Deep Thoughts

The End of Debate?

by

Yarelyn Mena, a 29-year-old graduate of CUNY and Fordham University, served as a lawyer for Johnny Depp in the   Depp–Heard    trial.   A high profile case like this represented a big opportunity for a fairly recent graduate, and she apparently did a very good job in her cross-examination of Heard.   Jonathan Turley says of her cross-examination:   “It was considered the turning point of one of the most famous trials in modern history. It is something that should be a matter of great pride for the CUNY community and, not surprisingly, the website did an article on their graduate…It is an extraordinary story for a woman who came with her family from the Dominican Republic. She proceeded to graduate from CUNY and then received her law degree from Fordham University. That is a quintessential American story of achievement that any institution should relish and highlight. She noted in the interview that “(Law) was the first career that I knew of before I even really understood what it was.””

But many students were outraged, and the article was removed from the website with an apology:

We understand the strong negative emotions this article elicited and apologize for publishing the item. We have removed it from our CUNYverse blog. The article was not meant to convey support for Mr. Depp, implicitly or otherwise, or to call into question any allegations that were made by Amber Heard. Domestic violence is a serious issue in our society and we regret any pain this article may have caused.

Turley:   ”

“The “pain” caused by the article was an account of a graduate doing her job as an advocate. We have gotten to the point that people are incapable of recognizing that everyone is entitled to a rigorous legal defense and that the lawyers are fulfilling essential roles in protecting the rule of law.  The only thing that matters is that the lawyer represented someone accused of abuse (even though the  jury clearly found that Heard lied with malice in the trial). Even lawyers defending a client must now be cancelled to protect others from the pain of dealing with a trial on spousal abuse.”

The reaction of the angry students represents a rejection of the whole concept of adversary proceedings in the legal process.   Apparently, a sufficiently-unpopular plaintiff or defendant must not have representation because we know they’re in the wrong…no need to hear evidence, no need to see what the statute books and the precedents actually say.

The class of people displaying this attitude is by no means restricted just to college students and to cowardly administrators.   Two lawyers at the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, who won a major gun-rights case before the Supreme Court, were told that they had to abandon such clients.   According to one of these lawyers:

We were given a stark choice: either withdraw from ongoing representations or withdraw from the firm,” Clement said in a statement. “Anyone who knows us and our views regarding professional responsibility and client loyalty knows there was only one course open to us: We could not abandon ongoing representations just because a client’s position is unpopular in some circles.

Again, one would think that a law firm would be proud to have two of its lawyers win a major Supreme Court case…evidently not.

The attitude that there can only be one view expressed is not limited to law.   The Cancellation of speakers, the suppression of unapproved views by social media…these are all aspects of same basic phenomenon.   It is somewhat similar to the old traditionalist Catholic position that Error has no rights…the number of people claiming that they have the authority to decide what is an “error”, and what is not, is now much larger.

Your thoughts as to causes, and remedies..if any?

 

Cupio Dissolvi

by

The Festival of Dangerous Ideas  (Sidney, Australia) will include a session focused on the question  Is progress threatened by the urge to burn it all down?    The title of the session reminded me of something I read quite a few years ago:

Cupio dissolvi…These words have been going through my mind for quite a long time now. It’s Latin. They mean “I (deeply) wish to be annihilated/to annihilate myself”, the passive form signifying that the action can be carried out both by an external agent or by the subject himself…Cupio dissolvi… Through all the screaming and the shouting and the wailing and the waving of the rainbow cloth by those who invoke peace but want appeasement, I hear these terrible words ringing in my ears. These people have had this precious gift, this civilization, and they have got bored with it. They take all the advantages it offers them for granted, and despise the ideals that have powered it. They wish for annihilation, the next new thing, as if it was a wonderful party. Won’t it be great, dancing on the ruins?  

The citation is from an Italian blogger who was only briefly active but put up several interesting and thought-provoking posts.

When I first read the above post, I was reminded of a passage from Walter Miller’s great novel A Canticle for Leibowitz:

…children of Merlin, chasing a gleam. Children, too, of Eve, forever building Edens and kicking them apart in berserk fury because somehow it isn’t the same.  

