/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录Liberal Mush From Mattis http://www./buchanan/liberal-mush-from-mattis/ http://www./buchanan/liberal-mush-from-mattis/#respond Fri, 05 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:12 +0000 http://www./?post_type=buchanan&p=262406 Looks like the general has just defected to the resistance.

The post Liberal Mush From Mattis appeared first on The American Conservative.

In his statement to The Atlantic magazine, former Defense Secretary General James Mattis says of the events of the last 10 days that have shaken the nation as it has not been shaken since 1968:

“We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers.”

Is “a small number of lawbreakers” an apt description of wilding mobs who have showered cops with bottles, bricks and rocks in 40 cities, looted stores in the hundreds, torched police cars, and injured dozens of Secret Service personnel defending the White House?

Is “a small number of lawbreakers” the way a patriot would describe anti-American anarchists who desecrated the Lincoln Memorial, the World War II Memorial on the Mall and the Korean War Memorial and tried to burn down the Church of the Presidents in Lafayette Square?

Was the sacking of Georgetown, Rodeo Drive in LA, 5th Avenue in New York and 40 city centers, the work of a few “lawbreakers”?

Is that a good description of the people who gravely wounded that cop in Las Vegas and shot four cops and murdered that retired black police chief in St. Louis?

The protesters, says Mattis, are “rightly demanding … Equal Justice Under Law.” This is a “wholesome and unifying demand — one that all of us should be able to get behind.”

But what does the general think of the methods and means the “protesters” have used—the massive civil disobedience, the blocking of streets, the vilification of police, the contempt for curfews. What does the general think of protesters who provide moral cover for insurrection?

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people,” says Mattis. Trump “doesn’t even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us.”

But it was not Trump who divided America in this racial crisis.

The nation was united in revulsion at the criminal cruelty that led to George Floyd’s death. The nation was united in backing an enraged people’s right to protest that atrocity.

What divided America were the methods and means protesters began using in the first hours of the Minneapolis riot—the attacks on cops with bottles, bricks and Molotov cocktails.

In Mattis’ statement, one finds not a word of sympathy or support for the police bearing the brunt of mob brutality for defending the communities they serve, while defending the constitutional right of the protesters to curse them as racist and rogue cops.

“Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them,” not to the military, says the general.

Correct. But what happens when mobs run wild to where a governor of New York is denouncing the NYPD for failing to protect the city from anarchy and is threatening to replace the mayor for failing to put down the insurrection.

In July 1967, the 82nd Airborne was sent into Detroit to put down the riot. In 1968, there were federal troops in D.C. to stop the rioting in the wake of Dr. King’s assassination. In the violent protests of the Nixon era, U.S. airborne troops were brought into the basement of the Executive Office Building.

The general quotes James Madison: “America united with a handful of troops, or without a single solider exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign invaders than an America disunited.”

And how, General, did that work out for Madison when the “foreign invaders” arrived in Maryland in August 1814, marched up Bladensburg Road, and burned the Capitol and White House and Alexandria, while “Little Jimmy” fled out the Brookville Road?

If memory serves, it was Gen. Andrew Jackson and the troops he pulled together for the Battle of New Orleans who defeated the British and saved the Union.

“Society cannot exist,” wrote Edmund Burke, “unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.

“It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”

That is where we are now. Society and civilization are on the line.

If mob tactics are now how we change laws and alter public policy, the democratic republic is dead and we have gone full Third World.

Some of us do not believe America is a racist society or that the nation’s police, numbering a million men and women, are shot through with anti-black racism.

Some of us believe the police are the last line of defense we have against that “small number of lawbreakers” Mattis tells us are no problem.

Did the general actually produce this pile of mush that reads like something out of Ramsey Clark in the 1960s?

My guess: Mattis, an obedient servant of President Trump for two years, has been persuaded that the wind is blowing the other way and his “place in history” demands that he get himself on the correct side.

The general has just defected to the resistance.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

The post Liberal Mush From Mattis appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./buchanan/liberal-mush-from-mattis/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录‘Great Power Competition’ is a Cheap Slogan Justifying Cold War http://www./articles/great-power-competition-is-a-cheap-slogan-justifying-cold-war/ http://www./articles/great-power-competition-is-a-cheap-slogan-justifying-cold-war/#respond Fri, 05 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:08 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262004 The fact is, we cannot afford a confrontation with China民彩网官网, no matter how it is packaged.

The post ‘Great Power Competition’ is a Cheap Slogan Justifying Cold War appeared first on The American Conservative.

The hawks that speak loudest about the importance of great power competition don’t have the first clue what the U.S. needs to do to remain competitive against other major powers. This has become impossible to miss in the growing push for pursuing a confrontational China民彩网官网 policy.

“Great power competition” has become the slogan that hawks now use to justify never-ending increases to the military budget without paying any attention to the importance of developing the social, intellectual, and economic resources at 民彩网官网 that the U.S. would need to stay competitive. That development would require substantial increases in spending on infrastructure, education, and research, but when it comes to those things the China民彩网官网 hawks are typically nowhere to be found. The sectors that the U.S. has shortchanged for decades desperately need major investments simply to bring them up to date, but there is no evidence that the new Cold Warriors desire to do any of this. The path that many of these China民彩网官网 hawks would have us take is instead one of overextension, exhaustion, and bankruptcy.

Perhaps the loudest of all these hawks has been Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton. He has typically been the first to advocate punishing China民彩网官网 in response to the pandemic, and he has a record of backing the most inflammatory and provocative measures against whichever country is unfortunate enough to be caught in his crosshairs. Last week, Tom Cotton a bill that would bar the granting of visas to Chinese students working in STEM fields. This legislation, the so-called SECURE CAMPUS Act, would have the effect of devastating American research universities by depriving them of a huge number of their prospective students and the tuition payments that come with them.

While Cotton claims to be doing this to safeguard U.S. research from being exploited by the Chinese government, the end result would be to kneecap our own institutions through short-sighted government interference. An effective ban on Chinese nationals studying at U.S. universities in STEM fields would also redound to the Chinese government’s benefit in another way. Instead of drawing talented Chinese science and engineering students to the U.S. where many of them would end up relocating and working, Cotton’s bill would guarantee that they never come to study here. Like so many other hard-line stunts that Cotton has pulled over the last decade, this legislation is clumsy and self-defeating. Even if it never becomes law, this bill represents the sort of blinkered thinking that prevails among so many proponents of a Cold War-like rivalry with Beijing.

