On Self-Justice

 On Self-Justice

 

 

The Bible often uses the word “dik”, which has two translations; righteousness and justice. The first is a personal quality; the second refers to society. American evangelicals, from an excess of American individualism, usually translate “dik” as “righteous”.

 

Alas, the word “righteous” is contaminated by association with “self-righteous”. Self-righteousness is the quality of an individual who self-regards as righteous, but this is an egotistical illusion due to lack of perspective.

 

Is there, then, such a thing as “self-justice”? Justice refers to society; therefore self-justice is the quality of a society that regards itself as just, but this is a tribalistic illusion due to lack of perspective. Self-justice is how an unjust society self-justifies.

 

So yes, self-justice is a thing, and it is as common as self-righteousness. Take, for instance, the policeman who kills an unarmed black man, but he gets off because he did it by the book.

 

Pro-covid tactics

Anti-vax = pro-covid. The leaders and owners of the pro-covid cult compute that a 3% mortality rate is acceptable losses for a loyalty test. The owners themselves are all vaccinated, because to them, loyalty is one-way.

 

The covid cultists do this to 'own' the libs; a telling turn of phrase! But how could those would-be Legrees own anyone? They don't even own themselves! For if they did then they'd take better care of themselves.

 

If the covid cult's voluntary sickness breeds worse variants, then I'll just get a new vaccine. Yawn. Self-harm is a losing military tactic, and biological warfare is treason against the human race.

 

They will do their worst. Let us do our best.

 

Second Amendment Repair Act: 6 of 6 Modest Proposals

 Second Amendment Repair Act

A modest proposal

by Nathaniel Hellerstein

 

I propose the following as legislation before Congress.

 

The Second Amendment Repair Act

1. The right of the people to keep and bear arms in a well-regulated militia shall not be infringed.

2. Well-regulated militias shall not arm those under adult age, nor arm those found guilty of treason as defined by the Constitution.

3. States have the right to enforce additional regulation of their militias.

 

Commentary by the author:

Compare clause 1 of SARA to the original 2nd Amendment:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Alas, poor Amendment! The sentence lies there, broken into four fragments, as if someone had dropped it on the floor. My critique of the 2nd Amendment is both literary and political; for its shattered incoherence is due to an unresolved political dispute. Washington insisted on good regulation of Jefferson’s popular militias; his objection was jammed on as a subordinate clause given top billing.

Clause 1 of SARA fixes the grammar of the 2nd Amendment. It’s a single coherent clause; that prevents partisans from exaggerating one clause and ignoring another. The original had well-regulation as an explanation for the need for the right to bear arms; here well-regulation is part of the right itself. This makes explicit the necessary link between rights (arms) and responsibilities (well-regulated). Clause 1 is as much about gun control as about gun rights.

This re-emphasis on regulation empowers clause 2. No children in arms, nor traitors; that’s necessary. If the militia is well-regulated, then it may not arm children or adolescents, who are not well-regulated people; and if the militia is of the state, then it may not arm those levying war upon the states. I choose these two regulations for the sake of clarity. Age is on public record; and treason is defined in the Constitution. (Article 3, section 3.)

          Clause 3 establishes that militias belong to the states, which they may regulate as they see fit, as a matter of state’s rights.

          This proposal is very conservative, in the non-Orwellian sense of the word ‘conservative’. It makes few changes in the original text, beyond rewriting it for clarity. This rewriting explicitly mandates both gun rights and gun control. Such rewriting is necessary because of the 2nd Amendment’s fragmented condition.

          Since DC vs Heller in 2008, we have been living with a partial reading of the shattered 2nd Amendment, one that ignores the first two fragments and fetishizes the next two. So due to Scalia’s judicial activism, for over a decade the 2nd Amendment has been half-repealed, to malign effect now self-evident.

I propose that we repair it, and reinstate it, whole.

 

Nuclear Blatancy Day: 5 of 6 Modest Proposals

           Nuclear Blatancy Day

 

 

          There are political dangers in a standing army; yet SAC’s power to destroy civilization should not be in the hands of recruits. How, then, do we reconcile citizen armies with nuclear technology?

          Jonathan Schell offers a partial solution in his book, “The Abolition”, which proposes that the USA become a “latent” nuclear power; that is, that it dismantle all actual nuclear bombs, but retain (and indeed strengthen) its ability to swiftly build those bombs.

We keep the know-how and the infrastructure and the fissile materials, but hold off on building the accursed things unless we need them right away. You could call it just-in-time civicide; like taking the bullet out of the rifle over the fireplace. I also call it the “virtual” bomb. Nuclear latency is purified deterrence; a way for America to say to the world that we don’t feel like killing a million people today, so don’t make us want to.

          I like Schell’s idea, but I think it’s incomplete. It’s too rational, it lacks the aura of apocalyptic histrionics so natural to all things nuclear. Also, those virtual bombs need occasional testing, to be credible.

Therefore I offer the following modest proposal: Nuclear Blatancy Day. It’s a nuclear war game, and it works like this:

 

Participating contestant countries send the following to the U.S.A.:

A “shell”; that is, a nuclear bomb, minus chemical trigger-explosives and fissiles;

Chemical explosives and fissiles;

Blueprints for those nukes;

A modest entrance fee;

And a sizable entrance loan.

