The Revolution Will Be Immanentized

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

The Declaration of Independence

Whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence. Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other an Absolute Power over the Lives, Liberties, and Estates of the People; By this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power, the People had put into their hands, for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty.

John Locke, Two Treatises of Government

Don’t you know?
They’re talkin’ bout a revolution
Sounds like a whisper

–Tracy Chapman, Talkin’ Bout a Revolution

As the abuses go from sufferable to insufferable, people are going there. Michael Anton dares the question in American Greatness:

…the American regime itself. Have we conserved that? Does it function as it was designed to do? As a political scientist, and as a historian of sorts before that, I find the question laughable. If any of you want to make the case that we still live in the founders’ regime, go ahead.

Meanwhile, I will tell you some of what I see. A giant, unaccountable, unelected fourth branch of government that does what it wants without input or supervision from the people, and that usurps executive, legislative, and judicial power. Rights are routinely trampled. Two-track justice—one standard for friends of the regime, another for its enemies—is now the norm. Just last week a man killed with his car a teenager for the “crime” of being Republican. He’s already out on bail. Meanwhile there are still dozens of January 6 protesters in pretrial detention for ridiculous noncrimes such as “parading.”

The Justice Department, FBI, CIA—all the security agencies—are out of control in attacking American citizens. The FBI is now doing SWAT raids for misdemeanors. Earlier this month, the president of the United States gave a speech calling half the American population enemies of the state. I could go on.

The FBI jackboots and political repression are the effective tools of the usurpation of power Anton describes, not the thing itself, and not the greater sin–which is the tyranny necessitating such as FBI raids. Anton would have done well to invoke the four years of anti-Trump “resistance” wherein virtually everyone at the commanding heights of government and culture openly collaborated to disenfranchise, after-the-fact, the majority that elected Trump. Four years of serial conspiracies and hoaxes seeking to effect a coup, culminating in a vast project to disenfranchise this same majority in the 2020 election.

But with hindsight we can identify other points where the government of the United States arguably ceased to be representative and became hostile to the founding nation of mixed European stock. Those points stretch back like mountain peaks into a misty horizon; maybe we’ve never had a true republic at all.

A genuine revolt can only be exercised as a right when the powerful consent to being displaced. That is to say, never. The Declaration of Independence is a political document, not a legal one. There’s no such intemperate talk in the Constitution. The colonists invoked Locke in justifying violent rebellion for which they expected to hang if not successful. Like power, the “right” to revolt comes out of the barrel of a gun. Needless to say, the current power has all the guns.

Anton points out how thoroughly media conservatives have internalized the values of the left. These values constitute a post-Constitutional revolution that goes unrecognized as such because it was effected gradually–the patient revolution took three generations to achieve what people would have rejected in “real time”, but its victory looks eternal.

Anton repeats a lot what we already know about respectable conservatism.

What is conservatism’s response to all this? What is the response of “the weasels, compromisers, mediocrities, and losers of the Republican-conservative-libertarian establishment”? Those are not my words, but I like them. They sum things up concisely, accurately, and vividly.

The “conservative” response is not just to get mad, it’s also to be amused, or affect amusement. Whole careers are now made doing a mirror version of what Steve Sailer calls the “point-and-sputter”–when lefties call out gaffes and express outrage–I call it the “point-and-titter”, when righties laugh at some lefty silliness–often cases of pointing-and-sputtering. The problem is it isn’t all just silliness.

A perverse symbiosis exists between the sputterers and the titterers and one of its effects is to keep the titterers invested in the current state of things. Human nature already is such that no one ever expects things to change drastically in their lifetime, and the titterers certainly aren’t doing anything wrong. But they may constitute a giant sinkhole harmlessly absorbing popular wrath that might find its outlet elsewhere.

It’s just a historical fact that violence birthed America. Granted, that violence was justified, organized, careful, and the furthest thing from indiscriminate. But the American Revolution was still a war waged against a government that considered itself legitimate…

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Anton makes his most important point here:

It’s that they [“conservatives”] believe—against the Founders, and against all experience of history—that once implemented, it can never be lost. They defend every perversion, distortion, corruption, and topsy-turvy reinterpretation of that system as if it were the system itself.

The original system of republican government was hollowed out and replaced–slowly and then quickly as they say–so that eventually this thing that resembles our original system of government only in that it wears its skin, can invoke before a benighted people the founders’ vision as they put down any attempt to effect it.

It may be that revolution simply isn’t possible for more reasons than repression.

Is the right of revolution ever justified? Was it justified only that one time, in 1776, but never again? If so, why was it justified then and what makes it unjustifiable ever again? Because of historicism? Because the American Revolution was somehow an irreversible leap forward?

Human vanity is at work here. Acknowledging our republic has been rendered unrecognizable to even our grandparents, much less to the founders, is to acknowledge its failure, to acknowledge the failure of the “democratic experiment”–to acknowledge we have failed humanity in the cause of liberty and individual rights.

How many chances does humanity get to establish human liberty as a given fact of society before the ghouls take over? Are they endless or finite? Did we have but one? Were–are–we humanity’s last chance to live free?

Moldilocks and Muh Mental Health

A homeless Goldilocks in Portland is serially breaking into homes to sack out and stuff.

