Thanks for pointing out the Oatly analysis from "Every" - it's a site I wasn't familiar with, and I appreciate both the content you referenced, and learning about the site.
Another winner JVL! You summed up black folks' exasperation with law and quite frankly the American experience with your comment on the black woman getting tackled and then the police officer lying about it and all that happens is (at best) charges are dismissed. This is why when the very, very few lawmakers who actually say "defund the police" they say it from a place of experience, like personal, boots on the ground experience and not as some sort of political statement. Then they get framed as being dumb and out of touch politically, like "why would you say something so dumb politically, it is all about politics and getting votes!" Then, those same folks get made at Kevin McCarthy and Elise Stefanik for doing what... saying things that are politically beneficial to them and that will get them votes. Neither of these people really believe most of what they are saying but they say it to score political points with the base instead of "standing up for what they believe" and trying to lead the political discussion instead of reacting to it.... interesting... it's almost as if we frame things by what we really believe, and think is valid instead of just calling balls and strikes independent of belief... Keep fighting the good fight!
"What has also become clear, however, is how significant the Ukrainian population has become as a 'sensor' for providing intelligence on Russian troops. ... these citizens and their mobile phones have turned into a gigantic, distributed, open source sensor network."
Ugh:
"Shishimarin said he was ordered by other soldiers to shoot the man because the man was talking on his phone and they feared he would report their location."
The only thing I can do is not support his business in the form of Tesla and potentially Twitter, though to be honest I already do not support Twitter.
The percentage of those who've decided to act as though the law doesn't apply to them--and so far, are getting away with it--is growing exponentially. Consider Amon Bundy, the Malheur Refuge occupiers, Air Force cadets refusing to follow orders to be vaccinated, Kyle Rittenhouse and his mom, George Floyd's killers, Presidents and elected officials lying their heads off in public, Congressmen/women openly selling favors to the highest bidders, Supreme Court justices making it up as they go along, high-echelon treason-weasels ignoring subpoenas issued by the Jan.6 Congressional Investigatory Committee, vote-suppressing autocrat wannabes, as well as too many others to mention here.
So my question is: what's the law-flouters' plan when rank and file American citizens who normally play by the rules--"the system" these creeps seek to exploit and dominate by extra-legal means--respond in kind? How will scofflaws function in a society of folks who've come to the similar conclusion playing by the rules just isn't working for them anymore, and so takes civil disobedience to a grievously predictable, but whole 'nother level? Who's going to intervene on their behalf to ensure they get their day in court when the fed-up-with-their-shit mob says, "Nah, just get a rope"? When all their performative bullshit is reduced, essentially, to the equivalent of a last cigarette? When the governed throw off the yoke of civilization, and deal with out-tribe malcontents who've been going around, aggravating the crap out of everybody, by using their own arguments--"natural freedoms," sovereign citizenship, highly subjective (if not just plain egregiously disingenuous) interpretations of established law, the Bible, Q, white Jesus, etc.--to remove them expeditiously, and in a way that sets an example?
This is America, after all. Law-flouters like Elon Musk, Formerly, Bannon, et al would do well to remember that a country comprised of armed rugged individuals (who've been exhorted for ages to live by the tenets of our revolutionary founding), is, at best, an unpredictable place to set up shop. Sooner or later, there's gonna be tea everywhere.
Holly, this perfectly encapsulates the problem. BUT the "powers that be" already have thought all this out.
Law enforcement will be explicitly dispatched to protect "high value" individuals, properties and resources.That is why so many sheriff's and police departments look more like armored divisions of a military unit than community policing agencies.
There will be a boom in private and well armed security services hired to protect those who can afford the protection.
Gated communities will become walled and well armed communities where all inside can get a good night's sleep.
We already know that the court system operates in four systems. Criminal law where the poor and less affluent receive one kind of justice and those with resources receive something kinder and gentler. Civil law courts where the well resourced have the power to prevail and the ordinary citizen can no longer even get a hearing.
The government has already been captured by the wealthy. In olden days when the wealthy were busy generating and accumulating money they hired politicians to protect their interests. NOW the wealthy ARE the government themselves. 96% of Congress is in the upper 20% of wealth holders. Almost half are in the upper 1% and the other half are in the next 9%. Ultimately they have the entire military at their disposal to protect their interests.
