Showing posts with label Ilana Novick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ilana Novick. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 19, 2019

Spare Me The Right's Tears For Kyle Kashuv - He Deserved Being Bounced From Harvard


"WAAAAAHHHA! Dem Libwuls gotta stop pickin' on Kyle! BWAAAHHAAA!"

Back on March 26 last year I posted about the fearless Parkland students who marched and demonstrated to return gun sanity to this country. I also tore into the NRA-backed punk, Kyle Kashuv,  who gained notoriety by going against his classmates.  In the words of fellow blogger Ilana Novick on smirkingchimp.com:

"Kashuv’s political views are often at odds with his fellow Parkland survivors. After the horrific Parkland shooting, many of the surviving students, including David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez, became activists. They organized the March for Our Lives in support of gun control and often spoke out against the policies of the Trump administration. Kashuv was an outlier among his classmates, a conservative defender of the Second Amendment."


 As I wrote at the time, in my above-cited post:

"Then there is the other clueless NRA tool making the talk show rounds on behalf of the gunrunners and 2nd amendment phonies. That would be Kyle Kashuv who.actually tweeted the following ding on his fellow Parkland  students:

No one's feelings are hurt by a group of people who Don't have a basic understanding of US case law and are fighting to get existing laws passed.

Which is total balderdash.

In fact it's Kashuv who lacks a basic understanding of U.S. case law pertaining to the 2nd amendment given he is blissfully unaware there is NO  "existing law" that currently bans military grade weapons like the AR-15 which is one of the provisions his classmates want passed.

Nor is he aware of the D..C. vs. Heller  Supreme Court decision  e.g.



Kashuv is now in the news after Harvard decided to revoke his admission. He asked for a face-to-face meeting but was told the matter was closed. Predictably, conservative Twitter erupted Monday, arguing that this was another case of liberal -elite Harvard bashing conservatives. Actually it was not, so these Reich whiners are off base.  It was a case of Kashuv trashing his own  Harvard aspirations by posting racist slime drivel - and Harvard finding out about it.  But I will get to that.

The backstory is that when he was 16, some months before the shootings, Kashuv wrote racist comments in text messages and on a collaborative Google doc.  In many ways it reminded me of the gaggle of 10 dimwits who also had their Harvard admissions rescinded in June of 2017.  This  after their depraved texts under a self-branded  Harvard memes for horny bourgeois teens”  were posted on a Facebook message board.  The story was first reported by the Crimson.     Suffice it to say that even one of the "least" offensive posts -  by one person in the original clique -  is simply too abominable for words, or repetition here.

Back to Kashuv: He was studying for the A.P. American History exam with some classmates online. Around midnight, they got restive and suddenly thought posting aberrant brain farts would be cool. At least a change from the drudgery of study. So they began posting assorted racist garbage and tried to see who could outdo the other in terms of outrage.  Much like the ten losers noted above on the deformed "memes for bourgeois teens" group.

Kashuv’s comments, to any normal, sentient person who read them, were degenerate, blatantly racist and anti-Semitic. He wrote the N-word twelve times and then even explained that he was good at typing that word. “[P]ractice uhhhhhh makes perfect.”

All sorts of excuses have been made for him in the wake including by NY Times scribe David Brooks,  who wrote:

"Moral formation is not like learning math. It’s not cumulative; it’s inverse. In a sin-drenched world it’s precisely through the sins and the ensuing repentance that moral formation happens. That’s why we try not to judge people by what they did in their worst moment, but rather by how they respond to their worst moment. That’s why we are forgiving of 16-year-olds, because they haven’t disgraced themselves enough to have earned maturity."

A nice patter but it doesn't hold water.    Left off Brooks' defensive radar is that each sentient human - certainly by the age of 16, and according to Catholics by the age of 7 - at least possesses the capacity for reason and a rudimentary conscience.  The role of conscience  as Ethics professor Cheryl Mendelson has noted ('The Good Life', p. 71) is critical to having a moral compass:

"In the premoral mind.... in place of the individual's capacity to think and act according to conscience - there is mere egoism: the demand or wish, to be allowed to do and have what one wants."

Even a 7 year old arguably has the capacity to know it's wrong when he grabs a candy bar off a store shelf and stashes it into a pocket.   He may not know the details and nuances of his moral choice, but instinctively he knows it was antithetical to societal accepted norms. And indeed, the furtive act amounted to taking something that wasn't his, he just wanted it at that time. Ego over conscience.

In the same respect, when the 14 year -old Donald Trump Jr. in Queens tested home -made switch blades on alley cats, he had to know at some level it was wrong to slice up those animals and leave them to die in agony. (The discovery of Trump's penchant for testing custom-made switch blades on cats was what led his dad Fred to ship him off to a military school in New York.)