We have seen another example of this dead-end hawkishness on the issue of arms control. The Trump administration keeps pretending to want China民彩网官网 to join arms control talks. China民彩网官网 has no interest in doing this, and the huge disparity between their nuclear arsenal and ours makes it a strange exercise at the best of times. Of course, the administration isn’t really interested in bringing more states into the arms control architecture, but prefers instead to dismantle that architecture and engage in arms races with both Russia and China民彩网官网. The president’s special envoy for arms control, Marshall Billingslea, recently declared that the U.S. would both governments into “oblivion.” This makes no sense given the much smaller size of China民彩网官网’s arsenal, and it would represent a huge waste of resources on nuclear weapons in any case. This is a case of wanting to throw huge sums down the drain on weapons that the U.S. doesn’t need. The administration seems determined to focus myopically on hard power as the only measure of great power strength, and meanwhile it is happy to let every other kind of power diminish and disappear.

China民彩网官网 hawks are currently ascendant because they can tap into public anger over the pandemic and the Chinese government’s serious abuses, but as ever the remedies they propose are the foreign policy equivalent of snake oil. We see this with Cotton’s anti-China民彩网官网 raving and Billingslea’s arms race rhetoric, and we can expect much more of it in the years to come. Like any demagogue, Cotton can both stoke fear and exploit frustration, but he cannot offer a solution that won’t make things worse.

Bonnie Kristian recently the case for a smarter, more restrained response that focuses on securing American interests rather than carrying out a vendetta against China民彩网官网:

We need not deny or downplay that reality to avoid making a colossal mistake of our own. Recklessly reacting to Beijing’s failure will backfire for our prosperity and peace.

There is understandable anger at the Chinese government for its delayed response to COVID-19 and its suppression of important information at the beginning of the outbreak, but anger distorts judgment and warps perceptions to the detriment of those that succumb to it. Hard-liners thrive on anger and suspicion because these feelings short-circuit careful deliberation and encourage us to indulge our worst instincts. Giving in to that anger has led to some of our most disastrous foreign policy blunders, and it blinds us to the alternatives to confrontation and conflict that are always available to us. Post-9/11 anger led to a colossal error and massive crime in the Iraq war, and we can only guess at how ruinous a similar fit of anger would be when it involves a major power.

A calm assessment of Chinese power would remind us that they are surrounded by many wary neighbors that will not easily yield to them. The Chinese government is an ugly authoritarian regime, but it has shown no sign of being the kind of expansionist power that would warrant the response that China民彩网官网 hawks want. Their ability to project power outside of their immediate neighborhood is quite limited, and they have not gone to war against any of their neighbors in more than forty years. When they did invade Vietnam in 1979, they were unsuccessful and quickly withdrew. 民彩网官网

A rational assessment of Chinese ambitions would distinguish between their government’s evident desire to establish regional hegemony and the hawkish fantasy that they wish to dominate the globe. A smart strategy would seek to lure other states away from China民彩网官网’s orbit through investment and incentives, but it would also recognize that there are some regions where the U.S. isn’t going to be able to compete effectively with China民彩网官网. There is a wiser course available that would strengthen the U.S. without committing it to another decades-long period of antagonism towards a nuclear-armed rival. That will have very little in common with what conventional China民彩网官网 hawks are offering.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi last week against taking the U.S. and China民彩网官网 to the “brink of a new Cold War,” and it is a warning that we should take seriously. The world was sundered and bloodied for forty-five years by the last Cold War, and tens of millions of people died in the wars that the two superpowers sponsored and fought. A Cold War-style U.S.-Chinese rivalry would in all likelihood produce at least as much bloodshed in the twenty-first century as our rivalry with the Soviets produced in the second half of the twentieth. That would be a horrifying development, and all the more so when we realize that it is still avoidable.

A Cold War with China民彩网官网 would be like our many other wars for the last seventy-five years: a war of choice that we could and should decline to fight. To the extent that it resembled the rivalry with the USSR, it would be an extraordinarily costly and long-running conflict. It would fuel proxy wars and atrocities in the countries where this contest would be carried out, and it would lock us into another series of draining commitments that have little or nothing to do with U.S. security. We should also bear in mind that it is not a given that the outcome would be as favorable for America this time as it was before. Previous great power contests have not always worked out for the old hegemon, and the U.S. could very easily become another bankrupt, overstretched Spain. It would be much wiser and more prudent to steer clear of another prolonged conflict when there are no vital U.S. interests that demand it.

The post ‘Great Power Competition’ is a Cheap Slogan Justifying Cold War appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/great-power-competition-is-a-cheap-slogan-justifying-cold-war/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录Bill Barr and the Justice Department Send In Their Own Troops http://www./articles/bob-barr-and-his-justice-department-send-in-the-troops/ http://www./articles/bob-barr-and-his-justice-department-send-in-the-troops/#respond Thu, 04 Jun 民彩网官网 17:15:29 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262351 While military voices criticize Trump's plans to crack down on the violence, federal soldiers of a different kind take to the streets.

The post Bill Barr and the Justice Department Send In Their Own Troops appeared first on The American Conservative.

Writing in on Wednesday, and in the midst of growing public protests over the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton decried America’s “anarchy” and “orgy of violence,” saying that local law enforcement officials “in some cities” are being overwhelmed by the protests. Cotton’s solution was that President Trump invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act to deploy the military to quell the demonstrations. “Send in the Troops,” the headline to the Cotton op-ed blared. “The military stands ready.” 

In fact, as recent events show, Cotton got it wrong: the military doesn’t stand ready and it certainly doesn’t want to “send in the troops.” Far from it. How do we know? Because in the hours following the publication of Cotton’s proposal, retired Marine General James Mattis (who served as Donald Trump’s first secretary of defense) and retired Marine General John Allen published articles saying otherwise. The power of their voices should not be underestimated: during their careers, Mattis and Allen were two of the most celebrated officers in uniform, and since the end of their careers, they’ve become icons of the retired military community. 

“We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers,” Mattis wrote in a statement published in . “The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values….” 

Mattis went on to criticize Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and J.C.S. Chairman Mark Milley for appearing alongside Trump during the president’s Monday stroll (“a bizarre photo-op,” as Mattis described it) from Lafayette Park to St. John’s Episcopal Church. “We must reject any thinking of our cities as a ‘battlespace’ that our uniformed military is called upon to ‘dominate,” Mattis intoned. “At 民彩网官网, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict— a false conflict—between the military and civilian society.” 

