Search This Blog

Monday, September 12, 2022

The Docent's Memo (Sept. 12, 2022)


VIDEO: "This is WHY the REVOLVER is STILL the BEST CHOICE for MOST Americans‼️😮"--Modern Survivalist (9 min.)


VIDEO: "Think First, Shoot Second: A Pistol Drill to Mess With Your Head"
Lucky Gunner Ammo (12 min.).

  • "When To Choose Between IWB vs. OWB Holsters." Despite the title, this article really doesn't discuss when to choose an inside-the-waistband holster over an outside-the-waistband holster. Instead, it discusses the pros and cons of each. For the IWB, the advantage is that the holster and weapon are easier to conceal since the holster is literally inside your pants. As the author notes:

    ... All you need to hide the gun is a light cover garment such as an untucked polo or button-down shirt. So long as the shirt covers the gun, you’re good. If the shirt drapes over the gun and naturally blouses enough to avoid printing (where the outline of the gun shows through), the gun should stay hidden. Winter concealment is even easier, as hoodies and jackets make excellent cover garments. You can even step up your game and conceal a bigger gun with more capacity and better shootability.

The downsides are that it is harder to draw from the IWB holster or to reholster the weapon. I would also add that you have to buy oversized slacks to accommodate the holster and gun: a significant cost in itself if you are just starting to use an IWB holster. And IWB is less comfortable for those with a "spare tire" around the middle.

    As you might expect, the pros and cons of the OWB holster are pretty much the opposite: it is easier to draw from one and to reholster, and it is more comfortable to wear than the IWB holster, but it is harder to conceal, although the author acknowledges that "[w]ith the right cover garment, such as a coat, sweater, or hoodie, an OWB holster can be concealed." For this reason, the author relates, "[w]hile less common in the concealed carry world," the "OWB is more popular in open carry environments such as at a range or in areas where open carry is not frowned upon."

    I would like to see some statistics to support the author's contention that OWB is less common for concealed carry than IWB. Obviously there are a lot of people using IWB holsters (particularly with the popularity of appendix carry), but of the people that I know that carry concealed weapons (family and friends), I can't think of any that use IWB holsters, while most use an OWB holster for some or most of their carry needs. 

    If you are new to IWB carry, one factor you should consider is cost: while the holsters run about the same price for good quality versions of each, the IWB holster may dictate purchasing new clothes and belts. A common statement on this issue suggests that you will need to get pants with a 2-inch larger waist than normal to accommodate an IWB holster and firearm, although it may be more if you are carrying a larger or bulkier weapon. You will also likely need to get a larger belt, as this site indicates that you will need a belt of between 1 and 3 inches larger of IWB carry. 

    Cost aside, and turning to the question of when to choose one over the other, I would say that will really come down to weighing concealability versus comfort and ease of use. If you are giving greater weight to concealability, then go with the IWB. If you want more comfort and ease of use, then go with the OWB. 

  • If you read the latest Defensive Pistolcraft post you may have already followed the link to the September Rangemaster newsletter. If not, there is an article on the topic of "Wheelgun Woes, and how to prevent them" that discusses some common problems with revolvers that the author sees at training classes. What it comes down to is that although the revolver is reliable (in that, you can leave it in a drawer for 50 years and it will probably function without issue and it is largely immune to ammunition issues), it is a complicated and, hence, fragile mechanism that can go down after long rounds of intense firing. Because powder can get under the ejection star on the cylinder and bind up the cylinder, the author recommends carrying a toothbrush to periodically clean out any loose, unburnt powder, and to make sure you are ejecting cases with the weapon pointed straight up into the air so any unburnt powder falls from the cases to the ground instead of into the weapon. You also need to be on the watch for screws or the ejector rod loosening after a long string of fire. 
  • "Ruger Introduces the New 308 Small-Frame Autoloading Rifle (SFAR)." (See also here). From Ruger's press release:

There’s been a hole in Ruger’s AR offering since SR-762 was discontinued.  Ruger® SFAR™, or Small-Frame Autoloading Rifle, is a sub-7lb, 16” 308 AR.  Not an AR-10.  The barrel and bolt are the same overall size as a conventional AR-556® and the upper/lower receivers were stretched and massaged to fit the bigger magazine and cartridge into the AR-556 envelope.  Ergonomics, manual of arms, and most mil-spec AR bits and bobbles are all compatible too.