For discussion: How prevalent is the nihilistic and destructive attitude represented by the above quotes, and what are its causative factors?   To what extent, if any, is it reversible?

Some additional posts from the Italian blogger (Joy of Knitting) are    here  and  here.

The FDI is scheduled for September 18 and 19.   Steven Pinker is the speaker for this session, and it is chaired by Claire Lehmann, the founder and publisher of Quillette.

The Light of Rutupaie Going Out

by

Rutupaie, the modern Richborough Castle, in Kent, England was once the site of a notable Roman military garrison graced by an enormous marble triumphal arch visible to ships arriving in the port, a tall lighthouse, and a thriving civilian town with an amphitheater. The lighthouse and the triumphal arch are long gone, but a large portion of the circuit of twenty-five-foot-high walls still remain visible above ground. This was the terminus of Watling Streat, a keystone in the network of carefully engineered roads which covered Britain like a net. It was most likely the site of the original Roman bridgehead in the time of the Emperor Claudius, which would in large part become the province of Britannia. Rutupaie became the major port of entry all throughout the four centuries that Roman power held sway over that far and misty isle, their ships and galleys guided into safe harbor after dark by the fire atop the lighthouse.

In one of the opening chapters of the novel The Lantern Bearers, a young Roman-British soldier makes his decision to remain in Britain when the legions are finally and officially withdrawn by order of the Emperor. Having deserted his unit as they are on the point of departure for the last time, he lights the great fire atop the lighthouse, as the galleys row away on the evening tide; a last defiant fire, as darkness descends. Peter Grant, who blogs at Bayou Renaissance Man noted this week that Rosemary Sutcliff’s series of novels about the Romans in Britain and the long, slow, painful dying of Roman civilization there were being republished at a reasonable price in eBook. This reminded me again of my very favorite historical author; The finest and most evocative historical novel ever in English is either the Rider of the White Horse or her retelling of the Arthurian epic, Sword at Sunset. Marion Zimmer Bradley’s version, The Mists of Avalon, is overwrought trash in comparison.

Read more

Reslience and Renewal

by

We’ve often talked here about businesses and other kinds of organizations that missed the turn…that failed to react intelligently to market or technology changes and disappeared (or at least suffered great harm)…or, in the case of military organizations, went down to defeat.   Sears failed to take advantage of the excellent fit that the Internet could have offered with their direct mail strengths.   The French Army of 1940 was so focused on the lessons of World War I that they failed to understand the tactics that would be used against them in the coming war.   None of the traditional US steam locomotive manufacturers became a force in the diesel-electric market.   The big integrated steel producers failed to exploit mini-mill technology.   And so on.

In this post & discussion, I’d like to look at this phenomenon from a different angle….what are some examples of organizations that did successfully make the turn, and/or revived themselves after being overwhelmed with internal as well as external problems?

To start things off, here are some examples that seem to fit:

Studebaker–this company was originally a manufacturer of horse-drawn wagons and carriages.   The ‘buggy whip industry’ is used as an archetypal example of an industry that was highly vulnerable to the mechanically powered automobile and failed to exist because of its failure to recognize and act on this vulnerability. (Why do people talk about buggy whip makers, rather than just buggy makers, I wonder?)    But Studebaker did enter the auto business, with electric cars in 1902 and gasoline vehicles in 1904.   Although never a dominant player in the US auto market, the company did manufacture and sell cars until 1963.   (It was also a significant supplier of military vehicles and other items during World War II.)

IBM was overwhelmingly dominant in the era of punched-card data processing…it was by no means inevitable that it would successfully make the transition to electronic computers, or at least would make this transition in a manner comprehensive enough to ensure its future.   Companies such as UNIVAC were more focused on electronics. It is easy to imagine an alternate history in which   IBM chose to exploit electronic computation only for the niche of scientific & engineering calculation, leaving business data processing to traditional punched card methods…but that’s not what happened.

American Express started out in 1850 as a package delivery company, focusing on transportation within New York State.   Fortunately for them, they expanded beyond this focus with the introduction of products such as money orders and travelers checks…I say ‘fortunately for them’, because in 1918, the federal government nationalized the major express carriers and expropriated their property.

