Reflections From a Murky Pond

On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done

This is the latest book – it’s actually more of a monologue – by Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s new Regulatory Czar. In it Obama’s new chief of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs calls for the end of free speech in this new, Internet Age.

This is, due to Sunstein’s new job, cause for worry.

In his monologue Sunstein contends that rumors threaten democracy by undermining public confidence in government, though he admits in the opening pages of On Rumors that there is no good definition for what constitutes a rumor.

What can we do to protect ourselves against the harmful effects of false rumors? As we shall see, part of the answer lies in recognizing that a ‘chilling effect’ on those who would spread destructive falsehood can be an excellent idea.

~*~

There is no settled definition of rumor, and I will not attempt to offer one here.

— Cass Sunstein
On Rumors, Pg 5

Mr. Sunstein admits that there is no adequate definition of rumor that he could use in his treatise, but wants the government to enact a “chilling effect” on rumors on the Internet – as a start no doubt. Later in work he claims that he is not calling for censorship, but thinks that there’s too much freedom of speech on the Internet.

Any marketplace requires standards and ground rules; no market can operate as a free-for-all. It is not obvious that the current regulatory system for free speech — the current setting of chill — is the one that we would or should choose for the Internet era.

— Cass Sunstein
On Rumors, Pg 78

That “setting of chill” within the current regulatory system for free speech was defined in the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution, a document that Cass Sunstein is obviously not particularly fond of.

It should also be noted that Sunstein contextualized his work with references to Obama’s campaign and the work was little more than a threat against Conservative websites.

Since President Obama installed Sunstein in a position to carry out that threat, Sunstein must be classed as a clear and present danger to America’s liberty and freedom of speech.

When the man that President Obama hand-picked to head the agency in the federal government that reviews draft regulations under Executive Order 12866 and develops and oversees the implementation of government-wide policies in the areas of information technology, information policy, privacy, and statistical policy is afraid of freedom of speech – especially on the internet, the seeds of tyranny have been well and truly planted – in the fecund soil of Obama’s government.

It seems that President Obama has found in Cass Sunstein the perfect Hierophant for his Ministry of Truth. One is forced to wonder, if one is American, how long we have before Inquisition begins.

The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Reassessing Current Theories

The Atheists really hate this book because it scientifically approaches Intelligent Design and the statistical improbability of evolution of cellular life by random chance. This is especially true of Eugenie Scott, PZ Myers, Richard Dawkins, and their ilk, who are theologically invested in a Godless universe.

But why do these Atheists hate the work of the authors: Charles B. Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley,  Roger L. Olsen so much? They hate and despise their work, The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Reassessing Current Theories, because in it these three scientists show the inherent  implausibility of life spontaneously arising from non-life. Atheists like Scott, Meyer, and Dawkins are far more comfortable attacking religions and religious beliefs than they are defending their pet theories and postulates against scientific inquiry.

This book offers an excellent scientific analysis of important data related to the theory of evolution. It is – or should be – a seminal work for the theory of intelligent design since it scientifically critiques the Atheists’ prevailing paradigmatic theories of chemical evolution. It doesn’t so much criticize Darwinism as it does criticize the very underpinning of the initial evolution of life on Earth, something that is a prerequisite for the Darwinian mechanism of evolution to happen.

The volume as a whole is devastating to a relaxed acceptance of current theories of abiogenesis. It is well written, and, though technical, much of the book is within the reach of the informed non-scientist. The book apparently has been well received by many who are working in the field of abiogenesis, such as Dean Kenyon and Robert Shapiro.

— James F. Jekel
Dept. of Epidemiology & Public Health
Yale University School of Medicine

Be forewarned though; the authors are distinguished scientists holding advanced degrees in chemistry, materials science, and geochemistry and the book, while very important and quite interesting, is not an easy read by any stretch of the imagination and truly requires a firm grounding in chemistry to fully appreciate.

The Revolt of the Elites: And the Betrayal of Democracy by the late historian, moralist, and penetrating social critic Christopher Lasch is a sobering and shockingly blunt appraisal of democracy in the new American economy.

The Revolt of the Elites is, at best, a disturbing and difficult work to read. Irrespective of your political philosophies, you will likely be bothered and/or offended by some of Lasch’s assertions and conclusions that a presented in this book.

It’s an important work though and well worth the effort and pain it takes to read it.

In “the Revolt of the Elites” Christoper Lasch powerfully and persuasively contends that that the values and attitudes of professional and managerial elites and those of the working classes have dramatically diverged. Although the claim is controverted, many of us on the right (especially social conservatives) agree with the quasi-populist/communitarian notion that democracy works best when all members of society can participate in a world of upward mobility and of achievable status. In such a world, members of society will perceive themselves as belonging to the same team and care about ensuring that that team succeeds. But how can society achieve this sort of mutual interdependence if its members are not part of a community of shared values? As Christopher Lasch explains: “[T]he new elites, the professional classes in particular, regard the masses with mingled scorn and apprehension.” For too many of these elites, the values of “Middle America” – a/k/a “fly-over country” – are mindless patriotism, religious fundamentalism, racism, homophobia, and retrograde views of women. “Middle Americans, as they appear to the makers of educated opinion, are hopelessly shabby, unfashionable, and provincial, ill informed about changes in taste or intellectual trends, addicted to trashy novels of romance and adventure, and stupefied by prolonged exposure to television. They are at once absurd and vaguely menacing.” (28)

The tension between elite and non-elite attitudes is most pronounced with respect to religious belief. While our society admittedly is increasingly pluralistic, “the democratic reality, even, if you will, the raw demographic reality,” as Father Neuhaus has observed, “is that most Americans derive their values and visions from the biblical tradition.” Yet, Lasch points out, elite attitudes towards religion are increasingly hostile: “A skeptical, iconoclastic state of mind is one of the distinguishing characteristics of the knowledge classes. … The elites’ attitude to religion ranges from indifference to active hostility.” (215)

Lash claims that the divergence in elite and non-elite attitudes is troubling for the future of democracy. Its hard for me to gainsay him. Yet, while “The Revolt of the Elites” is sobering – even a tad depressing – it deserves to be read even more widely than it has been. Lasch is no partisan. Conservative proponents of unfettered capitalism get bashed about the head by Lasch just as much as liberal critics of capitalism. Populists will find themselves nodding in agreement with some sections, while communitarians will concur with other sections. About the only folks who will be offended by all of “The Revolt of the Elites” are hardened libertarians and extreme left-liberals.

— Stephen M. Bainbridge

Christopher Lasch’s final question in this work, which was the last of his to be published during his lifetime, was a very important and chilling one: can a society survive when a significant portion of its elite have forsaken its founding principles?

America is about to pass through a crossroads. With Barack Obama about to take office as President of The United States of America a great deal will be subjected to change in our nation. Most of us aren’t truly cognizant of what those changes are expected to be or encompass.

In an attempt to give people the opportunity to educate themselves on what to expect and/or fear from the upcoming Liberal administration I’ve compiled three resources that I believe can provide a basis for understanding what Obama and his administration plan on doing.

Whether you’re a Conservative, Moderate, or Liberal these three books are important reading. The Plan, Change We Can Believe In, and Rules for Radicals outline the threats posed and/or promises offered by the incoming administration and some of the tactics they will probably use to implement them.

Read, learn, be studiously aware! Whether you loath and fear Obama or see him as the hope for a brighter American future, learn as much of the truth as you can and manage your own expectations.