The 16-inch barrel version is reportedly 6.8 lbs., which is pretty good considering that my AR-10 build using magnesium receivers, a carbon fiber handguard, and minimalist stock came in at 6 lbs. Price for the 16-inch and 20-inch models are both $1,229 according to the article. My concern is with the size of the bolt. If Ruger is using the same diameter bolt as the AR-15, it suggests that they must be using an enlarged bolt face necessitating thinner locking lugs, such as you see with the 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 SPC and others. If it holds up over time this would be a good alternative to those wanting something more powerful than the 5.56.

  • "New Colt Python 3-inch Barrel .357 Magnum: Full Review." It's a Python and it has a 3-inch barrel making it small enough for concealed carry, but large enough for duty use. Apparently only a very small number of Pythons were made in 3-inch, but I think this is a good size. And it looks great. The MSRP is, like the other models, $1,499, but when I came across one at a local gun store a couple months back, they were asking much more. The article also discusses some of the changes between these new models and the classic Pythons including how they were able to make the frame stronger.
  • "Umarex Origin .25 Caliber Airgun: Full Review." Although the specimen reviewed here was .25 caliber, the model also comes in .17 and .22. The weapon appears to be an entry-level pre-charged pneumatic (PCP) air rifle. While the article is primarily a review of this air rifle, it also has a lot of good general information about PCP rifles and charging them.
  • "Loading Bench: The Do-It-All .30-30 Winchester." Good information for those who handload .30-30, including a look at some newer bullets. Not so new any longer are the pointed, polymer tipped Hornady FTX bullets used in their Lever Evolution loadings. To get the most out of those bullets, Hornady also developed new powders. The one for the .30-30 loadings--the LEVERevolution--was released for sale to the public (although good luck finding any right now). When I was doing so loading for my son's .30-30, I was surprised at the velocities that the LEVERevolution powder could produce while still within safe pressures. The author of this article discusses powders as well, writing:

Various reloading manuals list at least 50 propellants for reloading the .30-30 Win. with jacketed bullets. Add another 10 or so propellants for reloading cast bullets. LEVERevolution is the choice for top velocity; CFE 223, though, trails it by only 100 f.p.s. If those fail to provide your accuracy aims, you can’t miss with powders such as IMR 3031 and 4064, H4895, TAC and Varget. A relatively slow-burning powder is the best for shooting cast bullets. Bullets cast of lead alloy are considerably softer than jacketed bullets, and too much pressure distorts them and ruins accuracy. The Lyman 50th Edition Reloading Handbook lists 10.6 grains of Unique that fires 170-grain cast bullets at 1,568 f.p.s. as producing 36,000 copper units of pressure (CUP). In contrast, the bullet reaches about the same velocity loaded with 22.5 grains of IMR 3031 with a mild pressure of only 18,300 CUP.

  • Shooting drills aren't just for self-defense: "Shooting Drills for Dangerous Game" by Bryce M. Towsley. Towsley remonstrates against those spending the money for a dangerous game rifle as well as a guided hunt in Africa or for bear in North America that are too cheap to buy extra ammo for practice. But if you do buy that extra ammo, he has a system of training for that big hunt to make sure that it is you that get the game and not the other way around. He explains:

Front to Back

    For this drill we place targets at 30, 20 and 10 yards and stagger them a bit side to side. I use targets with an 8-inch bullseye. That is more or less the critical kill zone of most dangerous game. Six inches would probably be better, but I had several hundred of the 8-inch targets. I put them on a cardboard backer and use portable target stands where needed.

    Load three rounds. Start with the far target and with the rifle at low ready and the safety on. At the buzzer, shoot the 30-, 20- and 10-yard targets in that order. Reload three rounds and reverse to shoot the 10-, 20- and 30-yard targets in that order.

    Work on hitting each target, but going fast. The main thing here is the reload, measured by the timer as the time between shots. So the time accounts for ejecting the empty, positioning the rifle, reloading the magazine, closing the bolt, getting back on target and firing another shot. Most shooters will record around 15 to 20 seconds to start. A fast shooter with a bolt action will do it in about 10 seconds. Anything faster is impressive.