Writing in , Allen followed suit, in a pointed response to Cotton. “Right now, the last thing the country needs — and, frankly, the U.S. military needs —is the appearance of U.S. soldiers carrying out the president’s intent by descending on American citizens,” he wrote. 

Mattis and Allen weren’t alone in expressing their views. The day before their articles appeared, former J.C.S. chairman Admiral Michael Mullen wrote a scathing critique of the Trump administration’s use of pepper balls and flash bangs against protesters just prior to Trump’s stroll. “I remain confident in the professionalism of our men and women in uniform,” . “They will obey lawful orders. But I am less confident in the soundness of the orders they will be given by this commander in chief, and I am not convinced that the conditions on our streets, as bad as they are, have risen to the level that justifies a heavy reliance on military troops. Certainly we have not cross the threshold that would make it appropriate to invoke the provisions of the Insurrection Act.” 

The views of this military triumvirate shocked the Trump administration. Inside the Pentagon, however, senior officers were less surprised with Mattis’, Allen’s, and Mullen’s views than with those expressed by former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Martin Dempsey, who is not only known for his reticence in offering his views on political issues, but has been outspoken when other retired officers have done so. That changed on Monday: “America is not a battleground,” . “Our fellow citizens are not the enemy.” 

While it seems likely that the rising chorus of retired military voices had a sobering impact at the Pentagon, it also simply accelerated a process that was already underway, as a senior Pentagon civilian told me. Esper, this Pentagon official claims, was intent to back off his comment within hours of it becoming public and regretted that he’d been included in Monday’s “bizarre photo op” when he stood alongside Trump in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church.

While Esper’s explanation for his Monday appearance with Trump was muddled, his statement about the use of the military to “dominate the battlespace” was not. “The option to use active-duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort,” during a hastily called briefing on Wednesday afternoon, “and only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now. I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act.” 

Esper then added that he regretted making the statement: “In retrospect, I would use different wording so as not to distract from the more important matters at hand or allow some to suggest that we are militarizing the issue.” In the wake of Esper’s appearance, rumors swept through the corridors of the Pentagon that the defense secretary was either planning to resign—or that Trump would fire him. As of Thursday morning, both options are still in play, with contradictory rumors swirling through the Pentagon that Esper will soon be shown the door—or that, alternatively, his friendship with fellow West Point graduate Mike Pompeo could save him. 

Reports that Esper was embarrassed by his trot-with-Trump hold true also for J.C.S. Chairman Mark Milley, according to a senior Pentagon official. Milley not only followed in Trump’s wake during Monday’s Lafayette Park-St. John’s walk, but was then videotaped on the streets of Washington that same night. 

“Freedom of speech, that’s perfectly fine,” Milley told a group of reporters who tracked him down. “We support that. We took an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America to do that, to protect everyone’s rights. That’s what we do. We’ve got the D.C. National Guard out here and I’m just checking their, seeing how well they’re doing, that’s all.” 

That Milley looked uncertain reflected his discomfort with appearing on the streets of Washington, D.C. in camouflage, a senior retired U.S. Army officer who knows him says. “He was chagrined,” this officer told me. “And frankly, this isn’t who he is. He’s a decent guy. He’s not someone who has trouble talking to people.” A second senior retired officer had a similar, if more pointed, take. “He’s walking a really delicate line,” this officer said. “He answers to the president. He can’t just go out and have a press conference, like Esper. So when I look at Milley I feel for him. And you can almost read his mind. I mean at one point Trump says he had put Milley ‘in charge.’ And Milley was probably thinking, ‘in charge of what?’”

In fact, the person that Trump appears to have made the field general of the federal response to the demonstrations, and particularly those in Washington, D.C., is Attorney General William Barr, who is not only not in the chain of command, he’s not even in uniform. If the presence of uniformed officers monitoring the demonstrations in Washington, D.C. is any indication, then Barr has responded to Trump’s desire that the military deal harshly with the demonstrators by flooding the streets with law enforcement officers of the Bureau of Prisons, units of which were flown into the city as early as Tuesday night from Texas and other locations.

Included among the contingent were Crisis Management Teams (CMT) and Special Operations Response Teams (Sort) that are . According to a BOP spokesperson, the teams have been dispatched to Washington, D.C. and Miami, Florida, “per the request of the Attorney General.” Photographs of the teams began appearing on social media on Wednesday afternoon, with demonstrators asking them where they were from and who they answered to. “DOJ,” one of the team members told a demonstrator. The teams were not wearing identifying badges, because while all law enforcement officials are required to do so by D.C. law, that statute does not include federal law enforcement forces. 

While the BOP “Sort” teams did not have identity badges or military markings, sported by Sort team officers appeared to mimic those featured in “The Punisher,” a popular Marvel Comics and Netflix series about a vigilante who appears with a facsimile of a “Totenkopf” or “deaths head” insignia worn by the Nazi military in World War II. The deaths head logo remains controversial, and sparked controversy in local communities when it was stenciled on police cars. 

A number of states, including New York, have established their own Sort Teams, mimicking the federal Bureau of Prisons template. , a typical “Sort team” is armed with “Sig Sauer P228s, Glock 19 pistols, Colt 9mm SMGs, Benelli M1 Super 90 shotguns, McMillan M86 SR Sniper Rifles, 37 mm gas guns, diversionary devices and chemical munitions.” Why such weapons would be needed now on the streets of Washington, D.C. is not clear. The Department of Justice did not respond to a request for comment, but Justice Department officials told a local television reporter that specific information on the teams could not be provided “for safety and security reasons.” 

But the senior Pentagon official with whom I spoke had his own theory: “Makes sense,” he said. “As the military has stepped back, the Justice Department has stepped in.” But when shown a photo of a Bureau of Prisons “Sort Team” deployed in downtown Washington, D.C., a senior retired military officer had a much different take. “These are more Delta wannabes. Now, every law enforcement agency has its own SWAT team,” he told me in an email. “This is not good.” 

Mark Perry is a journalist, author, and contributing editor at The American Conservative. His latest book is  He tweets .

