How To Do A Coup

Look, Donald. Ya gotta stop all the legal pussyfooting—it’s just pissing off the judges, even those traitorous finks you appointed. Just yank on your big boy dictator suit and bite the bullet and cross the Rose Garden Rubicon and whip out your sharpie and sign an executive order declaring the Constitution to be unconstitutional and suspending it until Jared Kushner can get it fixed. That’s the slickest (and probably only) way for you to stay in the oval office until you pop your clogs from metastasized bone spurs. Nice sunglasses, BTW. 

P.S.: you might need a teensy bit of help from those army dudes you call losers and suckers. And why not throw a little party for the boogaloo boys—they really like you and might be willing to die for you if you serve ‘em cheeseburgers stuck with little American flags on toothpicks.

America: Know-Nothings and Nincompoops

As we try to make sense of the fact that (apparently) millions of Americans cling to a totally fantastical belief that the reality of Trump’s defeat is not the REAL reality, we should probably remember that one of our country’s foundational “freedoms” was—and remains—religious/ideological nincompoopery: a determination by diverse groups of “true believers” to believe whatever they damned well WANT to believe, in spite of what they perceive as vast, (albeit often evidence-based), “conspiracies” that insist that they (the nincompoops) are quite simply “nuts.” America is the quintessential Loony Bin—in which, periodically at least—a gang of inmates gains control. But only, of course, after vicious squabbling among the asylum’s diverse factions about which is the most “qualified” to govern by virtue of, er, superior know-nothing nincompoopery.

The Trump Apostles’ Creed

I believe in Oh My God (OMG),
the Father almighty,
Creator of money and property ,
and in Donald Trump, his Instrument, our Lord,
who was conceived by Fox News,
born of Twitter,
suffered under Joseph Biden,
was defeated, lost, and humiliated by nasty people;
he descended into CNN,
on Inauguration Day, he stomped out of the House;
he ascended into Mar-a-Lago
and is seated at the right hand of his toady Lindsey Graham;
from thence he will attempt to overthrow the election results and Make America Grate Again.
I believe in Holy Hyperbole, 
the holy GOP,
the collusion of conmen, 
the forgiveness of cheating, 
the resurrection of the Proud Boys,
and lying everlasting.
Amen.

Secret Trump Voters

Remember Jerry Lundegaard in “Fargo”? If he were voting in this election, I suspect that he would be a “secret Trumpster”—someone who would tell a poll-taker that (like any “good” used-car salesman) he loved decency and compassion and would, of course, vote for Biden. But, in the privacy of the voting booth, he would practically break his pencil in his enthusiasm to release all his hatreds and put an X in the Trump box: blacks, gays, Jews, Mexicans, Muslims, feminists, atheists—not to mention inconvenient wives—all consigned to the Trump woodchipper. In my neck of the woods, these “nice” guys with plodding reptilian brains are much more worrisome—because they are undoubtedly more numerous—than the unapologetically “tough-guy” MAGA-hatters.

Excise Trump, Then Eradicate The Disease

Some diseases are latent, dormant, (some types of TB, for instance) and never manifest themselves unless the body’s immune system becomes too weak to control them. I think something like this is happening to America. Since our very childhood as a nation, we have been infected with racism, xenophobia, religious bigotry, know-nothingism. Our immune system (constitutional structures, judicial conventions, general apathy) has mostly contained the worst flareups, with the notable exception of the Civil War. But now, the constitutional T-cells seem truly worn out. So the infections are taking over. Trump is simply the most prominent carbuncle produced by the current resurgence of the systemic illnesses. I hope we will soon lance this particularly disgusting boil. But, even if Trump is excised, a boil is just a symptom. The deeper question is: can the immune system itself ever recover? And can it ever succeed, as it has never before done, in completely eradicating the sometimes dormant, but hitherto always lurking, American Dumbness Disorder?

 

Why Debate?

Apparently good ol’ Uncle Joe is conscientiously preparing for the final debate, whereas stable genius Trump is blithely ranting at super-spreader rallies. It’s logical, I guess. The general public EXPECTS Biden to manage facts and make sense. No one, however, especially his votaries, has even the remotest expectation that Trump will make sense or utter anything other than whatever addlepated bullshit pops into his head at the moment. The base will roar with approval, even if he does nothing more than belch. And if he shoots himself on Fifth Avenue, well, they will STILL vote for him. So it goes.

