Dear Intelligent American,
This past Tuesday was the Third of September, which, as Motown songwriter Norman Whitfield recounted, was a day to remember, because that was the day when his “daddy died.” When asked about this never-to-be-seen progenitor, his momma gave the blunt description:
"Son, Papa was a rolling stone, wherever he laid his hat was his home, and when he died, all he left us was alone.”
Which may be the reality of many readers of this missive. It surely describes the upbringing of many Americans, this story that transcends the decades, centuries, millennia. Of related interest: Tablet Magazine recently published a terrific article on “The Men Who Weren’t There,” explaining a fascinating turn-of-the-century effort—the “National Desertion Bureau”—in America’s Jewish-immigrant communities, aiming to find disappearing dads and rolling stones.
Check out that piece. Maybe do so while you listen to The Temptations tell the painful tale of the invisible Old Man.
And the Band Played On . . .
1. At The Jack Miller Center, the great historian George Nash sizes up the state of modern conservatism. From the interview:
Since 1991 one of the hallmarks of conservative intellectual history has been the quest for new sources of unity—a new fusionism, as it were, for a new era. Thus in recent decades, we have heard about “leave us alone” conservatism, “national greatness” conservatism, “compassionate” conservatism, “reform” conservatism, “crunchy” conservatism, and “tea party” conservatism, among other formulations of what conservatives should stand for in a new age. This process has accelerated since 2016, when Donald Trump and his “America First” supporters assailed not only the liberal establishment and the Republican Party establishment but also the separate and distinct conservative establishment rooted in the Buckley/Reagan/Cold War era.
Today the conservative community in America—a community built on ideas—has become a house divided over ideas, including the ideational foundations of American foreign policy. Those on the Right who recall the Cold War years and who adhere to Reaganite, conservative internationalism frequently find themselves at odds now with those who have a “nationalist” worldview and a post-Cold War (or pre-Cold War) aversion to military intervention in faraway places. I do not know how these tensions on the Right, which are partly generational, can be resolved intellectually. It may be that world events—a new Cold War, perhaps—will soon clarify conservative foreign policy thinking.
2. At USA Today, legal scholar John Yoo considers the tenor of American law schools, which has him worrying about the fate of our Constitution. From the piece:
A 2023 survey of accredited law schools reveals that only 68% require law students to take a course in constitutional law for a mean of 3.6 credit hours, which amounts to one semester of study. By comparison, 100% of law schools require students to take a course on contracts, with a mean number of 4.7 credit hours. Torts and civil procedure are similarly required by 99.5% of law schools with mean credit hours of 4.2 and 4.5 credit hours.
Little wonder, then, that law students—like undergraduates—are displaying open contempt for freedom of speech. In 2022, more than 100 Yale law students screamed, banged walls and hurled insults so that police had to appear. Why? Because a conservative lawyer wanted to discuss a Supreme Court First Amendment case she had argued. Indeed, Yale’s cancel culture has become so notorious that several prominent federal judges have pledged not to hire its graduates.
3. At Minding the Campus, Liza Libes says literary study must be freed from the control of Marxist academics. From the analysis:
Throughout my years as a reader and literary scholar, I have witnessed countless works imprint themselves on my psyche as I have grown into a richer human being. Jane Eyre taught me the value of trust and persistence in the name of love. Notes from Underground provided me with a window into the human condition. East of Eden presented me with the nature of good and evil. In reminding ourselves that literature is a vehicle through which we can understand ourselves, we can focus on what we have in common as members of the human species rather than augment our differences.
Across American college campuses, English literature students are being taught that literary study must necessarily rest on the far-left ideologies of Karl Marx, Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and others. As a result, literary fields such as publishing, academia, and journalism are increasingly becoming dominated by ideological extremists who are bringing the focus of literary study away from the humanistic tradition and towards their own political agendas.
It is unsurprising that in studying English, a field that claims to understand human beings through the written word, I was assigned more Karl Marx than Charles Dickens. If we continue to politicize literature to these extremes, it will die away, and then we will be left—dangerously—only with Marxism for its own sake.
4. At National Review, Jack Butler comes to the defense of college sports. From the piece:
It’s possible to argue against college sports for other reasons. Some might argue their all-consuming tendency distracts from higher education’s much more important academic mission. Over half a century ago, conservative luminary Russell Kirk left an academic post at Michigan State University in part because he thought its administrators believed that “mere aggrandizement in enrollments and buildings and course catalogs and football victories is the chief end of universities.”