That government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich shall not perish from the earth. And to be honest this has been the organizing principal of all governments down through the ages. But the American experiment and liberal democracy depended on the enlightened self interest of the wealthy. That rational self-interest that acknowledged limits has now been eclipsed by mere greed unbounded by restraint.
Machiavelli could not have dreamed up an environment better suited to for a new age of the Medicis ensconced in every luxury while the bulk of the country fights for survival. In the preoccupation with that fight the majority remain organizationally powerless to challenge the chosen order.
We will live in a world where the wealthy will fly over our heads in helicopters and private jets and enjoy the cultural delights of civilization while the rest of us amuse ourselves with the "Punch and Judy Show" of reality TV and morality is only a much dreamt of superpower possessed by comic book characters in the latest DC/Marvel epic. Bourgeois morality will be a luxury none of us can afford.
Back during the BLM protests, rioters torched and looted a lot of businesses near me, some within walking distance. Almost all were minority owned. Many videos were posted to the internet showing local police standing by and not taking any action to stop the looting or arson.
This was obviously not protest. The local police were more forceful in dealing with such violence against property in wealthier and whiter areas.
There's a depressingly cynical part of me that wonders whether police thought that as minority shopowners, the proprietors were probably supportive of the protests, so they deserved what happened to their stores.
It's the same where I live. Crime is rampant in the lower income communities of color I used to live in, while where I live now is virtually crime-free. When I called the cops before, they never came. Never. For example, the obviously out-of-his-head-on-something guy who took off all his clothes in broad daylight in front of my house, and started trying to climb the 8' iron fence between the street and my courtyard. My dogs were barking their heads off (rather menacingly) and I told him to stop over and over, but he kept trying to climb and falling down even after I turned the hose on him in desperation. This went on for 30 minutes. Innumerable 911 calls later, I finally told the dispatcher I didn't want to shoot the crazy guy, but I couldn't let him on my courtyard. If the cops weren't coming, I said, I wanted to be on the record as having tried everything before resorting to lethal force. She told me to go ahead and shoot him. Luckily for me, the crazy guy's system ran out of whatever it was juicing him up, and he wandered off, naked, down the street, never to be seen again.
Contrast that charming vignette with my daughter's call to 911 in my new neighborhood, informing them her mom "was being mean to her," which was answered by two of the city's finest within 3 minutes, whereupon I was questioned about this reported "domestic violence incident" for nearly an hour.
This is the way of the world--until we make it different.
This is something I've been aware of for quite some time. Recently, however, it occurred to me the great masses always have and have had the ultimate power to determine a population's destiny--if, that is, they're willing to absorb/suffer the temporary discomfort, pain and mortality occasioned when taking back their shit (read: lives) from those who've blithely stolen from them for so long.
Not saying it's gonna happen anytime next week, but I imagine the courts of Charles I, Louis XVI, the Shah of Iran, and the Empress of China were not at all prepared when their hereditary privileges and so-called "rights" to govern any way they wanted all at once went up in flames either. Frankly, that's what I believe is at the heart of the militia movements not as yet co-opted by the fascist state; they're sick and tired of living like serfs. Abhorrent as I find their politics and actions, I kinda get it, and I suspect more and more ordinary, law-abiding folks are getting it, too.
But that's a digression. My question remains: what's the scofflaw class going to do to subdue an un-subservient populace, besides beginning to shoot everything that moves, I mean? And trust me, they can't build walls high enough or hire enough guns to defend themselves from a people they've not only cultivated to despise any and all authority, but have made damned sure are armed to the teeth as well. How do they game out their options when 90% of the world really is out to get them, and has become so inured to violence, it no longer has the capacity to care if it has to die to see that it gets done?
Elon Musk's plan to evacuate rich guys to the Moon or Mars doesn't count, BTW.
To be fair, the lowest salary in Congress is $174,000 putting 100% of congresspersons in the upper 6% regardless of their wealth or lack thereof before being elected. 20% of Americans are upper class with a median household income of $200,000. I do not think there was ever a time when members of congress were not wealthy compared to all Americans.