    Practice loading from the way you plan to carry extra ammo during your hunt. For example, in these drills I used a Galco culling belt. After several runs I cut reload times to nine seconds and change. My goal is to get below eight seconds. Of course, my goal has always been to be rich. Neither will probably ever happen, but it’s something to work for.

    The other important times are the splits between shots. This indicates how well you are controlling the rifle. Clearly, the cartridge and rifle have some effect on the numbers. I am a little faster with my .375 H&H than I am with my .458 Lott, simply because I burn up more time dealing with the recoil from the big gun. It’s best to try for splits less than three seconds. Two-and-a-half-second splits are very good. Two seconds is a goal.

Top-Off Drill

    During any safari you are probably going to have to “top off” under stress. For example, you just shot a buffalo and he ran off, but you can hear him in the brush and you need to catch up and end it fast. The PH is going to call for you to “top off.” That means to load your gun back to its full capacity.

    When you top off, the cartridge in the chamber is going to be ejected as you open the bolt. You need to catch it and reload it into the magazine. Again, there are several methods. I open the bolt and block the cartridge from ejection so that the bolt stops in the rear position with the cartridge held in the extractor. I then push it out of the extractor and into the magazine.

    Following that, the magazine is loaded to capacity with cartridges taken from the culling belt. ...

* * *

    Place a close and far target. Say 10 yards and 50 yards. I place them linearly, due to our narrow range. If you can spread them out laterally it adds another degree of difficulty.

    Start with the rifle at low ready and the safety on. At the buzzer, shoot three times at the close target, and then run to the far target while reloading your rifle back to full capacity. (Let’s be honest, with this COVID-era weight gain, I waddle more than run, but you get the idea.) Stop when the gun is loaded or at 10 yards, whichever comes first. As soon as the gun is operable, fire one shot at the far target.

    You want to shoot three times at the first target to get your adrenaline going as much as to empty the magazine. If you fumble a shell and drop it while reloading, never stop to pick it up. Grab another cartridge and keep loading.

    Here, again, we are looking for reloading times as you top off while on the move. Most shooters will record 30 seconds or more to start. With some skills, 20 seconds is good. Fifteen is excellent. My goal is 10.

He also has a few drills for shooting off of shooting sticks as well as advice on how to use shooting sticks. Finally, Towsley has some advice on handling the recoil from these big rifles that would probably be good for those of us shooting lesser rifles or shotguns.

  • "Summer Prep for Western Big Game." This is another article from Towsley. What especially caught my attention, because I had recently addressed it here, was his mention of what he thought was a good distance to zero a hunting rifle. He writes: 

For Western big-game hunting with a modern bottlenecked cartridge, I suggest a 200-yard zero. This puts the point of impact at 100 yards about 1.5-2 inches high, depending on the cartridge. At 300 yards the point of impact will be 5-10 inches low, again depending on the cartridge. That means the hunter can hold on the animal out to 300 yards and expect a killing shot. With most cartridges, I recommend holding a third down from the backbone for 300 yards, always “on hair, not air.”

    The online survey, which was conducted by Centiment in February and March of 2021, was based on a representative sample of about 54,000 adults, 16,708 of whom were gun owners. Georgetown University political economist William English, who commissioned the survey as part of a book project, presents its major findings in a recent paper available on the Social Science Research Network.

    The overall adult gun ownership rate estimated by the survey, 32 percent, is consistent with recent research by Gallup and the Pew Research Center. So is the finding that the rate varies across racial and ethnic groups: It was about 25 percent among African Americans, 28 percent among Hispanics, 19 percent among Asians, and 34 percent among whites. Men accounted for about 58 percent of gun owners.

    Because of the unusually large sample, the survey was able to produce state-specific estimates that are apt to be more reliable than previous estimates. Gun ownership rates ranged from about 16 percent in Massachusetts and Hawaii to more than 50 percent in Idaho and West Virginia.

    The survey results indicate that Americans own some 415 million firearms, including 171 million handguns, 146 million rifles, and 98 million shotguns. About 30 percent of respondents reported that they had ever owned AR-15s or similar rifles, which are classified as "assault weapons" under several state laws and a proposed federal ban. Such legislation also commonly imposes a limit on magazine capacity, typically 10 rounds. Nearly half of the respondents (48 percent) said they had ever owned  magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds.