“She started by going up to my neighbor two doors down and urinating on their porch, and then she came directly over to my house, came in, crawled up into the bed and that whole thing happened,” said Smith. “They actually found her five minutes later around the corner trying to break into somebody else’s house. So, what happens the next time that she breaks into somebody’s house, and they have a gun?”

Zinser was taken into custody for first-degree burglary and harassment charges, however, she was released from jail the next day on “no complaint.”

Despite having no criminal convictions, Zinser has been arrested multiple times in the past for criminal trespassing, harassment, and theft. Court documents reveal she has failed to appear in court 11 times before.

Well what do they expect?  The city doesn’t want to let her crash at their place either.  The excellent question about what happens when she alarms the wrong person at the wrong time begs another: how many of our homeless fatalities might be attributed to lax law enforcement?

“Mental health” as a political issue has long been one vector of attack for police abolitionists in Portland looking to dismantle traditional law enforcement.  Their slogan “Mental Health is Not a Crime” politicizes mental illness by charging society with criminalizing it (and commits a crime against syntax in the process).  Like everything else the progressive left takes up it cannot be allowed to remain a mere public health issue; it must be a question of “justice” and it must condemn American society in toto.  Fit into the progressive template mental illness becomes another oppressed identity group in need of advocacy.  First order of business is normalization: the saying isn’t “Mental Illness is Not a Crime”.  That the radicals have more than their share of the mentally unstable and seem to know, even fetishize it, explains a lot.  For the definitely rational and powerful people ultimately driving this growing front in the war on the West those suffering from “mental health” represent something like a growth industry.

The same people driving your children insane stand ready to collect them at the other end, where they will hold their troubled heads to their breasts and stroke their purple hair, promising to make it all better.

In 2014 Oregon politicians asked Eric Holder’s Justice Department to initiate a pattern-and-practice investigation with the purpose of saddling the Portland Police Bureau with a consent decree regulating police encounters with the mentally ill.  Activists had rallied after an unstable man was shot and killed by police; our Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, Congressman Earl Blumenhaur, even the Police Bureau’s chief all wrote the DOJ requesting the investigation.

I genuinely believe the activist-political complex and its ally the Obama Administration would have preferred to base the sham on the PPB’s treatment of Black! and brown suspects–but we have a lot more crazies than Blacks! and in 2014 Blacks! were not as sacralized as now (indeed, back then I was still writing “black” instead of the properly reverential and celebratory Black!; I apologize).

This kabuki of lefties lobbying Eric and Barry’s radical and racial DOJ to bring the hammer down on such as local police played out in other progressive cities and returned with Biden in 2020.  Of course any Department of Justice investigation now ensures an institution will soon labor under a costly “equity” heavy consent decree: here’s Holder’s shakedown of a Portland Hospital.

In 2014 the Police Bureau was implementing the consent decree’s changes before the document was signed.  The new practices could be seen in police encounters with mentally unstable people on the street, with police taking noticeably more care and time to talk people down.  But all that was swept away with 2020’s campaign of BLM rioting and subsequent reduction in police services; the mentally ill, like criminal suspects, are engaged far less often by police now.

This must suit the abolitionists fine; the last thing they want is for police to accommodate their demands.  It’s the worst that can happen, as is anything improving the image of police in the public eye.  Bad police are good politics for the anarchist left.

(The other night I saw police drive past a man sitting in the middle of the street, the driving officer smiling and shaking his head, leaving his removal first to a woman who tried shouting him away–she succeeded briefly, but the man returned soon to sitting Indian-style in the middle of 3rd Avenue–then to the city’s unarmed polo-wearing security guards of the Community Safety Team; three of them were standing passively receiving the man’s shouted abuse–but from the sidewalk–as I left.)

The Police Bureau was set to exit 2014’s consent decree in–wouldn’t you know it–2020, when the same trio of Wyden, Merkley and Blumenhaur wrote asking the incoming Biden Administration to consider keeping it in place, because of the PPB’s treatment of BLM rioters.  What the PPB’s riot control measures had to do with mental illness is obvious, but not at all what they meant: BLM rioters are violently mentally ill.  But the determination of these responsible authorities was: the cops are going crazy! The decree remained in place.

Meanwhile normal people here (we do have some left; who else is going to keep the lights on?) are still normal enough to begin recoiling at our “new normal”.  The story of the serial sleeper drew enough attention to force woke DA Mike Schmidt to comment.  He threw mental health court presiding judge Nan Waller off the troika, mentioning her by name, before sullenly declaring he would comment no further.

After initially declining to comment, the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office now tells KOIN 6 that Zinser’s “lack of participation in treatment” warrants her case to be reviewed by their Strategic Prosecution Unit.

The DA’s Office’s full statement can be read below:

Based on recent federal court rulings and recent history with this defendant having similar cases dismissed due to a lack of participation in treatment and the court’s inability to compel the defendant to participate in treatment, we had initial concerns about whether we could proceed with this case at this time. The lack of mental health resources in our community is unacceptable when coupled with the inability to compel unadjudicated defendants to engage in available treatment options. The current crisis of capacity at the Oregon State Hospital puts the safety of our community, and the most vulnerable persons in our community, at risk. In this particular case, the accused had recently spent months at the Oregon State Hospital during which time the staff there was unable to restore her ability to aid and assist her court appointed lawyer. She was then ordered to engage in treatment in the community, but she did not appear for her evaluation and she left the treatment facility. Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Nan Waller dismissed the previous charges pending against her in early August. Our Strategic Prosecution Unit is reviewing this case and the previously dismissed cases to determine whether we are able to proceed with prosecution. Due to the ongoing process, MCDA will not be making further comments on this issue.”