One hundred years ago, America faced a similar period of wealth disparity. Partially the Great Depression, but also the aggressive action of government against monopolies, brought it under control. We are in a similar situation where mergers have created effective monopolies in almost every good or service we purchase. The baby formula crisis may well be the trigger that motivates Congress to break up these monopolies and encourage healthy redundancies in the economy.
I could care less if Elon votes Republican or Dem...but two things seemed "interesting".
First--perhaps Elon realized (although it took awhile as self awareness isn't in the Top 10 attributes) that his penchant for misinformation/lies and his failure to comply with rules/regulations were more aligned with the Republican Party and he was able to come out of the closet?
Secondly--In the contest with other billionaires over "quien es mas petty?", his petty (almost vengeful) reaction to Biden's support/preference for union based EV manufacturers and not praising Tesla by no longer voting Democrat has to rank up there with some of Trump's spiteful reactions for those who dare not praise the king. How quickly he forgot the fed's support Tesla got during the Obama years? Presumably fed support for you is good. For your competitors, not so much? Perhaps in this pettiness, he realized another reason he was really a Republican at heart?
This isn't intended to give the Dems/biden a pass by not acknowledging what Tesla/Elon has done in terms of innovation, creating wealth, improving the climate and his prior support for the party. They are at least consistent in frequently dismissing the successful entrepreneurs who may, are or have been Democrat supporters.
The reality sadly is that, even if you burn the system to the ground and replace it with something else(with the best intentions and sincere effort) all you will ultimately do (if you even manage that) is replace 1 set of these people with a different set of people who are functionally and ethically the same.
They will just be quiet about if for a while.
This is what history teaches us, anyway--well, it is what history has taught me. TC is a professional historian, he may have learned something else.
Enjoying your book, BTW, TC (Going Downtown).. even though I was growing up then, I didn't pay much attention to all of that.
"If you're Elon Musk, you just violate law after law and the federal government goes [shrug]..."
Might there be any other names that could take the place of Musk's in that statement? And is it any wonder that when 'little earth people' such as me look at enough of this behavior from both the high-dollar scofflaws and the Feds, some would like to see a new sheriff in town. One who will do more than chew the scenery as Kurt Russell did on that train platform in 'Tombstone', and actually deliver on the message of "You tell 'em I'm commin', and hell's commin' with me"? And when a lying miscreant such as Donald Trump stands up and says "I'm your huckleberry", more than a few who may not actually be looking for a reincarnation of Bull Connor buy into to it for all the wrong reasons?
Not defending them. Just asking if it's really that big a mystery, as so many people seem to think.
Musk and his ilk and the Fed's lackadaisical and ineffective responses to their thumbing their noses at them, and by extension at the rest of us 'little people' (anyone remember Leona Helmsley?) to whom the rule of law is a real and concrete thing, is one of the many reasons we all find ourselves on the outskirts of the mythological old Wild West, wondering if another O.K. Corral is in the offing.
Postscript: If one requires a little evidence of the disparity of responses from the Feds toward certain classes of 'scofflaws' (whether intentionally scoffing or not):
What is going on with Musk right now reminds me somewhat of Donald Trump in the eighties and nineties. At the time, I concluded Trump was a horrible, lawless person. When he ran for president, I knew even before his infamous elevator ride that there was no way I would vote for him.
Really couldn't agree with you more!! Trump...Musk...others of their ilk...though differing by degree and often individual motives, all seem cut from the same ugly bolt of cloth.
At one time, I think it was a common perception among us little people that rich people could simply 'buy' their justice, and as much of it and the exact kind that they needed or wanted. More and more it seems that they don't have to reach too far into their wallets, if at all (with the possible exception of Trump), since 'justice' amounts to whatever they want it to be for themselves in real time, any time, and the law and the rest of us who respect and live by it be damned.
More and more wealth and its concomitant 'power' concentrated into fewer and fewer hands is definitely not a good thing for many reasons! Not sure how you reconcile a 'healthy' capitalist economic system with that outcome.
I don't begrudge rich folks their fortunes if they came by them 'honestly', so to speak. In fact, I look at a lot of them and their lives and think if that's what having MONEY does for you, I'm glad I don't have any. It's what they do with all that money and power that I often resent. That, and the fact that our government kowtows to it at virtually every level, to the detriment of us all.