Be Afraid.

This is Donald.

Donald is very brave. 

He is not afraid of Covid.

He is not afraid of oxygen masks.

He is not afraid of helicopter rides to hospitals.

He is not afraid of needles and tubes.

He is not afraid of pricey experimental drugs.

Donald will not let Covid dominate his life.

He will continue to take joyrides in hermetically sealed SUVs

    for photo ops.

He will continue to sign blank executive orders

    for photo ops.

He will continue to make ridiculous military salutes on the Truman Balcony 

    for photo ops.

He will not wear a mask. 

He is not afraid.

He is very brave.

He is very delusional.

Don’t be like Donald.

Be afraid.

It Is What It Is

URBAN DICTIONARY: TOP DEFINITION

PANGLOSS

“The philosopher in Voltaire's Candide. He believes ‘All is for the best in this best of all possible worlds.’ Even as he suffers horribly throughout the book [and winds up losing his nose to syphilis] he stands by this concept. By the end of the book, though, he admits ‘he asserted it still, but he no longer believed it.’”

IMO, Donald Trump is our modern Pangloss. His motto is “It is what it is”—a justification for accepting and even encouraging existing or potential evil. This is DJT’s Fake Optimism and the source of all his ludicrous hyperbole. In reality it is a cruel, brutish, pessimistic, and stupid ideology. 

I suspect that many Trump supporters are like poor old syphilitic  Pangloss: they still “assert” the MAGA doctrines, but they no longer truly “believe.” They will continue to vote for Trump, though not out of any real conviction, but merely in order to demonstrate what Emerson called “a foolish consistency.”

Work Is a Waste of Time

Now don’t misunderstand: I am not CATEGORICALLY opposed to work. Some people seem to enjoy creating and producing “useful” things, and if that is how they wish to spend their time and acquire spending money, I certainly must respect their choice. But it IS a choice, and to my mind, a quite unnatural one. You see, we are all born free and lazy. Leisure is our birthright, as aristocrats have always recognized. Wealth, upkeep, and booze should come from elsewhere, preferably the constitutional order of things—the government, inheritance, go-fund-me accounts, and other convenient sources with links on Facebook.

Take the Crawleys of Downton Abbey, for example. They would never even THINK of engaging in productive or utilitarian activity. Rather, they spend their days exercising their God-given right to be civilized human beings. They drink tea, eat salmon mousse, smoke cigars, attend flower shows, shoot grouse, pay visits to other idle people of refinement and conspire to either marry or deceive them. This is the way human life SHOULD be lived, don’t you agree—in total blissful uselessness? 

On the other hand, expecting or obliging people to WORK—unless they absolutely WANT to, of course—is clearly unfair and an egregious abuse of human rights. Work is, let’s face it, a frequent form of discrimination against gullible people. Shouldn’t we all strive, but without too much exertion, to Make Unemployment Fun Again? MUFA.

The Golden Bard



Have you noticed that Donald Trump, in his unmatched mastery of words, is particularly fond of “poetic” devices? Anaphora, internal rhyme, alliteration, hyperbole—and, of course, lots of good old repetition? Here’s his latest political “insight,” cast as a free-verse poem. Isn’t it awesome?

“Not Doing Too Well” (by Donald Trump)

“Biden is going

To do things

That nobody ever

Would ever

Think even possible.

He’s following the radical

Left Agenda

Take away

Your guns,

Destroy

Your Second Amendment.

No religion,

No anything.

Hurt the Bible.

Hurt God.

He’s against guns.

He’s against energy.

Our kind of energy.

I don’t think he’s going to do

Too well 

In Ohio.

He’s not going to

Do well.”

Laughter and the Law of the Third

Of all the creatures on this planet, only humans laugh, because only humans see patterns and thus anticipate or predict trends and outcomes. When their predictions are unexpectedly overthrown by something that doesn't fit a pattern they have perceived, they react to this out-of-jointness—sometimes, if the incongruity causes suffering, by weeping at the “tragedy,” but other times, when the interruption is merely ridiculous or embarrassing, by laughing at the “comedy.” 