28-year veteran Nan Waller has in fact done a lot to keep the mentally ill on the streets.  She was the subject of a puff piece in Forbes earlier this year:

After 28 years of service, Judge Nan Waller became the presiding judge over the mental health court as well as managing the competency to stand trial docket in Multnomah County, Oregon. She is also co-chair of the Oregon Chief Justice’s Behavioral Health Advisory Council and is a member of the National Judicial Task Force, which examines the State court’s response to mental illness.

She wants to change the way things are done in the legal system…

“What seems like a good idea on paper can be a disaster in practice,” said Judge Waller.

“In the early 20th century, we sent anyone with mental illness to an institution, out of sight, out of mind. That created a national stigma and mental illness.

Then new policies were issued in the 1980s and then we closed the large institutions, which was well-meaning and good-intentioned, but no one considered the big picture. There was nowhere for these individuals to go. If we closed the institutions, we needed to have community-based services for persons with mental illness, in order to be successful and live their best life possible, but the community services were not available. What then happened, was a shift of persons with mental illness to our jails, to the streets, living under bridges and along highways – hiding in plain sight. People didn’t want to see mental illness. This, coupled with the re-routing of individuals into the justice system, has further increased the stigma and discrimination associated with mental illness.

While letting them wander free among us has totally de-stigmatized the mentally ill.

The Me-trix

Aggressive narcissism defines us now. Weaponized, it fuels the woke demolition machine.

But the individual narcissist lives in oblivion, most of all of his narcissism and its manipulation.

The image from The Matrix of people siloed off from and unaware of one another while all feed their energy into the same giant tower is apt; but the real life Matrix drains your psychic, not your physical energy–which itself is a problem addressed through “the climate crisis” and “sustainability”. It isn’t too crazy to suspect your elimination is the end-goal.

We’re not even useful as batteries–the Metrix says so. In fact, unlike the film where an entirely illusory world is created, the Metrix works by laying everything bare until mystery and innocence aren’t possible. Sex is stripped of all modesty and mystery. Mystery is wrung out of everything. Everything is made trite through repetition. Nihilism is presented as the only tenable position. The Metrix’ illusion isn’t that you live in another reality, but that this one is normal and natural.

This is what I thought when reading about the latest petty outrage by a woke aggressive narcissist–a teacher in Utah bragging about the cocoon of Black! and brown propaganda to which she she subjects the innocents in her care:

‘For the first time in my life I am teaching at a majority white school and I’m kind of interested to see how students and parents react to my classroom or if they even notice anything about it because it’s built for non-white students,’ she said on the social network. 

I live in a majority white city built for non-whites, by the way. My report is that subjection to the typical Black! condescension/white condemnation kitsch which dominates here is that it’s deadening. It sucks a little of the life out of you, and the city.

I was struck by the obliviousness of the teacher–for whom I suspect the quiet resignation with which most white parents greet this slander is all the more infuriating, for the lack of attention it draws to her. Naturally she still has a job.

District representatives told the TV news station that ’employees on their own time and personal lives have free speech rights.’

That’s good to hear. Now let me tell you about niggers and cri–oof! ouch! oh fuck…!

No word yet on whether Merrick Garland and the FBI are pursuing charges against the outraged white parents.

Gray Lady: Russia Hates Pussy, Hats

It’s likely been a while since you’ve thought about 2017’s “Women’s March” which bequeathed to posterity the “pussy hat”, or its prominent organizer Linda Sarsour (who wears a hijab–ironically a sort of anti pussy hat, representing sex roles and modesty in absolute opposition to feminism as expressed by the pussy hat; but who’s paying attention, now or then?).

The New York Times is revisiting this fresh and relevant history, and bemoaning the loss of Sarsour’s leadership, with the help of some Russiagate veterans:

Linda Sarsour awoke Jan. 23, 2017, logged onto the internet and felt sick.

The weekend before, she had stood in Washington at the head of the Women’s March, a mobilization against President Donald Trump that surpassed all expectations. Crowds had begun forming before dawn, and by the time she climbed up onto the stage, they extended farther than the eye could see.

More than 4 million people around the United States had taken part, experts later estimated, placing it among the largest single-day protests in the nation’s history.

But then something shifted, seemingly overnight. What she saw on Twitter that Monday was a torrent of focused grievance that targeted her. In 15 years as an activist, largely advocating for the rights of Muslims, she had faced pushback, but this was of a different magnitude.

That morning, there were things going on that Sarsour could not imagine.

More than 4,000 miles away, organizations linked to the Russian government had assigned teams to the Women’s March. At desks in bland offices in St. Petersburg, copywriters were testing out social media messages critical of the Women’s March movement, adopting the personas of fictional Americans.

Russian trolls, having just elected Donald Trump, went right to work grabbing pussies.

One message performed better with audiences than any other.

