What's Long Range in Abortion Battles?

 Kevin Drum questions whether a national 15 week ban on abortion with exception for the woman's health would be acceptable to his audience. Many of the comments don't reply, instead insisting it will never happen.

I wonder what happens if and when liberals gain a majority on SCOTUS. I assume that will happen at some point in our history, and before anything medically has changed the landscape. So SCOTUS changes, and liberals bring a test case asking the court to reverse Dobbs. Seems as if they'd have some choices--push for the landscape after Casey using Casey's arguments, come up with different arguments (as RBG had thought), go for different rules (maybe a national position). But I wouldn't see any new arguments or positions as changing the logic of the pro-life camp.  

So if Dobbs is reversed then the pro-lifers revert to their simple position and we're fated to continue the argument and possible SCOTUS flip-flopping into the future?

Women's Economic Activity

 Reading "The Wife of Bath".  Stumbled on the first sentence of Chapter 3, where the author Marion Turner claims that "women have also always been economically active.."  She's focused on European women and the Middle Ages, but somehow the phrase caused me to think.  "Economically active" isn't defined here, but I'd expect it to mean earning and spending money, which would make it more limited than working, although there might be a Venn diagram there.

I think we can assume that almost all women everywhere have worked for much of their lives, if competent, just as almost all men have worked, if competent. I don't know that we'd usually consider spending money as working, at least in common parlance, but we would, I think, consider it as economic activity.

The formal definition of "work" seems to be the expending of effort or thought to accomplish something.

Somehow the subject is fascinating, even if I'm not going anywhere with it today.

How Did the Academy Become Liberal

 IIRC in my young the American Medical Association and the American Bar Association were generally quite conservative, perhaps with an exception for the ABA on civil rights (though ChatGpt says it was criticized for being too conservative).

At my college the most liberal professor was Douglas Dowd, an economist.  

My question: the right today claims that colleges are dominated by liberals/the left.  The right says that today liberals essentially veto the hiring of almost all conservatives in almost all fields, perhaps less so in engineering. Assuming that's right, how did we get to this point?  Certainly liberals didn't dominate the academy in in the 1950s and 60s, so what happened?

My guess is that it's the result of the civil rights movement in the 1960s.Some protests split the professors, certainly they did at my alma mater--my advisor moved to Yale,  But I think after the protests died down the academy found itself pretty much united in supporting civil rights for blacks, rights for women, and open to the other cultural movments--notably Hispanics and gays. 

The Historic Context of Gun Ownership

 Justice Thomas had a recent decision on the 2nd Amendment, focusing on the need to have a documented historical basis for any regulations of gun ownership.  This seems to be the latest version of "originalism" as a tool to interpret the Constitution.

I can understnad the perceived need for a standard of interpretation that seems to be objective, in the sense that it exists outside of the preferences of the justices. But as a failed historian I've reservations.  My perception of American society in the late 1700's is it was still structured with family, religion, and hierarchy, not individuals pursuing their own destinies.

I'm reminded of my grandfather's memoir of his father, a Presbyterian minister in Illinois durin the 1840's-70's. One thing he did was visit each family associated with his church and examine the children to be sure they were being properly brought up, knew their bible, and were on the way to being good citizens of the US. I'm also reminded of another grandfather, a great great one, who was part of the founding of a Presbyterian church in upstate New York, outside Geneva at the beginning of the 19th century. He was the recording clerk for the session.  The church was for many years the body which enforced the community's mores.

So I tend to believe that community norms and community pressure would have applied to gun ownership; those were impaired with mental problems, those who were irresponsible, those who weren't trusted with lethal weapons would have faced community sanctions.

What Will ChatGpt Do for History?

 Discussing with my cousin the pros and cons of a decision on what to write caused me to reflect on ChatGpt, and how it might change historiography.

Some thoughts:

1. these days everyone is writing something, whether it's on social media or memoirs published through Amazon's KDP or whatever. Some of the material represent a minute-by-minute record of events, both significant and insignificant 
2. the cost of storage keeps dropping.
3. gradually or rapidly everything written in the past which has survived is being digitized and stored on media
4. 1-3 mean that historians have much more material to work with and from, but the task of finding relevant source records and assimilating their content is becoming impossible.
5. the advent of ChatGpt will provide historians with an invaluable, if dangeroous, aid to find relevant records and the ability to get summaries of the results--a tireless research assistant.

