Dear Intelligent American,
The solstice snuck up, so we comment as the days now . . . shorten?! Say it ain’t so! But it is so. An idea: For now, let’s pretend not to notice.
To preoccupy against the coming darkness, maybe turn to that great factory of American culture, Hollywood, if only to enjoy two wonderful, seasonal movies that might give delight on a warm night, when the sounds of cicadas and the faint of heat lightning and the shine of the little glowworms (glimmer, glimmer, hey there don’t get dimmer, dimmer) offer a pleasant backdrop.
One: There is David Lean’s lovely 1955 film, Summertime, with Katharine Hepburn and Rossano Brazzi navigating love abroad over fleeting days—it’s beautifully filmed and at moments aching. Two: For something completely different, watch the cornball 1950 musical Summer Stock, which merits your attention if only because Judy Garland is so darned good (when is she not?).
Name dropping. Miss Hepburn lived in Old Saybrook, Connecticut, where I spent a week or two with family, immediate and extended, in the early 1970s. Bicycling (not intentionally) near her Long Island Sound beach home, situated on a peninsula at the base of the Connecticut River, Yours Truly spied some dogs coming a-charging from her property, barking and yapping and forcing us to dismount, return fire (well, yell go away!), and skulk off, on foot, retreat-beating, using the bikes as shields. Let us just say that theirs was an Oscar-winning performance. Ours didn’t even qualify as a brush with greatness.
Between this edition and the next America will turn 248. Happy Birthday, Sweet Land of Liberty.
Of Thee I Excerpt
1. At National Review, Charles C. W. Cooke takes on the New York Times for taking on (and vilifying) a Second Amendment researcher. From the beginning of the piece:
On Tuesday, the New York Times published a remarkably long piece about a man named William English, who, despite being “a little-known political economist at Georgetown University,” has supposedly become “The Gun Lobby’s Hidden Hand in the 2nd Amendment Battle.” In their now-familiarly conspiratorial tone, the work’s authors, Mike McIntire and Jodi Kantor, reported that “one name keeps turning up in the legal briefs and judges’ rulings” within the gun-rights realm. That name is “William English, Ph.D.,” and it has now “been cited in a landmark Supreme Court case,” been referenced “in scores of lawsuits around the country,” and “figured prominently in a broad gun rights campaign that has transformed the law.”
Message: Reader, it’s his fault.
I must confess to being a little perplexed by all this. I do not mean this as a slight against Dr. English, who I’m sure is a pleasant and intelligent man, but as a keen student of this area of the law, I am baffled by some of the Times’ descriptions of the controversies that he’s supposedly swayed. To make their case, McIntire and Kantor focus in on English’s “largest-of-its-kind national survey that found gun owners frequently used their weapons for self-defense,” which, they claim, “has been deployed by gun rights activists to notch legal victories with far-reaching consequences.” But almost none of the rulings that they name revolved in any way, shape, or form around that research. What gives?
2. At Law & Liberty, Emina Melonic kicks off a forum focusing on the moral weakness of Simone de Beauvoir’s consequential work, The Second Sex. From the essay:
In The Second Sex, first published in 1949, de Beauvoir covers every aspect of womanhood, from biology to mythology to history and beyond. It is an audacious work, and well thought out. It’s not a work of mere sociology or psychology. Rather, de Beauvoir makes use of philosophy, history, and literature in order to illuminate her arguments about womanhood. Yet essentially, The Second Sex is rooted in pure rationalism (as described by Michael Oakeshott) and psychoanalytic, Kinsey-esque analysis.
Camille Paglia, that great philosopher-provocateur and feminist herself once said that despite de Beauvoir’s important contribution to the cause of feminism, it is greatly “deficient in humor,” and that certainly comes through in her work. In addition, Paglia points out that de Beauvoir’s view of religion is “symptomatic of an infantile mind.” Indeed, most of de Beauvoir’s arguments about religion and its oppression of women (especially in terms of contraception and abortion) sound as if they are written by a young girl intent on rebelling against either her parents or other authority.
Despite great many deficiencies of de Beauvoir’s thought, she still raises important questions about womanhood and many different aspects relating to it.
3. At National Affairs, Naomi Schaefer Riley warns that parents’ rights can be especially thorny. From the piece:
Of course, those of us on the right have historically been reluctant to trust experts who claim to have resolved ongoing scientific debates. The lobotomies of children who were mentally ill or disabled during the first half of the 20th century—often with their parents’ approval—suggest not only the ways in which the medical consensus can shift rapidly (and without much evidence), but how parents can make disastrous decisions about their children’s health care with the guidance of medical experts.