For those reasons, there may indeed be no "good" billionaires in a broad sense. But I don't know...Warren Buffet always seemed rather innocuous to me in that respect. Don't know a whole lot about him, but it's kind of hard to not like a guy at least a little bit who's got that kind of dough and doesn't seem to seek the limelight much or throw his weight around excessively, and for a while at least continued to live in a relatively ordinary home and drive around in a Jeep Wrangler.
Honestly, the problem is that this country has continually equated great wealth with great intelligence, and as such whenever someone deigns to criticize Musk, Bezos, Bill Gates or Larry Elison, etc., they are immediately shouted down.
Let me let all of you in on a little secret, as someone who deals with wealthy people on a daily basis in my job: RICH PEOPLE ARE NOT SMARTER THAN YOU!!
They are more willing to take risks, they are generally self-delusional, and very imaginative, but they are not smarter.
Remember that Elon Musk did not invent Tesla, he bought it, nor did Bill Gates invent the first Microsoft Operating System. Henry Ford did not invent the automobile; and John Rockefeller did not invent oil drilling, or refining.
So people need to stop cow-towing to these people; they use that as a way to beat down any criticism, regulation or oversight of their businesses.
I hate using this term, but at this point we as a society have now reached a tipping point: Someone needs to put these guys in their place, and only the government can do it!
I was watching Real Time and one of Bill Maher's guests was Adam Corolla. He fell for that fallacy repeatedly. He called Musk the "smartest man in the world."
I remember watching Jimmy Kimmel and Adam Carolla on "The Man Show" on Comedy Central (a show that could never see the light of day today...) and judging by their career paths it seems pretty clear which one of them had the brains in that outfit.
Trivia note: After Carolla and Kimmel left the show and Joe Rogan became a cohost...
We sometimes need to look at how we misuse words in making false assumptions. For instance, both sides talk about the "elites" -- they mean different things, but in general they mean those with power over the rest of us and those with more money than the rest of us. Actually, neither are those things makes anyone "elite" in the proper sense of the word. It has come to mean, through collective misuse, "those are are superior to the rest of us" because of wealth or social standing or power or allegedly intelligence. Actually, an "elite" is someone who honestly is the best at something, the most skilled at something. And none of the very wealthy or powerful or political are elite in that sense, unless by the best you mean the most ruthless or the most corrupt or the most willing to do anything for power and wealth. Remember the bumper sticker "The moral majority is neither"? Well, the so-called elites are not either. The tipping point is leaning to the down side. Either we are a nation of law and order and laws and equality. Or not. So far, it's not.
I've seen many examples of the equation of rich = smart to which you refer. And in my younger days I had a somewhat similar view. As a working-class guy living in a blue-collar milieu, it seemed only natural to assume that anyone who could accumulate a large fortune had to be pretty darned smart, and a lot smarter than me. Took some 'living' to figure out that wasn't the real difference.
But I've known a lot of guys over time who held that view and never bothered to examine it in any significant way, if at all. Guess it didn't bother them to see themselves as less smart or intelligent than someone else based on the size of their bank account, a point of view I can certainly no longer understand, and haven't for a very long time now.
I'm no genius, but I'm smart enough to know that a lot of rich folks aren't either. If a few more folks like me would wake up to that fact, it might not be as hard to "put these guys in their place" as it might be otherwise, since they might just change their view about how our government kowtows to these people, and why.
I'm reasonably certain that any penalty that can be given to Musk has already been written into his calculations. What you need to realize is that Musk is not selling boring machines , cars or trips to mars. He is selling stock in all those ideas and selling stock to the next sucker has so far made him the wealthiest man in the world.
I'm a fan of Elon Musk's companies but much less so of Elon himself. More and more his approach to rules and authority is to game them a la Donald Trump. In fact, I'm thinking that Musk has been directly inspired by Trump's flouting of the rules. Throw enough chum in the waters and there's no way that the supposed regulators can keep up.