The post Bill Barr and the Justice Department Send In Their Own Troops appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/bob-barr-and-his-justice-department-send-in-the-troops/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录Chicago Pastor: This Week’s Violence Has Set Our Black Community Back Decades http://www./articles/chicago-pastor-this-weeks-violence-has-set-our-black-community-back-decades/ http://www./articles/chicago-pastor-this-weeks-violence-has-set-our-black-community-back-decades/#respond Thu, 04 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:57 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262266 We worked tirelessly to turn around the city's most violent neighborhood, only to see it burned and looted.

The post Chicago Pastor: This Week’s Violence Has Set Our Black Community Back Decades appeared first on The American Conservative.

Martin Luther King famously noted that violence “destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue.” This week’s violent looting has produced a deafening monologue.

On the south side of Chicago, where I pastor a church and lead a ministry, Project H.O.O.D., we are in the business of building dialogue as the way of rebuilding our community. We help build community leaders and we equip our neighbors—especially young black men who are exiting gangs—to build their own character and to help rebuild the streets. We build self-esteem and respect for our fellow man. And we build stronger families with firmer foundations.

The destructive violence, rioting, and looting of the last few days, however, have quickly erased years of our dialogue.

When I began New Beginnings Church on the south side of Chicago, the neighborhood held the sad distinction of having one of the nation’s highest homicide rates. Over the years, we have changed that statistic. We have built a thriving church with an average of 600 to 750 people at our services each Sunday. We have a community center with a free gym, a career center that offers advice and assistance with interviews, and a high-impact jobs training program that has helped people build successful careers in fields such as construction or landscaping.

Our work has paid off, and we have witnessed the power of a changed life. I have seen the excitement of young men who have turned away from violent gangs to embark on their own new beginning and get fitted for construction boots for their new jobs.

Where despair once reigned, we have replaced it with hope and opportunity.

The riots of this past week, however, have set us back in our ministry work and have done incalculable damage to our community. The physical damage to property pales in comparison to the damage done to our morale.

George Floyd’s death at the hands of a police officer in Minneapolis sparked understandable outrage. How could another black man have died because of police brutality? The protests began as a natural outpouring of grief, as white and black Americans were united in their horror at this senseless act.

But these protests turned violent, and the victims of this widespread looting are often the black community leaders and business owners. How does it advance our cause of racial harmony to wreck the black communities?

Pastor Corey Brooks of Project H.O.O.D. in Chicago gives a sermon.

We are still surveying the damage on our streets. All of the CVS and Walgreens buildings were looted. The result is that we no longer have a pharmacy in our neighborhood. Church members are shuttling members of our community out to the suburbs to get their prescriptions and basic goods.

The grocery stores were also looted, leaving us without options to purchase local food.

The question lingers on many of our minds: Will these stores and pharmacies—so essential for daily living here—ever come back? It’s challenging enough in normal times to lure stores and businesses to rough neighborhoods; it’s going to be far more difficult to entice business owners to set up shop in our beleaguered communities now.

Liberal politicians in Illinois and across the country have fanned the flames of anger over the past several years. Their policies and worldview emphasize government as the solution to all problems, except, paradoxically, when we need police. Our mayor, Lori Lightfoot, has been unable or unwilling to put a stop to the violence in the streets of our 民彩网官网 city, in part because she has been unable to offer a strong defense for good law enforcement agents doing the necessary work of making our neighborhoods livable.

Lost in the liberal messaging is the reality that the foundation of our society is the rule of law. The tragic killing of George Floyd reminds us that we need better training and screening for police officers. But the vast majority of the law enforcement agents in our nation advance racial equality, and help black Americans participate in the American dream.

No one, after all, wants to live in an un-policed and lawless neighborhood. Thriving neighborhoods are able to attract businesses and families precisely because of the rule of law and the police officers upholding it. Lawless neighborhoods, by contrast, are a turn-off for parents and business owners.

Violence is rampant in Chicago, and it has nothing to do with isolated incidents of police brutality. Over Memorial Day weekend, ten African-Americans were shot and killed in drive-by shootings. I’ve given funeral sermons for victims of drive-by shootings in the past, and those victims’ deaths are each a senseless tragedy.

On the south side of Chicago, we don’t need police stepping back and retreating because of political agendas. The logical extension of liberal police reform is for law enforcement agents to retreat from their duties, but this is exactly wrong and will weaken our neighborhoods.

We need justice in the George Floyd case, and we need assurances that these hateful acts will not take place again. At the same time, we need partnerships with the police so they will help us re-establish law and order in our neighborhoods.

Democrats, however, cling to wrongheaded rhetoric that does nothing to stop the destruction of our 民彩网官网s. It is no coincidence that the most violent looting and destruction took place this past week in cities heavily controlled by Democrats.

I’ve been attacked, been robbed, life has been threatened. Black Americans deserve better than this.

Pastor Corey Brooks is the founder and Senior Pastor of New Beginnings Church of Chicago and founder and CEO of Project H.O.O.D Communities Development Corporation.

The post Chicago Pastor: This Week’s Violence Has Set Our Black Community Back Decades appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/chicago-pastor-this-weeks-violence-has-set-our-black-community-back-decades/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录The Worse the Better: Why Antifa Wants Trump to Win http://www./articles/the-worse-the-better-why-antifa-wants-trump-to-win/ http://www./articles/the-worse-the-better-why-antifa-wants-trump-to-win/#respond Thu, 04 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:27 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262156 They figure four more ears will move the U.S. to even higher levels of chaos—and get them closer to power.

The post The Worse the Better: Why Antifa Wants Trump to Win appeared first on The American Conservative.

Many thoughtful observers on the right—including , —have pointed out that the current protesting and rioting is likely to help Donald Trump and the Republicans. That is, the ongoing violence, fomented by leftist elements, including Black Lives Matter and Antifa, could boomerang against Joe Biden and his Democrats.

However, the planted assumption here is that the vandals and looters want Joe Biden to win. And that’s not so obvious. Indeed, maybe the truth is just the reverse.

To be sure, the protesters and looters all hate Donald Trump. And yet actions speak louder than words, and their actions on the street suggest a kind of anti-matter affection for the Bad Orange Man. That is, each act of violence obscures the memory of George Floyd, who died at the knee of a Minneapolis policeman, and raises the prospect of a national backlash against both peaceful protestors and violent looters, offering a ray of hope for Trump.

