Friday, December 08, 2017

Video conference: "Fake News and Social Media: the New Propaganda"

Here’s a video of a panel on “Fake News and Social Media: The New Propaganda” at DraginCon in Atlanta on Nov. 19, 2017.

Speakers were Amie Spetanovich, Blair B. Chintella (moderator), Gennie Gebhart, William C. Nevin, and K’Tech.

Anie adds that Google got rid of the “objective search results icon” recently.

There was also discussion on whether “truth” exists in consumers’ minds.
Vox has an interview by Sean Illing of author David Patrikarokas (“War in 140 Characters”)  that examines whether individual bloggers really change the world and challenge governments, as illustrated by the work of Eliot Higgins, a gamer who exposed Russia’s complicity with the Malaysia Flight 17 crash.  

Tuesday, December 05, 2017

"Blogtyrant" 's niche blogging advocacy, with a warning about copyrighted photos

“Blogtyrant” (Ramsay Taplin), while recently on his own vacation in native Australia and noting the importance of trees in fighting climate change, has put out a couple more important articles on blogging.

The first of these is “What to do when your child says they want to be a blogger”.  (Note the “they” – plural – yet that is becoming accepted English as a gender neutral singular pronoun;  I prefer “she” if I want to sound inclusive enough, without really implying binary-ness).  My own mother would not have approved in her old age when I moved back in, but I don’t think she really understood.

More critical is “11 Beginner Mistakes that Cripple Blogs intheir First Year”.  I can’t adhere to 1 and 2 very well, which I think really apply to niche blogging  -- and what matters there is that the underlying small business is successful (and the blog serves the business).  I don’t run email lists, and I guess that means I’m not the “GO TO” (no COBOL please) person for anyone’s practical needs.  There are reasons why that may change soon if I can combine others to cover some critical topics (like infrastructure security from foreign threats).  But #9 (not the same as the DC bar of that name) is about the risk of lawsuit for copyright infringement especially for photo and video infringements.


There’s a personal story of a photo copyright infringement here from Ron Loren worth citing. In general, realize that some photo collections online are copyrighted and the photos may not be used free.  Some publications actually sell rights to use photos as part of their income (DC’s gay paper Metro Times does that) so they depend on being paid for their business model.  It is possible that embedded photos could cause a problem, but less likely than one on your own server. Photos of copyrighted material might lead to problems.  I doubt that photos of ads like in Metro stations would (you’re promoting them for free).  A few years ago bloggers were getting sued by a “troll” named Righthaven for using articles and images from plaintiff’s small newspapers. The fact that a service provider does a DMCA Safe Harbor takedown does not protect the blogger from a later lawsuit or demand for payment. 

Here's another piece, from a UK site called Connotations, on how to write an effective blog posting that gets the desired attention.  Sounds like an English theme. 

Friday, December 01, 2017

Does blogging about white supremacists for journalistic motives make the neo-Nazis look "credible"? Vox weighs in

Karen Turner has a interesting discussion with Tom Rosenstiel on Vox, “How can journalists responsibly cover neo-Nazis: a media scholargives his advice.” 

There is a lot of flak on the left that even covering them gives them credibility as a movement, that could some day become very threatening to specific minorities if politicians had to take them seriously.

A major big city newspaper with national circulation has to consider that different parts of the country will react variably to the same coverage.

There’s a question when amateur bloggers cover it, too.  If a blogger happened to film the Charlottesville rally “for documentation” some people see this as promotion. Correspondingly, it seems that a few journalists might be in trouble now for filming the anti-Trump rally and vandalism on Inauguration Day.

Update: Dec. 3

Yesterday I went on a day trip to investigate the KKK Flyers incident in Rappahannock County (and Warren) VA,  But some would say that my doing so, as an amateur, only encourages more incidents like this because a perpetrator knows someone like me will pay and give attention to it.  When am I responsible for what other people feel motivated to do? 

Later Dec. 3

I saw a ThinkProgress plea (after an article about Orin Hatch and CHIP, children's health, and people "helping themselves") that ad networks were blocking them because they "produce 'controversial political content'" and "cover white nationalism and other controversial topics".  Well, so do I, on my own. I'm "fortunate" enough not to depend on ads or members, but in a way that could be a bad thing. What if every website had to pay its own way to stay up (to keep well-off people from steering the debate)?  

Update: Dec. 4

Now there is a flyer incident on the SMU campus in Dallas (University Park) (CNN story). 