Of course, the fault really lies with our regulators: Congress for Trump, the SEC for Musk. Still, no reason to like Musk or Trump for showing us the gaps in our systems. It seems it's the end of innocence in so many realms of human life. Perhaps we need new laws along the lines of "Thou shalt not game the system." Unfortunately, this will only throw the matter to the courts which have their own gaps. We are doomed.
We have all the laws we need. The enforcers just don't do their job, whether Congress of local sheriffs. They prefer to be among those who get away with everything.
(Frankly, if every woman in America stopped having sex with any man in America, SCOTUS would come right back into line regarding women's rights!: Just one example. etc. etc. etc.)
It is bad actors who generally resent regulations. Nearly all regulation came about because of bad actors. a good modern example is the article in yesterday's Bulwark about unwritten rules. Sooner or later a trump comes along, and voila--a new regulation is born.
I hear you but I know of at least one instance in which Musk is justified in resenting regulations. He has had a hard time selling Teslas direct to consumers in some states because they have laws protecting car dealerships. Even though Teslas have been on the market for at least a decade, this is still the case in a few states. I know that would piss me off and I'm generally a stickler for rules.
Then the thing to do is look into why dealer protection was written into law and address that. https://altdriver.com/gearhead/car-dealership-regulations/ The simplistic "down with regulations" in the Trump 2-for-1 policy is almost always foolish because the unthinking loss of regulation only invites the bad actors to immediately resume their bad actions.
More anecdotes. Every car company has lawsuits. A moments reflection on what automated driving entails will inform you that it is bound to have such cases, regardless of where the fault lies.
The problem is Tesla is using its purchasers to filed test its AI. I wonder how many owners who so like their Teslas know that. There is a very wealthy fellow named Dan O'Dowd running a quixotic campaign for governor of California because he wants to publicize one issue. Mr. O'Dowd runs a software company that creates the behind-the-scenes operating systems in a number of consumer products including cars. He is beyond furious that Tesla is testing its auto-drive software on public roads with unsuspecting Tesla buyers at the wheel thinking all is well and already safety-tested.
As far as I know, it is with permission of the Tesla owners. It is true that they almost certainly do not completely understand the risks but how could they? Even Tesla doesn't know the risks with any kind of certainty. That still doesn't mean that Tesla is reckless. I think some have unreasonable expectations of the process. It's not like Tesla could test them 100% using their own test drivers and promise no problems after delivery.
We also know that self-driving has the potential to reduce accidents compared to human drivers. This is hard to measure right now as self-driving is mostly only used on highways where it is probably already safer than human drivers. It also requires that the driver be ready to take over if needed but that's often violated. Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect this of a human driver. It is just not something people are good at. As with all technology, buyers have to be smart.
I don't own a Tesla but I've thought of getting one but I'm not sure I would get the FSD option. Still, I don't object to it being an available option. It will get better and better and it won't take long before it is better than a human driver. It's probably there now assuming the driver follows the rules.
"Then there's that guy in the Tesla/Mercedes Benz/Beemer, whipping from lane to lane right in front of you, driving fast in the rain. THAT guy is why there are traffic laws."
LOL! That's why there are traffic laws that also never seem to be enforced when it comes to the guy in the Tesla/Mercedes/Beemer class.
Meanwhile the poor guy observing all the traffic rules with a "tail light out" gets stopped, vehicle searched and sometimes shot dead by police in fear of their lives.
I'm still waiting for that to happen to a rich white guy.
I've heard comments like that but Teslas have held up well in reviews and in polls of their owners. I'm going to go with that over anecdotes from Tesla/Musk haters.
If you have access to Consumer Reports' ratings, please share the owner surveys. In the meantime, CR says, "The Model 3 has swift acceleration and remarkably agile handling. Though the front seats are comfortable, the ride is very stiff and choppy, and the rear seat is too low and uncomfortable. The Long Range version is rated at 358 miles of range. It takes 12 hours to charge on a 32-amp, 240-volt connector. The controls are very distracting because even simple tasks, such as adjusting the mirrors, must be performed using the large center-mounted touch screen. The Autopilot system can maintain the car's speed and keep it in its lane, but it isn't designed to react to all driving conditions, so drivers must remain constantly engaged. There is no proper BSW; instead, images of nearby cars are displayed on the center screen, which diverts the driver's attention. "
"2021 Tesla Model Y review: Nearly great, critically flawed.
