Happy Friday the 13th!

 Somehow this day has always had its problems. So lie low and wait till the 14th!

Excellent Discussion on Free Speech; A Threatened Right

 The Indispensible Right by Turley is an exceptionally well written and structured presentation of the position of the First Amendment right to free speech since the founding of the country. Although the Amendment states that free speech shall not be abridged, over the nearly 250 years of this country group after group, Administration after Administration have found ways and means to go around the right of free speech. The use of the less well defined assertion of sedition has been used to attack those not in power by those in power.

My view of many of these issues is somewhat nuanced and reflects personal contact with those whose free speech was encumbered by Presidents. As Turley opens with Ms Whitney, an alleged communist in the early part of the twentieth century, it was my grandmother, Hattie Kruger, who was arrested by Wilson and thrown in the Occoquan prison with six other women for protesting outside the White House with suffragists. Imprisoned for sign holding outside the White House, by direct order of Wilson, the seven women were dragged to the prison, hosed down in frigid November weather, force fed by hose, and allowed no counsel. Occoquan was the Guantanamo of Wilson’s time. Women were the Al Qaeda of his period as well. But the crime of the women was just their right to free speech.

Turley takes the reader from one act of free speech suppression to another over 250 years. From Adams, to Jefferson, to Jackson, Lincoln, yet somehow missing Wilson. On p 153 Turley seems to glorify Wilson as a defender of rage rhetoric. In my opinion and in my experience such could not be farther from the truth. Wilson made propaganda a key element of his Administration (see Bernays, Propaganda. Bernays was one of Wilson’s chief propagandists and his work made it to Madison Avenue for decades), he made it the driver for the entry into WW I. Wilson was a manipulative southerner and Turley’s reference to Wilson’s work on Constitutional Government was far from the interpretation of many. Wilson saw a Parliamentary system as a better one and he rejected many elements of the Constitution.

Overall the book is easy to read for those not fully engaged in the topic for a period of time. It is an excellent overview of how free speech has been curtailed historically.

The book begins with an attempt to address the question of what is a “right” and what is the basis for these rights. In this context there is the concept of natural rights, those rights that are assumed to have some universality. The origin of this rights is debatable, as from God, or as a fundamental part of the human psyche. The author examines many of these dimensions. Locke has been the alleged basis for property rights for example. Namely property rights result from the act of human work on unencumbered land for example. Then there is the concept that rights are a result of the human brains function. In my view it is a limbic system functionality. The classic example is a two year old and their toy. Try taking it away and the child screams “mine!”. Parents then attempt to mollify this limbic response to a right to property by saying the child should “share” and this does not always work. Natural Rights lead to Natural Law. In Ockham’s case he sees a distinction between God given Natural Rights and the rights mandated by law. Thus one can question that Freedom of Speech is either a Natural Right, a legal right, or both.

The book proceeds through various examples of Freedom of Speech and the suppression of it by Government. In this context we use one assumes the legal right of Free Speech. The most compelling violation of Free Speech in my opinion is the Bebs case. The author focuses on weaknesses of the Court and especially Holmes in deciding this case. However Deb, a Socialist, was arguing against the War, WW I. The Congress had passed an Act prohibiting any speech against the War, a clear violation of the First Amendment. The Court in the Debs case blatantly followed the Congress and denied the Constitution. Silencing a political adversary via the law and the Court had become a common practice. Debs was subsequently pardoned. This is in contrast to the Goldman case, a foreign born national and communist, not a socialist. Goldman gets set back from whence she came because the communists fundamentally argued for an overthrow of the Government, not a Free Speech issue. The Debs decision really needs more depth. It is in my opinion a key landmark in a poor Court. The details behind Debs, its context, the Socialists etc need to be placed in context. For example, the counterpoint of Ema Goldman and the communists set an alter example. Goldman was not a natural born citizen, thus there was a place to return her to. Also the communists desired to truly overthrow the Government and replace it with communism. Socialists in extreme wanted public utilities so that water and sewers worked.

Finally the author deals with the current Trump issues. Here things, in my opinion, get a bit muddy, mainly due to the timeliness of the case. Did Trump incite to riot, or was it just free speech? Will the Court be Holmesian or extend the First Amendment accordingly? Is there a clear line between Free Speech and the limits thereto?

Exceptional and Prescient

 Vertigo by Jahner is undoubtedly the best work on Weimar I have read over decades. The author addresses all elements of what led up to, and operated during, and led to the Nazi takeover. The author covers social, economic, political and intellectual areas.

 Germany was in chaos after the defeat for a variety of reasons. The author presents the Spartacists and Rosa Luxemburg with great clarity. I recall in the 60s when the local SDS chapter at MIT was called the Rosa Luxemburg chapter. For years I had no idea who she was until I spent time with a business partner and close friend, Pietr Mroczk, a Solidarity member and their voice in the US. Over drinks in Warsaw I got to understand Rosa. As the author describes her accurately, she could be a Socialist, Marxist, Communist all in one day. Her true goal appeared to be an anarchist, using the rubric of her left wing ideas as the battering ram. She and her colleagues led to the early battles between left and right and the death of many as a result, including her own.

 The author presents an excellent overview of the political leadership, its vacillations and collapses. Ending with old man Hindenburg and leading to Hitler. The author presents an excellent overview of the vacuous architects and their followers. Bauhaus et al led to blank and bland society as well.

 The author presents the life of young women drawn into the work world and the libertine life styles all too well known in Weimar.

