Last Night in Babylon

I’m told that last week the Park Police backed by the FBI raided this street party and shut it down at ten. This week the National Guard were giving the girls a spin. I asked the boys if they had anything like it in South Carolina. “No, sir,” they laughed. 

Tonight I did find ICE and the FBI staging up for a raid, which they then went off on accompanied by DC cops. No idea what the target was. 

There was a lot of cop activity, but they seemed to be protecting the late night crowds at the clubs. I didn’t see any harassment.

The crowds are thick in places. The bouncer at the Camelot “gentleman’s club” offered to let me in with no cover charge, for which I thanked him but passed by. The bouncer at a bar called Recessions stopped me to compliment my beard and discuss beard care for a while.

It’s definitely been an interesting trip. I’m out of here on a dawn flight, and should be back in my mountains before noon. 

Buck Rogers

In the pilot of the old Buck Roger’s TV show, post apocalyptic freaks signal their impending attack by banging a metal pipe against another. (3:58)

In DC residents currently do this every night at 8 PM to protest the occupation of their city by ICE and the National Guard. 

That was last night near Connecticut Avenue.

A Protest March

Columbia Heights by Night

A heavily Latino neighborhood in northeast DC, it has been the focus of a number of ICE raids. 

No loitering. 

These speedy delivery services are big illegal immigrant employers, so they tend to be found where they can find drivers. 

In the weird way of DC, this extremely nice apartment complex with security is right down the street. 

I saw a lot of cops today, and tons of National Guard. National Guard are everywhere downtown, but I’ve learned that they have very restrictive orders about their weapons. I saw some getting harassed today and they didn’t make any reference to pistol or rifle, they called the police. And the police came, hardcore. They came loud and fast and from every direction but up.

I’m guessing the cops don’t want to run any hazards about the guys with the M4s losing patience. 

On the way to stalk ICE, I walked through Adams Morgan. That’s the trendy neighborhood where “Big Balls” was beaten. 

The Sandwich Guy is a local hero. A Grand Jury refused to indict him. 

“Don’t Bread on Me!”

Self-explanatory. 

There are a lot of them in the Metro.

The South Has Risen Again

I don’t know how many of you clicked the link on the 118th Infantry, but they are an old unit of the Confederate States Army. They were part of the Army of Northern Virginia, commanded by Longstreet in several famous Rebel victories. They invaded the North under Robert E. Lee, and fought at Gettysburg. 

I find it deeply amusing that they are now occupying D.C. I don’t think anyone has made the connection, but there is definitely tension arising from the fact that all these Southern states are the ones contributing troops to this little adventure. 

All my life I heard old guys saying “The South will rise again,” but I never expected to see DC occupied by a heritage unit of the CSA.

DC By Night

First of all, this place is awesome.

Pleasant meal, quiet until the drum circle got started. We were invited to join, though I demurred.

UPDATE: I stayed out until nearly eleven, extremely late for me. This is the most pleasant DC has ever been. The reason is that it is nearly empty; there’s almost no one on the streets or in the restaurants. 

19th by night. 

DuPont Circle; the picture didn’t come out, but does convey how empty it is. 

Darkened empty streets. 

Even the gay dance clubs, usually triumphant in this city, are quiet. 

This is the famous Subway where “Sandwich Guy” got his sandwich. 

If you don’t like cities or people very much, as I don’t especially, this city is currently optimized for you. Of course it’s because the immigrants are terrified, legal and not, and the population of disarmed people is frightened by the sight of armed soldiers patrolling their streets. 

I did run into some 30th ABCT guys tonight, from the 118th mechanized infantry out of South Carolina. Real friendly guys, armed some with pistols and some with M4A1 carbines. They were somewhat amused by how much the locals are terrified by the very sight of the rifles. Everyone in the Carolinas has guns, but here they seem strange and foreign. 

The mood is not entirely positive, even if I like the absence of traffic, noise, and crowds. 

DC Report: Urban Hiking

It was a beautiful afternoon, especially for late August. Since I had a few hours, I walked across the city to see how it’s doing.