That is one data point to consider, but again I wish I could the actual CR report. What exactly do owners like? Do they even know about Tesla's ability to remotely interfere with its software similar to the Deere kill switches in tractors. Remember those kill switches are there as a measure against farmers, not Russian looters.
There are two sides to most of these issues. Over-the-air updates make a lot of sense to me. With most cars, you can't get any upgrades without an associated recall or going to your dealer and complaining. You can't even get the maps in your navigation unit updated without paying $200. On the other hand, a bad update will definitely ruin your day or your car. As with the Deere kill switch, it all depends on the details of one's particular situation. In general, you want to get updates as soon as possible for security and reliability reasons.
Walter Lippmann's term "public opinion" is a century old and one of his lesser peers at the time was Edward Bernays, who literally wrote the book on "Propaganda" in 1928, and shepherded many of these post WWII corporate public relations efforts. At least Bernays curbed the excesses of some of his German fans--who were influenced by his thinking in the '30s and 40s--when he represented tobacco and other industries in the 50s and 60s. While it is unfair to compare the consequences of Bernays (and others) PR efforts in the US, to the 1930-40 German implementation of his ideas, the long term results of Bernays PR tactics do rhyme with the outcome of the German propaganda tragedy . Because while the propaganda tools were more subtle, millions still died because people lied.
And here we are sixty years after the 1960s, with digital targeting tools, AI created messaging and faux videos on the horizon. What a frightening playground for the new practitioners of deceit. I HOPE YOU HAVE A GREAT DAY!
Was actually having a pretty good one. Until that last paragraph! Would like to say 'thanks", but think I'll just go on and have that 5 o'clock Highball now instead.
Many thanks for writing up the Musk piece at length and as a succinct linear narrative. The Twitter saga is tough to follow for non-finance-guru lay readers like me. The fact that much of what Musk is doing with the Twitter buy doesn't make sense only adds to the difficulty.
Thanks for pointing out the Oatly analysis from "Every" - it's a site I wasn't familiar with, and I appreciate both the content you referenced, and learning about the site.
Another winner JVL! You summed up black folks' exasperation with law and quite frankly the American experience with your comment on the black woman getting tackled and then the police officer lying about it and all that happens is (at best) charges are dismissed. This is why when the very, very few lawmakers who actually say "defund the police" they say it from a place of experience, like personal, boots on the ground experience and not as some sort of political statement. Then they get framed as being dumb and out of touch politically, like "why would you say something so dumb politically, it is all about politics and getting votes!" Then, those same folks get made at Kevin McCarthy and Elise Stefanik for doing what... saying things that are politically beneficial to them and that will get them votes. Neither of these people really believe most of what they are saying but they say it to score political points with the base instead of "standing up for what they believe" and trying to lead the political discussion instead of reacting to it.... interesting... it's almost as if we frame things by what we really believe, and think is valid instead of just calling balls and strikes independent of belief... Keep fighting the good fight!
It is not merely politically beneficial statements. The difference between Dem and GOP political statements is not dumbness, but meanspiritedness.
"What has also become clear, however, is how significant the Ukrainian population has become as a 'sensor' for providing intelligence on Russian troops. ... these citizens and their mobile phones have turned into a gigantic, distributed, open source sensor network."
Ugh:
"Shishimarin said he was ordered by other soldiers to shoot the man because the man was talking on his phone and they feared he would report their location."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/19/vadim-shishimarin-war-crimes-trial-forgiveness-russia-ukraine/
The only thing I can do is not support his business in the form of Tesla and potentially Twitter, though to be honest I already do not support Twitter.
The percentage of those who've decided to act as though the law doesn't apply to them--and so far, are getting away with it--is growing exponentially. Consider Amon Bundy, the Malheur Refuge occupiers, Air Force cadets refusing to follow orders to be vaccinated, Kyle Rittenhouse and his mom, George Floyd's killers, Presidents and elected officials lying their heads off in public, Congressmen/women openly selling favors to the highest bidders, Supreme Court justices making it up as they go along, high-echelon treason-weasels ignoring subpoenas issued by the Jan.6 Congressional Investigatory Committee, vote-suppressing autocrat wannabes, as well as too many others to mention here.