The shell, the explosives and the fissiles are handed over with great care and ceremony from participant countries to the U.S.A. via their elite military forces. The entrance fee defrays America’s game-hosting expenses; and return of the loan depends upon the kilotonnage of the nukes.

Some American citizens will compete for prizes by submitting their own shells and blueprints. The Defense Department will provide explosives and fissiles.

Shell, explosives and fissiles then go to the test site, where there are glove boxes, deep shafts, and many reporters with video cameras. On Trinity Day, representatives from the participating countries arrive at the test site. These representatives include their heads of state, so that they may witness the results personally.

Also on hand are American contestants, reporters, politicians, marching bands (pro-bomb) and satirical giant-puppet troupes (anti-bomb). Both groups are welcomed as essential components of the inherently mixed message being sent that day.  Politicians speak smoothly in praise of the People’s Bomb; a grandmother from Hiroshima pleads passionately for peace.

One of the speakers is a “holy fool”, who wears motley, and whose job is to question, warn, bewail, criticize, satirize, mock, castigate, and curse the assembled heads of state for their nuclear ambitions.

Each country’s team assembles their nukes in the glove boxes, under close surveillance by Americans. These nukes then go to the bottom of the mine shafts. The mine shafts are sealed off.

The countdown starts. Five, four, three, two, one, zero! Suddenly the earth quakes, and new craters collapse in the desert. The marching bands cheer, the puppeteers boo, and the foreign dignitaries look at each other nervously. Technicians announce yields; the winning contestants get scholarships and job offers; and the dignitary from Japan politely tells the other dignitaries that these Americans are indeed as crazy as they look, so don’t mess with them!

The heads of state attend a banquet, then go home.

All countries whose nukes do not achieve the kilotonnage goal forfeit their loans. The winning countries get back their loans, and the forfeited loans are distributed evenly among the winning countries and the U.S.A.

Entrance loans are also forfeit if the nukes cause damage to the test site by exceeding the kilotonnage limit.

The blueprints, and the glove-box footage, is distributed, unedited, to the winning countries and the U.S.A.

In addition to the loans, there may also be treaties whose terms depend upon the kilotonnage of the nukes. These “side bets” may cover exchanges of money, territory, alliances, trading arrangements, and other considerations that would otherwise require a war to settle.

          The point of the exercise is to impose order upon chaos via games and ritual. Nuclear war games are “virtual” nuclear wars; they have all the physical ferocity of nuclear war, but with zero casualties. This maximizes witnesses, and consequent political point. It is done under full global media scrutiny, with blueprints shared by the winners, in order to reduce uncertainty to a minimum; for the greatest terror is the unknown.

          Unassembled nukes, with shell, trigger and fissiles stored separately, are “virtual” nukes, which all participating countries have by definition. Virtual nukes are reliable once they are tested in a virtual nuclear war. Unlike assembled nukes, virtual nukes do not threaten a first-strike attack; yet they resist first strike. It’s hard to nuke a nuke that isn’t there yet. So it’s best to not wake the dragon!

The discerning reader will understand that this proposal is satirical; but it’s a satire that would work. It’s absurd, but slightly less absurd than what exists. I offer it as my fulsome praise, and also my excoriating critique, of America and civilization and the entire human race.

 

 

 

Neutralizing Tecumseh’s Curse: 4 of 6 Modest Proposals

     Neutralizing Tecumseh’s Curse

 

 

Being President is an affliction at the best of times, which these are not. The President elected in 2020 faces a plague, a depression, civic unrest, and also an Indian curse. According to legend, the Shawnee warrior Tecumseh laid a curse upon the Presidency; namely, that anyone elected on a year ending with zero will die in office.

          Tecumseh’s curse has accumulated a long list of victims: Harrison, Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, FDR and JFK. Only Zachary Taylor died in office without being elected on a zero year. There are two other exceptions, but they’re arguable. Reagan’s body survived, but his mind died; and unpopular Dubya left the office no stupider than he entered it, but his entire family’s political career died.

          Call me superstitious, but I wouldn’t face odds like that. Legendary Indian magic aside, the zero-year curse is certainly a persistent folkway in America’s deplorable culture of assassination.

Besides, the White House should bear an Indian curse. It deserves one, it earned it. Tecumseh’s curse gives the White House street cred. The tale is colorful and poetic. It’s authentic Americana.

          I write to tell how to neutralize the curse. Consider the Dubya exception: he survived, but his family’s political career died. So the next President should try this:

          Set up an Administration.

Then do something nice for the Shawnee.

Then resign for health reasons.

Then retire from politics.

So his political career dies instead of him. I figure that this sacrifice should keep him safe from Tecumseh’s curse.

He can risk waiting until he’s genuinely sick before he resigns; or he can lie by quitting the Presidency before the job sucks all of the life out of him. That’s his choice. For proof that the Presidency sucks the life out of people, just look at previous Presidents, before and after.

If he wants his resignation to be an act of power, then he can publicly denounce certain rich crooks, and take decisive but politically-suicidal action against their crimes, just before he retires. So if he wants to, then he can slam the door on the way out.

I recommend that every zero-year President, from now on, take these precautions. It would mean that every fifth Presidential campaign will really be about the Vice-President. That’s how it’s been, so far.