This very human response is a kind of acknowledgement of our own failure, our own detachment from reality, our own separation from the universe--which would make no assumptions about either patterns or interruptions thereto. The universe cannot be surprised, since it cannot detach itself from itself in order to see what's going on. But humans are "out of it" and when "it" doesn't behave according to our expectation, we either weep—or, more frequently, I think, laugh. And we laugh—we cannot help it—at how inescapably preposterous something or someone is—and by extension, how absurd everything, including homo sapiens itself, is.

Masters of comedy have many tricks for provoking laughter—and this heightened awareness of the “nonsense of things.” In my reading and teaching, I have noted, though, that almost all comic writers have a particular fondness for what I call the “law of the third.” 

Such writers (let us take Jane Austen, for example) create, in all apparent innocence, a thematic pattern—by citing at least two elements belonging to a single category of human experience. In Pride and Prejudice, for instance, Elizabeth Bennet blandly observes that Charlotte Collins seems content with “her home, her housekeeping, her parish”—all admirable concerns that lead the reader to expect a final element of approbation and esteem. But instead, Elizabeth ends her enumeration with “and her poultry.” This incongruous “third” (actually “fourth”) element—from a quite different and more trivial realm of experience—surprises us, and in making us laugh, overturns our assumption, formed by the pattern of the preceding elements, that Elizabeth approves unreservedly of her friend’s current status and occupations. 

This “law of the third” might also be termed the “absurd third.” It is my favorite device in comic writing, especially when I am doing the writing. Probably because it is so easy, so enjoyable —and so nasty.

Assisted Play Care (Schools)

Dear Schools: stop fussing about EDUCATING the kids. Education is a nice auxiliary benefit to schooling—but the really essential thing is CHILD CARE. That is what you must focus on now, in what our esteemed and compassionate leaders call “these difficult times.” Child care is what both the president and many parents REALLY want. So just get busy and convert those classrooms to child-care isolation wards (plastic cubicles?) for about ten socially-distanced internees per room. Staff members formerly known as “teachers” will become fully PPE’d nurse/monitors who move about their wards checking to see that sanitation measures are respected and that “every child succeeds” in playing video games and watching cartoons on school-provided computers or i-pads. 

When necessary, a student internee may be excused to go to the restroom, accompanied by a junior teacher/nurse/ monitor to ensure that peeing and pooping and hand-washing are accomplished according to CDC guidelines. Other, more senior (i.e., old and at-risk) teacher/nurse/monitors will be equipped with walkie-talkies and will patrol halls and public areas to ensure that no one is using them and that absolutely nothing is going on anywhere. About twice a day, a KP teacher, fully PPE’d, of course, will push a little cart from ward to ward, offering internees water, jello cups and cellophane-sealed Velveeta sandwiches.

Interestingly, the sole testing procedure occurring in these new “assisted play centers” will be for Covid-19, but only if a teacher/monitor has observed that an internee has symptoms and only if prior permission has been obtained from a parent or guardian. Thus, the few remaining teachers who have not been assigned ward duties, bathroom duties, patrol duties, or KP duties will be occupied in plastic cubicles filling out necessary forms and shredding outdated legal documents. All teacher/nurse/babysitters will therefore be fully employed, though not in teaching, of course. Nevertheless, every teacher will be required to possess an official teaching credential, as will any substitute hired to replace a regular teacher who is sick, hospitalized or dying of Covid-19. Obviously, this is to ensure a continuity of competent care for our precious children “in these difficult times.”

 

I Can't Bare It Any Longer

Yesterday I bought some new pajamas.

FYI, pajamas are now called "sleep bottoms" and "sleep tops" by all the trendy fashionista salesladies at Target.

I bought only the bottoms, because that's the part of me that I can no longer bare in bed, let alone while making toast in the morning.

I used to be able to bare things better.

But those things are no longer bareable. Not at all.

Alas, my new jammies are hot and twisty and bindy and, pour comble de misère, ugly. I told the lady that I was too old for the Spiderman design, but she persuaded me that classic cars were "ageless." Maybe. But they are almost as dreary as my unbareable bottom.

Why do they say "age before beauty"? It's really beauty before age, isn't it? Until, finally, you can't bare it any longer?

And you have to cover it with tiny, dreary, blue Studebakers.

Didn't Studebaker go out of business?

I suppose that's next.

Osmosis and Walls

People who read history know that when outsiders want "in," they will--eventually--get in, fences, walls, and military force notwithstanding. This is not a matter of right and wrong, nor is it preventable--at least in the long term.