So my question is: what's the law-flouters' plan when rank and file American citizens who normally play by the rules--"the system" these creeps seek to exploit and dominate by extra-legal means--respond in kind? How will scofflaws function in a society of folks who've come to the similar conclusion playing by the rules just isn't working for them anymore, and so takes civil disobedience to a grievously predictable, but whole 'nother level? Who's going to intervene on their behalf to ensure they get their day in court when the fed-up-with-their-shit mob says, "Nah, just get a rope"? When all their performative bullshit is reduced, essentially, to the equivalent of a last cigarette? When the governed throw off the yoke of civilization, and deal with out-tribe malcontents who've been going around, aggravating the crap out of everybody, by using their own arguments--"natural freedoms," sovereign citizenship, highly subjective (if not just plain egregiously disingenuous) interpretations of established law, the Bible, Q, white Jesus, etc.--to remove them expeditiously, and in a way that sets an example?
This is America, after all. Law-flouters like Elon Musk, Formerly, Bannon, et al would do well to remember that a country comprised of armed rugged individuals (who've been exhorted for ages to live by the tenets of our revolutionary founding), is, at best, an unpredictable place to set up shop. Sooner or later, there's gonna be tea everywhere.
Holly, this perfectly encapsulates the problem. BUT the "powers that be" already have thought all this out.
Law enforcement will be explicitly dispatched to protect "high value" individuals, properties and resources.That is why so many sheriff's and police departments look more like armored divisions of a military unit than community policing agencies.
There will be a boom in private and well armed security services hired to protect those who can afford the protection.
Gated communities will become walled and well armed communities where all inside can get a good night's sleep.
We already know that the court system operates in four systems. Criminal law where the poor and less affluent receive one kind of justice and those with resources receive something kinder and gentler. Civil law courts where the well resourced have the power to prevail and the ordinary citizen can no longer even get a hearing.
The government has already been captured by the wealthy. In olden days when the wealthy were busy generating and accumulating money they hired politicians to protect their interests. NOW the wealthy ARE the government themselves. 96% of Congress is in the upper 20% of wealth holders. Almost half are in the upper 1% and the other half are in the next 9%. Ultimately they have the entire military at their disposal to protect their interests.
That government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich shall not perish from the earth. And to be honest this has been the organizing principal of all governments down through the ages. But the American experiment and liberal democracy depended on the enlightened self interest of the wealthy. That rational self-interest that acknowledged limits has now been eclipsed by mere greed unbounded by restraint.
Machiavelli could not have dreamed up an environment better suited to for a new age of the Medicis ensconced in every luxury while the bulk of the country fights for survival. In the preoccupation with that fight the majority remain organizationally powerless to challenge the chosen order.
We will live in a world where the wealthy will fly over our heads in helicopters and private jets and enjoy the cultural delights of civilization while the rest of us amuse ourselves with the "Punch and Judy Show" of reality TV and morality is only a much dreamt of superpower possessed by comic book characters in the latest DC/Marvel epic. Bourgeois morality will be a luxury none of us can afford.
Back during the BLM protests, rioters torched and looted a lot of businesses near me, some within walking distance. Almost all were minority owned. Many videos were posted to the internet showing local police standing by and not taking any action to stop the looting or arson.
This was obviously not protest. The local police were more forceful in dealing with such violence against property in wealthier and whiter areas.
There's a depressingly cynical part of me that wonders whether police thought that as minority shopowners, the proprietors were probably supportive of the protests, so they deserved what happened to their stores.
Depressing indeed. Cynical? Maybe not.
It's the same where I live. Crime is rampant in the lower income communities of color I used to live in, while where I live now is virtually crime-free. When I called the cops before, they never came. Never. For example, the obviously out-of-his-head-on-something guy who took off all his clothes in broad daylight in front of my house, and started trying to climb the 8' iron fence between the street and my courtyard. My dogs were barking their heads off (rather menacingly) and I told him to stop over and over, but he kept trying to climb and falling down even after I turned the hose on him in desperation. This went on for 30 minutes. Innumerable 911 calls later, I finally told the dispatcher I didn't want to shoot the crazy guy, but I couldn't let him on my courtyard. If the cops weren't coming, I said, I wanted to be on the record as having tried everything before resorting to lethal force. She told me to go ahead and shoot him. Luckily for me, the crazy guy's system ran out of whatever it was juicing him up, and he wandered off, naked, down the street, never to be seen again.