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Cell phone metadata may have very little 4th Amendment protection

I’m not sure I agree with all those crying wolf on. Carpenter v. US, where the FBI secured cell phone metadata about the suspects without a warrant.  The Detroit News has a typical story here

Here is the transcript of oral arguments on Nov. 29. 

I’d wonder about analogous cases, such as records where my Metro Smart Card had been used. 

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Snapchat is social, not media

Evan Spiegel has a piece on Axios, “How Snapchat Is Separating Social from Media”. 

I got his tweet, and retweeted with the comment that I don’t use products that don’t store what I said.  (I can just use the phone or be in person, or maybe Skype).  I have to admit that as I go down my own agenda for my books, screenplays, music I could encounter people who want me to be able to use it to communicate.  I’ll reconsider. (It’s also a little dangerous not to have an account – someone could impersonate you – this almost happened with Instagram).

Spiegel has a good point in that algorithms ought to focus more on what “you” do rather than what “your friends” do.   Maybe that played into the susceptibility of Americans to the Russian fake news attack.

The other thing is that the “ethics” of wanting to create media may lie below relationship building, which puts your skin in the game.  But, “I hate speed-dating”. 

Here is "Business Insider's" account of Speigel's announcement. 

Sunday, November 26, 2017

Op-ed wants Facebook and other social media to prohibit images of people without permission; also, prior restraint of press

An op-ed on CNN by Amy Adele Hasinoff seems to want Facebook to adopt a policy that before any image of anyone can be posted, the subject must give permission.  The article is “The Policy that the uS Porn Industry Has but that Facebook Needs”. 

Theoretically, all images in any photo would have to be tagged before they could be posted on Facebook (or possibly any online place with user generated content).  This would sound totally impractical: in a public place, you don’t know everyone.  And even in a disco you probably don’t (although some bars prohibit photography). Or does she mean only nude images?

Generally photography of people in totally public places is legal in the US now, for example here.  
In Australia, Facebook is experimenting with a program of automatic comparison with a digital image library (a technique already used to identify child pornography known to the NCMEC).

CNN has an important story today on prior restraint of the press, with the background from Near v. Minnesota (1931) leading to the New York Times and the Pentagon Papers (1971), by Sonja West, here. In the Minnesota case, the muckraking publisher (whose stories were actually true) was actually enjoined from publishing anything until the Supreme Court, with some fortuitous luck, rescued it. 

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Under Trump, wealth seems to affect access to information and susceptibility to propaganda

I’ve written a lot recently about network neutrality on other blogs, and the concern that both telecom companies and large content companies like Facebook and Google will control inordinately what their customers see, for political and “fiduciary” purposes. 

I make it my own practice to look at news sources myself.  Even though I use Facebook and Twitter (Instagram not so much) I make the effort to go to news sites myself, especially all the major ones (Washington Post, New York Times, Wal Street Journal, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, as well as conservative (OAN. Fox, Intellectual Takeout, Reason, and yes, some Breitbart and some Milo) and “leftist” (Truthout), and some of the LGBT sites (Blade), and tech sites (Wired, CNET).

The major newspapers do have paywalls.  Right now I subscribe to three of them.

I also use what I think is the best source for my own articles.  These often include newspaper sites that have paywalls.  Facebook is reportedly working on a way to have a universal subscription to anything that previews but has a paywall.  But the point that the “Left” makes, especially in the network neutrality debate, is well taken:  less well-off people don’t have the money for paid subscriptions or fast lane service, and will be more vulnerable to believe “propaganda” that the companies encourage them to see.  While fake news should recede as a problem, vulnerability of poorer people to control of what they know and understand could increase in this Trump-like world.
I am concerned about the future of access to individual sites (not so much free-hosted blogs like this one but to hosted sites of small businesses and writers) because the “proles” may have less reason to know that they’re there.

The battle against elitism has only brought it back.

In the meantime, this Thanksgiving day, notice YouTube’s new rules for content that carries ads (story in the Verge) 

Tuesday, November 21, 2017

When is it "OK" to write your own memoir? What if it is really a "manifesto"?

Recently I’ve seen a few articles on why you should write your memoir, even if it isn’t going to sell.
This particular article explains the difference between autobiography and memoir. 

The memoir is more about key life periods and feelings about it.  Maybe a distinction without a difference.

Is this an exercise in personal self-indulgence, wanting to be heard if you are to be of service?