 What is a bit missing is what we Germany before the War that allowed for this type of seismic change. Unlike the US, for example, Germany was a class society, not like the UK but more in the serf like Middle Ages. How that effected the social change is unknown in this work.

 Also missing is the explosion of academic excellence. Germany was the bastion of such things as Chemistry, especially Organic Chemistry. As any student of Organic Chemistry in the US feels, the reactions developed in Germany were done just to force others to memorized hundreds of reactions which frankly would best be left on paper. Yet Germany was also the home of Quantum mechanics as well as early constructs of nuclear theory. This part of the Weimar period would have been of interest.

 Overall this book is a sine qua non, other works delight in the hedonism of the period failing to ply together all elements that resulted in the Nazi era.

More importantly this work may give us a glimpse of what can happen to society is massive internal dissension and economic strife.

Heresy vs Disinformation

 Back in the 14th century, the then Popes, located in Avignon, assigned to the Dominicans the task of seeking out heretics, and having the local authorities dispatch them accordingly. Now just what was heresy? It was what the Pope and/or the Dominicans assigned to the process decided it to be. 

A classic case was that of the Franciscans who believed in poverty. And they further believed that Jesus had no property and was reliant upon the kindness of strangers. For the Franciscans they vowed poverty, chastity and obedience. The latter could according to Francis be excused at times if one's belief was contrary to the commands. Whereas poverty and chastity were difficult to exempt from. This caused a problem with the Pope, especially, since he lived in extreme elegance surrounded by excessive riches.

The Franciscans were considered heretics by the Dominicans in accord with the ten Pope John XXII, legal scholar, not a theologian, and one consumed by riches. 

Along comes Ockham, and argues the case for his order. Then along comes the Pope and accuses Ockham of heresy, punishable by death. Ockham escapes and hides out in Munich under the protection of the local King,

Segue to now. Disinformation is changed from heresy and the Dominicans and Popes are found in select groups reporting to political pontiffs. It was Ockham who set the ball rolling but it would take 200 years for Luther and his political allies to get it full speed.

One wonders if there will be a 21st century Ockham and a 23rd century Luther. Just a thought.

Tree Collecting

 The NY Times had an interesting article about those who collect trees. The author recounts the tales of those who collect trees. Tree collecting is unlike flower collecting. You plant a flower and year after year if lucky it blooms. Like my day lilies. However tree collecting is not cyclical like flowers. It is linear in time, trees just keep growing and from year to year they are different. I am a tree collector, yes on my 15,000 sq ft of New Jersey clay.

I started with ginkgos. I have dozens and hundreds of seedlings. My Ag Agent got a 5' one this year, she has quite a few now. I got seeds from the NY Botanical Garden back in 1990, and now have dozens. Then I got metasequoia, an assumed extinct Chinese tree rediscovered in 1947. They grow 4"+ a year. I have the largest collection on the East Coast. Of course the locals in town are clueless and I am called "the tree man". I kind of like it. Some neighbors are former city types, the cut down all the trees and planted grass. My tree however make up for the callous grass lovers and reduce run-off. I have more than 50 tree species. Such as catalpas, 30' pea plants. I have pinus rigida, from Island beach, trees which grown from Florida to the high mountains in Canada. They have no fear of any climate change. 

My taxodium, or swamp cypress enjoy the run off from those with just grass, it helps prevent flooding. Then there are cunninghamia, many pines, magnolias, maples, oaks, chamacypirus, and the list goes on. 

I realize that being in New Jersey when I sell the house the new owner will likely cut every tree down and plant grass! It must be some mental defect, on them or me, but I prefer to believe it is not me. To prevent this I have spread ginkgo nuts across the country. Despite the professionals the ginkgo does naturalize, especially with squirrels around. 

Tree growers like myself look at the long term. Each year I can see the trees expanding, growing taller, enriching their shape. 

I am not a grass lover, have little of it. But I can sit on my deck and enjoy the pallet of green from the variety of trees, then the fall change, winter clarity of branches and Spring budding.

So yes, I am a tree collector. I hope the next owner has at least a bit of the same delight. But it is New Jersey, so I fear they will not.

Classroom Etiquette

 Back in the Dark Ages, say 1960, there were no mobile phones and no laptops or pads. There were spiral bound notebooks, pens and pencils. That's it. In fact I still have notebooks from classes in college and grad school. Why? I took great notes and annotated them neatly. I used sized spiral bound note books with a Parker 51 pen and black ink. My writing was clear block letters, organized neatly by topic. Also I dated each lecture. I then annotated them for exams.

Finally schools are ridding the interference of electronic devices. As the Harvard Crimson notes: As middle and high school students descended upon Cambridge for their first day of classes on Tuesday, one thing was missing from their pockets: cell phones. Beginning this fall, cell phone use during instructional time will not be permitted for all students grades six through twelve, Cambridge interim Superintendent David Murphy said in an interview Tuesday. “We just want to make sure that our learning environments are as free of distractions as possible so that the focus can be on the teaching and learning,” Murphy said. According to Cambridge Public Schools spokesperson Sujata Wycoff, though how phones are confiscated may vary across schools, expectations remain the same: cell phones will be collected at the beginning of each period and returned at the end, but students can use their phone during lunch time, in between classes, and before or after school.

Phones and pads detract and do not add. Paper has been useful for centuries and before that even wax tablets. Phones are distractions. I see many walkers in the AM while biking on their phones texting or whatever as they purportedly are getting exercise. Who can really waste so much time.

Congrats to Cambridge.