Indeed, Douthat quotes Princeton political scientist Omar Wasow, whose research shows that back in the 1960s, peaceful civil rights protests helped the Democrats, while violent protests (also known as riots) hurt the Democrats. In Wasow’s words, “proximity to black-led nonviolent protests increased white Democratic vote-share whereas proximity to black-led violent protests caused substantively important declines.” And that’s how Republican Richard Nixon defeated Democrat Hubert Humphrey in 1968.

We might add that Humphrey was a lot like Biden. Both were gabby senators turned vice presidents, regarded as reliable liberals, not as hard-edged leftists.

So now we’re starting to see where Biden, a pillar of the smug liberal establishment—he once a group of donors that if he’s elected, “nothing would fundamentally change”—veers away from the far-left ideologues amidst the mobs.

Let’s let –who has , literally, while chronicling bullyboy leftists—define the ideology of Antifa and Black Lives Matter: “At its core, BLM is a revolutionary Marxist ideology. Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi and Patrisse Cullors, BLM’s founders, are self-identified Marxists who make no secret of their worship of communist terrorists and fugitives, like Assata Shakur. They want the abolition of law enforcement and capitalism. They want regime change and the end of the rule of law. Antifa has partnered with Black Lives Matter, for now, to help accelerate the breakdown of society.”

We can observe that by “regime change,” these revolutionary leftists don’t mean replacing Trump with Biden—they mean replacing capitalism and the Constitution. In the meantime, if one looks at a Twitter feed identified by Ngo as an Antifa hub, , one sees plenty of anti-Trump rhetoric, along with general hard leftism, but nothing in support of Biden.

However, here’s something interesting: The Biden campaign shows no small degree of support for the street radicals. As Reuters on May 30,

“At least 13 Biden campaign staff members posted on Twitter on Friday and Saturday that they made donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which opposes the practice of cash bail, or making people pay to avoid pre-trial imprisonment. The group uses donations to pay bail fees in Minneapolis.”

We might observe that these 13 employees posted their pro-rioter sympathies on Twitter; in other words, not only did they make no effort to hide their donations, but they also actively bragged about them.

It could be argued, of course, that these are just 13 vanguard employees out of a campaign staff that numbers in the hundreds, maybe even thousands. And yet as the Reuters piece adds, Team Biden is not practicing political distancing from its in-house radicals: “Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement to Reuters that the former vice president opposes the institution of cash bail as a ‘modern day debtors prison.’”

When pressed by Reuters—which is not exactly Fox News in its editorial stance—the official spox for Middle Class Joe was unwilling to say more: “The campaign declined to answer questions on whether the donations were coordinated within the campaign, underscoring the politically thorny nature of the sometimes violent protests.”

So we can see: The Biden campaign is trying to maintain its equipoise between liberals and mobs, even as the former is bleeding into the latter.  Indeed, a look at Biden’s Twitter feed shows the same port-side balancing act. On May 30, for instance, he , “If we are complacent, if we are silent, we are complicit in perpetuating these cycles of violence. None of us can turn away. We all have an obligation to speak out.”

There’s enough ambiguity here, as well as in his other tweets, to leave everyone parsing, and guessing, as to what, exactly, Biden is saying—except, as he on June 2, that he opposes the use of chokeholds to restrain violent suspects, and also opposes more equipment for the police. The only other thing we know for sure is that he hasn’t tweeted an iota of specific sympathy for the people other than George Floyd who have died in the recent violence. One such is , an African American employee of the Federal Protective Service; he was shot and killed in Oakland, Calif. on May 29.

Yet while the Biden campaign attempts to keep its relationship with Antifa and its ilk fuzzy, other Democrats have made themselves clear. For instance, in 2018, then-Congressman Keith Ellison out a photograph of himself holding a copy of a book, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, which the radical-chic types at The New Yorker as “A how-to for would-be activists, and a record of advice from anti-Fascist organizers past and present.” Ellison is now the attorney general for the state of Minnesota.

And on May 31, Ellison’s son, Jeremiah, a Minneapolis city councilman, , “I hereby declare, officially, my support for ANTIFA.”

Still, if the Democrats can’t quite quit Antifa, most are smart enough to recognize the danger of being too closely associated with hooligans and radicals. Moreover, they need some theory of the case they wish to make, which is that they loudly support the protests, even as they mumble about the violence.

And Democrats have found their favored argument—the one that conveniently takes them off the hook. Indeed, it’s an argument they increasingly deploy to explain everything bad that happens: The Russians did it.  

Thus on May 31, former Obama national security adviser said on CNN of the tumult, “In my experience, this is right out of the Russian playbook.”

We might allow that it’s possible, even probable, that the Russian government has been taking delight in this spate of violence in America. And it’s similarly probable that the governments of China民彩网官网, Iran, and Venezuela, too, have been pleased, to say nothing of varying portions of the public in every country. And so sure, more than a few tweets and Facebook posts have probably resulted—after all, stories ripping the U.S. were right there, for instance, on the of China民彩网官网’s Global Times.

Still, it’s ridiculous to think that hundreds of thousands—maybe millions—of Americans are taking their cues from a foreign power; we’ve got plenty of 民彩网官网-grown radicalism and anger.

Yet even so, the Democrats have persisted in their Russia-dunnit narrative, because it serves their political, and perhaps psychological, need—the need to externalize criminal behavior. In other words, don’t blame us for the killings and lootings—blame Moscow.

Okay, so back to Antifa and Black Lives Matter. The left wing of the Democratic Party—including elements within the Biden campaign—might like them, but there’s no evidence that they like Democrats back.

Indeed, if the violence keeps up, it will become obvious that the leftist radicals are not trying to help Biden. To put it another way, the rads would become the objective allies (a political science term connoting an ironic congruence of interest) of … Trump.

To be sure, right now, Trump is running five or six points behind Biden in the RealClearPolitics . And yet, just as Dreher, Douthat, and McCarthy suggest, if the violence continues and Trump goes firm while Biden stays mushy, that could change.

Indeed, as we think of genuine radicalism, we would do well to look beyond the parochial confines of American politics, Democrat vs. Republican.  Instead, we might ponder the epic panorama of leftist history, which offers radicals so much more inspiration than historically centrist America.

For instance, we might look to Russia. But not to the Russia of Vladimir Putin, but rather, to the Russia of Vladimir Lenin.