But that doesn’t mean the experts always get it wrong. Female genital mutilation—a practice imposed on young girls by certain African and Middle Eastern cultures—is classified by the World Health Organization as a human-rights violation. It is also illegal in most U.S. states. Though the procedure is widely prohibited due to the long-term pain and suffering it causes women, it continues to be performed underground and has been the subject of cases terminating parents’ rights. In some instances, an over-concern about cultural sensitivity to religious minorities has made it harder to prosecute those involved. Still, the medical consensus on the subject has never been in doubt.
By contrast, what Walter Olson of the Cato Institute calls the “complicated cacophony” of expert voices on the subject of gender-transitioning procedures for minors is part of the problem. As Olson observes, you hear from medical experts who claim that such procedures are nothing short of abusive. But you also hear from experts who say that children who are not allowed to medically transition are at risk of suicide. Similarly, you hear from people who are glad they underwent a medical transition, but you also hear from detransitioners who are horrified that these procedures were performed on them, especially as minors.
4. At The American Conservative, Sumantra Maitra says NATO, maligned, can be reformed, and lays out a vision for the monolith. From the analysis:
Two, this is obviously not your grandfather’s NATO, a defensive alliance with shared values protecting Euro-Atlantic Christendom from the Soviets. In 2017, the NATO secretary general said, “LGBT people everywhere deserve dignity, inclusion and freedom from fear. Diversity makes our open societies stronger and safer.” In 2021, NATO headquarters hosted its first ever conference on LGBTQ+ perspectives in the workplace. NATO bureaucrats argue over how the alliance should act if member states curb LGBTQ+ rights and write policy papers on tackling work-related gendered violence in conflict zones. One gets the idea.
NATO member states comment on everything from abortion to human rights in Libya to climate change. Regardless of the feasibility or morality of such policies in international statecraft, NATO demonstrates a quintessential problem of all radical political organizations: revolutionary bureaucracies have a momentum of their own and either grow or die. It is unsustainable and by all commonsensical accounts destructive to American influence and goodwill across the globe. It needs to be, for lack of better word, de-Sovietized, with a rapid defunding and reduction of the ideological brass, moving it back to a narrow defensive alliance.
Three, the only sane path forward for the U.S. is one where NATO stops expanding. Expansion’s biggest drawback was not just a permanent rift between Russia and the US. It was the creation of a supranational organization fundamentally opposed to narrow U.S. national interests and even nationalism in member states per se. It created bloat, wherein the rich Western powers happily buckpass their security burden to the U.S. while lecturing Americans sanctimoniously about lofty liberal internationalist values. Europe’s strategy makes sense. The bigger the club, the more egalitarian it is, which means greater influence for the small states relative to the big ones; also, the more the club members, the more chances of friction between Russia and the U.S., as local problems become America’s.
5. At Modern Age, Andre Archie explains why color blindness is the antidote to racism. From the essay:
It’s mostly issues of race, and the underrepresentation of African Americans at flagship universities, that have fueled the popularity of these race-conscious programs. But these programs are very blunt and crude instruments of utilitarian social policy that end up “type-casting” schools based mostly on the ascriptive quality of race. In arguing for these types of percent programs, it’s not enough for state legislators to say that they are merely using segregated schools as a proxy for socioeconomic factors such as poverty. Race itself becomes the means by which moral merit is conferred on the individual or group, rather than the individual’s character, or personhood, as expressed through his freely chosen actions. These proxy maneuvers are becoming increasingly prevalent as institutions indirectly promote racial goals and confer racial spoils while formally rejecting race-conscious policies.
It wasn’t always this way. Ancient Greek ethics is person-centered, which means that in thinking about the best way to live or what to do, the ancient Greeks focused on two things: determining the right thing to do and doing it properly motivated by one’s virtuous character. Although bad people can certainly perform good actions, they cannot perform actions as the good person would do them, which is to say, in a way that is properly motivated. Properly motivated actions are anchored in and generated by one’s virtuous character, which is the end result of an individual’s autonomous choices. Character is not the product of factors that fall outside of the sphere of choice or voluntary action, and the way choice is exercised morally. Which is to say, the body and what belongs to it are not involved with the manifestation of virtue. Thus, for the ancient Greeks, ascriptive qualities such as race played no role in the formation of character nor the assessment of character.