It singled out an element of the Women’s March that might, at first, have seemed like a detail: Among its four co-chairs was Sarsour, a Palestinian American activist whose hijab marked her as an observant Muslim.

Over the 18 months that followed, Russia’s troll factories and its military intelligence service put a sustained effort into discrediting the movement by circulating damning, often fabricated narratives around Sarsour.

Apparently some of the “damning narratives” about Sarsour are true.  Thank you, New York Times.

One hundred and fifty-two different Russian accounts produced material about her. Public archives of Twitter accounts known to be Russian contain 2,642 tweets about Sarsour, many of which found large audiences, according to an analysis by Advance Democracy Inc., a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that conducts public-interest research and investigations.

This website says 867 million tweets are sent a day.  I don’t know how many tweets were sent on the subject of the March.  As it’s likely in the millions, the Russian trolls must have been as hard to find as Waldo in all those pink hats.

Many people know the story about how the Women’s March movement fractured, leaving lasting scars on the American left.

A fragile coalition to begin with, it headed into crisis over its co-chairs’ association with Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader, who is widely condemned for his antisemitic statements. When this surfaced, progressive groups distanced themselves from Sarsour and her fellow march co-chairs, Carmen Perez, Tamika Mallory and Bob Bland.  But there is also a story that has not been told, one that only emerged years later in academic research, of how Russia inserted itself into this moment.

We’ll see below just how “academic” this research is.

What effect these intrusions had on American democracy is a question that will be with us for years. Already, social media was amplifying Americans’ political impulses, leaving behind a trail of damaged communities. Already, trust in institutions was declining, and rage was flaring up in public life. These things would have been true without Russian interference.  But to trace the Russian intrusions over the months that followed that first Women’s March is to witness a persistent effort to make all of them worse.

So, it’s kind of like watching the Brandon Administration operate, only its effects are meaningless.

In early 2017, the trolling operation was in its imperial phase, swelling with confidence.

Accounts at the Internet Research Agency, an organization based in St. Petersburg and controlled by an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had boasted of propelling Trump to victory. That year, the group’s budget nearly doubled, according to internal communications made public by American prosecutors.

Under these auspicious conditions, their goals shifted from electoral politics to something more general — the goal of deepening rifts in American society, said Alex Iftimie, a former federal prosecutor who worked on a 2018 case against an administrator at Project Lakhta, which oversaw the Internet Research Agency and other Russian trolling operations.

Artyom Baranov, who worked at one of Project Lakhta’s affiliates from 2018 to 2020, concluded that his co-workers were, for the most part, people who needed the money.

The job was not to put forward arguments but to prompt a visceral, emotional reaction, ideally one of “indignation,” said Baranov, a psychoanalyst by training, who was assigned to write posts on Russian politics. “The task is to make a kind of explosion, to cause controversy,” he said.

Hey you Russian bastards, demagogy and gaslighting are provinces of our domestic elites, who only have our interests at heart!

If the problem is opinion being manipulated by dishonest operators it’s worth asking: how, in the language of the Times, “organic” is this news story?

The paper here looks like it’s acting as a passive conduit for Advance Democracy, an outfit wiki-ed up after Trump’s election to amplify and fabricate controversies around Trump, using Silicon Valley money.  Chuck Ross of the Daily Caller in 2019:

A Silicon Valley charity gave $500,000 to a nonprofit group founded by a former Senate staffer who is working with Fusion GPS and Trump dossier author Christopher Steele.

The Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF), which has received significant funding from tech industry billionaires, gave the donation in 2018 to Advance Democracy Inc., a Virginia-based 501(c)(3) group, according to a database the recipient group runs.

A Daily Caller News Foundation investigation found that Advance Democracy shares the same address as The Democracy Integrity Project (TDIP), another nonprofit group started by a former Senate Intelligence Committee staffer for California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Daniel Jones.

Mystery surrounds both of Jones’s operations. The identities of both groups’ donors have largely been kept secret, as Jones has avoided revealing his backers…

Jones created TDIP on Jan. 31, 2017, according to registration records filed in Washington, D.C. Through that group, Jones partnered with Fusion GPS and Steele to continue a private investigation into President Donald Trump and Russia. One goal of the organization, Jones told the FBI, was to provide information to the media, lawmakers and the FBI.

The aforementioned, massive Silicon Valley Community Fund has been described as a “black hole” with little transparency but unique tax sheltering benefits for donors.

SVCF has drawn criticism in recent years as a “Black Hole” for charitable donations because IRS rules and SVCF practice have allowed money to be held in DAF accounts for years with no required minimum payouts to charitable organizations (as are required of private foundations).  This allows donors to receive large tax breaks immediately, before the donations benefit charitable causes.

From an Atlantic article bemoaning the Silicon Valley Community Fund’s neglect of the Silicon Valley community:

And wealthy residents of Silicon Valley are donating large sums to such funds. Last year, the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund received $114 million from Jan Koum, the co-founder of WhatsApp, and $526 million from Laurene Powell Jobs, the founder of Emerson Collective, according to Bloomberg, which obtained two pages of IRS information that the agency mistakenly posted online. (Emerson Collective owns a majority stake of The Atlantic.) “Donor-advised funds have been growing at double-digit rates from year to year,” Ray Madoff, a professor at Boston College Law School and a critic of donor-advised funds, told me. “Ask any nonprofit what their growth looks like—it’s nothing like that.”