Temporarily, of course, walls and police actions can impede and delay this ingress. When we feel threatened by outsiders, we quite understandably implement such measures--even as we subconsciously sense that they won't provide any lasting solution and that they really aren't even justified within our OWN system of American values.

Huh, Kirkeby? So you believe it is legitimate to break American laws and enter this country illegally?

Well, yes, I guess I do. Each of us has only one life; and each of us legitimately, I believe (as Mr. Jefferson so eloquently stated), has the right—or, at least, the instinctive desire—to live that life with as much liberty and pursuit of happiness as he/she can obtain. This is a universal law of human nature, inscribed in the reptilian brains of homo sapiens (though not, I am sure, in any divine or karmic plan— Mr. Jefferson was either wrong or disingenuous in referring to “Nature’s God.”)

So I do not blame foreigners who, following their instincts, gather the courage to leave homelands that offer little and seek to improve their lot in the U.S. This movement of peoples appears to me as natural and as inevitable as osmosis. Furthermore, like osmosis, (and despite any hastily contrived interventions) it will not stop until an equilibrium is achieved--until Mexico becomes as appealing as the US or until the US becomes as unappealing as Mexico.

Question is, once they get in, will they become "insiders" and help the existing culture survive and grow or will they remain hostile "outsiders," committed to overthrowing and dismantling the existing culture?  Surely, a lot depends on how the existing culture "welcomes" their unavoidable arrival.

Will we let them become part of “us”? Our history suggests that sometimes we do and sometimes we don’t. And that the deciding factor, alas, is most often race or skin color. Sobering, and the subject for a later post.

The Conscience Is a Crock

How to know the Good: age-old dilemma. I just had an online "discussion" with two very self-assured, very self-righteous, very "self-reliant" (in the Emersonian sense) anti-war zealots. They were signing and emailing petitions to world governments demanding that, because of the zealots' conscientious objection to taking human life, they be exempted from any taxes intended to "pay for war."

Of course, my two interlocutors knew only too well that these petitions, if they were ever read by any official of any government, would be dismissed out of hand as the frivolous ravings of crackpots.  But a positive response from governments was not the petitioners' real purpose.  Their purpose was consciousness-raising, rattling cages, attention-getting.

Well, they got my attention--mostly because I, too, (like that hypothetical government drudge assigned to read crackpot emails), found the petition ludicrous--on a par with the whinging of the right-wing "religious liberty" folks--you know, those self-designated guardians of morality who want a government dispensation to discriminate against people whom they, in their Bible-befogged consciences, condemn as "disordered."

But as the argument progressed, I began to reflect a bit more deeply--and I realized that my aversion to the deliberately provocative petition was not that I disagreed with the anti-war sentiment--I think that wars, in general, are more harmful than beneficial--but rather that I was deeply suspicious of what I must call "justification by conscience."

Because “conscience,” all too often, is an illusion—a dishonest (though often purely reflexive) attempt by our conscious brain to objectify and rationalize as “good” our subjective, prerational and hence, morally neutral, reactions to our environment. That transcendental notion--still so prominent in American thinking--that our inner selves will just somehow "naturally" vibrate in unison with the great Oversoul and the Ultimate Good--well, it's a crock. Self-reliance--if one is relying on nonsense or fantasy or knee-jerk emotion is less "good" than merely quixotic.

So let's talk about what we really mean when we talk about the "conscience." Dictionaries tend to define conscience as an "inner-voice" that defines "right and wrong" and directs our conscious mind to act accordingly. OK. But what interests me most is the question of a moral CRITERION. 

In other words, WHAT principle or yardstick does the conscience use to determine whether a certain behavior is right or wrong? Here, psychology's concept of the super-ego offers some enlightenment: apparently, for its judgments, the super-ego relies almost entirely upon the cultural norms prevalent in an individual's home society/environment. THESE NORMS ARE SUBJECTIVE AND VARIABLE (though I suppose there might be a few that are universal). In short, what our conscience tells us is right depends, for the most part, on the family we were born in, the religion of our parents, the political and economic conventions we have internalized, the education we have received. Conscience is NOT an objective guide to truth or the Good--it merely tells uswhat other people like us believe is good because they have been taught pretty much the same thing that we have been taught.