6. At The Daily Signal, Casey Ryan says the video game industry is begging for a “Bud Light” moment. From the piece:
Nintendo of America’s website additionally promotes “Diversity & Inclusion” with Mario front and center. The company appears to have segregated affinity groups, with one labeled as “rainbow.” The goal of this group is “fostering an accepting and open environment to welcome new LGBTQ+ family members into the greater Nintendo family.”
Most of the largest corporations in the video game industry appear to be more than willing to use their platform and influence to ensure the next generation of children embrace an extremist LGBTQ+ ideology that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.
So it’s time for the video game industry’s Bud Light moment.
The goal of activist leaders in the industry is to use their power to influence children. Whether it is Xbox or Nintendo, parents and gamers alike need to speak with their wallets.
7. At Tablet Magazine, Michael Lind susses out the voting predilections of America’s “Nazi”-slandered working class. From the essay:
The contemporary Democratic pundits and professors who toss around phrases like “the authoritarian personality” and “status anxiety” to support such fantasies belong to a tradition going back to The Authoritarian Personality, a book published by the German Marxist émigré Theodor Adorno and his several co-authors in 1950. The book sought to explain the rise of Nazism and other forms of fascism in terms of the psychological maladjustment of working-class individuals. Adorno and his co-authors claimed that their “F-scale” could measure how fascist an individual was. Among the factors that were supposed to identify fascist Americans in Truman’s America were these: “Conventionalism. Rigid adherence to conservative, middle-class values . . . Exaggerated concern with sexual ‘goings on.’”
The F-scale was nonsense—as was the idea that Hitler rose to power with the support of the German working class. The Nazi Party never got more than a minority of the working-class vote. Most working-class Germans opposed the Nazis and preferred socialists, communists, or the Catholic Center Party. Once the Nazis seized power, many trade unionists along with socialists and communists wound up in concentration camps. Nor, with some exceptions prior to 1933, was big business on the side of the Nazis. Scholars have shown that the most pro-Nazi constituencies were small business owners and members of the military and civil services nostalgic for the authoritarianism of Imperial Germany, and who helped to undemocratically install Hitler as chancellor even though most Germans voted against the Nazis.
8. At The Free Press, Carine Azzopardi laments the West’s fear of calling out Islamism, which claimed the father of her daughters. From the article:
I couldn’t stay silent. A couple of months into the trial, I wrote a column. “Ideology has an essential place in a terrorist trial,” I argued, “because terrorism is the choice to use violence in pursuit of a political cause, in this case Islamism.” I explained that the terrorists believed Islamic law should govern all public life, including in France. I said they directly opposed our country’s constitutional secularism, its laïcité.
The column resulted in an invitation to testify at France’s parliament. In a room full of experts, I gave the facts: over the last 40 years Islamist terrorism has caused the deaths of over 210,000 people, and France is the European country most often targeted: we have experienced 82 attacks since 1979. And yet, I said, “our country is so afraid of being accused of xenophobia or Islamophobia, it refuses to accurately name the insidious ideology that motivates these attacks.” The following year, nineteen of the 20 men were found guilty of involvement in the Bataclan massacre, which was named for what it was: a terrorist enterprise.
What I said in the French parliament shouldn’t be controversial. But it was only in private that people dared thank me. Shortly after the trial, I was contacted by a man who taught at a school in a Paris suburb, whose colleague had been beheaded in October 2020 on his way home from work. The murder of Samuel Paty made headlines around the world and should have been a cautionary tale—but since then, French public schools have continued to incubate Islamist ideology. So many of Samuel’s students were vulnerable to indoctrination, growing up in communities of poor Muslim immigrants where Islamist views had gained a foothold. A parent had once told him: “The laws of my religion supersede those of your Republic.”
This teacher kept telling me: “Schools in France are in a state of emergency.” But he was too petrified to speak out. So I offered to tell his story without naming him.
9. At The National Interest, Manisha Singh demands America win the AI race. From the piece:
As with most other significant innovations in the last century, AI was born in the United States. Rivals are racing to overtake what exists, either through their own efforts or infringing on creation occurring here. Domestic and global regulatory efforts are well underway. The question of balancing innovation and regulation is not new, but it is original in the case of AI. Perhaps the most defining feature of AI is the existential anxiety it has created.
Such apprehension has been a motivating factor in the new rules of the road for the AI super highway. A group of U.S. Senators put forth a “Framework to Mitigate Extreme AI Risks,” which acknowledges the benefits of AI but highlights that it “presents a broad spectrum of risks that could be harmful to the American public.” Both a notification and licensing procedure, as well as the creation of a new regulatory body to be established by Congress, are contemplated. Although the framework isn’t binding, it does provide insight into the evolving thought process of regulators.