I know nothing of the nonprofit grift, but the SVCF’s opaque “donor-advised” model looks like a good way for Silicon Valley to fund its various “causes” free of public scrutiny or legal limitations.

The amount of money going from the Silicon Valley Community Foundation to the nine-county Bay Area actually dropped in 2017 by 46 percent, even as the amount of money under management grew by 64 percent, to $13.5 billion. Local nonprofits called the foundation the “Death Star” and the “Black Hole” because it was so hard to get money out of it, Al Cantor, a nonprofit consultant, told me. “They got so drunk on the idea of growth that they lost track of anything smacking of mission,” he said.

Maybe.  Maybe they have a very clear sense of mission–they just don’t want us to have a very clear sense of it.

The Daily Obscurantist

News reports now often raise more interesting questions than they answer:

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office is seeking help in tracking down a suspect who allegedly crashed into a deputy’s car.

MCSO says that they have been performing a “safety mission” to reduce gun and traffic violence in East Multnomah County.

They reported that so far these efforts have resulted in 45 traffic stops, five arrests and one firearm seizure.Gresham passes crime initiatives to reduce gun violence

During this mission, deputies report that they saw a black sedan swerving through traffic.

Deputies say they attempted to stop the vehicle and that the car turned and crashed head-on into the deputy’s car.

There was a deputy and a K9 in the car at the time, and neither was injured.

The suspect reportedly got out of the car and ran into the Mount Hood Community College campus.

Police set up a perimeter but were unable to stop the suspect.

This article gives the impression they did not follow the suspect into the school. What gives? They “were unable to stop the suspect” can mean a lot of things. Did they not pursue? This article reads as if they didn’t.


Does the college provide sanctuary for those fleeing police or something?

It’s probably attributable to the sloppy grammar and inept phrasing typical of short news reports now, which read like bad translations or automated programs. I can’t find the Sheriff’s Department’s pursuit policy online. I’ve emailed KOIN and MCSO seeking clarification.

Including this clip just because

This KOIN report is much clearer, but the import is the same: police aren’t policing so much right now:

A SE Portland neighborhood says they’ve been targeted by a man on a bike who has been smashing their windshields as they’re driving.

After two people shared their own stories online, other neighbors came forward to them to say they’ve also been targeted in Portland’s Sunnyside neighborhood just west of Mt Tabor.

The attack came out of nowhere, according to victims. Last weekend, Steve Magnuson was driving along SE 49th near Hawthorne, when a man on a bike smashed his windshield — all caught on dashcam.

“He stood up and sort of steadied himself and just took a big swing with a rock or something hard, right into my windshield,” said Magnuson, who went on to add he didn’t see where the man went off to but later found the same bike with a cart attached in a nearby homeless camp.

When he contacted police, they say they recognized the suspect, identifying him as 51-year-old Robert Casey McClatchey.

Great, that means he’s going to jail, right?

Another neighbor — who wished to remain anonymous — says the same thing happened to her a few weeks ago near 42nd and Belmont. She says she saw a man on a bicycle pulling a cart and pulled over to give him room. She says the man threw what appeared to be a coffee cup at her car, which she says she later found had paint in it, splattering near her tires.

She says as he got closer, he raised his hand, and she thought maybe he was going to wave and thank her for pulling over — not expecting what came next.Economist: Few vacant units mean more rent increases in Oregon

“Instead, he took something like a really heavy glass bottle and he just started smashing at my windshield, right in front of my face. My windshield shattered. It didn’t break through but there were shards of glass everywhere,” said the woman. “It was a violent attack, completely unprovoked.”

She says her daughter is a teen driver who also drives in the neighborhood and she worries for her family’s safety while pointing out that violence like what she experienced should have harsher penalties.

“I went home and called the police and when the officer came, he said, ‘well even if we can find him, he’ll just get a $100 citation,’” the woman told KOIN 6.


An earlier version of this story included a paragraph referencing the relevant Oregon law providing for a jail sentence in this case, that seems to have disappeared. Why they would edit it out I don’t know. Oregon law recognizes four levels of assault, each one requiring some level of bodily harm. A quick search of our intimidation laws suggests they all require a racial or similar motivation. We’ve outlawed the display of nooses (which is a little terrifying when you realize any looped piece of string now can qualify). We have a “cyberbullying” law.

Intimidation in the Second Degree looked promising, but it too is a “bias crime”. I suspect the police gave the victim a quote for a petty vandalism charge–that is, the law against breaking the windshield of a parked, unoccupied car. That someone can smash your windshield while you’re driving and there’s no law to address it is clearly a lie. A working police department would find the relevant charges.

It appears you can terrorize and intimidate people to your heart’s content–as long as your heart’s in the right place, social justice-wise.

Where the Rubber Meets the Road

Street takeovers are common now in Portland, a Black! and brown thing that has migrated north out of California, drawing enthusiasts from the Willamette Valley’s surplus of white yahoos. Something like hip hop that way. They’ve been a deadly problem here since the BLM insurrection of 2020 ushered in Portland’s Racial Reckoning® and the consequent decrease in public order, entering its third year with no political exit in this one party state–despite widespread public dissatisfaction.