Honestly, with one exception that I will get to directly, I’ve never seen it this nice. 

Reagan Intl., “DCA”

19th & K, a famous street for lobbyists

DC’s unarmed Public Safety

The Old Executive Building in Second Empire architecture 

The White House

The equestrian statue of Andrew Jackson, which BLM protesters tried and failed to destroy because his jealous spirit watches over it

First sign of anything criminal going on (end of street)

The FBI building

Clear evidence of criminal behavior now in view

Outside Union Station

Inside Union Station 

When I lived in Virginia more than twenty years ago, Union Station was nicer. It used to have many more stores and restaurants, some of which I miss. It’s not crime but mismanagement that has caused it to decline; it’s still perfectly safe. 

Otherwise DC seems pleasant and happy in spite of the occasional protesters (which there always are protesters in DC). I talked to several groups of Guardsmen, though not the 150th Cavalry so far; these were from South Carolina and Louisiana, and were all MPs. They were armed with handguns, but I am not surprised to see police units armed. They were all friendly and said most people are treating them well. 

I hiked a little bit more than 20 blocks this afternoon. I’ll keep going and see if the evening brings anything different. So far it looks pretty good. 

RETVRN

Getting medieval with college students:

The University’s Best Weapon Against A.I.: The 14th Century

...In 1355 the arts faculty at the University of Paris forbade masters to lecture at a slow speed that would have allowed students to copy their words verbatim.

You can still see traces of that old academic culture in Ph.D. programs, in which students have to pass oral exams and defend their thesis in a viva voce (“with the living voice”) in conversation with their examiners. Cambridge and Oxford, the inspiration for most early U.S. colleges, did not meaningfully adopt written exams until the 18th and 19th centuries, half a millennium after they were founded. The shift to original, written student work was partly in response to instruction in increasingly technical fields and partly due to the fact that written work made it easier to teach more students.

Even in the U.S. our earliest colleges followed the tradition of oral examinations. Emphasis on students writing compositions did not spread until we started copying German research universities in the 1870s. Freshman comp, the standard U.S. writing class, shifted to expect more unique and expressive content from students after World War II.

All of which is to say that our current practices around student writing are not part of some ancient tradition. Which assignments are written and which are oral has shifted over the years. It is shifting again, this time away from original student writing done outside class and toward something more interactive between student and professor or at least student and teaching assistant.

Though the return of the blue book exam is one sign of this change, a number of older practices for assessing student learning are being revived.... 

There's still a chance they might learn something, but only in a harder school.  

Nicomachean Ethics V.7

 Another short chapter today, still on justice. We're about two-thirds through Book V after this.

Of political justice part is natural, part legal, natural, that which everywhere has the same force and does not exist by people's thinking this or that... 

The "natural" here refers to human nature. What Aristotle is saying is that human nature is such that certain things have to be done a certain way no matter who or where (or when!) you are. Human beings come to be in a certain way, and they reliably have certain needs and certain capacities. These have to be answered. 

The alternative is that things are merely conventional, things that a society does in a certain way because of traditions or laws or cultural values. Often critical theorists today call these "social constructs." 

In general our contemporaries agree with this distinction, although some few deny that there really is any sort of thing that might be called "human nature." (Transhumanists, for example, believe that we will shortly be able to transcend many traditional limitations like death or illness; in principle, we could with technology become totally different sorts of beings than have ever existed before.) Where we disagree with Aristotle and each other is often in drawing the line between what is natural and what is socially constructed. When we moved to China in 2000, I had many ideas about things that I thought were human nature that proved to be conventional, for example, that men naturally recognized that women deserved protection and care due to their smaller size and in recognition of their great value as actual or potential mothers. It turns out that was a value that the American South had trained into me; in China women were seen as less valuable and targets for exploitation because of their relative weakness.  

Aristotle is calling the conventional the "legal," although that implies a formalization that isn't necessary.

