Wednesday Bible Study: Moar Genocide

I'm in a meeting all day (and yesterday), so drive by blogging only. Joshua 11 is just more of the same, massacring whole peoples. I will just say that it's evidently a coincidence that there's a land of Goshen in Canaan. This couldn't be the region where the Israelites once resided in Egypt. The "Anakim" who get wiped out in the end are a race of giants. Anyway, once again you can take comfort in knowing that this is all entirely fictitious.

11 When Jabin king of Hazor heard of this, he sent word to Jobab king of Madon, to the kings of Shimron and Akshaph, ² and to the northern kings who were in the mountains, in the Arabah south of Kinnereth, in the western foothills and in Naphoth Dor on the west; ³ to the Canaanites in the east and west; to the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites and Jebusites in the hill country; and to the Hivites below Hermon in the region of Mizpah. ⁴ They came out with all their troops and a large number of horses and chariots—a huge army, as numerous as the sand on the seashore. ⁵ All these kings joined forces and made camp together at the Waters of Merom to fight against Israel.

⁶ The Lord said to Joshua, “Do not be afraid of them, because by this time tomorrow I will hand all of them, slain, over to Israel. You are to hamstring their horses and burn their chariots.”

⁷ So Joshua and his whole army came against them suddenly at the Waters of Merom and attacked them, ⁸ and the Lord gave them into the hand of Israel. They defeated them and pursued them all the way to Greater Sidon, to Misrephoth Maim, and to the Valley of Mizpah on the east, until no survivors were left. ⁹ Joshua did to them as the Lord had directed: He hamstrung their horses and burned their chariots.

¹⁰ At that time Joshua turned back and captured Hazor and put its king to the sword. (Hazor had been the head of all these kingdoms.) ¹¹ Everyone in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed^[a] them, not sparing anyone that breathed, and he burned Hazor itself.

¹² Joshua took all these royal cities and their kings and put them to the sword. He totally destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded. ¹³ Yet Israel did not burn any of the cities built on their mounds—except Hazor, which Joshua burned. ¹⁴ The Israelites carried off for themselves all the plunder and livestock of these cities, but all the people they put to the sword until they completely destroyed them, not sparing anyone that breathed. ¹⁵ As the Lord commanded his servant Moses, so Moses commanded Joshua, and Joshua did it; he left nothing undone of all that the Lord commanded Moses.

¹⁶ So Joshua took this entire land: the hill country, all the Negev, the whole region of Goshen, the western foothills, the Arabah and the mountains of Israel with their foothills, ¹⁷ from Mount Halak, which rises toward Seir, to Baal Gad in the Valley of Lebanon below Mount Hermon. He captured all their kings and put them to death. ¹⁸ Joshua waged war against all these kings for a long time. ¹⁹ Except for the Hivites living in Gibeon, not one city made a treaty of peace with the Israelites, who took them all in battle. ²⁰ For it was the Lord himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the Lord had commanded Moses.

²¹ At that time Joshua went and destroyed the Anakites from the hill country: from Hebron, Debir and Anab, from all the hill country of Judah, and from all the hill country of Israel. Joshua totally destroyed them and their towns. ²² No Anakites were left in Israelite territory; only in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod did any survive.

²³ So Joshua took the entire land, just as the Lord had directed Moses, and he gave it as an inheritance to Israel according to their tribal divisions. Then the land had rest from war.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 11:11 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them; also in verses 12, 20 and 21.

Dah Poleez

What do they actually do? Here is an informative article from the New Haven Independent. They got a record of all the dispatch reports in New Haven for a two year period. These include dispatches in response to 9-1-1 calls, non-emergency calls from citizens, and police-initiated actions such as traffic stops. Only 4.4% involved any form of violence. 

 

The most frequent reason was for burglary alarm activation. Unfortunately the data doesn't specify how many of these were false, but I'm guessing it's a lot. Anyway that was less than 8% of calls. It seems that is within the common perception of what ought to be a police responsibility and it seems to me a reasonable claim that an armed officer should respond to these because you never know if there's a perpetrator there who might be dangerous. However, for the majority of dispatches, it's a very legitimate question whether the police -- given the nature of their training and skills, the powers they have, and their martial culture -- are the right kind of people to respond. 

The second most common dispatch, actually, is motor vehicle accident, no injury. Others high on the list, in order (some of which would seem to overlap and perhaps be somewhat arbitrarily classified) are breach of the peace/disorderly conduct; domestic dispute; theft; trespass/"unwanted person"; parking violation; noise complaint; public hazard; welfare check; evading/no injury (I'm guessing this means leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident); and finally the only violent situation on the list, "assault/fight". Then there's "person down"; behavioral/psych/suicide; criminal mischief; motor vehicle stop; harassment; tenant/neighbor issues. (I've skipped "miscellaneous" and 9-1-1 hangup calls.) Emotionally disturbed/intoxicated; drug offenses; and prostitution are father down the list.

It certainly seems to me -- and this is more than just common sense because I have interviewed police officers about these issues for reports I did for community groups, and yeah, even some of the wiser police leaders know this -- that the most appropriate responders to most of these problems are not heavily armed people whose training has been mostly about effecting forceful apprehension and shooting or otherwise disabling uncontrollably violent people. These situations call for medical and psychiatric personnel, social workers and other people trained in dispute resolution and counseling. If they find that they need police backup, they can call for it, and maybe in some cases the judgment would be to have backup nearby, but to keep out of the way until called. 

 

It seems to me this even applies in the case of say, a store clerk believing that a customer may have passed a counterfeit bill. The sort of person who responds to that can be more like a parking enforcement officer. They can collect contact information for the parties, and take the bill for examination. If they determine that it was fake, or apparently fake, they can write a ticket. There is no good reason to detain the person, any more than there is to detain people for running a red light. 

The Independent interviewed criminal justice professor and former police officer Kalfani Ture:

 

He said he consistently hears complaints from past colleagues as well as from officers he talks to today about police officers “having to do work that is beyond the scope of policing.” This current nationwide rethinking of policing underscores the necessity of training social workers, counselors, and crisis intervention specialists to respond to incidents that society currently leans on “warrior-minded” police officers to handle instead, he said. . . . 

“When warrior-oriented policing became the dominant paradigm after 9/11, we were taught about how it takes just a fraction of a second for someone to take your life. Therefore you should be proficient in being a killing machine, if circumstances call for it,” Ture said.

He said he and his colleagues in Atlanta would spend a significant amount of time learning defensive tactics, firearms training, and how to forecfully gain compliance from a suspect, and relatively little time on deescalation. He said deescalation was largely treated by police officers with a “hug a thug” mentality: that is, that a suspect inherently presents a violent threat to the officers and their surroundings.

He said many officers — in Connecticut as well as all over the country — spend much of their spare time training in mixed martial arts, which only reinforces that warrior mentality.

This militant stance runs in direct contradiction to the types of calls that police officers increasingly respond to, as borne out by the NHPD dispatch data. Those calls are for drug-dependent issues and mental health crises and traffic stops, he said, and only a very small portion require a forceful response. . . .