Police still haven’t recovered from all the reckoning, remaining understaffed, underfunded and demoralized. Recruiting is difficult and weighed down with diversity requirements; many veteran cops have decamped for suburban and other friendlier municipalities. As I’ve pointed out here before, the abolitionists have succeeded in their goals of eliminating police through the attrition coming with all the demoralization and harassment, whether by design or not (though I very much think by design, as evidenced by the strain of “drive cops insane” propaganda and tactics they employ). I’m heartened to see Tucker Carlson make that point in a segment that calls out the Black! malice that’s filling the void left behind by order’s retreat.

The “dog whistles” are numerous, but Carlson also points out directly the color of the crime wave, showing the recent viral video of a Black! bully savagely beating a white kid at school.

In Portland our police appear to have indeed heeded the abolitionists’ call to “re-imagine public safety”, largely by doing what Steve Sailer calls “retreating to the donut shop”.

This is all the point of police abolition. Complete police disengagement with the public is the end goal of the movement; the movement welcomes it wherever and however it occurs, whatever its consequences. Abolitionists oppose things like shot-spotter technology mostly because it leads to police engaging the public (by responding to someone firing guns on your street). Likewise of course traffic stops, gang intervention strategies and other life-saving police functions.

Police abolitionists are forthright in stating they seek to end all encounters between traditional police and the public and they’re honest the goal is reducing the numbers of Black! criminal convictions. This model–when all surrender something, in this case public order, due to its disparate impact on Blacks!–manifests wherever it can, but nowhere so plainly as in law enforcement. You may want police to show up if someone is firing a gun on your street, but advocates for Black! thugs have gained the upper hand, so we all must accept the lowest common denominator of order–determined by Black! malice and including firing of guns on the street.

We are to go without traditional police to spare Black! criminals, because law enforcement is racist, as evidenced by all the Black! people in prison; this is our hell. Likewise we are soon to go without competent medical professionals, engineers, administrators.

(Entertainment was surrendered long ago. And despite the profusion of dull Blacks! it doesn’t feel like it’s theirs either–it’s nobody’s and that seems to be the point. Blacks! are oblivious to the condescension of it all and so take this looting of the culture on their behalf as a right, so the effect of repeated failure and rejection by non-Blacks! of this mediocre fare only inspires, like everything now, more Black! resentment.)

Public opinion is against them but the abolitionists don’t recognize public opinion, or any failure of their ideas (such as increased homicide rates and traffic fatalities) and are always pushing aggressively. Their gains of the past two years are modest on paper–they only managed a fraction of the police defunding they sought–and the city may eventually reverse course, but it will be a long time, if ever, until the city returns to “normalcy”–if it can. But the effect of 2020’s other street takeover, the BLM riots, goes well beyond the dollar figure.

Trust between police and public is shattered. The criminal and the crass have joyously adapted to lower standards of behavior as police have miserably adapted to impossibly higher standards of conduct. One retreats and one advances on the street. The police you see now drive about in cars scarred and dinged from abuse the city can’t keep up with.

Just over a year ago the problem of street takeovers was already far enough gone the city responded by passing an ordinance against it, but police mostly aren’t responding to 911 calls reporting takeovers, citing a lack of manpower. The takeovers can involve hundreds of cars and even a fully staffed department would be strained responding to this now regular occurrence.

Police recourse to the manpower excuse a lot now–and it’s always plausible. Ironically, genuine police accountability is impossible as a result of the abolitionists’ successes-and while they won’t say it, that too is feature-not-bug. They don’t really want police accountability, or reform; they want the police gone (really they want to be the police ultimately). Abolitionists work to wreck your trust in the police; for them bad police are good politics.

The so-called “social worker” model offered by abolitionists to replace police in dealing with mental health calls, Portland Street Response, establishes an important beachhead in the campaign to take over all police authority. That program remains small, but its proponents–biggest being abolitionist leader Jo Ann Hardesty–keep pushing to expand it to cover all mental health calls in the city.

But I wanted to address street takeovers specifically.

I was struck watching the footage of the crazed nurse who took out a busy intersection in LA: she flies over pavement marked with the familiar circular rubber tracks you now come upon regularly in Portland. One act of disorder taking place on the scars left behind by another–and I do believe the nurse’s mindless act is just as much a result of our new disorder as the street takeover of that intersection days before. To further indulge this idea (I wouldn’t know how to prove) I believe when Anne Heche crashed her car days later in a similarly suicidal or just wreckless act she was subtly influenced by the footage of the crash we all watched. We are too: we’re all swimming in the same water. And it’s getting more toxic.

To highlight the lunacy of it all is the inherently dumb nature of “drifting” and “doing donuts” in cars: spinning mindlessly in circles.

In August of 2021 a section of busy freeway on Portland’s Fremont Bridge, which looms over the Willamette River, was taken over.

Commenter: “This shit happens all the time in Norcal [northern California]”.

Street takeovers aren’t just a nuisance; they’ve become deadly. And it isn’t just because of the inherently dangerous nature of them–people are getting shot now, and without police on the scene they’re not even making it to the hospital. When an elderly man wandered upon one recent scene and panicked, someone starting shooting at him, killing a 20 year-old bystander. The victim didn’t make it to the hospital for some reason and died on the street somewhere else in town, where he was at first mistaken for a drug overdose:

Police on Sunday night discovered a man who’d been shot to death in the Eliot neighborhood, the Portland Police Bureau said.