    Those results underline the practical challenges that legislators face when they try to eliminate "assault weapons" or "large capacity" magazines. The survey suggests that up to 44 million AR-15-style rifles and up to 542 million magazines with capacities exceeding 10 rounds are already in circulation.

The average gun owner owns about 5 firearms, and handguns are the most common type of firearm owned. 48.0% of gun owners -- about 39 million individuals -- have owned magazines that hold over 10 rounds (up to 542 million such magazines in total), and 30.2% of gun owners -- about 24.6 million individuals -- have owned an AR-15 or similarly styled rifle (up to 44 million such rifles in total). Demographically, gun owners are diverse. 42.2% are female and 57.8% are male. Approximately 25.4% of Blacks own firearms, 28.3% of Hispanics own firearms, 19.4% of Asians own firearms, and 34.3% of Whites own firearms. In total, Americans own over 415 million firearms, consisting of approximately 171 million handguns, 146 million rifles, and 98 million shotguns.

VIDEO: "The Great Tsunamis When The Earth Turns Over"--Suspicious Observers (3 min.)

VIDEO: "Cyclical Disaster | What's Coming Next"--Suspicious Observers (6 min.)

  • "15 Best African Hunting Books For When You’re Dreaming Of Being On Safari." The Big Game Hunting Blog has an updated (as of this year) list of books for those interested in African game hunting. Since these hunters are out in the field, these probably would be of interest to those interested in wilderness survival or the outdoors generally.
  • "How Long Do Bic Lighters Last?" The article looks at the number of strikes (sparks), whether they expire in storage, how to store them, and burn time. On the latter issue, the article relates:

    A normal-sized Bic lighter will last for approximately 60 minutes (3,600 seconds) of burn time before running out of fuel.  

    This equates to approximately 120 lights lasting 30 seconds each, 360 lights lasting 10 seconds each, or 1,800 lights lasting 2 seconds.  A mini Bic lighter has less fuel, so it lasts only 20-30 minutes (1,200 to 1,800 seconds).    

  • "Best Butter Powder: What It Is, Shelf Life, Uses and Brands." The brands that the author recommends are: Augason Farms, Future Essentials, Judee’s Butter Powder, Anthony’s Premium Butter Powder (they sell smaller packets if you just want to try out butter powder), Healthier Comforts Organic Butter Powder, and Butter Buds Sprinkles (although this is for flavoring not baking). The author adds:
    Because most butter powders are made with nonfat milk powder, they have a slightly milky taste. You aren’t going to get a strong buttery flavor, and the texture isn’t as creamy as regular butter. The nonfat milk powder also means that butter powder has less fat than regular butter, so eating it isn’t as satiating.  

    You probably won’t notice any difference if using butter powder in baked goods, but it may be noticeable as a spread. Butter powder made with maltodextrin has a milder buttery taste, and the texture isn’t as smooth when reconstituted.

We are in an exceptionally challenging civil-military environment. Many of the factors that shape civil-military relations have undergone extreme strain in recent years. Geopolitically, the winding down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the ramping up of great power conflict mean the U.S. military must simultaneously come to terms with wars that ended without all the goals satisfactorily accomplished while preparing for more daunting competition with near-peer rivals. Socially, the pandemic and the economic dislocations have disrupted societal patterns and put enormous strain on individuals and families. Politically, military professionals confront an extremely adverse environment characterized by the divisiveness of affective polarization that culminated in the first election in over a century when the peaceful transfer of political power was disrupted and in doubt. Looking ahead, all of these factors could well get worse before they get better. In such an environment, it is helpful to review the core principles and best practices by which civilian and military professionals have conducted healthy American civil-military relations in the past — and can continue to do so, if vigilant and mindful.

The impression I have is that the letter is either in response to fears that the military might decide to take matters into its own hands over disgust with current civilian leadership, or fears that the military might refuse to carry out "legal" (but morally dubious) orders from civilian authorities. Obviously, if you belong to a class of civilians that has been branded the number one threat to the country, the latter may be concerning. It is notable that the authors of the letters were all active in prosecuting the GWOT and therefore responsible, in large part, for it having "ended without all the goals satisfactorily accomplished," and the majority of them supported the decay of the military as an institution by championing woke causes including expanding the role of women in the combat arms and welcoming gay and lesbian servicemembers. 