That sounds like we need a distinction between a memoir and a "manifesto", which has become a bad word. (Elliot Roger, Kaczynski).  The former's ("My Twisted Life"), particularly, seems to say mixed race kept him from having his own sexual capital, so he went off the deep end.   

I have to say that three DADT books are all part memoir, especially 1 and 3.  And many amateurish novels turn out to be overly autobiographical, although I’m gradually trying to wean myself of that with my own manuscripts. But readers kindly called my DADT-1 book "The Manifesto". 

By the way, I can’t believe he bald tone of the email I just got, “because you have been identified as a supporter of President Trump…”  Sounds like a hit list. 

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Law journal posts big article on threats to Section 230 while the Senate Commerce Committee approves SESTA.

Cindy Cohn and Jamie Williams wrote a valuable article for “” about the history of Section 230 over 20 years.Cindy Cohn and Jamie Williams wrote a valuable article for “” about the history of Section 230 over 20 years.  EFF has also shared the article on its own site. 

The article goes back to the 90s with the Zeran case (regarding possible defamation related to the Oklahoma City bombing) where someone tried to force AOL to take down harmful speech.  Soon it was apparent that the law needed to recognize a difference between “distribution” v. “publication” of speech, even after 230 had been past.

Another wave of attacks came with regard to responsibility for ads for housing that discriminated illegally.  We’ve seen something similar recently with Airbnb.

The article goes on to speculate about the burden on platforms.  Some of them, like Google, Facebook and Twitter, have considerable resources in dealing with some “dangerous” stuff (terrorism, for instance). I’m more concerned about hosting companies (Bluehost, for example) that are normally mucy more distant from their users.

Note also Eliot Harmon’s report on EFF that SESTA was just approved by the Senate Commerce Committee, with a lot of discussion of automated filters (like we saw with COPA).  

(See my COPA blog for related article today.) 

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Sci-Hub case is back, as a court ruling could implicate associated third parties for "infringement"

With respect to open-access, I see I discussed the Sci-Hub (Alexandra Elbakyan) before, on Feb. 22, 2016, in the good old days.
A federal court in Virginia issued an injunction for ACS, a science publisher, a ruling unnameunnthat indirectly holds unnamed associated parties like domain name registrars in violation, more or less trying to circumvent the concept of DMCA Safe Harbor (not sure if it really applies to trademarks or wordmarks). It also got to search engines and potentially web hosting companies.

This sort of protection in the copyright world from downstream liability is comparable logically to Section 230 protection.
Electronic Frontier Foundation has a story on the matter today by Mitch Stolz.  

Monday, November 13, 2017

Roy Moore: gratuitous, politically motivated allegations? could allegations of 4 decades ago trip anyone?

Just look up “Roy Moore” on the Washington Post website.  The Post is understandably obsessed with him

 Try this story out, about fundamentalist Christian men. 

New York (Margaret Hartman) has as good account as any on Moore’s threat to sue the Post. 

As a public figure, Moore would have to show “malice” and “reckless disregard of the truth”. Pretty hard for a politician.   Trump wanted to change this to the English rule (“open up the libel laws..”)

There are stories that the girls did not come forward after 40 years. The Post learned of some stories and went out and got the stories.

Are bloggers like me spreading the panic for no gain other than “because we can”?  You wonder if gratuitousness becomes a legal question itself. 

Saturday, November 11, 2017

Inequality, unfairness, elitism, and "real life"

Here’s a couple pieces for thought, maybe for more expansion later.

One is by Brian Lufkin on BBC News.  “There’s a problem with the way we define inequality”. 
  That is to say, that most of us accept the inevitability of some kind of inequality if there is going to be ego that can drive progress, but in time abuse of unearned “privilege” and particularly “unfairness” will cause life to lose a lot of meaning to some people, and tend to drive the less competitive young adults toward autocratic belief systems (religious or not) and causes they can belong to – or else to nihilism itself.   Preoccupation with "unfairness" has its own downside implication, that people are to be ranked on some kind of scale.  Authoritarians love that.  
Then on Vox, Ezra Klein writes, “For elites, politicsis driven by ideology; for voters it is not”.   He adds the byline, “committed conservatives and liberals don’t realize how weird they are.” Real people tend to be driven by social and trial alliances, not to truth they can really find out on their own. 