He said the warrior mentality . . . encourages officers to look for violent crime where it may not necessarily exist. “If you are searching for crime where it may not even exist, you may end up in a situation where you’re not policing, you’re harassing.”

 

The calls to "defund the police" were an unfortunate choice of language. Almost no-one I know of is advocating completely abolishing the police as we know them. There are situations that require a forceful response. However, they are far more rare than the general impression. What people are calling for is redirecting resources to more appropriate resources for the bulk of what police are now doing. And the remaining police force needs a radically different kind of training, and needs to recruit based on different criteria. 

 

 

Sunday Sermonette: God the compassionate, the merciful

I'm afraid that Joshua 9 offers only a brief respite from genocidal slaughter. Joshua 10, one of the longest chapters we've read so far, and in case you thought it was impossible to scale greater heights of depravity, it manages the feat. In this single chapter, Joshua and the Israelites murder all of the inhabitants of 12 cities. God gets involved directly, helping to wipe out the Amorite alliance with a hailstorm, and making the sun stand still in the sky so Joshua can get his mass murder done in the daylight. Then we get an elaborate depiction of the humiliation and murder of the Amorite kings, followed by a relentless, repetitive recitation of the genocide of seven more cities. I don't think I really need to comment on this. 

BTW the "Book of Jasher," mentioned as depicting the standing still of the sun, is unknown. It is mentioned again in Samuel, so perhaps it existed. I note this only because it suggests there could have been some prior sources for material in Joshua. I'm inclined to think, however, that it was largely or entirely invented de novo on behalf of King Josiah. Again, the good news is that these events, nor anything like them, never happened. This is a work of fiction.

10 Now Adoni-Zedek king of Jerusalem heard that Joshua had taken Ai and totally destroyed^[a] it, doing to Ai and its king as he had done to Jericho and its king, and that the people of Gibeon had made a treaty of peace with Israel and had become their allies. ² He and his people were very much alarmed at this, because Gibeon was an important city, like one of the royal cities; it was larger than Ai, and all its men were good fighters. ³ So Adoni-Zedek king of Jerusalem appealed to Hoham king of Hebron, Piram king of Jarmuth, Japhia king of Lachish and Debir king of Eglon. ⁴ “Come up and help me attack Gibeon,” he said, “because it has made peace with Joshua and the Israelites.”

⁵ Then the five kings of the Amorites—the kings of Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon—joined forces. They moved up with all their troops and took up positions against Gibeon and attacked it.

⁶ The Gibeonites then sent word to Joshua in the camp at Gilgal: “Do not abandon your servants. Come up to us quickly and save us! Help us, because all the Amorite kings from the hill country have joined forces against us.”

⁷ So Joshua marched up from Gilgal with his entire army, including all the best fighting men. ⁸ The Lord said to Joshua, “Do not be afraid of them; I have given them into your hand. Not one of them will be able to withstand you.”

⁹ After an all-night march from Gilgal, Joshua took them by surprise. ¹⁰ The Lord threw them into confusion before Israel, so Joshua and the Israelites defeated them completely at Gibeon. Israel pursued them along the road going up to Beth Horon and cut them down all the way to Azekah and Makkedah. ¹¹ As they fled before Israel on the road down from Beth Horon to Azekah, the Lord hurled large hailstones down on them, and more of them died from the hail than were killed by the swords of the Israelites.

¹² On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord in the presence of Israel:

“Sun, stand still over Gibeon,
    and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.”
¹³ So the sun stood still,
    and the moon stopped,
    till the nation avenged itself on^[b] its enemies,

as it is written in the Book of Jashar.

The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. ¹⁴ There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the Lord listened to a human being. Surely the Lord was fighting for Israel!

¹⁵ Then Joshua returned with all Israel to the camp at Gilgal.

Five Amorite Kings Killed

¹⁶ Now the five kings had fled and hidden in the cave at Makkedah. ¹⁷ When Joshua was told that the five kings had been found hiding in the cave at Makkedah, ¹⁸ he said, “Roll large rocks up to the mouth of the cave, and post some men there to guard it. ¹⁹ But don’t stop; pursue your enemies! Attack them from the rear and don’t let them reach their cities, for the Lord your God has given them into your hand.”

²⁰ So Joshua and the Israelites defeated them completely, but a few survivors managed to reach their fortified cities. ²¹ The whole army then returned safely to Joshua in the camp at Makkedah, and no one uttered a word against the Israelites.

²² Joshua said, “Open the mouth of the cave and bring those five kings out to me.” ²³ So they brought the five kings out of the cave—the kings of Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon. ²⁴ When they had brought these kings to Joshua, he summoned all the men of Israel and said to the army commanders who had come with him, “Come here and put your feet on the necks of these kings.” So they came forward and placed their feet on their necks.

²⁵ Joshua said to them, “Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Be strong and courageous. This is what the Lord will do to all the enemies you are going to fight.” ²⁶ Then Joshua put the kings to death and exposed their bodies on five poles, and they were left hanging on the poles until evening.

²⁷ At sunset Joshua gave the order and they took them down from the poles and threw them into the cave where they had been hiding. At the mouth of the cave they placed large rocks, which are there to this day.

Southern Cities Conquered

²⁸ That day Joshua took Makkedah. He put the city and its king to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it. He left no survivors. And he did to the king of Makkedah as he had done to the king of Jericho.

²⁹ Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Makkedah to Libnah and attacked it. ³⁰ The Lord also gave that city and its king into Israel’s hand. The city and everyone in it Joshua put to the sword. He left no survivors there. And he did to its king as he had done to the king of Jericho.

³¹ Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Libnah to Lachish; he took up positions against it and attacked it. ³² The Lord gave Lachish into Israel’s hands, and Joshua took it on the second day. The city and everyone in it he put to the sword, just as he had done to Libnah. ³³ Meanwhile, Horam king of Gezer had come up to help Lachish, but Joshua defeated him and his army—until no survivors were left.

³⁴ Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Lachish to Eglon; they took up positions against it and attacked it. ³⁵ They captured it that same day and put it to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it, just as they had done to Lachish.

³⁶ Then Joshua and all Israel with him went up from Eglon to Hebron and attacked it. ³⁷ They took the city and put it to the sword, together with its king, its villages and everyone in it. They left no survivors. Just as at Eglon, they totally destroyed it and everyone in it.

³⁸ Then Joshua and all Israel with him turned around and attacked Debir. ³⁹ They took the city, its king and its villages, and put them to the sword. Everyone in it they totally destroyed. They left no survivors. They did to Debir and its king as they had done to Libnah and its king and to Hebron.

⁴⁰ So Joshua subdued the whole region, including the hill country, the Negev, the western foothills and the mountain slopes, together with all their kings. He left no survivors. He totally destroyed all who breathed, just as the Lord, the God of Israel, had commanded. ⁴¹ Joshua subdued them from Kadesh Barnea to Gaza and from the whole region of Goshen to Gibeon. ⁴² All these kings and their lands Joshua conquered in one campaign, because the Lord, the God of Israel, fought for Israel.