One possibility is to circumscribe the damage in order to save most of the structure: If you divide a system into small, independent subsystems, you can prevent the cascade of failures from propagating over the network; if the subsystems do not communicate with each other, then the failure cannot move so easily from one to another. It is a well-known strategy in materials science: “Composite” materials are stronger than homogeneous ones because their internal boundaries can stop a crack from expanding. In economic systems, we say that “small is beautiful.” In social systems, the movement called “transition towns” is based on the idea that a village is more resilient than a whole state. And a federation of smaller states may be more flexible in facing difficulties and absorbing shocks than a larger, centralized state.

Sounds like the federalism envisioned by our founding fathers.

VIDEO: "Why A US Population Collapse Is Unavoidable"--EPB Research (11 min.)


VIDEO: "Africa is Not Poor Because of Colonization"--Jordan B Peterson (11 min.)

    According to the study, the majority of psychological research is conducted on subjects from Western nations, primarily university students. Between 2003 and 2007, 96 per cent of psychological samples came from countries with only 12 per cent of the world's populations. The U.S. alone provided nearly 70 per cent of these subjects.

    However, the study finds significant psychological and behavioral differences between what the researchers call Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) societies and their non-WEIRD counterparts across a spectrum of key areas, including visual perception, fairness, spatial and moral reasoning, memory and conformity.

Notwithstanding the cries of the bleeding-heart liberal, we know that criminals think differently than we do. Well, it turns out that most of the rest of the world also thinks differently than we do. 

    Russian gas giant Gazprom said Friday that Nord Stream - due to reopen last the weekend after three days of maintenance - would remain shut for repairs after oil leaks were found in a turbine.

    The halt in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline means Russian gas shipments have fallen 89 per cent from a year ago.

    Russia used to supply 40 per cent of Europe's natural gas, and even more to Germany, where inexpensive energy was a pillar of the economy.

    There's still some Russian gas flowing to Europe through a pipeline passing through Ukraine into Slovakia, and another crossing the Black Sea to Turkey and then to EU member Bulgaria. 

    Russia started cutting back gas as early as last summer, before the war in Ukraine started. That sent gas prices sharply higher.

    Then Gazprom cut off a number of European countries after they responded to the outbreak of the war by banning many dealings with Russian banks, businesses and persons.

Whatever the band aid solution that is applied, however, the reality is grim. And while we wait for the latest Zoltan note to quanity it in a way only he can, the math is simple: Europe can’t print more nat gas, oil, coal, etc, so one way or another, it will have to offset the surge in costs, first in commodities and then in all downstream chains, which in the very near future will mean governments will soon be subsidizing Europe’s cost of living as the alternative is a violent revolution. In short: we are about to see the printers go brrrr like never before, if only to prevent Europeans from going brrrr this winter…

  • Of course, this doesn't mean that things are rosy for Russia: "Russia Privately Warns of Deep and Prolonged Economic Damage." Although Russia's public stance is that its economy will only contract 3% due to the sanctions, Bloomberg has obtained a private government document that paints a far grimmer picture:
    Russia may face a longer and deeper recession as the impact of US and European sanctions spreads, handicapping sectors that the country has relied on for years to power its economy, according to an internal report prepared for the government.

    The document, the result of months of work by officials and experts trying to assess the true impact of Russia’s economic isolation due to President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, paints a far more dire picture than officials usually do in their upbeat public pronouncements. Bloomberg viewed a copy of the report, drafted for a closed-door meeting of top officials on Aug. 30. People familiar with the deliberations confirmed its authenticity.

    Two of the three scenarios in the report show the contraction accelerating next year, with the economy returning to the prewar level only at the end of the decade or later. The “inertial” one sees the economy bottoming out next year 8.3% below the 2021 level, while the “stress” scenario puts the low in 2024 at 11.9% under last year’s level.

    All the scenarios see the pressure of sanctions intensifying, with more countries likely to join them. Europe’s sharp turn away from Russian oil and gas may also hit the Kremlin’s ability to supply its own market, the report said.