In the early 20th century, Lenin’s Bolsheviks, awaiting their revolutionary moment, operated according to a simple slogan: “The worse the better.”  That is, the enemy of Bolshevism was incremental reform, or progress of any kind; the reds wanted conditions to get so bad as to “justify” a communist revolution. And that’s what Lenin and his comrades got in October 1917, when they seized power in the midst of the calamities of World War One.

Yes, of course, the communists made conditions worse, not better, for ordinary Russians. And yet things weren’t worse for Lenin and his Bolsheviks—they were now in power. So today, that’s the sort of dream that inspires Antifa radicals.

To be sure, an America dominated by Antifa and Black Lives Matter is a distant prospect. But radicals figure that four more years of Trump in the White House will move the nation to even higher levels of chaos—and thus move them closer to power.

With all that in prospect for radicals—that is, the worse, the better—the prospect of Joe Biden losing this year is a small price to pay. Actually, for them, it’s no price at all.

In the meantime, for America, there is no better. Only worse.

The post The Worse the Better: Why Antifa Wants Trump to Win appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/the-worse-the-better-why-antifa-wants-trump-to-win/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录End the Lockdowns Now http://www./articles/end-the-lockdowns-now/ http://www./articles/end-the-lockdowns-now/#respond Thu, 04 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:23 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262153 There has never been a greater number of volatile, young, unemployed people, doing nothing.

The post End the Lockdowns Now appeared first on The American Conservative.

Why are any lockdowns still in place anywhere in the United States? The rationale for them was already waning by the close of May. With the riots of the past week, ending them is now a matter of national necessity.

Timid governors and mayors previously calculated that letting the lockdowns run on for a little longer, or phasing them out gradually, was the safe choice. The economic damage couldn’t get too much worse in another week or two, they reasoned, and on the other hand they would be blamed for even the slightest increase in coronavirus deaths if they reversed course too early.

Maintaining the lockdowns is no longer the safe option. Erring on the side of caution now means opening up everything bar nursing 民彩网官网s tomorrow.

Back in February, there was tough talk from some Bernie Sanders supporters that “if Biden gets the nomination, Milwaukee will burn.” Few people really believed that the Democratic National Convention in Wisconsin this August would be like the 1968 convention in Chicago, because Americans have gotten too fat and lazy. Socialists might mouth off on Twitter, but in a First World country like ours, they have too much to lose to really riot.

Then came the lockdowns, and suddenly no one had as much to lose anymore.

The severity of a riot — at a certain point, whether a riot graduates to a revolt — depends on the number of people involved. A rampage of fifty people is qualitatively different from one of five hundred people, or five thousand.

The Los Angeles riots of 1992 were precipitated by a crowd of only about three hundred. The LAPD surrendered the pivotal intersection of Florence and Normandie avenues to a crowd that size on the afternoon of April 29, then came back a few hours later, found a crowd the same size, and fell back again. This signaled to the rioters that the neighborhood would be abandoned to its fate and prompted the mass lawlessness that raged for five days.

There are now more than 40 million unemployed in the United States. Job losses have been concentrated among the young and poor, the kind of people who don’t yet have families and careers to make them circumspect about lawbreaking.

Never before in American history, literally never, has the country had so many people in the combustible demographic of the young and unemployed.

In the face of this unprecedented danger, why are we not giving these people something else to do? For three months, they haven’t been able to go to the gym, pick up girls at a bar, or shout themselves hoarse at a concert. COVID-19 poses less risk to their age bracket than the flu, so why shouldn’t we let them start doing those things again immediately?

Why shouldn’t they go back to work? Not knowing where you’re going to be living in three months, whether you’ll have to crash on couches or if you’ll have any kind of job, is a powerful stimulus to recklessness.

The silver lining of the past week has been the way it has jolted coronavirus worriers out of their lingering anxieties. Most people can now see with their own eyes that nothing bad will happen to them if they stand closer than six feet apart or gather in groups of more than 10, all while data continues to roll in showing the concentration of coronavirus deaths in nursing 民彩网官网s. The idea that ordinary people will be too frightened to go out and get a haircut is ludicrous, and politicians can’t credibly keep barbershops closed after cheering on the protests.

The presence among this week’s rioters of so many college-educated and middle-class people—the sort who would have been too employed to riot in 1968, who probably were too employed to riot six months ago—is highly ominous. We immediately need to reduce the population of potential rioters to ordinary levels, the usual underclass and antifa malcontents, or this year could be worse than 1968.

Much mischief in the world has been averted by the six little words: I can’t, I have work tomorrow. Having somewhere to be in the morning is the best curfew. The lockdowns caused these riots. Ending them can be part of their cure.

The post End the Lockdowns Now appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/end-the-lockdowns-now/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录America Can’t Save Hong Kong http://www./articles/america-cant-save-hong-kong/ http://www./articles/america-cant-save-hong-kong/#respond Thu, 04 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:13 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262265 Only deft diplomacy, by threatening China民彩网官网 with realistic penalties, offers any hope for the future of the former British colony.

The post America Can’t Save Hong Kong appeared first on The American Conservative.

Rather like Adolf Hitler’s Thousand Year Reich that ended 988 years early, China民彩网官网’s guaranteed 50 years of freedom for Hong Kong has ended 27 years early. It’s been a good run since 1997, since Beijing left the territory mostly alone for longer than many people expected.

However, the Xi government’s plan to directly impose a comprehensive national security law and allow security forces to operate in the special administrative region (SAR) ends any pretense that residents will retain traditional British liberties and enjoy Western-style due process. Nor is there much hope for prudential forbearance in using powers nominally intended for emergencies. Under Xi Jinping the People’s Republic of China民彩网官网 has ruthlessly crushed any hint of dissent, political, religious, or other, at 民彩网官网; it considers nothing other than immediate and complete obedience as acceptable. The result will be no different in Hong Kong.

Tyranny’s approach has triggered an understandable air of desperation in the territory. After the PRC’s announcement, protestors at one demonstration called on the U.S. military to intervene. Jimmy Lai, publisher of the Apple Daily, who recently was arrested and charged with participating in illegal demonstrations last year, urged President Donald Trump to save Hong Kong.

Unfortunately, there is little Washington can do. And the more Hong Kongers press for outside interference, the greater the likelihood the People’s Republic of China民彩网官网 (PRC) will enter faster and more firmly. Indeed, opposition missteps—understandable and well-intentioned, but serious mistakes nonetheless—accelerated the destruction of Hong Kong’s autonomy.