Likewise,  Kashuv already had a moral compass and conscience by the time he wrote those racist epithets. His conscience may not have been fully aggregated or formed - but it was there - and he damned well knew right from wrong.   Hence, all the caterwauling now by the conservo crowd is a bit rich, especially in appealing yet again to the tired trope of  'political correctness'. Which has now become a general catch all and escape clause for dodging any moral responsibility .  An ethically grounded citizen appears and critiques Trump for his caging of migrant infants? "Political correctness!" is the knee- jerk response by these dingbats.

Finally, Harvard would have looked inconsistent in its admission rescission standards had it given Kashuv's vicious mischief  a pass while not doing so for the ten previous "bourgeois memes"   miscreants.  Kashuv, if he really had a brain - say to have earned that reported 5.345 grade point average at Parkland (preposterous grade inflation!) - ought to have known the competition to gain the advantage of a place at Harvard was enormous,  Tens of thousands of worthy candidates apply each year and receive rejection slips.

  In the words of two recent NY Times commenters:

"Harvard has the widest talent pool to draw from. Why would it accept a bright student who makes racist comments when they can accept the next equally bright student who doesn't?"

And:

"For every maybe racist kid who gets into Harvard there are thousands of non-racist kids who are dying to go. Harvard simply set an example for teenagers everywhere to clean up their acts and to be aware of how their social media is presenting them to the world. Without reforms like this, social media will take us and our kids all down the swirling toilet of crass behavior, bullying, words that should matter but don't seem to. Kids and adults alike should take this as a lesson in life."

Amidst this milieu and so many other more worthy students trying to gain admittance, Kashuv's best response now is to suck up his rescission and learn from his errors.  Also, cease thumping his chest about his "act of contrition".  Fine, he rendered himself contrite for his reckless and disgusting words, but now there is the piper to be paid.   Learn and move on!  Besides, not gaining entry into an elite school (or the prime one desired) it not the end of a talented person's options or aspirations.  Millions do not graduate from Harvard (or Yale, or Princeton) and still have very successful careers, lives.  Kashuv could as well if he ditched the self-pity and moved on.

Meanwhile, his conservative whiners, enablers, and apologists need to also grow up and rethink their stance.  No, Harvard isn't saying Kashuv "can't grow" or hasn't learned. They are merely saying that vicious words, as well as actions, have consequences - and for Harvard these are taken seriously. Unlike in the rest of  Trump's America.

And yeah, Kashuv did "experience a vicious shooting spree" but let's bear in mind his vile words on Google.doc were dispatched before that event, not after. So he doesn't get to claim it as an excuse, nor should he. 

See also:


Friday, May 17, 2019

Why Be Amazed That A Racist Administration Would Snub An Accord To Curb Hate Speech?



The recent news that the Trump Racist and Criminal White House - a nest of vipers if ever there was one - snubbed the Christchurch Call, should not shock anyone. The "Christchurch Call", for those unaware, was an accord signed by nine nations Wednesday in response to the murderous attack on mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand that left 51 dead.

One would have thought all civilized nations with interests in curbing extremist vitriol online would have signed on the 3-page agreement sponsored by New Zealand Premier Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron.

But not Trump and the U.S.   The Trump White House stated that "while it agrees with the overarching message" of the initiative, it "isn't currently in a position to join the endorsement".  These are weasel words for asserting it fully intends to protect hate speech, such as emanates from the dregs of the net, like 8chan, 4chan and similar cesspools.

Just put the speech under the banner of "free speech" and anything goes, and besides Trump can then get to applaud his top pals amongst the Nazis and KKK as worthy of respect.

I mean, when you have former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke applauding your spiel it's a no brainer that you're on the freaking WRONG side of history. Worse, you're cheering the Nazis and KKK, White Nationalists on by referring to them as "some very fine people".  This is what Herr Drumpf did back in August of 2017 after the Charlottesville violence with racists beating the holy hell our of protesters, e.g.

Image may contain: one or more people, tree, outdoor and nature
As well as thousands of cheering jeering Nazis and Confederates parading proudly, gratified to emerge from the hate woodwork after Trump had ascended to Fuhrer.

Image may contain: one or more peopleImage may contain: one or more people and outdoor
Trump's extremist minions march in Charlottesville, VA in Aug. 2017.

So why be surprised the Trump criminal vermin would refuse to sign on to an accord that would seek to curb hate speech, and the sort of verbal vomit that egged on the perpetrators of the slaughter in New Zealand as well as last year in the U.S. e.g. ithe Tree of Life massacre.

According to the  corporate media the U.S. stance simply "points to how ideological differences on the role of government and the primacy of free expression complicate efforts to rein in extreme content on social media".    But I have a different take more in line with the signatories: that the U.S. leadership no longer possesses the moral compass to distinguish right from wrong, and hence is unable to differentiate hate speech from free speech. In effect, in the Trumpite Nazis' minds the two are now conflated, and woe betide anyone who tries to bring heat down on the Trump base for their bigoted memes.