...legal, that which is originally indifferent, but when it has been laid down is not indifferent, e.g. that a prisoner's ransom shall be a mina, or that a goat and not two sheep shall be sacrificed, and again all the laws that are passed for particular cases, e.g. that sacrifice shall be made in honour of Brasidas, and the provisions of decrees. 

Now some think that all justice is of this sort, because that which is by nature is unchangeable and has everywhere the same force (as fire burns both here and in Persia), while they see change in the things recognized as just. This, however, is not true in this unqualified way, but is true in a sense; or rather, with the gods it is perhaps not true at all, while with us there is something that is just even by nature, yet all of it is changeable; but still some is by nature, some not by nature. It is evident which sort of thing, among things capable of being otherwise, is by nature, and which is not but is legal and conventional, assuming that both are equally changeable.

Again, it is less evident than he suggests because this is often where disputes arise. Of the moment, how much of sex and sexuality is natural and how much is 'a social construct' like gender has been hotly debated.  

And in all other things the same distinction will apply; by nature the right hand is stronger, yet it is possible that all men should come to be ambidextrous.

Obviously not quite right, but the point holds even if we allow that some people are left-handed. By nature one hand is stronger because it is favored and more frequently used, etc. 

The things which are just by virtue of convention and expediency are like measures; for wine and corn measures are not everywhere equal, but larger in wholesale and smaller in retail markets. Similarly, the things which are just not by nature but by human enactment are not everywhere the same, since constitutions also are not the same, though there is but one which is everywhere by nature the best. Of things just and lawful each is related as the universal to its particulars; for the things that are done are many, but of them each is one, since it is universal.

That's an interesting claim about constitutions. It seems to reduce the legal/conventional sphere to zero ideally, leaving just one way to order human life that would -- by nature, i.e. our nature, human nature -- be best for everyone. Aristotle does not give that prescription anywhere that has survived, not even the Politics. There we get a typology of types of states, each of which has a corrupt form that it is likely to pass into and each of which has instabilities that make it likely eventually to transition to one of the others via revolution or collapse. 

He has a few clear recommendations, but this ideal constitution may simply be theoretical: it ought to be true that a constitution exists that ideally fits our nature, which is the same everywhere as fire burns both here and in Persia. I rather suspect it is not true that such a constitution exists, though I can see the attractiveness of the idea that it should. 

There is a difference between the act of injustice and what is unjust, and between the act of justice and what is just; for a thing is unjust by nature or by enactment; and this very thing, when it has been done, is an act of injustice, but before it is done is not yet that but is unjust. So, too, with an act of justice (though the general term is rather 'just action', and 'act of justice' is applied to the correction of the act of injustice).

Each of these must later be examined separately with regard to the nature and number of its species and the nature of the things with which it is concerned.

That will be the subject of the next chapter. 

Nicomachean Ethics V.6

Today we examine a question of character.

Since acting unjustly does not necessarily imply being unjust, we must ask what sort of unjust acts imply that the doer is unjust with respect to each type of injustice, e.g. a thief, an adulterer, or a brigand. Surely the answer does not turn on the difference between these types. For a man might even lie with a woman knowing who she was, but the origin of his might be not deliberate choice but passion. He acts unjustly, then, but is not unjust; e.g. a man is not a thief, yet he stole, nor an adulterer, yet he committed adultery; and similarly in all other cases.

This is a place where Christianity offered a real shift, I think. If a man steals he is a thief, but only among all the other things he is, including beloved by God. In any case Jesus was hung between two thieves, one of whom he invited to accompany him to heaven. 

Even in that story, you can see the effect of the ancient world's moral code. The thieves were condemned to death, and condemned precisely for 'being thieves'; and the penitent thief admits the justice of that condemnation, for they had committed the crimes for which they were being punished. There is thus a serious question involved in whether 'a man is not a thief, though he stole,' or whether in fact his character is thus defined. 

Now we have previously stated how the reciprocal is related to the just; but we must not forget that what we are looking for is not only what is just without qualification but also political justice.

We normally speak of justice in terms of political justice, so it's nice to see this distinction drawn out. Aristotle now gives an account of political justice that happens, by the way, to spell out the difference between just states and unjust tyrannies.  