    Beyond the restrictions themselves, which cover about a quarter of imports and exports, the report details how Russia now faces a “blockade” that “has affected practically all forms of transport,” further cutting off the country’s economy. Technological and financial curbs add to the pressure. The report estimates as many as 200,000 IT specialists may leave the country by 2025, the first official forecast of the widening brain drain.
    We have enormous reason to believe that it was [the result of gain-of-function reasearch]. And clearly, we haven’t even asked that question. But we have a lot of reason to believe that it was, because the scientists that were doing that research loved that research. And they explained to us publicly why it’s so important. And they wrote editorials about why this research must continue. And they made grant proposals saying that it should continue. And for those of us in the business of writing grant proposals, the fact that a particular grant proposal that’s deeply troubling was turned down doesn’t mean that it wasn’t carried out afterwards. But where is NIH saying, “Yeah, that’s an interesting question. Why  don’t we get the evidence?” It doesn’t even ask that question. 

    And the scientists like those that talk about the Huanan market, they don’t even discuss that research that was underway. That is just misdirection, to my mind. It’s like sleight of hand art. Don’t look over there. Look over here. But we know that there was a tremendous amount of this research underway. We have interviews by the lead scientists. We have these research proposals. I know the intention of doing this research from discussions. I’ve read so many studies of the importance of this research claimed by the scientists. And yet I see NIH with its head in the ground. “Oh, no, nothing here to look at.” And then I see the scientists. “Oh, nothing here to look at. We know it’s the market. Did we find an animal? No. Do we have an explanation of where that furin cleavage site came in? No. We don’t have an explanation of the timing, which doesn’t quite look right. Oh, but don’t look over there, because there’s nothing there,” they keep telling us. Well, that’s a little silly. 

    So my point is, there is a huge amount of reason to believe that that research was underway. Because there are published papers on this. There are interviews on this. There are research proposals. But NIH isn’t talking. It’s not asking. And these scientists have never asked either. From the very first day, they have kept hidden from view the alternative. And when they discuss the alternative, they don’t discuss the research program. They discuss complete straw men about the lab, not the actual kind of research that was underway, which was to stick furin cleavage sites into SARS-like viruses in a way that could have created SARS-Cov-2.
  • From Forbes: "China’s ‘Lost Decade’ Is Even Worse Than You Think." Although the author does not believe that China will face the same deflationary process that struck Japan after the collapse of its real estate market in the late 1980s (he's wrong--demographic changes guarantee that China will suffer the same fate in the coming decades), he does see China's entering a period of economic doldrums:
    By “right” we mean the cost of President Xi Jinping’s disastrous battle with Covid-19 variants Beijing clearly doesn’t understand. It’s helping relegate China to a roughly 4.5% growth rate for this decade—and 3% in the next one. This estimate from Oxford Economics means China won’t be catching up with the U.S. anytime soon in terms of living standards.

    In fact, Adam Slater at Oxford suggests that South Korea, Taiwan and other major Asian export economies can probably stop looking over their shoulders, too. The odds of Chinese blowing past developing Asia in per capita income terms anytime soon may be dropping, too.
    • More: "China’s Economy Is Headed For One Of The Largest Meltdowns Ever." Key part: "The big story is not that the Chinese economy is falling apart. It is, at least apart from the export sector. The big story is that China’s stimulus efforts, so successful in the past in jumpstarting growth, are no longer working. The country’s economy is, in a word, exhausted."
  • This is purposeful attempt to drive conservatives and Christians out of the public sphere: "Higher Ed’s New Woke Loyalty Oaths" by John Sailer. An excerpt:
    In 2021, the Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) School of Medicine—ranked fourth in the country for primary care—released a 24-page “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Anti-Racism Strategic Action Plan,” listing dozens of “tactics” for advancing “diversity and racial equity” over the ensuing half-decade. One of those tactics reads: “Include a section in promotion packages where faculty members report on the ways they are contributing to improving DEI, anti-racism and social justice.” The plan promises to “reinforce the importance of these efforts by establishing clear consequences and influences on promotion packages.”

    OHSU’s policy represents the latest stage in the institutional entrenchment of DEI programming. Universities have long required diversity statements for faculty hiring—short essays outlining one’s contributions to DEI and future plans for advancing DEI. Since it began almost a decade ago, the policy has been criticized as a thinly veiled ideological litmus test. Whether you see it as one largely depends on whether you think DEI is simply a set of corporate “best practices” like any other, or constitutes a rigid set of political and social views. In any event, the diversity statements and criteria have only expanded, and are now commonly required for promotion, tenure, and faculty evaluation.