Corning started in 1851 but made its mark as a manufacturer of glass bulbs for Edison’s lamps–by 1808, bulbs accounted for half Corning’s business.   This seems like the kind of business that would have been highly susceptible to replacement via vertical integration by GE and the other lightbulb companies which were its customers.   But in 1915, the company came up with Pyrex, and in 1952 the accidental overheating of a piece of photosensitive glass led to the creation of CorningWare.   And in the 1970s, Corning pioneered the use of fiber optic cables for data transmission.

Apple, in the late 1990s, did not look like it had a great future.   The company’s desktop products were doing poorly against PC-type products.   Many experts believed that Apple should get out of the hardware business entirely and merely license its software to other manufacturers, as Microsoft had done with Windows, and, indeed, some licensing deals were struck. But Apple’s future would turn out not to lie in pure software but in software tightly integrated with proprietary hardware, especially with handheld devices.

The Royal Navy, in 1797, suffered from serious internal problems.   The service was rocked by two mutinies–one at Spithead and the other at the Nore.   The Spithead mutiny was mainly about a demand for improved living conditions, due in part to the fact that pay rates had not increased to keep up with inflation.   The Nore mutiny was more far-reaching in its demands, including demands that the King dissolve Parliament and make immediate peace with France.   There was apparently also some involvement by Irish separatists.

Yet these mutinies preceded by only 8 years the great naval victory at Trafalgar.   It seens unlikely that an angry, demoralized, and radicalized force of sailors could have achieved such a victory or enabled Britain’ s “ruling of the waves” for the next 100-plus years.   The willingness of the naval authorities to make needed changes (increased pay, abolition of the ‘commissions’ that ships’ pursers had traditionally been allowed to take for themselves), surely made a difference, along with a combination of conciliation and limit-setting.   (All of the Spithead mutineers received a royal pardon; at the Nore, 29 mutineers were hanged and an equal number imprisoned; some were transported to Australia…however, most Nore mutineers were not punished at all, which was lenient by the standards of the time.)

Speaking of Britain….following the withdrawal at Dunkirk in 1940, the future of that country…and of western civilization…looked dark indeed.   Writing in exile from Brazil, the French writer Bernanos wrote in December of that year:

No one knows better than I do that, in the course of centuries, all the great stories of the world end by becoming children’s tales. But this particular one (the story of England’s resistanceed) has started its life as such, has become a children’s tale on the very threshold of its existence. It mean that we can at once recognize in it the threefold visible sign of its nature. it has deceived the anticipations of the wise, it has humiliated the weak-hearted, it has staggered the fools. Last June all these folk from one end of the world to the other, no matter what the color of their skins, were shaking their heads. Never had they been so old, never had they been so proud of being old. All the figures that they had swallowed in the course of their miserable lives as a safeguard against the highly improbable activity of their emotions had choked the channels of circulation..They were ready to prove that with the Armistice of Rethondes the continuance of the war had become a mathematical impossibility…Some chuckled with satisfaction at the thought, but they were not the most dangerous…Others threatened us with the infection of pity…”Alone against the world,” they said. “Why, what is that but a tale for children?” And that is precisely what it wasa tale for children. Hurrah for the children of England!  

Men of England, at this very moment you are writing what public speakers like to describe in their jargon as one of the “greatest pages of history”….At this moment you English are writing one of the greatest pages of history, but I am quite sure that when you started, you meant it as a fairy tale for children. “Once upon a time there was a little island, and in that island there was a people in arms against the world…” Faced with such an opening as that, what old cunning fox of politics or business would not have shrugged his shoulders and closed the book?

Britain and its allied did of coure prevail, and at the end of World War II, the enemy countries of Germany and Japan were physically and economically crushed. Their populations were near starvation, and they were viewed around the world as moral pariahs, a status that they had richly earned.

But both countries were able to recover, grow, and prosper economically and to establish reasonably stable democratic governments.   How long this will continue, given the low fertility rates (particularly in the case of Japan) and the suicidal energy policies (particularly in the case of Germany) remains to be seen, but both countries have had a pretty good run over the past 70+ years, probably much better than would have been foreseen by most people at the time.

 

What other examples of resilience and renewal can you think of?