Thursday, November 09, 2017

Mozilla (and then Writers Guild West) warns us about gatekeepers

These days when you sign on to Mozilla you get a warning about gatekeepers.  You see this text:

“Big corporations want to restrict entry. Fake news and filter bubbles are making it harder for us to find our way. Online bullies are silencing inspired voices. And our desire to explore is hampered by threats to our safety and privacy. It’s time to join Mozilla and do our part as digital citizens. Donate today to support programs that keep the internet healthy, free and open for us all.”

In mid-November, Mozilla added "Will the future of the Internet be a set of walled gardens with restricted entry? Or an open, productive commons where creativity and innovation flourish."  I thought about the Hanging Gardens of Babylon after the Jews were put into exile. 
Yup, as I noted in several recent posts and on a short film from Vox today on the Movies blog, ungated speech seems to be coming under pressure.

Here’s a story about gatekeeping, from Variety (by Dave McNary).  The Writers Guild of America West has told members (often Hollywood move and television screenwriters) that they may not work on artificial virtual reality projects not already covered by union contacts.

I have one screenplay script (“Baltimore Is Missing”, 2002) filed with WGA West.  I hope that doesn’t hem me in later somehow. 

Sunday, November 05, 2017

Billionaire Ricketts insists his local newspapers pay their own way; when they tried to unionize, they got shut down

Billionaire Joe Ricketts, who owns a newspaper company specializing in local news, shut down his papers (DNAInfo, Gothamist) abruptly a few days after his 100+  employees had voted to unionize. 
Andy Leland and John Leland have a detailed account in the New York Times here. The Times article embeds a copy of what visitors see when trying to visit one of the sites.   Callum Borcher of the Washington Post weighs in here
Ricketts maintains that his venture had to pay its own way and be profitable.  This is unlike the case with me (I have some means but orders of magnitude less than him), or even companies like The Washington Times, a conservative newspaper said to be published for its speech value and not money.

But it’s interesting also that the paper had specialized in local news.  I can recall a gay paper that tried to start in Minneapolis shortly after my own layoff from my career that insisted it would remain local. I don’t recall how it did.
Joe Ricketts has an interesting perspective on his refusal to let his own businesses unionize.  I guess he has the right to shut them down, it they’re really his.  

Friday, November 03, 2017

Sexual harassment complainants face risk of "frivolous" litigation

The increase in sexual harassment claims has resulted in countersuits now, at least one. Brett Ratner has sued Melanie Kohler over a Facebook post accusing him, link to Variety story here
The Los Angeles Times has a story by contact reporters Amy Kaufman and Richard Winton 


The threat of litigation could make it hard for people to pursue sexual harassment charges, as they would need financial resources to defend themselves.  Truth is an absolute defense to libel in the US, but you have to pay for the defense (usually) unless you take the risk of being your own attorney. 

Wednesday, November 01, 2017

Personal domains are more likely to be blocked than "free service" blogging subdomains

Although pundits on blogging recommend getting your own domains to call up blogs rather than depending on free-service subdomains of Blogger and Twitter, it seems that many workplaces block these kinds of domains but may allow Blogger and Wordpress themselves.

Today, at Koons Ford, in a guest computer, I found my three Blogger domains (including this one) blocked.  The Wordpress sites said I needed to login – but you don’t, just to see them.

But my one https domain kept getting http 403 Forbidden in IE or Edge, and “this site can’t be reached” in Chrome. 

Also my legacy doaskdotell site (in IE)  kept saying the security certificate was revoked when it never had one.
In any case, “free service” blogs may be more easily reached on public computers than regular amateur sites that were paid for. This goes against conventional wisdom. 

Update:  Nov. 3

I tried all these pages at a UPS store this morning and they all worked. 

Saturday, October 28, 2017

Open access bill is before Congress again (FASTR)

Electronic Frontier Foundation has urged the public to support FASTR, the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act, advocated by Rand Paul (R-Ky), in an article Oct. 27 by Elliot Harmon, link  

The bills at issue are S 1701 and HR 3427.  There are provisions to allow open access by the public to documents, typically after six months (NIH normally requires a year).

Would this be the “Jack Andraka Act”? 

I have an important Wordpress posting today on Goldman v. Breitbart and a new threat to embeds, here

Sunday, October 22, 2017

The role of web designers servings small business; shared hosting issues

Ramsay Taplan (Blogtyrant) discusses the changing role of web designers in a detailed post, shared on social media, here. (I note that Blogtyrant has gone to https everywhere). 