First, military action is a nonstarter. The U.S. will not go to war, nor threaten to go to war, against a nuclear-armed power on the Asian mainland over that government’s human rights violations in territory universally acknowledged to be legally under its control. Nor should Washington do so. Full stop.

Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union slaughtered millions. The U.S. did not start World War III over the issue. Mao Zedong’s China民彩网官网 slaughtered millions. Washington did not start World War III to stop the Chinese Community Party then.

Pol Pot slaughtered millions. Washington did not invade Cambodia/Kampuchea. Countries as diverse as North Korea and Eritrea established hellish dictatorships. Washington did not bomb or invade them. Horrendous conflicts and civil wars have dotted the globe: Sudan, Liberia, Burundi, Turkey, Rwanda, Syria, Yemen, Democratic Republic of Congo. Washington did little-to-nothing in them.

Despite its often soaring rhetoric about freedom, the U.S. government’s chief responsibility, and thus the appropriate focus of its foreign and military policy, is to protect America, its people, territory, and liberties. Washington often does a bad job, creating even greater harm, as in Iraq. But its interventions that purport to be purely humanitarian are few in number—Haiti, Somalia, the Balkans. And none involved serious powers that could defend themselves and threaten retaliation. The PRC would fiercely resist U.S. action. Even an American victory would merely the first round of a conflict bound to play out over years and more likely decades.

Nor does Washington have a political answer for Hong Kong. America’s commitment to human rights is inconsistent at best: just ask the oppressed masses under dictators favored by President Donald Trump: Mohammed bin Salman, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Kim Jong-un, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Vladimir Putin, Mohammed bin Zayed, and even, until recently, anyway, Xi Jinping. The U.S. government uses human rights as a cudgel against its adversaries, such as Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela. Otherwise mass repression, including kidnapping and murder, receives short shrift. Remember Jamal Khashoggi?

Moreover, short of war, the U.S. has no way to force even weak governments to change policy. Sanctions usually fail to win compliance with American demands. Especially policies viewed by other governments as vital, essential to maintain authority, enhance power, preserve order, suppress opposition, and deter challenges. Washington has run “maximum pressure” campaigns against Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela. None has yielded. The U.S. applied and continues to apply significant economic pressure on Cuba—after 60 years!—and Russia. Neither has given in. Sudan long was the target of stultifying sanctions, but only a popular uprising last year finally ousted the regime.

For the PRC, a rising nationalistic power, authority over Hong Kong is not a peripheral matter to be bartered away. Indeed, no serious government would willingly surrender such vital or even important interests to a foreign power. Especially Beijing, since reclaiming territory lost during the “century of humiliation” has been a major Chinese priority.

For this reason the belief that the U.S. government might intervene directly in Hong Kong would likely spur a Chinese crackdown. The last thing the Xi government would countenance is direct foreign intervention in what is seen, by the PRC’s population as well as government, as an internal affair. If the opposition calls for outsiders to interfere, the regime has an even greater incentive to act quickly, before any such an attempt is made.

Ironically, Hong Kong’s best hope is the threat of economic retaliation by a broad coalition led by America focused on vital redlines protecting essential liberties, not democracy or independence. Today the U.S. and most countries treat the SAR, and the freedom of its financial system, as very different from the mainland. Instead regulating the territory like the PRC proper would impose severe economic losses on China民彩网官网. The issue is less current production than access to Western capital through Hong Kong, as detailed by a recent study by Hong Kong Watch. Such losses would be painful at any time, but especially after the economic damage done by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The prospect of such economic losses might deter Beijing from putting the SAR under de facto direct rule. The Chinese Communist Party might judge the cost to be too high, the gain to be too little. However, there is no chance that the Xi government would accept either democracy or independence. Doing so would violate the regime’s long-term determination to reconstitute historic China民彩网官网. The loss of prestige would be enormous. And the threat of a spreading freedom virus would be too serious. Demanding too much of Beijing ensures losing everything.

Indeed, past overreach cost Hong Kongers dearly. Beijing’s intrusions may have been inevitable and in hindsight look inexorable, but the demand for democracy and failure to negotiate for more realistic objectives ensured the failure of the Umbrella Revolution in 2014. Free elections never were going to be and will never be granted by the PRC as presently constituted.

Moreover, the oath-taking contretemps of 2016 unnecessarily attracted Beijing’s malign attention, drawing the regime into the territory’s electoral affairs and turning democracy advocates into targets. Public contempt even more than resolute opposition was sure to anger the Xi regime, which decided that it had to act.  The National People’s Congress intervened to set electoral rules and Xi Jinping used his subsequent visits to publicly set a tougher course. Unfortunately, these actions appeared to reflect public as well as elite sentiment in the PRC. 民彩网官网

Finally, last year’s protests, though courageous, were also chaotic. Forcing the SAR government to suspend the extradition legislation was a notable achievement. Beijing might have been able to accept, however reluctantly, such a setback. However, the demonstrations continued, threatening China民彩网官网’s control, creating disorder, trashing the legislative chamber, disrupting the airport, and more. There was no obvious end, since protestors were pursuing seemingly unattainable objectives, namely democracy and independence.

This guaranteed a tougher response. Few governments, even liberal republics, would be willing to accept daily disarray and disruption. The Communist regime proved willing to fill Beijing’s streets with blood in 1989 to maintain the party’s authoritarian control. A more powerful country under an even more brutal ruler surely is willing to do the same in Hong Kong today.

Of course, the PRC remains to blame for the assault on the territory’s rule of law. The opposition’s fault is imprudence, understandable but unfortunate. The task today is to salvage as much as possible. The U.S. can help. But not by overt, dramatic intervention which is unrealistic and would force China民彩网官网’s hand, ensuring an even tougher and more permanent clampdown.

Hong Kong risks losing what makes it most special, its protection of legal and political liberties. Contrary to the hopes of some residents, Washington does not have the answer. Indeed, the call on America risks triggering an even tougher Chinese reaction. Only a deft game of diplomacy by a united West, threatening realistic penalties focused on the essentials of territorial autonomy, offers any hope for the future.

Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of several books, including Tripwire: Korea and U.S. Foreign Policy in a Changed World and co-author of The Korean Conundrum: America’s Troubled Relations with North and South Korea.

