Comments on: Legal education is indoctrination at Columbia and elsewhere, and has borne much fruit

By: Mike Plaiss

Mike Plaiss — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 17:00:21 +0000

I’d say the commenters here who are infatuated with the French Revolution (which includes me) are often referring to the fact that while Robespierre, Danton, Saint-Just, etc. (revolutionaries all) might not have gotten the shovel, they did get the blade. Of course a lot of people had to die first.

By: Abraxas

Abraxas — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:49:14 +0000

Reading about the Dominion lawsuits — and now the Smartmatic lawsuits — made me think that we have become a country with more lawsuits than people.

By: gallchobhair

gallchobhair — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 14:50:23 +0000

I find the infatuation with the French Revolution on the part of the commenters on this website very odd.

I think you misunderstand who the revolutionaries ARE in contemporary America and who is going the get the shovel.

By: Mark Alexis

Mark Alexis — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 13:22:34 +0000

Two of CRT’s main players, Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic, “rebutted” that book you referenced by Daniel Farber and Suzanna Sherry in what amounts to a level of gaslighting unprecedented even by modern standards. In their standard work on the topic they write of Farber and Sherry: “Citing the example of Jews and Asians—two minority groups that have achieved high levels of success by conventional standards—they argued against the idea that the game is rigged against minorities. … [T]he crits replied that if Asians and Jews succeeded despite an unfair system, this is all to their credit. But why should pointing out unfairness in universal merit standards, like the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), bespeak a negative attitude toward members of those groups? As the crits saw it, Farber and Sherry confused criticism of a standard with criticism of individuals who performed well under that standard.”

In other words, pointing out the fact that Jews and Asians on average perform so well academically and economically is being turned into an accusation that “crits” are critical of Jews and Asians. Which is clearly not the point that Farber and Sherry were trying to make.

Delgado and Stefancic’s bullshit book, which I forced myself to read cover to cover, is riddled with this level of scholarship. An absolute abomination.

By: miguel cervantes

miguel cervantes — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:55:17 +0000

the father of critical legal studies was derek bell, once upon a time, the sane members of harvard prevailed to deny him tenure, but one of his top students was barak obama, the evidence was in the university of chicago syllabi, that jodi kantor glossed upon back in 2008, but was expanded upon in the daily caller, two years later,

By: Chases Eagles

Chases Eagles — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:39:19 +0000

I’m sorry but I have lost the point here. Disunion means going your own way. The left will not let you alone. They are already trying to cram abortion down the throats of states that are opposed to it. I can’t imagine why you would think they would let you go without a fight. They will be your greatest enemy.

Also don’t think for a moment that the Feds couldn’t crush MJ growers and sellers in those states that allow it if they wanted to. They don’t want to. Yet.

By: Frederick

Frederick — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 04:11:55 +0000

@Chases Eagles:No nation in their right mind would give up nukes at this point.

I think I’d agree with this, but they’d first have to HAVE nukes to give up. No Soviet republic had nukes under its control, they only had Russian-controlled nukes on their soil. When the US had nukes in Germany, Germany did not “have nukes” because Germany did not control them. The US has nukes in American states but no American state “has nukes”, because no American state can use them on their own initiative.

Who’s would you be under? Japan?

FedGov would certainly keep the nukes, so probably under theirs. Unless you assume FedGov wants to nuke Americans, in which case we’re already not safe under our own umbrella. There’s a lot of forms “national divorce” could take, they don’t all involve shooting or even secession.

You know how blue states stopped allowing marijuana enforcement, declared themselves sanctuaries for this and that, and don’t participate in the Real ID requirement? Red states could start doing the same kind of thing. If they were serious.

The fragmentation of the industrial base needed to maintain the triad would probably end our nuclear capability

France maintained a nuclear triad despite only having the GDP of California. Splitting the US GDP in half would give you two countries with almost the GDP of China, and no other power with a nuclear triad is anywhere near that size.

By: PA+Cat

PA+Cat — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 03:47:00 +0000

huxley–

You’re more than welcome.

By: Chases Eagles

Chases Eagles — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 03:04:09 +0000

No nation in their right mind would give up nukes at this point. Not one. A bunch of the former SSRs rushed to get under our nuke umbrella. Sweden and Finland now and soon maybe Ukraine. Who’s would you be under? Japan?

The fragmentation of the industrial base needed to maintain the triad would probably end our nuclear capability (and most of our military industrial complex too) and all rump components of the former USA would likely be at the mercy of China.

By: huxley

huxley — Thu, 27 Apr 2023 02:51:21 +0000

Les aristocrates à la lanterne! — The aristocrats to the lamp-posts!

PA+Cat:

Sarah Hoyt likes to the throw in that pithy phrase. I didn’t know where it came from.

Thanks.