It comes as no surprise that the European Union (EU) has already enacted a dense, onerous law set forth in 458 pages known as the EU Artificial Intelligence Act. The EU AI Act has met with mixed reactions from member state governments. It appropriately addresses concerns about potential abuse, including authoritarian-like facial recognition techniques. On the other hand, French president Emanuel Macron expressed unease that the burdensome law would disadvantage France against American, Chinese, and even British innovation, as EU rules no longer bind the United Kingdom. AI competition is extreme in both the commercial and security spheres. Companies and governments are racing to perfect the face of the future.
10. In The Bronx, at The Riverdale Press, the editors of a reliably annoying, lefty community paper—like the stopped clock—get it right, here about a crazed plan to allow new apartment buildings sans parking. From the beginning of the editorial:
It feels fair to say Eric Adams’ legacy as mayor of New York City—in whole or in large part—will teeter on the success of his “City of Yes” initiative.
As the entire program is multi-pronged and sweeping, this small space in this humble newspaper will be dedicated to only one of those prongs: “City of Yes for Housing Opportunity.” And, narrower still, on one of the goals therein: the removal of city-mandated parking for new residential development.
“’City of Yes’ would end parking mandates for new housing, as many cities across the country have successfully done,” NYC.gov vows. “The proposal will preserve the option to add parking, but no one will be forced to build unnecessary parking.”
Unnecessary parking? Seriously?
This is New York City, this isn’t Second Metroville, USA.
11. Meanwhile, at Front Porch Republic, Drew Maglio calls out the “Florida-fication of the World.” From the article:
Most people don’t realize just how recently “civilization” in an industrialized sense was brought to Florida. While Europe was marching off to war in the summer of 1914, Florida was still a vast, largely untamed wilderness. In Western popular culture, the United States’ “Wild West” is often considered the last truly free and wild frontier, but historically, Florida was the contiguous United States’ last frontier, which was not fully settled or adorned with modern conveniences like intricately connected (st)roadways, air conditioning, or culture—the latter of which would eventually take the form of amusement and entertainment—until the latter half of the twentieth century. In general terms, it wouldn’t be inaccurate to say that the two innovations of land reclamation and air conditioning are what made Florida habitable.
One hundred years ago, Florida was a raw, sublimely beautiful but uninhabitable wilderness, one that had many more (non-native) disease-carrying Aedes Aegypti mosquitoes, alligators, snakes, sharks, and other natural pestilences than people. Around the turn of the twentieth century, this began to change via the advent of Henry Flagler’s “Florida East Coast Railway,” which would eventually connect Jacksonville to Key West, with notable stops along the way at St. Augustine, West Palm Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, and Miami. But this process of creating logistical transportation arteries via railroad-ification—which dammed and severed Florida’s natural watersheds—did not transform Florida over a fortnight. In fact, when Flagler’s railroad did reach Key West in January of 1912—a mere four months before the sinking of White Star’s infamous RMS Titanic—his conquest of the sea was relatively short-lived: for in 1935 one of the most powerful hurricanes in recorded history pummeled the Florida Keys, destroying large spans of the “Railroad that Went to Sea.” And so, for a brief period in the subsequent depression and war-ridden years, it seemed as though Flagler’s conquest of nature was all for naught. But it is hard to know whether it is nature or man that is more stubborn and persistent: in the post-WWII years, the defunct and destroyed remnants of Flagler’s “Overseas Railroad” were reclaimed, restored, and repurposed, forming the basis of what is now known as the “Overseas Highway,” bringing with it civilization—and its discontents.
12. At Education Next, Bruno Manno makes the opportunity case for career and technical education. From the article:
Many Americans, including the last wave of Gen Z-ers now entering high schools, want schools to offer more education and training options for young people like career and technical education, or CTE. They broadly agree that the K–12 goal of “college for all” over the last several decades has not served all students well. It should be replaced with “opportunity pluralism,” or the recognition that a college degree is one of many pathways to post-secondary success.
School-based CTE programs (there are also programs for adults) typically prepare middle and high school students for a range of high-wage, high-skill, and high-demand careers. These include fields like advanced manufacturing, health sciences, and information technology which often do not require a two- or four-year college degree. CTE programs award students recognized credentials like industry certifications and licenses. Some programs also provide continuing opportunities for individuals to sequence credentials so that they can pursue associate and bachelor’s degrees if they choose.