This [i.e. political justice] is found among men who share their life with a view to self-sufficiency, men who are free and either proportionately or arithmetically equal, so that between those who do not fulfil this condition there is no political justice but justice in a special sense and by analogy.

We've already seen that 'equality' means 'proportional equality' in most senses, but can mean 'arithmetical equality' when we are trying to balance the effects of crimes and other injustices. Aristotle points out that the reason we need such laws is that, in fact, these free and equal men treat each other badly:

For justice exists only between men whose mutual relations are governed by law; and law exists for men between whom there is injustice; for legal justice is the discrimination of the just and the unjust. And between men between whom there is injustice there is also unjust action (though there is not injustice between all between whom there is unjust action), and this is assigning too much to oneself of things good in themselves and too little of things evil in themselves.

There is then a warning against letting any man have too much power, and instead trusting to the laws and the courts to find what is really just. (An interesting reflection for the present moment.)  

This is why we do not allow a man to rule, but rational principle, because a man behaves thus in his own interests and becomes a tyrant. The magistrate on the other hand is the guardian of justice, and, if of justice, then of equality also. And since he* is assumed to have no more than his share, if he is just (for he does not assign to himself more of what is good in itself, unless such a share is proportional to his merits-so that it is for others that he labours, and it is for this reason that men, as we stated previously, say that justice is 'another's good'), therefore a reward must be given him, and this is honour and privilege; but those for whom such things are not enough become tyrants.

The "he*" there is ambiguous. Structurally it looks like it should point to the magistrate as its antecedent, but the sentence doesn't make as much sense as if "he" is the ruler. Irwin goes ahead and translates this line as, "If a ruler is just, he seems to profit nothing by it." If he does not profit by his rule, he is just and deserves honor and privilege; but if he does profit from ruling, he is a likely to become a tyrant. 

The justice of a master and that of a father are not the same as the justice of citizens, though they are like it; for there can be no injustice in the unqualified sense towards thing that are one's own, but a man's chattel, and his child until it reaches a certain age and sets up for itself, are as it were part of himself, and no one chooses to hurt himself (for which reason there can be no injustice towards oneself).

There are many highly debatable assertions in that sentence. They are obvious enough that I will leave them as an exercise for the interested reader. 

Therefore the justice or injustice of citizens is not manifested in these relations; for it was as we saw according to law, and between people naturally subject to law, and these as we saw' are people who have an equal share in ruling and being ruled. Hence justice can more truly be manifested towards a wife than towards children and chattels, for the former is household justice; but even this is different from political justice.

The idea that family business is not resolvable in the public political courts is Aristotle's more than it is ancient Greece's. A wife could initiate a divorce if she wished, apparently without the state having the power to contest her decision; but the state would be involved to ensure the proper return of her dowry and other matters. Thus, the Greeks had clear ideas about political justice as it applied to the dissolution, at least, of marriages; and a notion of what it would mean for her to receive (proportionately) equal and fair treatment. 

The Cornerstone of Any Nutritious Breakfast

AVI and David Foster were discussing inflation and McDonald's menus at AVI's place. I got to thinking about it. I remember eating those hamburgers as a kid, but I didn't know if they were even still on offer. I don't eat at the place except rarely on a road trip if it's the only option when I stop for gas; but what I remember seeing on offer was Quarter-Pounders and Double Quarter-Pounders with Cheese, Big Macs and specialty burgers of one type or another. Those tiny little hamburgers that used to be the cornerstone of their offerings I don't remember even seeing on the menu.

I looked it up, and they do still offer them if you want one. Depending on the market they're $2.85-$3.99, and 250 calories, 12 grams of protein. The bigger offerings tend to cost more like $7.15-$10.59, but they also offer 580-750 calories. The Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese has 48 grams of protein; the Big Mac 25 grams.

The prices have still gone up more than inflation as calculated by the CPI. The 15 cent burger should cost $1.65, not $3.99. 