    A quick search for academic jobs inevitably yields dozens or hundreds of positions that require diversity statements. In November 2021, the American Enterprise Institute conducted a survey of faculty jobs and found that 19% required them, a number that is likely to grow. At the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, applicants seeking positions in chemical and biomolecular engineering must submit a one-page “Statement describing candidate’s approach to and experience with diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education.” At the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, despite a new law that prohibits requiring job applicants “to endorse a specific ideology or political viewpoint,” applicants for a job in political science must submit a “statement concerning experience with and plans for contributing to diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Meanwhile, every open faculty position listed by Ohio State University’s College of Arts and Sciences, including roles in econometrics, freshwater biology, and astronomy, requires some variation of a statement “articulating the applicant’s demonstrated commitments and capacities to contribute to diversity, equity, and inclusion through research, teaching, mentoring, and/or outreach and engagement.”

    It’s conceivable that job candidates could list their plans to contribute to diversity and inclusion without indicating a commitment to any particular political or social viewpoint, but the most commonly available rubrics for assessing diversity statements demonstrate a clear ideological gloss. Almost all of the publicly available rubrics used by recruitment search committees resemble the University of California, Berkeley’s “Rubric for Assessing Candidate Contributions to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging,” which dictates that applicants should receive a low score if they “[discuss] diversity in vague terms, such as ‘diversity is important for science,’” or if they “state that it’s better not to have outreach or affinity groups aimed at particular individuals because it keeps them separate from everyone else, or will make them feel less valued.”

    Most notably, the Berkeley rubric explicitly punishes any candidate who expresses a dislike for race-conscious policies, requiring a low score for anyone who “states the intention to ignore the varying backgrounds of their students and ‘treat everyone the same.’” Conversely, it rewards those most committed to the cause: Candidates receive a high score for “discuss[ing] diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging as core values that every faculty member should actively contribute to” and “convincingly express[ing] intent, with examples, to be a strong advocate for diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging within the department/school/college and also their field.”

    The rubric published by the University of Colorado Denver mimics parts of Berkeley’s rubric verbatim, but also takes it a step further: In one category, candidates receive a middling score for espousing the “golden rule” (“I will treat others as I want to be treated”) but the highest score for espousing the “platinum rule” (“I will treat others as they want to be treated”). Meanwhile, some institutions employ even more overtly ideological language. At Western Oregon University, high-scoring statements provide “at least two or more strategies for contributing to advancing racial equity and eliminating systemic racism” and identify “at least three inequities and … how they would address those inequities if employed at WOU.”

    Such evaluations create obvious issues for academic freedom. Even the tamest rubrics reward candidates for affirming the value of race consciousness and punish candidates for affirming the value of racial colorblindness—not exactly an apolitical hiring criteria. In an Aug. 22, 2022, statement, the nonprofit organization Academic Freedom Alliance called for an end to the practice, arguing that the “demand for diversity statements enlists academics into a political movement, erasing the distinction between academic expertise and ideological conformity. It encourages cynicism and dishonesty.”

Of course, were a college to require something similar about promoting family values, marriage only between a man and woman, etc., it would be vilified and probably risk losing its accreditation. Such is the topsy-turvy, substituting good for evil and evil for good world in which we live.

    The Boise Pride Festival has canceled its controversial “Drag Kids” performance, and at least five sponsors have withdrawn from the event, while other sponsors have publicly condemned the performance.

    The festival organizers released a statement on Thursday announcing the “difficult decision” to “postpone” the performance involving minors “due to increased safety concerns.”

"Safety concerns" is always what they say when they suddenly realize that normal people despise them. Unfortunately, this is not the end. The Boise Mayor, for instance, is about as liberal as you can get, which is why I call the north part of town "Portlandia." More:

The Daily Wire previously reported that Zions Bank publicly withdrew its participation from the event on Wednesday, citing concerns over the drag performance involving children as young as 11. Since then, five additional sponsors have dropped out for the same reason, including Idaho Power, the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (DHW), agribusiness company Simplot, Idaho Central Credit Union (ICCU), and CapEd Credit Union. 