⁴³ Then Joshua returned with all Israel to the camp at Gilgal.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 10:1 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them; also in verses 28, 35, 37, 39 and 40.
2. Joshua 10:13 Or nation triumphed over

Where I've been . . .

I didn't post here for a couple of days because I've been reviewing proposals for a federal agency. I'm not allowed to say anything specific about it, but it did get me to thinking. First of all, as I've been saying here lately, federal support for basic science and innovative technology that has the character of public goods is essential to national welfare and for that matter the future of humanity. 

 

Yeah yeah, technology got us into most of this mess but it's also the only way out. Starting in the 19th Century -- well a bit before maybe but it really got going then -- humanity experienced an explosion of knowledge and technological development. But what didn't come with it was the wisdom to use it responsibly or the understanding of our place on the planet and its limitations. Now, at least some of us are starting to understand that better. (Not, unfortunately, anyone who identifies with the Republican party.)

While we need a second Great Transformation, there are some smaller transformations going on that we barely notice. One of these is in health and medicine. Telecommunications, machine learning, and artificial intelligence are starting to revolutionize diagnosis, treatment decision making and disease management, clinical communication, and personal wellness and self care. For  while now, if you wind up in the ER in the middle of the night, you X-ray may have been read by a radiologist in Australia. Soon, however, it might be a computer. The pandemic has accelerated a trend that probably would have gotten going pretty soon anyway, of remote interaction with health care providers. Technology is also just starting to revolutionize psychiatry, by finally elucidating the neurobiological basis of behavior and emotion. Machine learning is also starting to revolutionize our understanding of clinical and counseling communication.

 

There's a lot more going on, but what it adds up to is overturning everything I've spent my career studying. Very quickly it's all going to be a whole lot different, and this old dog is going to have to learn some new tricks.

Basic info on the J&J vaccine kerfuffle

I've seen a lot of chatter to the effect that the FDA/CDC advise to pause administration of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine is ignorant, counterproductive, foolish and contrary to the public interest. The same reaction followed when many countries in the EU halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine, accusing the authorities of succumbing to the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. Well no. There is a legitimate debate about whether this was an overreaction, I suppose, but it isn't simple.

Here's a good summary of the issues. It isn't as simple as saying there have been six cases of the adverse effect -- cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, a rare event in the first place, but associated with low platelet count in these cases which is unusual -- out of more than six million doses. So that's one in a million, far less dangerous than actually getting Covid-19, so why are we even paying attention to it?

Well, in the first place, all of the cases are in young adult women, who are at low risk from Covid-19 complications, so the cost-benefit calculus isn't quite as extreme as it might appear at first glance. And it's not just "blood clots," as most news stories have it, it's something more specific and much more rare. Also, most doctors have never seen this and won't know to recognize it or how to treat it. Also, if this can happen maybe there is some biological mechanism going on that could have other ill effects which haven't yet been recognized. The same complication seems to be associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine and they both use adenovirus vectors, so something seems to be going on there that the regulatory agencies want to understand.

They may move very quickly to make recommendations, which might be, for example, that this is not the best choice of vaccine for women younger than 50; that information be disseminated to the medical community about how to recognize this and treat it; and that research continue and very careful monitoring be instituted for this vaccine. There is little cost to the pause because there is a lot of Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna vaccine available and this one isn't really needed in the U.S., although it's a lot easier to distribute and administer under some relatively challenging circumstances. It only requires one dose and it doesn't need to be kept as cold, so it's handier. 

The fear is that this may contribute to more general distrust of vaccines. It shouldn't, logically. On the contrary, the risk is very low, no matter how you slice it, and the regulators have demonstrated extremely high vigilance. Unfortunately facts and logic aren't that influential any more. But if you're willing to take it from me, not to worry. Get vaccinated.

Wednesday Bible Study: One weird trick

Joshua 9 is a very strange story. Of course Biblical apologists find deep meaning in it, although I would say that whatever moral lesson you might try to draw is easily demolished, especially in the context. The Gibeonites trick the Israelites into a treaty which precludes the Israelites from massacring them as they are everyone else in the area. When the Israelites discover the deception, they nevertheless still consider themselves bound by the treaty, but only part way. They won't murder the Gibeonites, they'll just enslave them. 

So why is this here? I haven't been able to find that there's any historical record of it, but it is possible that at the time this was written -- 300 years or more after it supposedly happened -- the Gibeonites were a subject people of Judah. That's what the text literally says. Or at least, in general terms, the writers wanted to endorse the idea of subjugation. Note that Yahweh butts out of this -- he could have warned the people of the deception, but he is absent from this part of the story. Make of it what you will.

9 Now when all the kings west of the Jordan heard about these things—the kings in the hill country, in the western foothills, and along the entire coast of the Mediterranean Sea as far as Lebanon (the kings of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites)— ² they came together to wage war against Joshua and Israel.

³ However, when the people of Gibeon heard what Joshua had done to Jericho and Ai, ⁴ they resorted to a ruse: They went as a delegation whose donkeys were loaded^[a] with worn-out sacks and old wineskins, cracked and mended. ⁵ They put worn and patched sandals on their feet and wore old clothes. All the bread of their food supply was dry and moldy. ⁶ Then they went to Joshua in the camp at Gilgal and said to him and the Israelites, “We have come from a distant country; make a treaty with us.”

⁷ The Israelites said to the Hivites, “But perhaps you live near us, so how can we make a treaty with you?”

⁸ “We are your servants,” they said to Joshua.

But Joshua asked, “Who are you and where do you come from?”

⁹ They answered: “Your servants have come from a very distant country because of the fame of the Lord your God. For we have heard reports of him: all that he did in Egypt, ¹⁰ and all that he did to the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan—Sihon king of Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth. ¹¹ And our elders and all those living in our country said to us, ‘Take provisions for your journey; go and meet them and say to them, “We are your servants; make a treaty with us.”’ ¹² This bread of ours was warm when we packed it at home on the day we left to come to you. But now see how dry and moldy it is. ¹³ And these wineskins that we filled were new, but see how cracked they are. And our clothes and sandals are worn out by the very long journey.”

¹⁴ The Israelites sampled their provisions but did not inquire of the Lord. ¹⁵ Then Joshua made a treaty of peace with them to let them live, and the leaders of the assembly ratified it by oath.

¹⁶ Three days after they made the treaty with the Gibeonites, the Israelites heard that they were neighbors, living near them. ¹⁷ So the Israelites set out and on the third day came to their cities: Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth and Kiriath Jearim. ¹⁸ But the Israelites did not attack them, because the leaders of the assembly had sworn an oath to them by the Lord, the God of Israel.