1. To the extent that materials 
2. 
   

• 
  

Responsibility for Deficits

 Kevin Drum had a post the other day showing the percentage of the nation's GDP devoted to the federal government.  It's roughly 21 percent from 1980 to now. Kevin argues that shows the various tax cuts delivered by Republican presidents (Reagan, GWB, TFG) are responsible for our deficits: because spending has remained level(ish) the deficit must be on the tax side.

I don't find that argument conclusive. I think a more realistic picture is that spending and taxing both wiggle over the years: sometimes up and sometimes down, but consistently the public and its political leaders are comfortable with a regular deficit. 

Trigger Warnings--A Compromise?

 Saw a tweet by FIRE arguing against a call at my alma mater for mandatory trigger warnings.  Here's a piece in the college newspaper arguing against it.

I can sympathize with someone whose emotions are so easily triggered as the result of some trauma in the past, but as an old fart, my knee-jerk reaction is: tough it out, snow flake.

I seems to me there's a reasonable compromise: FIRE agrees a professor is perfectly free to give trigger warnings.  I'd suggest requiring every professor to have a policy on trigger warnings that's announced in the first class of the semester. That way students have fair warning of what the rules are.  If the professor is my age, and with my views, they can drop out of the class (though after it becomes a requirement, it will be easy enough to include the professor's policy in the write-up of the course). If the professor is a "woke" member of a younger generation and wants to commit to giving trigger warnings, fine.

The Lesser Importance of Libraries?

 Much concern these days over which books are in school libraries and which are not. It's warranted: the presence of a book in a school library signals something. 

But these days hasn't it a diminished importance?  When I went to school the library was my source for magazines to read and books to take out. I didn't have other sources, unless my family could subscribe to a magazine or buy the book.  My appetite for reading material far exceeded the available money my family could spend. 

Today's youth have access to cellphones and printed material on the internet. I realize the material differs from the books whose presence in school libraries is currently questioned, but still.

Back in the day the two sources of perversive material were the library and the mass of rumor and fact passed down from older kids to younger kids. Today it's just a click  away.  

The bottomline seems to me that those trying to ban books are wasting their energy on the lesser threat, not the major one, while those fighting bans often exagerate the significance of the ban. 

Government Budgeting

 Was alerted to this substack post going back in history to efforts in federal budgeting and spending.

As I commented, I didn't follow some of the argument, but it triggered memories.  Back in the old days ASCS could use CCC funds as a piggy bank and its status to bypass some restrictions.  For example, if we had a rush print job for program signup involving the notices of bases and yields and the signup form, the print branch could justify bypassing the Government Printing Office's rules by claiming the material was to implement CCC programs, enabling them to go directly to a printer. 

Details of interest only to oddball types like moi.

The Port Royal Experiment and Phonics

 Stumbled across an odd fact today.  I've been reading Roger Lowenstein's "Ways and Means: Lincoln and His Cabinet and the Financing of the Civil War."  It's interesting.  A main character for most of the book is Sec. of Treasury Chase, who ends up designing the "National Bank System" and also had charge mostly for the Sea Island plantations after the Union Army took the islands.  This led to what is called the Port Royal Experiment, giving the government the problem of how to handle the freed slaves and the occupied plantations.  It was a forerunner of Reconsttuction's issues.

One problem was teaching adult blacks to read. A teacher was John Zachos, a Greek whose father was killed in the Greek rebellion in 1824, and was brought to the US by an American who supported the rebellion.  He wrote a book, the first book the blacks had, entitled: " The Phonic Primer and Reader, A National Method of teaching Reading by the Sounds of the Letters without altering the Orthography. Designed Chiefly for the Use of Night-Schools Where Adults are Taught, and for the Myriads of Freed Men and Women, Whose First Rush from the Prison-House of Slavery is to the Gates of the Temple of Knowledge?"