Since Wordpress particularly has made “do it yourself” easier, the role of web designers, especially for small businesses, may have become more challenged.  Remember when you needed help with things like Dreamweaver?

But web designers may be needed for advanced security consultation, and for advanced plugins and themes.

I think the jury is out on SEO optimization, because rules keep changing.  I can remember the days of coding my own metatags, until I found them not needed.  I do think adding taglines to wordpress (as opposed to categories) does help sites be found, especially with respect to proper nouns and important concept names.

People using shared hosing can find once in a while that the webhost has created an error 503, service not available.  This can happen because of a spike in the application pool managed by IIS, and it may sometimes be due to one customer.  Here’s the best link I could find on the problem.  It would sound plausible that this could happen with a DDOS attack on one customer on the server, so this could be a sensitive issue. 

Saturday, October 21, 2017

NY Times offers a quiz on Facebook's hate speech standards

The New York Times offers a 6-question quiz on what Facebook considers hate speech, in an article Oct. 13 by Audrey Carlsen and Fahima Haque, link

The guidelines prohibit slurs against protected classes, which to include classes defined by sexual orientation and gender identity. They do not include speech against subclasses, like poor people within a racial group.

That leads to odd results in what the public views as hate speech.   Many people don’t consider the statement “white men are a-holes” hate speech, but Facebook does.  But limit it to “cis-male whites are …” then it is not.

Personally, I don’t pay much attention to a person’s membership in a protected class in my own statements about policy.  Even personally, I may be attracted to one person and not another for superficial reasons, but the class membership is coincidental (even if probabilistic), not existential, following James Damore’s ideas. 

And I don’t favor making policy by categorizing people.  (Imagine if the draft had demanded proportional service by race.)  Singapore does just that in who lives in various luxury buildings, demanding ethnic balance.

Self-publishing companies do "content evaluation" of submissions for "hate speech". 

And, "by the way", Michael Smerconish on CNN says he is locked out of his Facebook page and that the Russians hacked it. 

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

When does bringing up a settled issue become hate speech?

Time Magazine’s latest on campus speech codes, by Katy Steinmetz, Oct. 12, link, seems to be well summarized by this one Cornell student.

many on the left argue that some things are no longer open for discussion, that speech itself can be violence and that trying to question the equality of women or undocumented people or same-sex couples can amount to harassment. “Ignorance is hostility in this political climate,” says Cornell student TreviƱo. “It’s attacking our mental well-being.”

Would my reviewing the past military draft gratuitously be viewed as harassment because it might tempt a politician into passing it again?  Same for filial responsibility laws.


Or what about revisiting the draconian reaction of some conservatives in Texas in the 1980s against gay men and the AIDS epidemic?

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

Childless men and OPC ("other people's children"); the dangers of populism

Devin Foley has a piece in Intellectual Takeout that, toward the end, challenges childless men to take responsibility for other people’s children, specifically, boys.

The title is “Men, they took your NFL, now what?”  Is this about the kneeling controversy, or about concussion risks.

The article is somewhat vari-focused, as it gets into gender culture wars, where everything can be politicized.  Curiously, the black and white picture that appears to come from an Hollywood spectacle of ancient evenings shows all the (white) men without chest hair.

The culture war is in part what happens with those whose gender-related behaviors and capacities don’t conform to the traditional expectations of the group.  Is this about granting rights by group according to past oppression and intersectionality, or should it concern individual rights and concomitant personal responsibility?   Yes, people with privilege have a better chance to learn how to make good choices.  Is getting everybody into the responsibility of family tending (children or not) part of how to balance things out?  Any philosophy of individual rights and responsibilities will start out with some irreducible postulates.  
I’m not sure that this is what Dr. Phil really meant by “Man camp”.  And, oh yes, Intellectual Takeout begs for donations to speak for you.

Note well, also, this NBC op-ed by Evan McMullin on the dangers of "populism" -- on a day when Trump threaten NBC stations' broadcast licenses on Twitter.

Monday, October 09, 2017

Jemele Hill case: should private companies discipline employees for off-the-job social media speech on their own accounts?

Jemele Hill has been suspended by ESPN for two weeks for a second violation of its social media guidelines.  She issued some tweets critical of Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones for taking a hard line against his players protesting police profiling by kneeling during the national anthem at NFL games.

ESPN has apparently warned associates about social media speech, even off the job, that could reflect poorly on ESPN or drive away advertisers.  

CNN has the story here.