The whole assembly grumbled against the leaders, ¹⁹ but all the leaders answered, “We have given them our oath by the Lord, the God of Israel, and we cannot touch them now. ²⁰ This is what we will do to them: We will let them live, so that God’s wrath will not fall on us for breaking the oath we swore to them.” ²¹ They continued, “Let them live, but let them be woodcutters and water carriers in the service of the whole assembly.” So the leaders’ promise to them was kept.

²² Then Joshua summoned the Gibeonites and said, “Why did you deceive us by saying, ‘We live a long way from you,’ while actually you live near us? ²³ You are now under a curse: You will never be released from service as woodcutters and water carriers for the house of my God.”

²⁴ They answered Joshua, “Your servants were clearly told how the Lord your God had commanded his servant Moses to give you the whole land and to wipe out all its inhabitants from before you. So we feared for our lives because of you, and that is why we did this. ²⁵ We are now in your hands. Do to us whatever seems good and right to you.”

²⁶ So Joshua saved them from the Israelites, and they did not kill them. ²⁷ That day he made the Gibeonites woodcutters and water carriers for the assembly, to provide for the needs of the altar of the Lord at the place the Lord would choose. And that is what they are to this day.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 9:4 Most Hebrew manuscripts; some Hebrew manuscripts, Vulgate and Syriac (see also Septuagint) They prepared provisions and loaded their donkeys

Shorter Philip E. Agre . . .

 By David Roberts. Read the whole thread, but here are the highlights.

All the people who think there was some noble, credible US conservatism that has "fallen," or been "taken over" by Trumpism, tell me: why was it so weak? Why did it offer so little resistance? Why did it devolve so *easily* into reactionary madness? Doesn't it make you wonder?

 

Pizza's cooking, so: my theory of conservatism. Basically, in any society, there's a group/class/demographic that has power & privileges, sometimes economic, sometimes relating to race or caste. And every such group has a story about why their place at the top is justified. The US was founded on equality -- at least that's what it said on the tin -- so its ruling class (white property owning males) came up w/ a story about property rights, "free markets," "small government," & federalism. They *earned* their privileges! . . .

But in all societies, when that privileged class begins feeling threatened, outnumbered, & insecure, the politesse fades. The high-toned philosophical justifications drop out. Raw tribalism takes over. The class is always, first & foremost, for its own continued hegemony. 
And this has basically been the course of US conservatism in the 21st century: from a self-serious, high-falutin' "party of ideas" to a raw, raging army fighting for white hegemony. Once they got scared, all pretense of "free market" & "family values" went right out the window.

 

 

Like I've been telling you . . .

 Open letter from prominent economists to federal leadership:

The share of our Gross Domestic Product invested in federally funded research and development has fallen from around 2 percent in 1960 to just 0.6 percent today; this means less knowledge-creation, fewer good jobs, and a harder time boosting employment in new sectors. Research—and common sense—tell us that this disinvestment is damaging for U.S. communities and our economy as older infrastructure depreciates, and economic and social challenges go unaddressed.

This government disinvestment has also placed the United States at an extreme competitive disadvantage in relation to other countries. Among OECD countries, the United States ranks 22nd in government investment as a percentage of GDP. And female labor force participation has been largely in decline since 1999, in contrast to rising rates in other OECD countries that invest more heavily in care infrastructure.

 

Government has to make the necessary investments in public goods that private investors won't make. You can call that socialism if you want to, but that's just a word. I can call you a poopyhead. That is not an argument. Free Market™ ideology is destroying us.

State of Denial

It's just human nature, I suppose, but we have to face and defeat our instinct to turn away and pretend that predictable catastrophe isn't actually happening. Al Gore titled his documentary An Inconvenient Truth, recognizing that people won't see what they don't want to see, but 15 years later, nothing has really changed. 

So here's the deal. Much of the southwest U.S is already in extreme drought, and it's going to get much worse. The cold truth is that there will not be enough water to sustain the population and industry of a vast stretch of the country. To quote the CNN story, "While there will be wet years, the overall trend is towards drying. Scientists say this is a result of human-caused climate change, which is leading to less reliable rain and warmer temperatures — both consistent with what has been projected by climate computer models." If you thought the wildfires were bad last year, just wait. 

 

Wanna know why all those Guatemalan children are showing up on the southern border? Heres' why:  

Rising numbers of children in Guatemala are going hungry as drought linked to climate change reduces food harvests, fueling child malnutrition rates in the Central American nation, the United Nations and charities said. . . .

"There is an increase in cases of acute malnutrition that are related to climate change and the long periods of drought from June to October (last year)," said Maria Claudia Santizo, a nutrition specialist at the U.N. children's agency UNICEF. Drought is also adding to the area of Guatemala suffering problems, she said. "With climate change, the dry corridor has expanded," Santizo told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Poor harvests of staple crops such as beans and maize mean rural families are forced to eat fewer meals a day, and have less food to sell, according to the World Food Programme (WFP). Families also are unable to store food to see them through the lean period before the next harvest, the U.N. agency said.

"We are seeing a high rate of child malnutrition that's rising for two reasons - high temperatures which affect the crops and resulting crop losses, and rains that are more erratic and unpredictable," said Amy English, a technical advisor at international aid agency Mercy Corps, which works in Guatemala.

 

In other words, they're fleeing north because the alternative is starving to death. This is also why Syrian society collapsed, and why millions of migrants from the Middle East and Africa are trying to get to Europe. This will only get worse, and it's happening much faster than experts predicted just a few years ago. Are you looking forward to hurricane season?  

To people who can't read: I didn't say that the Guatemalan drought is a brand new thing or that the drought alone has caused the recent increase in unaccompanied minors at the border. Actually the devastating hurricanes that hit Central America last year are part of the explanation, Also, the effects of the drought are cumulative -- people hold out for as long as they can but conditions keep getting worse and worse, including deteriorating social conditions, violence, and civil disorder. So you will tend to see more people over time. Finally, of course it's possible that people think the Biden administration will change policies to give people a better chance of getting asylum, although in fact that has not happened yet. But I personally don't think that would be a bad thing.

Sunday Sermonette: More family values

I'm afraid the Book of Joshua is going to be very tedious. It's one genocide after another. You will find many religious apologists claim that religion is necessary for morality, that without religious faith there can be no way to tell right from wrong. Isn't it odd that I, who have no religious faith, can determine that the entire Book of Joshua is monstrously wrong, and that living according to Biblical morality would make you the precise moral equivalent of Adolf Hitler? Regarding the ending of the first part of the chapter, what did the king of Ai ever do to the Israelites? 

8 Then the Lord said to Joshua, “Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Take the whole army with you, and go up and attack Ai. For I have delivered into your hands the king of Ai, his people, his city and his land. ² You shall do to Ai and its king as you did to Jericho and its king, except that you may carry off their plunder and livestock for yourselves. Set an ambush behind the city.”

