And Vindictiveness For All (Fred Reed)

The creeping lunacy creeps on, creepishly. It gives life a constancy comforting in an uncertain world. For this we should be grateful.

In the GreeleyTribune* of northern Colorado I see that Mitch Muller, a boy of thirteen, has been expelled from school for a year. Yep. Gone.

You might surmise that he committed some grave crime, that he assaulted a teacher perhaps or was discovered to be selling bulk-lot cocaine. No. He played with a small laser pointer-the sort that projects a red dot onto maps during lectures. It was, said the depressing drones who run the school, a "gun facsimile."

To begin, there is no substance to the charge. A laser pointer does not look like a gun, no more so than a ball-point pen or a lipstick tube. It isn't a weapon, doesn't look like a weapon, and is not intimidating, being less dangerous than, say, a fist.

Further, note that we are not confronted by a somewhat overzealous application of a reasonable rule. If young Muller had disrupted class and gotten tossed for a week, that would have excessive but not absurd. (Excessive because unnecessary: When you have a male principal who has not been administratively neutered, he says, "Bobby, stop that. Now." That's all he says.)

The child was suspended for a year, not for misbehavior but for possession of a legal and harmless object that was determined ex post facto to be gunlike. You see. Crimes carry harsh penalties, but you cannot tell what things are crimes until after you have committed them. That is, the authorities can find you guilty at will, whenever they wish to punish you.

This isn't discipline. It's sadism-sexless, boring, mean-spirited bureaucratic sadism. The school's officials are seeking to hurt the child because they enjoy doing it.

This Stalinism of the inadequate isn't a fluke. Across the country, time and again, little boys (always boys) are suspended for pointing chicken fingers and saying "bang," for drawing soldiers or the Trade Centers in flames. The schools are in the hands of sodden prisses, intellectual offal, who don't like male children. Mediocrity loves revenge, revenge on others for one's own mediocrity.

"Passive aggression," if memory serves, means an attempt to hurt others while pretending that one's aim is pious. Passive aggression, and its cousin misdirected aggression, dominate American culture. Again and again, bullying is packaged as high principle.

Consider the persecution of smokers-which is what it is. Yes, reasonable restrictions on smoking are, well, reasonable. To have a smoking section in a restaurant is an exercise in consideration, given that having a stream of smoke in one's eyes is unpleasant.

By contrast, putting signs in a subway saying that "second-hand smoke" shortens the lives of children, which it doesn't, with a picture of a piteous, helpless, wide-eyed child, is sheer hostility. So are laws banning smoking within fifteen feet of governmental buildings. The intention is not to provide for the common comfort, but to make smokers as miserable as possible.

The giveaway of a mean-spirited law is that it doesn't do what it pretends to do, yet makes people unhappy. Consider the agitations of the rabble opposed to guns. These vessels of rightness transparently are not concerned to prevent crime with firearms. You hear nothing from them favoring mandatory heavy sentences for using a gun in a crime. Nor do they criticize the drug dealer in the ghetto who kills his enemies. Their efforts are aimed at law-abiding men who own guns.

Similar spuriousness underlies the degrading searches at airports. The government's policy isn't rational. If we armed pilots, watched Moslems, and conducted searches, I might believe that security was the motive. But we don't. Taking nail clippers is ridiculous, like suspending a kid for having a laser pointer. The searches seem designed to humiliate. I have been searched by, among others, Israelis and Japanese. Neither had people undressing in public, and neither was staffed by hostile minorities getting even.

There is in all of this, in so very much of American life today, a vindictive meanness enwrapped in moral pose-in hate-crime laws, in careers deliberately destroyed over imaginary sexual harassment, people destroyed over any trace of racial incorrectness, fathers prevented from seeing their children by vengeful exes and worse courts. Why?

I'll guess that the cause is a confluence of two social currents. First, the United States is an angry, divided, unhappy country, twisted by unresolved conflicts that it refuses to face. Racial tension is ugly, powerful, and a forbidden topic. Women are grindingly angry at men. Men, angry at the divorce laws, avoid marriage. Universal divorce causes deep strains that we don't talk about. Children raised as half-abandoned mall rats turn into angry young adults.

The recently acquired American habit of distributing emoluments by race and sex rather than merit rubs people raw. The decay of the schools into centers of indoctrination angers many. The inability to escape the filth that flows from Hollyork grates. Perhaps more so does the inability in a mass, centrally run, not particularly free society to influence one's surroundings, raise one's children in one's values, or escape ever-deepening regulation.