Am I being too hard on Trump and his retinue of fascists, bigots and lawbreakers? Judge for yourselves after Trump delivered his "very fine people"  spiel and former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke responded:   "Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa.”

Righto - the "leftist terrorists" who protected elderly African-Americans singing "this little light of mine" from being clubbed to death and maced by white supremacist thugs who also pointed guns at their heads.

Back to the Christchurch accord:  it  takes aim at  online terror, extremist rhetoric, and anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim content. In other words, anything that can trigger terror attacks such as the one in N.Z. where we know the Aussie mass killer had live streamed his murderous acts to appeal to the denizens of 8chan for their approval.

This is not rocket science and as my psychologist niece Shayl put it the M.O. is clear: "Most of the domestic terrorists promote themselves and their propaganda online and use it to basically radicalize others, create copycats and mainstream their memes and ideologies."

At the meeting Wednesday all the main G7 nations agreed the accord needed to be implemented to shut down extremist voices.  The only country that diverged - in the name of "protecting free speech" (actually protecting hate speech)- was the United States.   As one on site media observer noted last night on 'All In':

"Everyone's jaw dropped. It was then clear the president of the United States - who refused to disavow his Nazi and white nationalist supporters- now had made it official to the rest of the world. That is, he is unwilling to fight hate and terror online."

What was the big deal, the big problem in signing? Who knows? The accord simply incorporated signed commitments to act from signatory governments and tech giants such as Facebook, Twitter and Google - owner of Youtube.  The promises include the creation of a crisis plan for sharing information in the event of a terrorist attack.  Also important are the commitments of companies (like Google and Facebook) to prevent the live streaming of any domestic terror butchery or any other displays that might spread violent extremism. 

Sadly, we know other memes the Trumpies may have listened to are similar to what appeared in a TIME essay ('Hate Can't Be Blocked', May 19, p.25).  That essay, by Alex Krasodomski-Jones,  claimed it was "impossible" to totally snuff out hate speech given it would always emerge someplace - maybe in darkness (dark web) - where its propagators could still feed off it.  Maybe.  But at least it would be sequestered from the more open public square where it might infect susceptible minds.  

What was most revolting to me is when the author claimed:

"There's a lot to learn from sites like 8chan, alongside the violent extremism"

He argues this is given "they are among the most innovative and forceful drivers of cultural change and politics online for the last decade."

Yeah, but seriously, one need not go to a landfill to excavate the waste from porto-potties to learn how bad waste and its contamination can be. 

He also inbsists we need to learn (governments, that is), how and why extremist communities thrive in online spaces and "how they can brought back into the fold."  This again, isn't like general relativity.   More education, including in basic ethics, is needed at all levels for a largely amoral populace that thrives on seeing anyone different as "the other" and open to persecution.  In the meantime, we need to control the spread of the incipient mind viruses like we would Measles or Avian flu.  We also know the setting of moral-ethical standards begins at the top, so we need an election (next year) to change this vile current occupation by nationalists and know nothings.  Ethicist and author Marilynne Robinson is correct that we need to re-examine ourselves.  That includes the basis for voting choices. We can't simply base them on reaping better 401k balances.

We also know other nations - like Germany - take such viral mind infection seriously.  Thus, as my German friend Reinhardt noted when I last saw him in Garmisch 6 years ago, one can get years in prison for displaying swastikas or engaging in holocaust denial. 

I am not saying the U.S. need go that far, but it could at least be a signatory to an accord that embodies acceptance of basic human decency, and making an effort to control the dissemination of pathological propaganda and mind viruses online.  Especially given social media platforms are among the most powerful agents for radicalization today.  

 It's either that, or we are faced with ever more domestic terror and mass slaughters.  Meanwhile, the Canadians signing onto the accord were very clear on where they wish to go and are unafraid to over regulate if need be. Better to err on the side of over regulation than have mass slaughter such as in New Zealand and the Tree of Life Synagogue in the U.S.

See also:
by Ilana Novick | May 17, 2019 - 6:47am | permalink

Excerpt:


"Sometimes, however, theories escape the confines of online message boards and social media and turn dangerous, even fatal. No one laughed when a man named Edgar Welch drove from North Carolina to Washington, D.C., and fired shots at innocent people in a pizzeria because he was a “believer in Pizzagate,” a theory spread by people like right-wing radio show host Alex Jones that Hillary Clinton and her close advisers ran a pedophilia ring out of the pizzeria’s basement. There also was no laughter when James Alex Fields drove his car into a crowd at a 2017 white supremacist gathering in Charlottesville, Va., killing anti-racist protester Heather Heyer.


As journalist Anna Merlan explains in her new book, “Republic of Lies: American Conspiracy Theorists and Their Surprising Rise to Power,” “While conspiracy theories are as old as the country itself, there is something new at work: people who peddle lies and half-truths have come to prominence, fame, and power as never before,” thanks to the Trump administration’s outward embrace of some of their biggest boosters."