³ So Joshua and the whole army moved out to attack Ai. He chose thirty thousand of his best fighting men and sent them out at night ⁴ with these orders: “Listen carefully. You are to set an ambush behind the city. Don’t go very far from it. All of you be on the alert. ⁵ I and all those with me will advance on the city, and when the men come out against us, as they did before, we will flee from them. ⁶ They will pursue us until we have lured them away from the city, for they will say, ‘They are running away from us as they did before.’ So when we flee from them, ⁷ you are to rise up from ambush and take the city. The Lord your God will give it into your hand. ⁸ When you have taken the city, set it on fire. Do what the Lord has commanded. See to it; you have my orders.”

⁹ Then Joshua sent them off, and they went to the place of ambush and lay in wait between Bethel and Ai, to the west of Ai—but Joshua spent that night with the people.

¹⁰ Early the next morning Joshua mustered his army, and he and the leaders of Israel marched before them to Ai. ¹¹ The entire force that was with him marched up and approached the city and arrived in front of it. They set up camp north of Ai, with the valley between them and the city. ¹² Joshua had taken about five thousand men and set them in ambush between Bethel and Ai, to the west of the city. ¹³ So the soldiers took up their positions—with the main camp to the north of the city and the ambush to the west of it. That night Joshua went into the valley.

¹⁴ When the king of Ai saw this, he and all the men of the city hurried out early in the morning to meet Israel in battle at a certain place overlooking the Arabah. But he did not know that an ambush had been set against him behind the city. ¹⁵ Joshua and all Israel let themselves be driven back before them, and they fled toward the wilderness. ¹⁶ All the men of Ai were called to pursue them, and they pursued Joshua and were lured away from the city. ¹⁷ Not a man remained in Ai or Bethel who did not go after Israel. They left the city open and went in pursuit of Israel.

¹⁸ Then the Lord said to Joshua, “Hold out toward Ai the javelin that is in your hand, for into your hand I will deliver the city.” So Joshua held out toward the city the javelin that was in his hand. ¹⁹ As soon as he did this, the men in the ambush rose quickly from their position and rushed forward. They entered the city and captured it and quickly set it on fire.

²⁰ The men of Ai looked back and saw the smoke of the city rising up into the sky, but they had no chance to escape in any direction; the Israelites who had been fleeing toward the wilderness had turned back against their pursuers. ²¹ For when Joshua and all Israel saw that the ambush had taken the city and that smoke was going up from it, they turned around and attacked the men of Ai. ²² Those in the ambush also came out of the city against them, so that they were caught in the middle, with Israelites on both sides. Israel cut them down, leaving them neither survivors nor fugitives. ²³ But they took the king of Ai alive and brought him to Joshua.

²⁴ When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai in the fields and in the wilderness where they had chased them, and when every one of them had been put to the sword, all the Israelites returned to Ai and killed those who were in it. ²⁵ Twelve thousand men and women fell that day—all the people of Ai. ²⁶ For Joshua did not draw back the hand that held out his javelin until he had destroyed^[a] all who lived in Ai. ²⁷ But Israel did carry off for themselves the livestock and plunder of this city, as the Lord had instructed Joshua.

²⁸ So Joshua burned Ai^[b] and made it a permanent heap of ruins, a desolate place to this day. ²⁹ He impaled the body of the king of Ai on a pole and left it there until evening. At sunset, Joshua ordered them to take the body from the pole and throw it down at the entrance of the city gate. And they raised a large pile of rocks over it, which remains to this day.

The Covenant Renewed at Mount Ebal

³⁰ Then Joshua built on Mount Ebal an altar to the Lord, the God of Israel, ³¹ as Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded the Israelites. He built it according to what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses—an altar of uncut stones, on which no iron tool had been used. On it they offered to the Lord burnt offerings and sacrificed fellowship offerings. ³² There, in the presence of the Israelites, Joshua wrote on stones a copy of the law of Moses. ³³ All the Israelites, with their elders, officials and judges, were standing on both sides of the ark of the covenant of the Lord, facing the Levitical priests who carried it. Both the foreigners living among them and the native-born were there. Half of the people stood in front of Mount Gerizim and half of them in front of Mount Ebal, as Moses the servant of the Lord had formerly commanded when he gave instructions to bless the people of Israel.

³⁴ Afterward, Joshua read all the words of the law—the blessings and the curses—just as it is written in the Book of the Law. ³⁵ There was not a word of all that Moses had commanded that Joshua did not read to the whole assembly of Israel, including the women and children, and the foreigners who lived among them.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 8:26 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them.
2. Joshua 8:28 Ai means the ruin.

Hoarding: Buried Alive

The U.S. and some other wealthy countries are making progress toward vaccinating enough people to achieve herd immunity. Whether we will actually get there depends on whether disinformation promulgated mostly by conservative propagandists stops people from doing what's right for themselves, their families, their community, and their country -- which for example 40% of Marines have refused to do. But even if we can overcome this insanity, we have an even bigger problem.

So far 87% of vaccine doses have gone to high or upper middle income countries, and only 0.2% to people in low income countries. That's because the rich countries bought up all the doses. So what, you say? Those are shithole countries anyway, we're rich because we're better and smarter and whiter and we deserve to get the vaccine first. The problem, Tucker, is that as the virus continues to circulate among the billions of people in Africa, Asia and South America who will not have access to vaccines, it will continue to mutate, and then it will come back and get us and our vaccines won't work any more. Then we'll be right back where we were in November. It is imperative, as a matter of urgency, that the rich countries fund a massive effort to vaccinate the world. It is a small world after all.

A word or two more about Gaetzgate

It was pretty funny when Mitch McConnell said that corporate CEOs should stay out of politics, since as everybody who doesn't need a glass navel to see already knows, McConnell has been the political poodle of corporate CEOs for his entire career. Because the basic mission of the Republican party is to transfer wealth from working people to plutocrats, hardly anybody would vote for them if they campaigned on their actual platform. Hence we get Dr. Seuss, Mr. Potatohead, and Family Values™. 

It isn't just the occasional sinner, however, who exposes the basic hypocrisy of the conservative "movement". The are all hypocrites. Because of the WaPo paywall, I'll give you Alexandra Petri via PZ Myers:

I keep coming back to the detail in CNN’s report that this wasn’t something Matt Gaetz did a single time, but repeatedly. Because if it happened more than once — if it happened twice, even — that is because the first time went better than it should have.

To me, this is something you do, ideally, zero times. You never experience the impulse to do it, and you lead a pleasant life. You travel. You eat lunchmeat sandwiches. Maybe you do a marathon, or climb something. You lead a blithe existence for many decades, you die in your bed in your mid-nineties surrounded by your cherished relatives, and in all that time, you never walk up to a colleague on the floor of the House of Representatives and out of nowhere present him with a nude photograph of someone you claim to have had sex with.

But if you can’t do it zero times, then ideally it happens only once. It happens only once, because the moment you do it, the person you show it to responds the way a person should respond. You produce your photograph to your colleague, and your colleague looks at you and says, “Never show that to anyone, ever again. Go home and rethink your life. I do not feel closer to you. If anything, I want to have you removed forcibly from my presence by strong gentlemen whose biceps are tattooed with ‘MOM.’ The fact that you thought this would make us closer makes me question every decision in my life that has led me to this point. Leave now and never come back.”