But the naysayers are wrong. A visit to any of the best college-football towns or stadiums on gameday suffices to disprove them. Here, one will see an entire municipality geared toward a single purpose; or an entire arena (that, in some places, can swell to the population size of one of the biggest cities in the state on gameday) suffused with raucous energy. The institutional attachment and localized pride college sports inculcate help explain why, in 43 states, the highest-paid public employee is a college-sports coach. There’s a good chance that’s what the state would vote for—unless that coach is presiding over a losing season. It sure beats spending taxpayer money on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
Then there are the athletes themselves. Sure, not all of them meet the NCAA’s professed student-athlete ideal; the “rocks for jocks” stereotype exists for a reason. But even a Kirkian ought to admit that they strengthen community, variety, and “things established by immemorial usage.” They also provide a model for the physical potential of the human body at places where too many either neglect that potential or devote it to all-nighters, alcohol binges, and other unseemly shenanigans that the young frame can withstand. And they remind us, as Plato did, that a full education is not just intellectual but also physical. In short: Jocks rock.
5. At City Journal, Wilfred McClay argues that the university has a broader responsibility—to conserve the cultural. From the essay:
But the restoration of free speech, as well as the ethos that supports its flourishing, is not the full cure to what ails higher education in America. Yes, a university is a community of inquiry. But it also is something more than that: a community of shared memory, the chief instrument by which the achievements of the past are transmitted to the present as a body of knowledge upon which future knowledge can be built. Without the prior existence of that body of shared knowledge to build upon, the concept of progress is empty. This is what it means to be a civilization: a social formation in which such transmission takes place continuously and reliably, forming the basis of a rich and enduring common life.
Healthy civilizations do not reinvent the wheel in every generation. They do not require the young to invent their own trigonometry or calculus, or require them to discover the laws of physics by unguided experimentation, or to suss out for themselves what the greatest works of literature are and why they are great. Instead, they use time-honored tools of instruction—the laboratory, the seminar, the lecture—to transmit that body of knowledge so that the young can push off from what others have discovered and put that insight to use, addressing themselves to new endeavors and to the task of living full and reflective human lives.
6. At Philanthropy Daily, Mark Bauerlein finds that higher-ed education reform can come from engaged trustees. From the article:
Trustees rarely exercise this power, instead rubber-stamping the recommendations that come before them. They're faithful to the status quo; they don't want conflict. Most of them come from the worlds of business, law, and politics, which leaves them ill-equipped to disrupt the ideological passions raging in academia. Governors in red states dislike the leftist condition of the campus, but they, too, are unaccustomed to academic dispute. They have the power to appoint trustees, but it doesn't occur to them to put intelligent, experienced warriors on the board who know how intramural politics work.
Here is where conservative philanthropy may play a role in advancing the trustee method. Governors and current trustees need to be educated on the power of the position. They need to learn of the biased decisions faculty and administrators make behind closed doors. The academic jargon that cloaks many of the ideological shenanigans must be decoded. Two or three trustees familiar with academic culture wars can translate these discourses and practices into easily understandable terms.
Here is a practical first step: a donor could create a small troupe of experts who would run seminars for governors, relevant staff members, and trustees, much like the weekend meetings for federal judges supported by the Olin Foundation in the 1980s and ’90s. These seminars could present an overview of higher education, how it has decayed, and what trustees are able to do to fix it. Or, they could be tailored to specific states, to places where a public university might be ready for improvement.
7. At The New Criterion, Gary Saul Morson considers some new books and the persistent specter of communism. From the essay:
Robert Conquest wisely observed that Marxism captivates not in spite of its mass killings but because of them. That is why it attracted far more enthusiastic American followers during Stalin’s great terror than in the less brutal reigns of Khrushchev and Brezhnev, when admiration shifted to the even more murderous Mao. I wonder whether a similar fascination with brutality explains why, on October 7, 2023, and in the days that followed, some progressives cheered Hamas.
For McMeekin, the essence of communism, and the source of its endless appeal, lies not in its outdated economics but in its totalitarian imperative to destroy utterly the old world, reject all traditional values, and completely remake both individuals and society. The apocalypse is never out of date. Despite its market reforms and economic modernization, China is still, in McMeekin’s view, an essentially communist country using the latest technology not to liberate but to surveil people further. The richer it grows, the more tools for repression China deploys.
8. At Forbes, eduguru Bruno Manno explores the gender and degree occupation divide for America’s young workers. From the article:
Labor force participation for those without degrees has generally declined for men and risen for women. The share of young men who were in the labor force either working or looking for work with some college or with only a high school diploma dropped steadily between 1970 and 2023. In 1970, 96% of young men with some college education were in the labor force. Today, the share is 89%. In 1970, almost all young men with a high school diploma (98%) were in the labor force. Today that share is around 87%.
