Dark side of the Moonbeam

California Governor Jerry Brown:

Never underestimate the coercive power of the central state in the service of good.

Or evil, Governor Brown, you oh so Superior Man.

Meanwhile, California Climate Policies Chilling Housing Growth.

And, Can California Be Saved? I know which way I’d bet.

Rapist credits

The real-world judicial system impinges upon the Jared Polis plan.

Representative Polis (D-CO) says that because we can reasonably assume that of 10 accused campus rapists 2 are actually guilty, we should force-transfer all 10 to other universities. One obvious consequence is that the receiving institutions would be enrolling 2 real rapists whose crimes go unpunished. Another is that no one could be sure if they got a real rapist, so they’d have to act as if all 10 had actually committed rape. I’m not sure what that would mean, but I wonder about the legal liability for any university which accepts someone who is subsequently accused of committing a(nother) rape. Surveillance 24/7?

Another result of Mr. Polis’ plan is that 8 accused rapists would be in a position to sue the originating institution. In fact, to preserve what little of their reputation they would have left, all 10 would be incentivized to file suit. Nobody knows which 2 are guilty, so the odds are good for all of them.

Polis does not explain why any university would want to enroll accused rapists. Perhaps we would need to supply an incentive: Maybe something analogous to carbon credits. Think of accused rapists as coal-fired power plants and complainants as newly planted trees. Why not establish a credit system for the transfer of complainants?

Math is hard, but if 1 in 5 campus men accused of rape is guilty, then 4 of 5 of accusations are false. For every 5 complainants transferred into your institution you could avoid accepting 1 accused rapist. That increases your tuition base. Further, transferring all complainants would address a larger proportion of the problem (4 liars become somebody else’s problem), while simultaneously endangering fewer women on the new campus than the transfer of a single rapist.

It does put a whole new group of men at higher risk of false accusations, but who cares?

It also doesn’t put the real rapists behind bars. But that isn’t the point, is it?

‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first – verdict afterwards.’

With Representative Jared Polis (D – Boulder, CO) and soon to be former Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton (D – Carpetbag, AR) channeling Iracebeth of Crims, I am reminded not just of Lewis Carroll, but also Joseph Heller and Franz Kafka.

The trial of the Knave in Alice in Wonderland, Clevinger’s Court Martial in Catch-22 and Joeseph K.’s year imprisoned in The Trial have much in common with the kangaroo court system Jared and Hillary want to establish.

Carroll:

“If there’s no meaning in it,” said the King, “that saves a world of trouble, you know, as we needn’t try to find any.”

Heller:

Clevinger was guilty, of course, or he would not have been accused, and since the only way to prove it was to find him guilty, it was their patriotic duty to do so.

Kafka:

“[I]t is an essential part of the justice dispensed here that you should be condemned not only in innocence but also in ignorance.”

Polis:

I mean, if there’s 10 people that have been accused and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, [it] seems better to get rid of all 10 people. We’re not talking about depriving them of life or liberty, we’re talking about their transfer to another university.

Yep. They’re at liberty to apply to the University of Accused Rapists.

Hillary:

To every survivor of sexual assault… You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed. We’re with you.

The ‘right’ of the accuser to be believed eliminates the rights of the guilty and innocent alike. Who has the “right to be believed?” Well, in Hillary’s case, we know who doesn’t: Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick and Monica Lewinsky.

Always good intent they have

Actually, that’s not true, as Representative Jared Polis, D-CO and the people who applaud him are demonstrating.

Here’s what TITLE IX OF THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1972 states:

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

That is called the “intent,” which for our Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should be sufficient to uphold the law even as it is transformed into Representative Polis’ desired result:

“Every male person enrolled in any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance in the United States shall be subject to summary expulsion from that program or activity if anyone, no matter how wildly specious their complaint, makes an accusation of “untoward” behavior as defined by unelected, judicially untrained administrators acting outside the Justice system and without reference to Constitutional protections. The parameters shall apply retroactively and be recodified contemporaneously with each and any accusation to reflect the suggestions of the three (3) most junior female-identifying clerks at the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights who possess a minimum Body Mass Index of 35.”

A Tale of Two Seizures

You might think from these stories that the American system of child protection is superior to the German. In one case children are protected from thuggish parents, in the other they are whisked away from loving parents by jackbooted thugs. However, that’s not quite the whole story. There’s something to detest in either case.

First, to Germany:
Meanwhile, Back in the Fatherland…

Because they were home-schooled, the German judge was concerned that “the children would grow up in a parallel society without having learned to be integrated or to have a dialogue with those who think differently and facing them in the sense of practicing tolerance.” So, he ordered the State to seize well adjusted children from caring parents, because at some indeterminate future date, and based on a moronic hypothetical, they might not have been properly assimilated by the State.

If you accept the German judge’s definition of child abuse, you’ll be in agreement with the Progressive tyrants in this country who vilify home-schooling and want to criminalize it. He just stated their case succinctly. They think it’s your child’s job to help civilize the teenager the toddler in our next story is going to become.

Here’s a “parallel society” in the United States from which children were forcibly removed:
Cursing toddler: See why this ‘thug’ video is shocking the nation

The twist is, after this video was posted on the internet, some people called it racist. Not the activity in the video, the act of posting it. Think about that, who thought it was a good idea to make the video in the first place?

No, the video itself is not racist, but some Americans consider exposing child abuse to be racist based on the melanin content of the participants. Those people are the actual racists. They’d have been cheering former MSNBC host Martin Bashir on were he to have shown a similar video of Jews or Japanese.

In America revealing a 2 minute home video of black family dysfunction is cited as evidence of racism, but if you have hours of white dysfunction you make it into a television series and call it Honey Boo Boo.