 

But no. Not a single one of them said one word. Nobody made a referral to the Ethics Committee, nobody even told him to stop doing it, apparently. But then we have the example of their Dear Leader. (As far as we know, and we can presume this is true, he only showed the pictures to his Republican colleagues.)

Wednesday Bible Study: A major fuckup

Remember that the Book of Joshua is a fictitious work created with a purpose: to assert the claim of the kings of Judah, both to territory and to wealth. It seems a dubious claim from our point of view because it is based on theft and genocide, but in this case it is theft and genocide endorsed by God, so that is presumably the source of legitimacy. Chapter 7 is not about territory, but about property, specifically the priestly treasury. And once again, it also enforces the absolute requirement of obedience.

7 But the Israelites were unfaithful in regard to the devoted things^[a]; Achan son of Karmi, the son of Zimri,^[b] the son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took some of them. So the Lord’s anger burned against Israel.

Note that KJV translates this as "accursed things" rather than "devoted things," but as the footnote suggests, this is probably a better translation although there isn't any real equivalent in English. As it turns out, in this particular instance, it refers to a combination of something that should have been destroyed, and other objects that should have been given to the priestly treasury.

² Now Joshua sent men from Jericho to Ai, which is near Beth Aven to the east of Bethel, and told them, “Go up and spy out the region.” So the men went up and spied out Ai.

³ When they returned to Joshua, they said, “Not all the army will have to go up against Ai. Send two or three thousand men to take it and do not weary the whole army, for only a few people live there.” ⁴ So about three thousand went up; but they were routed by the men of Ai, ⁵ who killed about thirty-six of them. They chased the Israelites from the city gate as far as the stone quarries and struck them down on the slopes. At this the hearts of the people melted in fear and became like water.

⁶ Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell facedown to the ground before the ark of the Lord, remaining there till evening. The elders of Israel did the same, and sprinkled dust on their heads. ⁷ And Joshua said, “Alas, Sovereign Lord, why did you ever bring this people across the Jordan to deliver us into the hands of the Amorites to destroy us? If only we had been content to stay on the other side of the Jordan! ⁸ Pardon your servant, Lord. What can I say, now that Israel has been routed by its enemies? ⁹ The Canaanites and the other people of the country will hear about this and they will surround us and wipe out our name from the earth. What then will you do for your own great name?”

¹⁰ The Lord said to Joshua, “Stand up! What are you doing down on your face? ¹¹ Israel has sinned; they have violated my covenant, which I commanded them to keep. They have taken some of the devoted things; they have stolen, they have lied, they have put them with their own possessions. ¹² That is why the Israelites cannot stand against their enemies; they turn their backs and run because they have been made liable to destruction. I will not be with you anymore unless you destroy whatever among you is devoted to destruction.

Note the implication: the Israelites deserve no credit for martial skill or valor; not on the other hand any blame for defeat. The success or failure of their armies depends entirely on the will of Yahweh.

¹³ “Go, consecrate the people. Tell them, ‘Consecrate yourselves in preparation for tomorrow; for this is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: There are devoted things among you, Israel. You cannot stand against your enemies until you remove them.

¹⁴ “‘In the morning, present yourselves tribe by tribe. The tribe the Lord chooses shall come forward clan by clan; the clan the Lord chooses shall come forward family by family; and the family the Lord chooses shall come forward man by man. ¹⁵ Whoever is caught with the devoted things shall be destroyed by fire, along with all that belongs to him. He has violated the covenant of the Lord and has done an outrageous thing in Israel!’”

¹⁶ Early the next morning Joshua had Israel come forward by tribes, and Judah was chosen. ¹⁷ The clans of Judah came forward, and the Zerahites were chosen. He had the clan of the Zerahites come forward by families, and Zimri was chosen. ¹⁸ Joshua had his family come forward man by man, and Achan son of Karmi, the son of Zimri, the son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, was chosen.

¹⁹ Then Joshua said to Achan, “My son, give glory to the Lord, the God of Israel, and honor him. Tell me what you have done; do not hide it from me.”

²⁰ Achan replied, “It is true! I have sinned against the Lord, the God of Israel. This is what I have done: ²¹ When I saw in the plunder a beautiful robe from Babylonia,^[c] two hundred shekels^[d] of silver and a bar of gold weighing fifty shekels,^[e] I coveted them and took them. They are hidden in the ground inside my tent, with the silver underneath.”

The robe should have been destroyed, the gold and silver given to the priests.

²² So Joshua sent messengers, and they ran to the tent, and there it was, hidden in his tent, with the silver underneath. ²³ They took the things from the tent, brought them to Joshua and all the Israelites and spread them out before the Lord.

²⁴ Then Joshua, together with all Israel, took Achan son of Zerah, the silver, the robe, the gold bar, his sons and daughters, his cattle, donkeys and sheep, his tent and all that he had, to the Valley of Achor. ²⁵ Joshua said, “Why have you brought this trouble on us? The Lord will bring trouble on you today.”

Then all Israel stoned him, and after they had stoned the rest, they burned them. ²⁶ Over Achan they heaped up a large pile of rocks, which remains to this day. Then the Lord turned from his fierce anger. Therefore that place has been called the Valley of Achor^[f] ever since.

The Valley of Achor cannot be identified with any specific geological feature. The name did not remain in use.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 7:1 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them; also in verses 11, 12, 13 and 15.
2. Joshua 7:1 See Septuagint and 1 Chron. 2:6; Hebrew Zabdi; also in verses 17 and 18.
3. Joshua 7:21 Hebrew Shinar
4. Joshua 7:21 That is, about 5 pounds or about 2.3 kilograms
5. Joshua 7:21 That is, about 1 1/4 pounds or about 575 grams
6. Joshua 7:26 Achor means trouble.

The Days of Miracles and Wonder

Here's a good overview by Derek Thompson in The Atlantic of the history of mRNA technology. This heretofore obscure field of biomedical research burst into view with the Covid-19 vaccines, but the apparent suddenness of vaccine development was misleading. As I have noted here before, the technology was decades in development. As the technology became more mature, Pfizer partnered with one of the speculative ventures, BionTech, originally to develop flu vaccines, and then of course pivoted to Covid-19. Unlike Moderna, Pfizer actually didn't take federal funding for that final stage of development. But for most of the decades, the work depended on government and philanthropic funding -- the big publicly traded drug companies won't invest very much in areas of basic biology with only speculative prospect for commercial success.

And that's understandable. Most basic research doesn't end up having any commercial application, at least not for a very long time. I have mentioned this before in reference to physics, although after a century quantum theory does finally have some application in electronic devices and relativity is applicable to the Global Positioning System. In the case of mRNA, however, Covid-19 vaccines are likely only the beginning. There is potential for vaccines against any number of infectious and parasitic diseases; for vaccines that target the specific cells of an individual cancer; and, in a spin-off technology, for injections that can get the body to manufacture its own therapeutic proteins. The latter is problematic in a way that mRNA technology is not, to be sure. The mRNA in the Covid vaccines can't replicate, so it doesn't make any lasting change other than the presence of antibodies to the virus. The long-term safety of sustainable, sRNA technology, is not so obvious. Nevertheless the potential is astonishing.