In September ESPN had threatened to discipline or fire Jemele for calling Donald Trump a “white supremacist.”  But Sports Illustrated provided an article saying that Connecticut law provides that even private employers may not discipline associates for constitutionally protected speech.

That’s unusual.  When I was working for a company that sold life insurance to military officers, I transferred to another division and moved within the company to avoid what was perceived as a conflict of interest when I was intending to publish a book on gays in the military. 

Sunday, October 08, 2017

The Left's "selective" attacks on free speech could backfire

Michelle Goldberg has an important New York Times op-ed, “The Worst Time for the Left to Give Up on Free Speech”, link .

Goldberg writes about the recent disruption of an ACLU speaker at William and Mary for defending free speech rights of alleged white supremacists (Oct. 5). 

Goldberg points out that many people believe that some topics should be “beyond the pale” of acceptable conjectures for discussion.  She notes that among these ideas are a return to the belief that women and people of color should have an inferior or submissive assigned station in life to white men. You could add, gay people or transgender or gender fluid, to heterosexually married men with children.

I certainly have hit that theme had in the past, as explaining what happened in my own background.  Perhaps some people would say that my even rehearsing it gives it potential legitimacy for political enemies to use again in the future.

One could say that about the attention I have given to the history of conscription.

It used to be said that communism should be beyond the pale of discussion. That idea was based on a definition of communism as invoking violence and the use of force to make political change (and force expropriation), whereas socialism alone was to be achieved by the democratic process (Bernie Sanders).  But communism as subject matter was different in that it did not normally target one protected class of people.  Even so, people in the past were barred, say, from federal employment had they ever been members of the Communist Part (and they could be removed for “sexual perversion” too, until 1973).

White supremacy is obviously very dangerous because it would propose subjugating a class of people (on race or skin color). Neo-Nazism is for similar reasons banned today in modern German, as it also can include people of a certain religion (Judaism) for subjugation.  The Left may feel that it barely has less to worry about than the Right on these matters.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled against content-specific restrictions on free speech.

But a much bigger issue, which I must keep coming back to, is the idea that people should speak only through groups.  

Friday, October 06, 2017

Why tribalism is unavoidable

David Brooks (the columnist who wants to teach us how to be good)  has an interesting op-ed in the New York Times, “The Philosophical Assault on Trumpism”, which maybe should read, “How to beat Trumpism”, link here. 

Brooks ascribes all the problems that lets Trump bully everyone to tribalism.  And he’s probably right.

People have a need to belong, and do belong somewhere whether they want to or not (Martin Fowler’s book in Aug. 2014). People can belong to nuclear and extended families, to communities of faith, to activist groups or newly defined identity groups.  On top of all of this the arbitrary idea of nationalism.

I can pause for a moment, a few hours before the Washington Nationals start the playoffs and finally prove that they, no “we”, can win a playoff series, what rooting for a professional sports team means.  It’s a kind of tribalism.

I could say there is one individualistic art form that bridges individualism and tribalism – and that’s music.  When my brain and soul learns a repertoire, it seems to join something, find a commonality with others that is beyond words.  But music also has a way of getting people to join in to things together.  It’s interesting to ponder how classical, spiritual (like in church) and rock or hip-hop all work.  I’ll come back to all that again.

The only thing that survives “me” is what is beyond myself (as well as the historical meta-fact of my life, which always exists in larger space-time).  That’s true for all of us.  So, at some point, we all have to “join in” to something for some meaningful existence to transcend us after we are gone.

So some kind of tribalism is necessary.  But it takes individual work to solve problems and make innovations.  There is always this moral tension between individualism and connectivity, between ego expression and moral equality, between innovation and stability.
But we do have to face the idea that sometimes, one has to take one for the team. 

Thursday, October 05, 2017

Black Lives Matter group disrupts ACLU speaker at William and Mary

Today, the Black Lives Matter Facebook page “Built on our Backs” shared a one hour video of its disruption (starting at about 4:10) of a speaker from the ACLU, Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, for what it claims is ACLU support of white supremacy, at William and Mary.   The group claims “zero tolerance for white supremacy no matter what form it masquerades in.” This demonstration seems to originate from a W-M chapter of BLM. 

Inside Higher Ed wrote a story on the protest (Jeremy Bauer-Wolf), which Rick Sincere from Charlottesville carried today on his “”. 

I have a history with William and Mary, back in 1961, as my own readers know.
Let’s see if Milo Yiannopoulos carries this story as an example of the aggressive, anarchist Left.