The labor force participation of young women without a college degree increased from 1970 to the early 1990s. By 2000, about three-quarters of young women with a high school diploma and 79% of those with some college education were in the labor force. That share generally fell during the 2001 recession and the Great Recession of 2008, with a sharp decline for young women with a high school diploma. Since around 2014, labor force participation for both groups of young women increased. As of 2023, 69% of young women with a high school education were in the labor force, as were 78% of young women with some college education.
The decline in male workforce participation is a matter of serious concern, as it correlates with increased rates of substance abuse, addiction, and crime. It also might lead some to conclude wrongly that the labor market is a zero-sum game, with women’s advancement coming at the cost of men’s success.
9. At Front Porch Republic, Elizabeth Stice argues that public spaces are under assault by those determined to charge admission and seek revenue. From the piece:
Civil society relies on common spaces where people of all backgrounds can meet, but states and cities have been pursuing semi-privatization of public spaces. Across the country, public pickleball courts and golf courses are being handed over to companies to be run, more or less, privately. Parks are placed to allow access to a wide range of people, but those spaces are being treated more like profit centers than community-builders. Public spaces are not designed or intended to exist for profit.
Beyond this philosophical error, it is also practically unwise to put profit at the center of public spaces. All kinds of people have moved to Florida in the last few years. The population is growing. That has led to development and many economic opportunities. Florida has a great GDP. But for some people, it is never enough. If there is a penny to be made, something will be squeezed. Florida has been here before. The Florida housing market bubble was at the center of the story of the 2008 Recession. Everyone was seemingly getting rich quick, then everything fell apart. Florida also had a big land boom in the 1920s. Right now, Florida is one of the fastest growing states: Are we once again looking at everything as an opportunity to turn a profit?
10. At The American Conservative, anti-statist curmudgeon Peter Tonguette offers no cheers for the bus driver, a long-held pique. From the reflection:
In my case, it was not my mother but my father who drove me to and from school every day through the second grade, and, to help pass the time on our daily sojourns, we would count the number of school buses we happened to pass en route to school. I cannot be certain of this, but I think we would remember the number counted from one day to the next. What can I say? I was 8 years old, and it amused me.
Even at that age, though, I recognized that being free to count school buses—rather than compelled to ride on one of them—made me one of the lucky ones: I was not among those unfortunate youngsters whose parents were so determined to acclimate them to the world that they not only subjected them to public schools but to a form of public transportation to get there. I knew I had it better sitting in the passenger seat of my parents’ Volvo (or whatever car we owned at that point) than sitting in what I assumed was a stuffy cauldron of loud, rude and raucous kids.
This may strike some as unbearably elitist, but I now see the real risks of parents relying on school buses: This teaches the child to depend on a public service for a basic need—surely a “lesson” that leads to increasing reliance on the state. I am not ignorant of practical considerations, but if a parent is really, truly unable to convey their offspring to school, why not make use of a carpool? That, at least, teaches the child to rely on friends and neighbors. And, if physically possible, the child simply walking to school would send the message that he can rely on himself. Better that than counting on the school bus driver.
11. At TomKlingenstein.com, Will Thibeau explains the crisis facing the U.S. military. From the piece:
When it comes to policy, the military must maintain a strict separation between values unrelated to the military profession and those values necessary to maintain an effective force. Like a drop of ink in a glass of water, the faintest hint of ideology outside the scope of the military profession will degrade the whole force’s effectiveness. Historical examples from eighteenth century France to the Soviet Army of the late Cold War attest to the reality of this threat.
At stake is much more than the relative quality of military units. A military consumed by politics and identity threatens the very integrity of our republic. In other sectors of society, the consequences of shirking the primacy of merit amount to a bad hire as university president, or maybe a missed revenue projection for a given fiscal quarter. In the military, the stakes are obviously higher.
Nowhere are the consequences of hiring anyone but those selected for their professional qualifications higher than in the wars our military may soon fight. In May of this year, the Daily Caller reported on the Air Force’s efforts to diversify flight school. The Air Force created classes that mirrored the race and gender demographics of the nation. This manipulation of the most critical talent of our military produced consecutive flight school classes below sustainable levels, far below average. This brutal case study is a harbinger of things to come in a military whose organizing principle is diversity rather than merit.
12. At Law & Liberty, Nathan Schlueter explains why the free market is hard to defend. From the essay:
The truth is that the free market is not easy to defend. That is not to say it is indefensible. To the contrary, there are many strong arguments in favor of it, including the scope it gives to human freedom and creativity; the innovation and wealth it generates; and the incompetence, injustice, and dangers of undue government interference and control.