The main point I want to make from all this is that public investment in science is essential to scientific and ultimately, technological progress. Technological development can be good or bad -- we're seeing a lot of the bad in climate change, particulate pollution, resource depletion -- but we aren't going to solve these problems the Ted Kaczynski way, by going back to the neolithic. The only way out is through -- we need to develop technologies that can support our civilization sustainably. That requires putting tax dollars to work. That's the only hope.

And please note, the whole idea is that basic research has uncertain payoff. Some ideas turn out to be dead ends; some hypotheses are disproved; some scientific findings don't have any immediate technological payoff. I'm talking about high risk/high reward investigations.  It is precisely because any economic payoff is uncertain that business corporations will tend to underinvest in this sort of research that government needs to support it. You can't predict in advance what will pay off, so some of the investment won't. That's the point, not an objection.

Sunday Sermonette: Not very spiritual

Joshua 6 is one of the better known chapters in the Bible, probably because it is the subject of a famous and much-recorded African American slave song, usually titled "Joshua fit the battle of Jericho,"  fit, of course, being dialect for fought. It is interesting that the subject matter of most slave songs with Biblical content, conventionally called spirituals, is Old Testament. That suggests that the slaveholders' religious instruction of their slaves focused heavily on OT stories, or perhaps that the  slaves found the OT more inspirational. The symbolic meaning of the song to its creators and the people who sang it would have been quite different from what the slaveholders wanted; the same must be said of other such songs such as Go Down Moses.

There is a good deal more about this chapter that is notable so it merits some exegesis. First of all, this is entirely fictitious. There was a human settlement at Jericho as long as 10,000 years ago, in other words at about the earliest time people made settlements at all. Because there are springs there, it is a desirable location in an arid land. However, the city was destroyed by an Egyptian invasion in the 15th Century BCE, and the site was unoccupied in the 13th Century, when these events purportedly occurred. A Judean city was built there later, in the 10th Century. As I have noted before, this account was written during the reign of King Josiah (d. c 609 BCE), and later revised. 

 

There is quite a bit to be said about the content of this story. The elaborate ritual the invading army is made to perform in order to bring about the miracle of the collapse of the city wall makes up a good half of the tale. God presumably could have knocked down the wall any time he wanted, but this reinforces the main content of the Torah, that is the essentiality of strict adherence to ritual, and the immense power of God to perform miracles. 

 

The morality of the Israelites undertaking a war of aggression in order to steal the land from its inhabitants is obviously not in accord with contemporary standards, although it is fully in accord with standards at the time of, say, the European invasion of the Americas. Nevertheless, the reason for this particular action is not clear, even in that context. If the idea is to occupy the land and exploit its resources, why kill all the animals and destroy the city, as well as massacre all its inhabitants? The soldiers are ordered to murder all of the children and women, as well as the men, and to plunder only the precious metals, which are to be given to "God," i.e. the priests; but the city is to be burned down and all other potentially useful objects must be destroyed. 

 

Finally there is the curious matter of Rahab and her family. They are saved because as you will recall she concealed the Israelite spies from the authorities. One must suppose that this is here as a suggestion that others among the enemies of the Israelites might benefit from betrayal. Since her house was built into the wall, that they somehow survived the collapse uninjured is presumably a miracle, though this goes unremarked. The modern Christian moralists who I just discussed will presumably have difficulty with the uncritical acceptance of Rahab's profession. If you know any, you might want to ask them about that.

6 Now the gates of Jericho were securely barred because of the Israelites. No one went out and no one came in.

² Then the Lord said to Joshua, “See, I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and its fighting men. ³ March around the city once with all the armed men. Do this for six days. ⁴ Have seven priests carry trumpets of rams’ horns in front of the ark. On the seventh day, march around the city seven times, with the priests blowing the trumpets. ⁵ When you hear them sound a long blast on the trumpets, have the whole army give a loud shout; then the wall of the city will collapse and the army will go up, everyone straight in.”

⁶ So Joshua son of Nun called the priests and said to them, “Take up the ark of the covenant of the Lord and have seven priests carry trumpets in front of it.” ⁷ And he ordered the army, “Advance! March around the city, with an armed guard going ahead of the ark of the Lord.”

⁸ When Joshua had spoken to the people, the seven priests carrying the seven trumpets before the Lord went forward, blowing their trumpets, and the ark of the Lord’s covenant followed them. ⁹ The armed guard marched ahead of the priests who blew the trumpets, and the rear guard followed the ark. All this time the trumpets were sounding. ¹⁰ But Joshua had commanded the army, “Do not give a war cry, do not raise your voices, do not say a word until the day I tell you to shout. Then shout!” ¹¹ So he had the ark of the Lord carried around the city, circling it once. Then the army returned to camp and spent the night there.

¹² Joshua got up early the next morning and the priests took up the ark of the Lord. ¹³ The seven priests carrying the seven trumpets went forward, marching before the ark of the Lord and blowing the trumpets. The armed men went ahead of them and the rear guard followed the ark of the Lord, while the trumpets kept sounding. ¹⁴ So on the second day they marched around the city once and returned to the camp. They did this for six days.

¹⁵ On the seventh day, they got up at daybreak and marched around the city seven times in the same manner, except that on that day they circled the city seven times. ¹⁶ The seventh time around, when the priests sounded the trumpet blast, Joshua commanded the army, “Shout! For the Lord has given you the city! ¹⁷ The city and all that is in it are to be devoted^[a] to the Lord. Only Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house shall be spared, because she hid the spies we sent. ¹⁸ But keep away from the devoted things, so that you will not bring about your own destruction by taking any of them. Otherwise you will make the camp of Israel liable to destruction and bring trouble on it. ¹⁹ All the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron are sacred to the Lord and must go into his treasury.”

²⁰ When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. ²¹ They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

²² Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the land, “Go into the prostitute’s house and bring her out and all who belong to her, in accordance with your oath to her.” ²³ So the young men who had done the spying went in and brought out Rahab, her father and mother, her brothers and sisters and all who belonged to her. They brought out her entire family and put them in a place outside the camp of Israel.

²⁴ Then they burned the whole city and everything in it, but they put the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron into the treasury of the Lord’s house. ²⁵ But Joshua spared Rahab the prostitute, with her family and all who belonged to her, because she hid the men Joshua had sent as spies to Jericho—and she lives among the Israelites to this day.

²⁶ At that time Joshua pronounced this solemn oath: “Cursed before the Lord is the one who undertakes to rebuild this city, Jericho:

“At the cost of his firstborn son
    he will lay its foundations;
at the cost of his youngest
    he will set up its gates.”

²⁷ So the Lord was with Joshua, and his fame spread throughout the land.

