Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

More things I believe

- Bradley R. Gitz Freelance columnist Bradley R. Gitz, who lives and teaches in Batesville, received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois.

Even more has become clear to me lately:

■ That Joe Biden shouldn’t apologize for supporting the 1994 crime bill because the primary function of government is to protect people from other people, which the bill admirably did.

In essence, criticism of the bill is built around the dubious assumption that people living in crime-infested neighborho­ods would have been better off if criminals had been left on the streets instead of put behind bars.

Critics also get it backwards by confusing the independen­t and dependent variables—“mass incarcerat­ion” didn’t destroy the black family, the disintegra­tion of the black family caused an upsurge in (mostly blackon-black) crime and what came to be called mass incarcerat­ion.

■ That the reasoning behind Biden’s flip-flop on the Hyde Amendment— that a right is meaningles­s unless people have the means of exercising it (hence the claimed need to use taxpayer dollars to finance abortions)—only holds water until you try to apply it to other, more firmly establishe­d rights.

Does, for instance, the Second Amendment mean that government has an obligation to buy a Glock G19 for anyone who can’t afford one? And does the First Amendment’s guarantee of a free press require government to buy everyone their own newspaper?

■ That political correctnes­s has undermined public discourse by encouragin­g posturing rather than thinking. We have effectivel­y incentiviz­ed the disseminat­ion of “correct” but illogical arguments because those making them can expect to receive approval from woke virtue-signalers and protection from criticism.

Put differentl­y, people are increasing­ly rewarded for saying dumb things that others can’t say are dumb.

As Charles Murray famously noted, when you subsidize something you get more of it, and we are now subsidizin­g and getting more ludicrous ideas (that gender is a social construct, that we should “always believe the woman,” that eating at Taco

Bell is a form of cultural appropriat­ion, etc.).

■ That it was amusing to see Disney CEO Bob Iger threatenin­g to boycott the state of Georgia because of its “fetal heartbeat” bill.

Whatever one thinks of Georgia’s pro-life law, or abortion more broadly, there is an obvious contradict­ion in Disney running a huge resort in the police state of communist China, which Iger not too long ago called the company’s “greatest opportunit­y since buying land in Florida,” and filming in repressive Middle Eastern countries where women lack rights of any kind, as Disney also frequently does, but being too dainty to operate in an American state because of its restrictiv­e abortion regime.

The intriguing question might be why Iger, a presumably intelligen­t person, would lay himself so open to charges of hypocrisy by saying such things; that none of his aides pulled him aside beforehand and mentioned the China and Middle East stuff before he spouted off about Georgia.

Or, again, when it comes to virtue-signaling, maybe logic and consistenc­y don’t matter. It’s the politicall­y correct sentiment that counts.

■ That it is distressin­g to see the left increasing­ly abandon the principle of free speech on the grounds that disagreeab­le speech constitute­s a form of violence that makes members of “marginaliz­ed” groups feel unsafe.

It is also ironic because, as Peter Berkowitz of the Hoover Institutio­n puts it, “Far from serving as an instrument of oppression and a tool of white male privilege, free speech has always been a weapon of those challengin­g the authoritie­s—on the side of persecuted minorities, dissenters, iconoclast­s, and reformers. In the United States, free speech has been essential to abolition, woman’s suffrage, the civil rights movement, feminism, and gay rights.”

None of the movements Berkowitz cites would have been successful without the robust tradition of respect for free speech that the left now seeks to undermine.

Censorship is the ally of dictatorsh­ips that hope to suppress challenges to the existing order. Free speech is the ally of people seeking change in the form of equal rights and justice.

■ That something has gone wrong in higher education when research studies and employer surveys indicate college students are studying less, learning less, and graduating with weaker writing and critical reasoning skills, but college grade point averages (GPAs) continue to go up.

Many of our colleges are now dependent for financial survival on “retaining” as many of their students as possible, which in practice means keeping enrolled large numbers with poor levels of preparatio­n and only a cursory interest in studying; a circumstan­ce which can’t help but lead to reduced rigor, lower expectatio­ns, and easier grading.

■ That it is refreshing to see the new CEO of ESPN, Jimmy Pitaro, acknowledg­e that people don’t want political commentary mixed in with their sports.

Ricardo’s law of comparativ­e advantage argued that producers should focus on doing what they do better than other producers, and ESPN most certainly doesn’t do politics better than outlets that specialize in doing politics (just as those outlets don’t do sports better than ESPN).

No, everything doesn’t have to be politicize­d, and we aren’t wayward children in need of hectoring about racism or sexism from our self-appointed moral superiors while trying to watch a ballgame.

When we seek political instructio­n it might also make more sense to turn to learned scholars of political theory or history rather than the guy reporting the hockey scores on Sportscent­er.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States