Officers responded to a call about a suspected drug overdose at 15 Northeast Broadway shortly before 11 p.m. and found 20-year-old Cameron Taylor “suffering from a gunshot wound,” police said.

Medical examiners determined it was a homicide by gunshot, police said in a statement Wednesday…

Portland police said three people were killed and nine injured in shootings and other assaults since Saturday morning, including a ride-share driver held at gunpoint and a dangerous street-racing incident involving “hundreds of people and cars” that impeded officers who were responding to a call about a man who’d been wounded by gunfire.

Police would later determine Taylor was the man wounded by gunfire at the takeover.

Video posted to social media from the Marine Drive event shows gunfire and chaos as someone in a white van seemingly tries to break through a blockade of wall-to-wall vehicles. At one point, someone hits the van with a bat. As the van driver gets more erratic — hitting a vehicle after backing up and then surging ahead again — another person pulls a gun and starts shooting at the van.

Needless to say no shooter is in custody.

Cameron Taylor wasn’t the first casualty of our post-Reckoning streets. KOIN News:

A year after enacting an emergency ordinance aimed at cracking down on street racing and takeovers, Portland still struggles to contain the illegal events, which can draw hundreds of spectators who block major roads, including Interstate 84, the Burnside Bridge, the Sunset Highway Tunnel and the Fremont Bridge, endangering participants and bystanders. The events have left two people dead and injured at least eight others since August 2021.

Ashlee Diane McGill, 26, was struck by an “out of control” street racer at around 5:30 a.m. on Aug. 27. The driver who hit her was racing another car on Southeast Stark Street near 133rd Avenue, police said. McGill’s mother, Misty Nicholson, told KATU that her daughter was waiting for a bus when the car leapt the curb and struck her. McGill had a 6-year-old son, Nicholson said.

Cameron Taylor, 20, of Vancouver was killed the next day after he was struck by a stray bullet at an illegal street racing event. According to a family friend, Taylor was in a crowd of hundreds at North Marine Drive and Interstate 5 to “check out all the cars” when he was shot. A friend got Taylor into their car and tried to take him to get help, but he died on the way, police said.

Two others suffered gunshot wounds during the same event.

Since 2015, at least seven people have been killed in street-racing related incidents, and more injured – including an 11-year-old boy injured by gunfire in March and an 18-year-old woman in a coma after being hit by a racer in 2018.

The 2021 ordinance revised city code to make street racing or takeovers misdemeanor offenses, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a $500 fine. Since then, Portland police have partnered with the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office and Oregon State Police on multiple “speed racing missions.” Mayor Ted Wheeler said in a written statement that the city has “seen success,” noting that Portland police have made 21 arrests, conducted 50 traffic stops, confiscated three guns and towed 10 vehicles associated with illegal street racing.

And I don’t expect Taylor to be the last.

Park Blocks Blues

She might be beautiful, mixed race with delicate Caucasian features on a small face framed in ringlets trickling out of her tied-up hair. She’s arguing with an imaginary companion who is proving difficult, they just won’t listen; she’s making a moral argument about something. This spectacle is so common I’d wager a good half of those on the street yammering away thus are doing this: defending or arraigning something to an imaginary audience, commonly with the air of a prideful person defending himself. The homeless have an excess of pride, because pride is free. They affect a shamelessness and their station suggests they have none, but shame and pride are inextricable. False pride at least, arising in response to shame.

I confess I do the same in my head (I too have an excess of pride): imagining monologues I might have given; I’ve found myself imagining defending a given action to someone from my past–anyone who’s held any sort of influence over me. Have you? I’ve even caught myself muttering out loud once or twice. The line is too fine.

But there we were three men, strangers evenly spaced on the long wooden bench (with its inexplicable curvature inviting one into a squatting posture), placidly watching her pass before us, apparently oblivious. At first I thought she was approaching the brother with cornrows (maybe homeless maybe not, you can’t always tell), and she’s peppering her harangue with “nigger” this and “nigger” that. She passes us to set up at the end of the bench.

I try to transcribe but she goes too fast; I pick up fragments.

I don’t care…I don’t give a goddamn…there’s nothing that will change… I’m miserable today was the most miserable…and if I’m not God why are you asking me about crazy shit…and it still hasn’t stopped…In don’t even want my Dad to live I hate everyone…I will never get married…I called myself a nigger in the Starbucks [this is a refrain; she got into some sort of trouble at a Starbucks]…I’m not going to become a man I’m not changing my gender…I don’t know you…however you talk to me…here’s the thing…any pejorative disgusting [this phrase another refrain]…so I won’t ever marry…I’m not a Muslim and I”m not an immigrant…

Cornrows ambles off. The street car howls to a stop, the recorded female voice announces the destination in placid counterpoint to–for no good reason I’ll call her “Sally”. Three Women of Color painted on the side of the trolley assail me with ambiguously aggressive expressions. A contented looking pair of lesbians, salt and pepper, get on.

Sally breaks down sobbing.