But just because they withdrew their names does not mean that they withdrew their money. From a local news report:

Boise Pride won't confirm whether or not the funding will stay from all the sponsors who dropped their participation from the event, but Donald Williamson, the Executive Director of Boise Pride, said Friday that the Zions Bank funding will stay, just that their participation is withdrawn.

I want to know why my tax dollars are going to fund this cesspool of depravity through a contribution from the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. The Idaho Freedom Foundation has more on this obscene use of tax dollars:

    As a celebration of the new official religion of our country, this upcoming weekend’s 2022 Boise Pride Festival has attracted many corporate and government sponsors who want to signal their fealty to the LGBTQ+ community. 

    Local grocery chain Albertson’s serves as the premier sponsor this year, dusting off its June Pride Month logo once again. Many other local banks, retailers, alcohol distributors, and medical companies are on the long list of sponsors as well.

    If residents disagree with this corporate promotion, they are free to vote with their wallets. But what about their tax dollars?

    The City of Boise is just one of several public entities that are donating taxpayer dollars to fund this event. Other government sponsors include the University of Idaho College of Law, the College of Western Idaho, and Central District Health. 

    Of course, using taxpayer money to fund such causes isn’t a new phenomenon; the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare spent more than $100,000 on pride events in 2021. 

Obviously the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare has too large of a budget if it has $100,000 to blow on drag shows.

    In math, the average score for 9-year-old students fell 7 percentage points between 2020 and 2022, according to the study. The average reading score fell 5 points.

    The pandemic’s upheaval especially hurt students of color. Math scores dropped by 5 percentage points for white students, compared with 13 points for Black students and 8 points for Hispanic students. The divide between Black and white students widened by 8 percentage points during the pandemic.
U.S. and Mexican officials likened it to how a company works, manufacturing and marketing an array of illegal drugs and cultivating links to suppliers in dozens of countries in Latin America, Europe and Asia. The cartel is believed to have different units handling jobs such as security, money laundering, transportation, production and the bribing of public officials.

So when the Chinese trade ended, the Sinaloa cartel could fall back on established trafficking networks built around drugs like cocaine, marijuana and heroin, as well as relationships with Chinese chemical makers to obtain precursor chemicals and its expertise running drug making labs through its production of methamphetamine. The Jalisco cartel is expanding its control by "fighting with Sinaloa for control of seaports where fentanyl’s chemical ingredients arrive from China as well as routes through the country and border crossings into the U.S." 

     One of the factors that has made Fentanyl so attractive to the cartels is that it is cheap and easy to make. The article explains: 
 
    Fentanyl production is simpler than heroin, because it is entirely synthetic and doesn’t require cultivating the poppies needed for heroin. Busts of Mexican labs or large seizures at the border can be quickly offset by new batches without having to wait to harvest crops or pay farmers.

    It is also less expensive to make. The plant-based opium needed to produce a kilogram of heroin can cost producers about $6,000, while the precursor chemicals to make a kilogram of fentanyl cost $200 or less, according to Bryce Pardo, associate director of the Rand Corp.’s Drug Policy Research Center, who helped lead a recent bipartisan report on synthetic opioids.

    “Synthetic opioids offer economic and tactical advantages that allow criminals to vastly outpace enforcement efforts,” the report said. Illegal drug exports to the U.S. from Mexico are worth tens of billions of dollars annually, it estimates, with fentanyl a growing share of the business.

    Heroin’s profile has been shrinking as fentanyl becomes more available. Some Mexican poppy farmers in the mountains of Sinaloa say they have lost income as cartels shift away from heroin, and have abandoned their fields.

The article also details that there is so much competition to provide Fentanyl pills (which the cartels manufacture to look identical to legitimate pain killers) that they are looking at new products that ditch the pain medication look for other shapes and colors and even flavors/scents. 
Not long ago, environmentalists constantly used pictures of polar bears to highlight the dangers of climate change. Polar bears even featured in Al Gore’s terrifying movie “An Inconvenient Truth.” But the reality is that polar bear numbers have been increasing — from somewhere between five and ten thousand polar bears in the 1960s, up to around 26,000 today. We don’t hear this news. Instead, campaigners just quietly stopped using polar bears in their activism.

By at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Weekend Reading

 First up, although I'm several days late on this, Jon Low posted a new Defensive Pistolcraft newsletter on 12/15/2024 . He includes thi...