The United States is further, I think, a frightened country, or at least an insecure one. People are afraid of terrorists and crime but more importantly vaguely afraid of a life that isn't satisfactory, yet seems uncontrollable by them. There is a widespread sense that the country is sliding fast toward something undesirable yet hidden in the murk Insecurity breeds both meanness and a desire for control.

The feminization of society plays its part. On average, men prefer freedom to security; women, security to freedom. Women, having climbed into a male world in which they don't seem comfortable, seek laws, laws, laws to control every cause of angst. Men, hemmed in, feel trapped. Much of the tightening control seeks security-helmet laws for kids on bicycles, fear of smoke, seat-belt laws, ever-falling definitions of drunk driving, warning labels stating the universally known, the neurotic fear of laser pointers, the hostility of a female-run school system to competition and rough games beloved of boys.

The astonishing thing in the latter is that women, thought to be nurturing of children, will destroy, will permit the destruction, of boy children by an angry sisterhood in the schools. The instinct of motherhood is perhaps overstated.

Donate, Or Snuggles The Fabric Softener Bear Gets It!

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

If this isn't the best article I've ever read it maybe number 2.

This guy hits it on the head with every point. My wife is a teacher and I read her the article and she agrees 100%!!

After reading this article I decided to check what is implied in this article -- yes, my testicles are gone -- I am no longer a man -- and the goofy left is in control.

BTW I have thrown my laser pointer away afraid that it soon will have to be registered.

"If young Muller had disrupted class and gotten tossed for a week, that would have excessive but not absurd."

One other small observation -- I've recently heard about 5-10 incidents were very young children were sexually attacked by other young kids. So, in schools we must be allowing sex but punishing laser pointers.

I guess in the long run I would over come my traumatic introduction to laser pointers but not an introduction to forced sex at age eight!

From Pink Floyd, "The Wall"

The happiest days of our lives[?]

When we grew up and went to school
There were certain teachers who would
Hurt the children any way they could
By pouring their derision
Upon anything we did
And exposing every weakness
However carefully hidden by the kids
But in the town it was well known
When they got home at night, their fat and
Psychopathic wives would thrash them
Within inches of their lives

There is in all of this, in so very much of American life today, a vindictive meanness enwrapped in moral pose

The instinct of motherhood is perhaps overstated.

C'mon, Fred, say it out loud.

"This Stalinism of the inadequate isn't a fluke. Across the country, time and again, little boys (always boys) are suspended for pointing chicken fingers and saying 'bang,' for drawing soldiers or the Trade Centers in flames. The schools are in the hands of sodden prisses, intellectual offal, who don't like male children. Mediocrity loves revenge, revenge on others for one's own mediocrity"

Well said. POWERFUL article. The kid's family should sue the school district.

This is so accurate it is amazing. I wish I could write like this, to concisely state the problems we all face. This guy's good! :^)

Thanks for posting this!

I've always liked Fred Reed, and usually agree with most of what he says, but lately his answer to everything seems to be to just leave the U.S. and head off somewhere else.....

I'm starting to think he's given up.

"C'mon, Fred, say it out loud."

Well, THAT part of the article I can't agree with, because my maternal instinct is overdeveloped if anything...on the other hand, no one, especially teachers, school administrators OR nanny-state agencies, messed with my kids. Not for long...and they we always defeated them.

Then again, I've met mothers who seem to have no maternal instinct at all. 'Course, most of THEM are leftists.

The schools are in the hands of sodden prisses, intellectual offal, who don't like male children.

Schools have always been a woman's demesne. They weren't an angry woman's demesne until the educational programs at universities had been taken over by political zealots grimly determined to remake the world by molding little boys into pliant men through social and political indoctrination and drugs. This experiment has failed, and the laboratory animals are trying to make sense of it all, and I'm sorry for them.

"I've always liked Fred Reed, and usually agree with most of what he says, but lately his answer to everything seems to be to just leave the U.S. and head off somewhere else.....

I'm starting to think he's given up."

I don't think it's a matter of having given up, I think it's more a matter of finally accepting the reality of the worsening situation. Personally, I have a home in Viet Nam, live there part of each year, travel part of each year and live in the U.S. primarily to maintain residency, see my (grown) kids, etc. If you tried it, you'd probably find you, also, would prefer it.

I understand the sentiment, both yours and Fred's, but I just can't do that myself. I still want to believe that there is something here worth saving, and I have to fight for it. Belive me, after the time I spent in Thailand, there is little else I would like to do, rather than be back on Phuket, laying on the beach, but I know that here is where I must be.

You lost the battle long ago....
Just look at the number of posts here....
Nobody cares anymore...

.......Westy.......

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.