But most people find it difficult to understand and appreciate these arguments when faced with the immediate advantages of government intervention. The problem is not logical, it is psychological. Instead of an explicit rejection of the free market, we have witnessed the steady growth of well-intentioned anti-market attitudes and policies, which cause real but hidden harm while nudging us along what F. A. Hayek famously called The Road to Serfdom.
We can see why the defense of the free market is so difficult and yet so important by juxtaposing it with other domains of human action. The common good of a healthy political association is not simple. It includes at least three spheres that exist in a dynamic and uneasy tension with one another: civil society, the free market, and government.
Lucky 13. At the Big Rapids Pioneer, Cathie Crew reports on a generous Michigan bus-stuffing. From the story:
When Baldwin Community Schools students return to the classroom on Aug. 26, they will be greeted with an abundance of new school supplies and technology, courtesy of the Pure Markette Farmers/Makers Market “Stuff the Bus” event.
During the Aug. 14 Pure Markette, community members and market patrons were encouraged to donate school supplies or monetary donations to stuff a 1977 VW Microbus, provided by volunteers Andy and Meredith Gremel.
“The result was the bus was stuffed with over $1,200 in supplies, including calculators and headphones purchased with cash donations,” Pure Markette Market Volunteer Manager Meredith Gremel said.
Bonus. At Commentary Magazine, Rob Long, amigo and Hollywood pro, shares old tales from Studio City, possibly as a distraction from the current madness. From the column:
No one, in other words, wrote 62 of them. So my angry friend was either lying about his credits—a time-honored show-business tradition, and a lot easier to get away with before IMDb—or the bitterness he felt at being too old and cast aside had curdled his memory. In his mind, perhaps, he may not have written exactly 62 episodes of Mr. Ed, but he wrote a lot of them. The one thing that was undeniably true was that he couldn’t get a meeting. You didn’t need to consult The Complete Directory to Prime Time Network TV Shows, 1946–Present to know that. You knew because he was wearing bedroom slippers outside at 2 p.m.
The proper human response to the sad old Mr. Ed writer is compassion plus a dollop of the reaper comes for all of us humility. But even back then, before I could claim to be an industry insider, I could do the basic and brutal math of show business.
In the mid-1960s, when Mr. Ed was broadcast on the CBS network, there were three national television broadcasters delivering roughly the same number of hours of programming as they did in 1990, when I was loafing around the Brentwood Country Mart pretending to understand what was in Variety. A few years before, Rupert Murdoch had launched the Fox Broadcasting Network, which added more hours to the supply but didn’t hit its stride until the mid-1990s. The television business wasn’t an ever-expanding marketplace of abundance, but rather a tightly limited number of available time slots on the same broadcasting networks that had been in business since 1948 or so. Here’s what I knew: If I wanted to get a show on the air, someone else’s show had to get canned. If I wanted to work as a television comedy writer, the old guy in the slippers needed to leave the business, and I meant that in the most euphemistic way possible.
For the Good of the Cause
Uno. At Philanthropy Daily, Jeremy Beer and Les Lenkowsky explore and explain the 2024 Giving Report, and what is behind America’s generosity decline. Listen here.
Due. Attention, all Givers, Doers, and Thinkers: C4CS will host a consequential conference on K to Campus: How the Education Reform Movement Can Reshape Higher Ed. It takes place at Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA, from October 23 to 24, and just about every bit of info you want/need to know can be found here. Fun fact: The kick-off event will be Yours Truly interviewing the great Victor Davis Hanson. Come, and prepare to be inspired.
Tre. The Center for Civil Society will be serving up an important, via-Zoom Master Class on Thursday, September 19th (from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m., Eastern). Its title—“Direct Mail Outreach”—is as simple as the subject matter is vital for fundraising types. Attend and you’ll why direct mail still makes sense in an increasingly digital age, how to acquire new donors through the mail, how digital techniques can complement and elevate direct-mail fundraising, and tons more. Get complete information here.
Quattro. Oh, you wanted a Master Class on Planned Giving? Well, C4CS has got one of them too. Mark your calendar: October 10th from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m., Eastern. Get complete information here.
Department of Bad Jokes
Q: Why did the principal allow the rooster to teach the algebra class?
A: Because he was a mathemachicken.
A Dios
The readings last Sunday included passages from Mark, where Jesus downloads the copious list of sins that defile a person: “sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.” Not to make light of such, but the latter—which seems less egregious than murder or adultery—intrigues. Does it refer to the primary trait of the neighborhood chooch or lame-brained brother-in-law, or is there something willful and intentional about this particular sin that the Good Lord finds fit to declare. We shall ponder on this more. Meanwhile, a good week to you and yours, and do please remember, on the 11th, the souls of those murdered 23 years ago.
Lest We Forget,
Jack Fowler, who honors the dead at jfowler@amphil.com.