Lucky 13. At KWTX, Julie Hays reports on a fundraiser where the community turned out for an ill neighbor who had helped raise millions for local causes. From the article:
A beloved Central Texas man who raised millions of dollars for people in their darkest hours had the favor returned over the weekend as nearly a thousand people showed up for a fundraiser to benefit him and his family as he fights terminal cancer.
Wes Waller, 55, resisted the idea of a fundraiser to benefit his family, but the droves of people he’s helped wouldn’t take “no” for an answer.
Wes is fighting stage four, renal cell carcinoma, or kidney cancer. He was diagnosed in 2015 and has undergone chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy. He’s also had a kidney and a half removed, but doctors say he’s now exhausted all options as the cancer has moved to his partial kidney and his neck. . . .
When word began to spread about his latest news, volunteers from across Central Texas began planning a benefit at the Lee Lockwood Library and Museum on Waco Drive for the man usually on the other end of fundraising.
It sold out the first minutes after it was announced.
Bonus. At Discourse, John Mac Ghlionn praises the enduring passion for denim. From the essay:
That brings me to the other major reason why denim reigns supreme today—it seems to be one of the few fashion options that blurs the lines among ages. Despite the age gap among those who feel it’s appropriate to wear jeans to formal events, there’s no doubt that people of all ages find denim appealing in at least some instances.
Why is this? First, Americans seem to be increasingly interested in agelessness. Between 2019 and 2022 alone, there was a nearly 20% increase in cosmetic surgery procedures. Rocking a pair of jeans is less costly and risky than going under the knife, but for some people, wearing denim represents a similar desire to look youthful. At the same time, jeans are also a must-have staple that represents comfort and familiarity—still a reminder of their younger days, albeit a gentle one.
And on the other end of the age spectrum, lots of young people choose to wear denim out of a subliminal sense of nostalgia. On first inspection, the link between nostalgia and denim might seem flimsy. But look a little closer, and you’ll see that they are, in fact, intimate bedfellows.
Denim’s timelessness and versatility have ensured its enduring presence in fashion across decades. Its ability to transcend age boundaries is undebatable. For younger generations, particularly Gen Z, denim serves as more than just a fashion choice—it’s a symbol of anemoia, a longing for a time they never lived through themselves. This generation finds resonance in the cultural ethos of past decades, adopting styles that harken back to earlier fashion eras, a time far more familiar to their parents than to themselves. Members of my own generation, millennials, have a somewhat cringe-worthy passion for skinny jeans. Gen Zers, however, do not. In their eyes, skinny jeans are well and truly dead. Instead, zoomers can be found rocking low-rise jeans, which were fashionable long before the first post-millennial arrived on the scene. Gen Z females are huge fans of denim maxi skirts, which were fashionable in the 1980s.
For the Good of the Cause
Uno. Hey you, Givers, Doers, and Thinkers: The Center For Civil Society, mother ship of this missive, is holding 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 23–24, 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. The agenda is super, and yes, besides the what’s-wronging, there will be plenty of inspiration on tap. Be there.
Due. At Philanthropy Daily, Austin Detwiler explains why fundraising and humility are the best of partners. Read it here.
Tre. On the new “Givers, Doers, & Thinkers” podcast episode, Jeremy Beer and Brent Beshore discuss what’s wrong with private equity, what good organizations have in common, and why small private companies matter. Listen here.
Quattro. “We need to do a capital campaign. By the way, what is a capital campaign?” Good question, one among many that will be answered at the Center for Civil Society’s “In the Trenches” Master Class scheduled for Thursday, August 8th, via Zoom from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. (Eastern). If you’re a nonprofit worker bee, or even trustee, that is noodling the idea of a capital campaign, you’ll regret not attending. So sign up. Do that, and learn more, right here.
Department of Bad Jokes
Q: What do mermaids sleep on?
A: Water beds.
A Dios
The readings this weekend past dealt with Job (remaining faithful in the face of adversity) and Christ quieting the winds and raging sea: “Even the wind and the waves obey him!” spout the amazed and frightened Apostles. It struck: That the winds, the seas, were things to which the Creator spoke. We are beings dependent on the demonstrative, yes? Well, that noodled—why can’t He who created creation converse with it?—may your rough seas calm and your gales turn to gentle zephyrs.
Make We Be Moved by the Wonders of the Heavens and the Earth,
Jack Fowler, who wonders at jfowler@amphil.com.