So conscience, really, just tells us what we already thought: it cannot legitimize or justify our beliefs in reference to any objective God or Natural Law or Great Oversoul. It is, in other words, a nice, cozy, feel-good crock.

Mammy’s Rule: It Ain’t Fittin’

Regardless of Gone With the Wind’s undeniable racial stereotyping, I think that Mammy is the most consistently reasonable and admirable character in that book/movie. And I also think that her famous “rule” is by far the best way to measure the acceptability of statues, place names, etc. Let’s simply ask ourselves: is the PURPOSE of this statue/name “fittin’” for the PLACE/TIME in which it is situated? Is it fittin’ to honor a vice president of the Confederacy in the U.S. Capitol in 2020? No. (Because this statue’s PURPOSE is to glorify and legitimize racism and rebellion—and such a message is not acceptable in this place, at this time.)

On the other hand, is it fittin’ to honor crusader king St. Louis with a statue in a city named for him? Yes, I think so. (Because this statue’s PURPOSE is to encourage a city to take pride in the saintly virtues of its eponymous patron—not to glorify or advocate Louis IX’s anti-semitism.) 

Mammy’s rule should also be applied to names. Was Austin, Texas, for example, given that name because Stephen Austin was an advocate and defender of slavery? Certainly not, though he was both—but rather, because he is regarded as the “Father of Texas” (as unlikable a showman as he probably was). 

Sometimes, a thing is fittin’ even if you don’t like it, people! And sometimes, as Mammy would say, a thing—like, for instance, Miss Scarlett showing her bosom before three o’clock—well, that just AIN’T fittin’ (at least, for a barbecue given for plantation gentry in 1861). Yes, I admit, there IS a measure of relativity—time and place—involved in Mammy’s rule. So be it. It’s still the most fittin’ rule I can think of for these unruly and iconoclastic times.

Abortion and Picklehood.

Are you pro-pickle? At precisely what point does a cucumber immersed in brine become a pickle? I mean, when does picklehood start? Is a cucumber automatically a pickle as soon as vinegar is poured over it? Or does it have to gestate for a few days in the refrigerator? I’ve been reading a lot of pickle recipes lately, and I’m sorry to report that pickle-making is rather an inexact science. Who SHOULD decide whether or not a cucumber has become a viable pickle?

Sin for Jesus

I’ve been watching a Netflix series entitled “The Last Czars,” (in which, historical authenticity be damned, the Czarina talks like a Californian—“You’ll be OK”—and prays before a crucifix with a very unOrthodox three-dimensional Jesus). Well, anyway, despite the occasional oops moments, I’ve learned a lot of fascinating history. For instance, Rasputin’s special understanding of Christian redemption theology, i.e., redemption is reserved for those who have SINNED, and the greater the sin, the greater (obviously) the redemption. It is therefore necessary for true believers to sin mightily and often—in order to be fully deserving of forgiveness, salvation and eternal life. This theology found considerable favor among the Russian aristocracy, especially women, who did their best to Sin For Jesus—often with Rasputin himself.

Trump's Inferno: The Nine Circles of Trumpster Insanity

Levels of Trumpster Insanity

1.  LIMBO.  Only intermittently insane. Mostly just clueless. Probably voted for Trump because they heard of his steaks.

2.  LUST. Mildly insane. Passionate about everything. Partiers. Voted for Trump because he grabbed someone's pussy.

3. GLUTTONY. Quite insane. Gobblers and guzzlers and indulgers of every appetite. Voted for Trump because he likes to pig out on Big Macs and ice cream.

4. GREED. Solidly, gold-platedly insane. Approve of exploiting others for personal gain. Voted for Trump because he’s rich (like they want to be) and doesn’t care about poor people (which they refuse to admit they are).

5.  ANGER.  Substantially insane. Pissed off at the world and everybody in it.  Voted for Trump because he banned Muslims, put Mexicans in cages, and made fun of handicapped people.

6.  HERESY. Talking-in-tongues insane. Think Trump is God’s chosen vessel. Voted for him because he opposes abortion and gay marriage and horse-faced prostitutes.

7.  VIOLENCE.  Dangerously insane. Want to overthrow all existing institutions in which they do not own stock. Voted for Trump because he was enthusiastic about exercising his 2^nd Amendment right to shoot someone--preferably with an assault rifle--on Fifth Avenue.