If you're like me, the main nutritional concern is adequate protein per meal. Your dollar is buying you 3 grams of protein with the little burger. It'll get you 4.5 per buck with the Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese, or 3.5 grams with the Big Mac. I wouldn't make a habit of eating Double Quarter Pounders, but it's not a terrible bargain: 48 grams of protein is pretty good for a quick meal on the road. 

Grim Nods

Apparently I was wrong; at the direct command of the administration, the National Guard deployed in DC are armed in general, not just MPs. 

That unit insignia is 30th Armored Brigade Combat Team, “Old Hickory,” most of which is here in North Carolina. Now our Democratic governor has not sent any troops to support this deployment; that means these are the West Virginia NG contingent. That means they are the 1st Squadron, 150th Cavalry Regiment. I spent some time with their predecessors 16 years ago in Iraq. Their predecessors were good men, West Virginia hillbillies of course but citizen-soldiers of good character. Hopefully these men are too, because suddenly a lot depends upon that. 

They are armed with M4 carbines in condition Amber — I assume, since it’s cosmetically indistinguishable from Red but Red would be reckless beyond what I can imagine a military commander supporting. 

This is all remarkably reckless in any case. Trump and Hegseth, of course, but it’s already well beyond the risk tolerance of the regular military. 

Now the 1-150th are mostly cavalry scouts and armor personnel. They’re at least not trained infantry whose practiced responses are extremely lethal. Still, this is a perilous decision. The risk they are running here is very high.

On the Current Controversy

A Free Education

If you go for the more expensive sort, you'll read a lot less Aristotle. 

Using Open Syllabus Analytics, Campus Reform tracked the 11-year shift and found that authors like Aristotle and Plato fell considerably in the overall rankings. In 2008, Plato ranked 19th and Aristotle 46th. By 2019, their ranks dropped to 53th and 85th, respectively.

Meanwhile, Karl Marx, Michel Foucault, and Judith Butler consistently ranked high across U.S. college syllabi.

At least here it doesn't cost you anything. There are also no stressful examinations that you have to pass, although those do have their purpose.  

DEI

I call this photo “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.” (Harley, two Yamahas, and a Kawasaki Ninja.)

Nicomachean Ethics V.5

After today's reading we will be halfway through Book V. Today's reading is on a Greek version of 'An Eye for an Eye.'

Some think that reciprocity is without qualification just, as the Pythagoreans said; for they defined justice without qualification as reciprocity. Now 'reciprocity' fits neither distributive nor rectificatory justice-yet people want even the justice of Rhadamanthus to mean this:

Should a man suffer what he did, right justice would be done -for in many cases reciprocity and rectificatory justice are not in accord; e.g. (1) if an official has inflicted a wound, he should not be wounded in return, and if some one has wounded an official, he ought not to be wounded only but punished in addition. Further (2) there is a great difference between a voluntary and an involuntary act.

It does matter to justice, as Aristotle says here, whether you put out the eye on purpose or involuntarily, as perhaps by accident. Even by accident, we might distinguish between an act from negligence when you should have taken more care, over against a pure accident that no one could have seen coming. Even if it were right to put out the eye of the man who intentionally put out another's in a fight, it might not be right to put out the eye of one who did so in a car accident; and especially not if the car accident was caused not by negligence but by circumstance.

But in associations for exchange this sort of justice does hold men together-reciprocity in accordance with a proportion and not on the basis of precisely equal return. For it is by proportionate requital that the city holds together. Men seek to return either evil for evil-and if they cannot do so, think their position mere slavery-or good for good-and if they cannot do so there is no exchange, but it is by exchange that they hold together. This is why they give a prominent place to the temple of the Graces-to promote the requital of services; for this is characteristic of grace-we should serve in return one who has shown grace to us, and should another time take the initiative in showing it.

Confer with the Christian position on this matter of forgiveness and showing each other grace, as the basis for a just society.

This is a longer chapter, and we've had several long readings lately, so I am going to put the rest beyond a jump break. However, many of you will find this chapter very interesting because it is about proto-capitalism and justice in market exchange.