Footnotes

1. Joshua 6:17 The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the Lord, often by totally destroying them; also in verses 18 and 21.

Crime and Punishment Part Two

I noted a couple of days ago that the jails are full of people with mental illness or substance use disorders, that incarceration does not do anything to help these people, and that we would have less crime if we were to decriminalize possession or sale of small amounts of controlled substances, and divert people who commit non-violent drug-related crimes to treatment and supportive services instead of prosecution. Well, maybe I didn't spell all that out quite as explicitly as I could have, but that's what I'm arguing for.

However, that obviously does not account for everybody who is incarcerated. I need to explain something that not everyone knows. There are two main categories of state carceral institutions in the U.S., called jail and prison. It doesn't work exactly the same way in every state but the basic idea is that jails -- often run by counties rather than the state  -- house people who are awaiting trial, or who have been sentenced to one year or less. Prisons, run by the states, house people who have been convicted and sentenced to a term of more than one year. The federal system houses far fewer prisoners, although it does house some of the most notorious.

Anyway, you will read arguments that most of the people in prison have been convicted of serious felonies, including violent crimes. This is true, although it is not true of most people who are incarcerated at any given time. There are several arguments for why people who commit assault, armed robbery, rape, murder, grand larceny, and some other serious crimes, should be incarcerated. 

 

The first, and most persuasive from a purely pragmatic point of view, assuming it truly works, is deterrence. If there are people who would be inclined to commit such crimes, and after reflecting on the risk of incarceration choose not to, then  the penal system may have a large social benefit. This proposition is obviously difficult to test empirically -- we can't do the experiment of creating a law free zone -- but it's likely true in some cases. If some people who are otherwise morally unconstrained conclude from observing the experience of others that crime doesn't pay, they may refrain from crime, or at least do less of it. But I can't say how large an effect this has. Many crimes are impulsive, or committed by people who are reckless,  heedless of consequences, or driven by compulsions. 

The second reason is simply disablement. For as long as a person is  incarcerated, they aren't a threat to the larger community. Of course a limitation of this argument is that most prisoners will be released sooner or later, and imprisonment might make them more, not less likely to offend again. There are pretty good arguments for the former, at least under some circumstances, but individual cases vary. There is no doubt but that some people will say that they don't reoffend because they don't want to go back to prison. What the ratio is or the net effect is impossible to say, however. 

 

That said, there are some people who are so dangerous that the public would not tolerate them being released. There are psychopathic serial killers and rapists who won't control their behavior no matter what. I must say, however, that this not true of everybody with a very lengthy or life sentence, but it's hard to know the difference. At least we can say that serious crimes committed by people who are in their teens are not necessarily evidence that the person will not develop a conscience and impulse control when they are mature. The adolescent brain is not fully developed.

The third reason is simply an abstract concept of justice. People who are harmed by criminals, or who see harm done to others, want vengeance. The condemnation of the larger society is, to many people, an end in itself. We have to mark certain behaviors as reprehensible, and the criminal justice system is how we do it. I think there's  a lot to be said for that. (The question of exactly what behavior is reprehensible can be controversial. For example, Oscar Wilde was incarcerated for being homosexual.)

 

What this all comes down to for me is that we need to make sure that we incarcerate people for only the right reasons. Having a substance use disorder or engaging in consensual sexual conduct that is disapproved by a particular religion are not among them. Second, we have to think of most prisoners as people who will eventually be released, and we need to treat them in a way that will reduce, not increase, their risk of re-offending. The impulse that much of the public has to make the condition of prisoners as punitive as possible is totally counterproductive. People do not create themselves, we are all the product of forces we do not control, from our genes to the circumstances of our childhood, to possible psychiatric disorders, traumatic experiences, or desperate need. The question of what really ought to happen in prison is for later.

The Party of Family Values

The increasingly tawdry and grotesque story of Trump Mini-Me Matt Gaetz -- here's an update -- is just the latest in an unending, continual, predictable, depressing, ugly and yet darkly comical procession of Bible thumpers and political champions of "traditional" sexual morality who are publicly exposed as total hypocrites. 

 

I can't say whether Republican politicians are more likely than Democrats to be the subject of sex scandals in general, if you include sexual harassment -- Andrew Cuomo needs to resign, BTW -- but some kinds of scandals are only possible for so-called social conservatives. It isn't a scandal that Pete Buttigieg is gay, but it was a scandal that Sen. Larry Craig engaged in homosexual activity. It's not that big of a deal if a liberal politician has an affair or gets divorced, but it was indeed a big deal when Newt Gingrich was outed as having an extramarital affair with a woman 23 years his junior while he presided over the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

 

The idolatry of the former guy is enough to prove that they don't really mean it. When I call Gaetz Mini-Me I mean that in all respects.* I'm not an expert in the psychology of this, but Jay Michaelson had some thoughts back in 2017 --  even before the saga of Jerry Falwell Jr. and the poolboy, or one you may have missed, Ravi Zacharias, who was eulogized by Mike Pence, or Donald Foose, or many others. Michaelson notes that he had easily uncovered 17 recent preacher sex scandals just with a little googling. So here's his analysis:

[O]ur blasé attitude toward clerical sexual philandering minimizes the serious harms it causes: primarily to the victims, but also to sexual and gender minorities who are persecuted in public precisely because these conservative Christians are wrestling with their own demons in private.

And that is the point that’s usually missed when the mainstream media covers religious “hypocrites” or “perverts” or whatever. It’s also missed when anti-LGBT and anti-women religious conservatives are described as “haters” or “bigots.” They’re not haters—they’re fear-ers, and the people they’re most afraid of are themselves.

There is a direct line from the religious hysteria over trans people in bathrooms to religious people hysterical over their own wayward libidos. It’s well known that the most homophobic people are also the most aroused by homosexual stimuli—this has been established in a variety of studies, some measuring arousal with ingenious devices attached to the “straight” men’s penises. Psychologically, this is what Freud called “reaction formation”—essentially, projecting your psychological baggage onto someone else.

But conservative Christianity is institutionalized reaction formation. Socially, culturally, and theologically, it drums in the message that sex is bad, that you are bad for wanting it, and that people who say they want it are even worse than you. This is not true for liberal Christians (or Jews or Muslims); but it is true for almost all conservative Christians (or Jews or Muslims).

And that of course brings up the case of Robert Aaron Long, who murdered 8 people in Atlanta including 6 Asian women and blamed it on psychosexual torment created by his conservative Evangelical church. Of course in this case it was also bound up with a racist component, although it's not entirely unique in that respect. What is really sad is that these people are a fervent, monolithic voting bloc, and they vote for politicians who claim to champion their "values" while doing everything possible in office to harm their economic interests and life opportunities. 

There is also a conversation to be had about this in the context of the anti-abortion movement, but I'll save that for later.

 

* Don't forget about the late Roy Cohn, Donald Trump's lawyer, who was a gay man who persecuted gay men. Also J. Edgar Hoover.