…this state will never admit…I won’t get…I’m not agreeing to do anything…I don’t care…I never agreed to anything nigger no…this state won’t ever…I will never have sex I will never get married nigger…

Sally’s going faster; I’m losing most of it.

let me tell you…they never — no they don’t nigger no they don’t…really guarantees that no one will ever oh my Gawwwwd…I will never consent to have sex more than I have already consented…nigger…everything I’ve said…no nigger I’ m not even saying sorry…I want to go home I want to go home [sob] and she wants to go home tonight the second of September….so I decide to live forever like I always do I’m dying freeee….

The building across from me announces itself as home to Portland State’s graduate school as well as SCHOOL OF GENDER, RACE AND NATIONS; BLACK STUDIES; CHICANO/LATINO STUDIES; INDIGENOUS NATIONS STUDIES; WOMEN GENDER & SEXUALITY STUDIES. It’s a wonder the modest little brick building can contain it all. A group files out–notably no more sexually ambiguous than typical downtown–comes across the street near us and forms a circle.

I am not going to do anything for anyone I refuse to do anything for anyone…I will not be vegan…I’m not blind and deaf I’m not Helen Keller I’m not my sister…

Sally goes quiet.

In the lapse a pair of young women with formless bodies under formless casual clothes like frocks sit across from me. They give a start when Sally hits the ground running on resumption of her dialogue:

niiii-ger...I don’t care I’m asking you what I think…this man’s in love with me and you got a crush on me…wow…when I was homeless…I had no idea who the fuck she was…nigger no, not a gypsy like the religion this older white lady…so obviously it was never me I never…who Salvia you are so many fucking things…stop thinking you can justify every drug…I’m going sit here like Meg on Family Guy…come on nigger…oh shut up…why are you always asking her…nigger shit…fat…no I’m asking you no I’m literally what…the theory of — consent…I am a redhead a ginger…how am I having a fake ass overdose?…I don’t like saying shit like that…I knew you would never have to I never give my hideaway…

She’s got out a sheet of ruled paper and is reciting, somewhat, boilerplate about the rules of sexual consent. The new girls watch with mild interest.

…once they do that they have to reassess the language that they use…these are black women…really reading something I fucking written down…you’re not listening…

The trees spreading their skinny green long limbs against the horizontal afternoon light loom like firework blooms over, in the distance down the long narrow perspective of the park blocks, the tiny, perfect silhouette of a girl walking confidently.

Sally jumps up, looks at the two sexually ambiguous boys (two more possibly homeless–they are both residentially and sexually ambiguous) who’ve sat down between us. She looks shocked and hurt; she resembles a handsome boy holding back tears. There are holes in her jeans, scabs of mud on her knees. How exploited has she been? How much more? A homeless man, relating the latest beating he’d suffered on the street, once told me the worst thing about being a homeless person is other homeless people.

Sally sat back down as fast as she got up and started sobbing into her hands: you’re not listening nigger you’re not listening nigger you’re not listening nigger…

Dark Brandon Rises

they have built the electric chair and hired the executioner to throw the switch all right we are two nations America…

–John Dos Passos, The Big Money

Sacco and Vanzetti at least had defenders. They still have. Will we?

Someone in the furtive Biden Administration, America’s first fully fake presidency, thought it would make a good backdrop for a political speech to bathe the “sacred ground” of Independence Hall in Philadelphia in a garish blood red making shadowy and threatening two Marine guard props flanking an American flag–as guardians of hypocrisy, er democracy. Semper fi DEI

And it was hypocrisy that loomed over the crude and desperate speech that saw American political rhetoric fall to its nadir, an Idiocracy-level stupidity and a, well, 2022-level of mendacity. I’m not sure Brandon. slurring the “maga republicans” refrain (has anyone tallied how many times?), is operating at a level comfortably above that film’s body-builder newscasters.

Perhaps the world would be wise to take note. Is the world still paying attention? I kind of hope not; it was a shameful thing. But they should. “Democracy” is the universal value for which the Ukraine is taking its turn in the barrel presently, and for which Taiwan can expect its coming glory. That red glow of democracy (real or fake) framing Joe is to illuminate the globe after all–the incendiary red glow of munitions usually announces democracy’s arrival, its embers glow in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya. The world should be scared if not impressed.

Don’t scoff at Brandon; this ad campaign has persisted for decades

Biden shaking his skinny fists like antennas to heaven; branches of lightning crackle from them as the Marine guards morph into seven-foot drag queens with rainbow-colored M60s; the red brick of Independence Hall begins pulsing, breathing…

Sorry; the video also appears capable of inducing hallucinatory flashbacks.

But Brandon was only embarrassing us before the world, not speaking to it. He wasn’t even speaking to us, that dissident half or more of the nation characterized dishonestly as “Maga Republicans”–we are another nation the president declared, and if there’s any substance to Joe’s sad betrayal it is that: the president of the United States declared half the nation an irredeemable threat. A doddering acid-trip Lincoln announces the suspension of civil liberties and opening of hostilities not to force the Union together, but to force it apart.

But make no mistake. There will be union if not the Union. Operation Dark Brandon isn’t looking to cut us loose (conflicts aren’t fought over land any more, Vladimir Putin!) and the nascent one-party post democratic regime hijacking America isn’t interested in ceding land, rights or resources to any people or to any competing models–Brandon’s hallucinatory “democracy” can barely abide competing models abroad.

So I guess it’s on, Bran-don.