8.  FRAUD. Extremely, like totally, insane. Lie and cheat habitually and blatantly. Condemn truthfulness and authenticity as Fake News. Voted for Trump because HE behaves exactly like them.

9.  TREACHERY.  The nadir (or "apex") of insanity. Think only of themselves and are loyal to nothing or no one else. Will betray "friends," family, commitments, oaths, and especially NDAs. Will even BETRAY Trump, himself, by not attending his super-spreader rallies in order to selfishly avoid possible death by Covid. Can't be trusted to vote for Trump. Maybe didn't even vote for him the last time.

Could We Please End the Civil War?

Undoubtedly because of my intellectual somnolence, it has only recently dawned on me (and, I suspect, a great many white Americans living in the North) that an entire pantheon of Confederate “saints” has long been honored and venerated by the very Union they fought to destroy. I do not believe in censorship, but I DO believe in censURE. And now that I know who Bragg, Benning, and Hood WERE, now that I’ve actually paid notice to those dreary racist icons in Statuary Hall, I certainly want to censURE the less-than-subtle, dog-whistling message this public canonization/idolatry sends to American citizens. 

When decoded, here’s the real message: “Never mind our official doctrine of E Pluribus Unum, racial equality, justice for all, etc., etc. All that is cosmetic—to make folks feel good and keep them calm. In actual fact, there are lots of ‘good’ racists and traitors who deserve to be included in our list of national saints and venerated in our national holy places. We need to be fair. C’mon.”

It’s as if the Vatican had erected statues of demons and devils in St. Peter’s Basilica—right there next to Jesus and Mary and Joseph. As if various supposedly Christian sites had been named Mephistopheles Seminary, Beelzebub Academy, Lucifer Meditation Center, Antichrist Chapel. 

Surely that heretical message should be promptly brought into line with  orthodox doctrine by purging our revered places of racist/secessionist taint.The Capitol should be cleansed, the confederate statues removed to a museum, the confederate names effaced from military sites. Total decontamination is imperative. And now!

Dear Lost Cause Folks: by all means, excercise (if you must) your First Amendment right to discuss, praise, worship, erect altars to these “saints”—who betrayed their oaths to the Constitution just as surely as Judas kissed Jesus. But do this in appropriate, non-official, non-consecrated places—museums, talk radio, a soapbox in the park, your own back yard or a cemetery plot you purchased. Just NOT, please, in the Capitol—our nation’s equivalent of St. Peter’s Basilica—or in military establishments dedicated to preserving that nation. 

Could we please end the Civil War! Now!

Desultory Iconoclasm

      About the removal of public statues of historic personages whose character and/or achievements are now considered “dubious.” Well, I am only a very desultory iconoclast. Most of these statues are of limited artistic value anyway, so if they could be dismissed as mere pigeon perches (like most park statuary), I would simply say “who cares?”. But, alas, their function is not purely ornamental, because their PURPOSE is not to serve as space-fillers. Rather, they were erected with the deliberate intent of indicating the approval, even veneration, of the public—for what? Surely for the OVERALL contribution to the general welfare/culture made by the depicted individual. This, therefore, seems to me the best criterion for deciding whether a statue should be erected or removed. Was this person’s OVERALL contribution to the community legitimately worthy of veneration—and (with regard to removal) is his-her contribution STILL seen as positive? By this measure, the statues of Robert E. Lee (in Richmond, VA) and of Edward Colston (in Bristol, England) probably DO deserve to be removed. Lee betrayed his oath to the Constitution, and his primary claim to fame is that he led a rebellion against the United States (a rebellion intended to preserve the institution of slavery). Colston made his fortune as a slave-trader and is—apparently—remembered primarily for that nauseating “feat.” Since neither treason nor slave-trading is today considered a venerable accomplishment, it seems justifiable to remove these statues from places of honor (though, surely, they should be preserved, as articles of historic interest, in museums or archives). Now, about Jefferson and Churchill. Yes, Jefferson was a slaveholder with a black mistress. Not admirable. But his overall contribution to American culture remains, in the popular mind, overwhelmingly positive. Likewise, Churchill is known to have harbored notions of the White Man’s Burden. Not easily condoned. But for his OTHER deeds, he deserves to be admired. In short, let’s not cease to honor those whose overall contributions were, and remain, positive. I vote to keep Jefferson and Churchill, despite their views on race, which we are nonetheless justified in condemning.