The post America Can’t Save Hong Kong appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/america-cant-save-hong-kong/feed/ 0
民彩网官网|全民彩票官网网址|全民彩票官网登录What Took Trump So Long? http://www./articles/what-took-trump-so-long/ http://www./articles/what-took-trump-so-long/#respond Wed, 03 Jun 民彩网官网 04:01:41 +0000 http://www./?post_type=articles&p=262152 His decision to deploy troops to the streets is welcome but late. Turns out his advisors urged him to stand down.

The post What Took Trump So Long? appeared first on The American Conservative.

The last weekend of May 民彩网官网 was the time when racial tensions in America came roaring back. Millions of people who have been socially conditioned to believe America is an inherently racist country joined protests that often turned into riots. As cities burned, those in the silent majority looked to the White House for some semblance of leadership, only to find their president tweeting from a bunker about “sleepy Joe.”

Americans know our history: the original sin of slavery, Jim Crow, and the Great Society programs that robbed black Americans of their liberties, rights, and dignity. It’s something we are engrained with from the time we are children. In a new woke America however, this has expanded into a belief that the U.S. has only made slight progress from our past. It has become something everyday Americans are shamed with by wealthy elites and race profiteers.

This vision of America and the perception of systemic anti-black discrimination comes from social conditioning that is pushed in every corner of elite society. Ph.D. student Zach Goldberg produced a series of indispensable showing how media outlets including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and NPR have increased their use of ‘woke’ terminology in their everyday reporting since 2010. Some outlets by as much as 300 percent in less than a decade. This effort has helped brand all white Americans as a single monolithic group that holds biases against all ‘people of color.’

Since 2007, white liberals are than black Americans to believe that racism is responsible for the fiscal and social ills of the black community, although both baselines have increased in the last decade. Encouraged by white liberals, black Americans have a greater in 2019, than they did the decade before. In 2006, around 29 percent of black Americans believed at one time or another they’ve been unfairly stopped by the police because of their skin color, according to a Kaiser study. By 2019, the number increased to nearly 44 percent, according to a Pew Research report.

America responded to these growing concerns with a series of reforms to both policing and sentencing. From , the number of unarmed black men shot and killed by police annually fell from 38 to 9. Likewise, the number of incarcerated black Americans has fallen by a third since 2006, according to

Yet despite all of this progress, the conversation about race is more vitriolic and generations of white Americans who even questioned the premise were told to “check their privilege.” It became orthodoxy that only those who experienced victimhood could speak about it. Personal experiences and viral videos trump data, polling, and policy reforms.

Then, George Floyd was killed and a decade of racial resentment boiled over. A mixture of terrorists who identify as members of the mostly white Antifa groups and young minorities committed acts of violence across the country. Images went viral of desperate store owners putting up signs asking the mob not to destroy their minority-owned businesses, on social media told the mob to target white-majority neighborhoods, and police and civilians were brutally attacked. It was a clarifying moment for an untold number of young people that see the world through the lens of social media. Civil society, racial harmony, and civilization itself could disappear within a few days of lawlessness.

President Trump and many other Republican leaders condemned the murder of Floyd and demanded action against the police officers involved. In the days that followed, however, the White House felt absent in the national conversation. Protests turned to riots and cities like Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Atlanta turned into war zones, yet the president was nowhere to be found. Outside of Twitter and the few remarks given by Trump during the SpaceX launch, the silence from the White House was deafening.

Sources inside the administration said that throughout the tumultuous weekend, the White House was running on a skeleton crew. Advisors Jared and Ivanka Kushner were celebrating a Jewish holiday, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows was at his daughter’s wedding, other key members of the administration were out of state. While Washington burned, Trump was ushered into a bunker with the few aides that were by his side, including Dan Scavino.

On Thursday, Kushner and his allies, Brooke Rollins and Ja’ron Smith told the White House and the campaign that they shouldn’t discuss the riots in overtly negative terms because it could harm the campaign’s efforts at coalition-building with the black community. They insisted the whole thing would eventually blow over.

With no team and no plan, Trump took to Twitter, demanding that mayors and governors take more action. Writers and media personalities from nearly every conservative outlet tweeted, “where is Trump?” Presidential sycophants, many of whom campaigned against the president in the 2016 primary, tried to calm the growing chorus of concerns. Their reasoning ranged from there was nothing he could do, the optics would be bad, and this will help him in November. Yet as the days mounted and the riots spread to every major American city, it became glaringly obvious that the situation was only becoming worse and the president was missing in action. It seemed that the president was just tweeting as America burned. 

The hashtag #WhereIsTrump began trending as those most looking for leadership felt abandoned. It was the dismal to a weekend of rage. The political class, even Trump, were unable to establish security and order, which are the cornerstone of civilization.

By Sunday, Attorney General Bill Barr started moving to declare Antifa a terrorist organization, while also expanding efforts inside the DOJ, and making a push to activate the national guard. Sources within the administration said that Barr was determined not to hang for Kushner’s inaction.

While Barr moved, the White House was still frozen. reported and it was independently confirmed to me that Kushner and his allies pushed Trump to respond by holding listening sessions with black pastors, business groups, and other organizations. Around midnight, Trump decided that he was going to give a national address. Yet by the morning the White House messaging was still in chaos. Spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany repeated Kushner’s talking point that a presidential address to the nation wouldn’t calm the rioters. Later, Brooke Rollins gave a disastrous interview with Politico where she said the president was looking for bipartisan solutions. Well into the day, it seemed uncertain that the White House would adopt the tough-on-crime strategy that his supporters demanded.

Trump’s Rose Garden address Monday night may have saved him and the country. Cracking down on protesters, deploying federal troops, strength—was what most Americans, even those who aren’t his base, wanted to hear. That he would provide leadership and stop the carnage and lawlessness that had enveloped over the weekend. If he can deliver, it will give him an advantage that law-and-order candidates, like Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, used as cornerstones of their campaigns. It is doubtful, however, that any long term changes will emerge from this weekend of chaos. Will Kushner and Rollins, who advised Trump to let it blow over, be forced to leave their jobs? It’s extremely unlikely.

America is not the same place it was a week ago. A countless number are looking at their country with a more Hobbesian worldview. Society and civilization are extremely fragile, and their institutions and leaders have less willpower than they imagined.

Ryan Girdusky is the author of They’re Not Listening: How the Elites Created the National Populist Revolution. He is a contributing editor to TAC and a host of Right Now.

The post What Took Trump So Long? appeared first on The American Conservative.

http://www./articles/what-took-trump-so-long/feed/ 0