Contrast that charming vignette with my daughter's call to 911 in my new neighborhood, informing them her mom "was being mean to her," which was answered by two of the city's finest within 3 minutes, whereupon I was questioned about this reported "domestic violence incident" for nearly an hour.
This is the way of the world--until we make it different.
Every Black and Hispanic neighborhood in New York City voted for a retired NYPD Captain for Mayor in both the primary and general election last year.
This is something I've been aware of for quite some time. Recently, however, it occurred to me the great masses always have and have had the ultimate power to determine a population's destiny--if, that is, they're willing to absorb/suffer the temporary discomfort, pain and mortality occasioned when taking back their shit (read: lives) from those who've blithely stolen from them for so long.
Not saying it's gonna happen anytime next week, but I imagine the courts of Charles I, Louis XVI, the Shah of Iran, and the Empress of China were not at all prepared when their hereditary privileges and so-called "rights" to govern any way they wanted all at once went up in flames either. Frankly, that's what I believe is at the heart of the militia movements not as yet co-opted by the fascist state; they're sick and tired of living like serfs. Abhorrent as I find their politics and actions, I kinda get it, and I suspect more and more ordinary, law-abiding folks are getting it, too.
But that's a digression. My question remains: what's the scofflaw class going to do to subdue an un-subservient populace, besides beginning to shoot everything that moves, I mean? And trust me, they can't build walls high enough or hire enough guns to defend themselves from a people they've not only cultivated to despise any and all authority, but have made damned sure are armed to the teeth as well. How do they game out their options when 90% of the world really is out to get them, and has become so inured to violence, it no longer has the capacity to care if it has to die to see that it gets done?
Elon Musk's plan to evacuate rich guys to the Moon or Mars doesn't count, BTW.
To be fair, the lowest salary in Congress is $174,000 putting 100% of congresspersons in the upper 6% regardless of their wealth or lack thereof before being elected. 20% of Americans are upper class with a median household income of $200,000. I do not think there was ever a time when members of congress were not wealthy compared to all Americans.
One hundred years ago, America faced a similar period of wealth disparity. Partially the Great Depression, but also the aggressive action of government against monopolies, brought it under control. We are in a similar situation where mergers have created effective monopolies in almost every good or service we purchase. The baby formula crisis may well be the trigger that motivates Congress to break up these monopolies and encourage healthy redundancies in the economy.
Re: baby formula crisis, you may very well be right.
I could care less if Elon votes Republican or Dem...but two things seemed "interesting".
First--perhaps Elon realized (although it took awhile as self awareness isn't in the Top 10 attributes) that his penchant for misinformation/lies and his failure to comply with rules/regulations were more aligned with the Republican Party and he was able to come out of the closet?
Secondly--In the contest with other billionaires over "quien es mas petty?", his petty (almost vengeful) reaction to Biden's support/preference for union based EV manufacturers and not praising Tesla by no longer voting Democrat has to rank up there with some of Trump's spiteful reactions for those who dare not praise the king. How quickly he forgot the fed's support Tesla got during the Obama years? Presumably fed support for you is good. For your competitors, not so much? Perhaps in this pettiness, he realized another reason he was really a Republican at heart?
This isn't intended to give the Dems/biden a pass by not acknowledging what Tesla/Elon has done in terms of innovation, creating wealth, improving the climate and his prior support for the party. They are at least consistent in frequently dismissing the successful entrepreneurs who may, are or have been Democrat supporters.
Recently, Tesla has disappeared hundreds of billions of dollars of paper wealth. (It was clearly way overvalued.)
The reality sadly is that, even if you burn the system to the ground and replace it with something else(with the best intentions and sincere effort) all you will ultimately do (if you even manage that) is replace 1 set of these people with a different set of people who are functionally and ethically the same.
They will just be quiet about if for a while.
This is what history teaches us, anyway--well, it is what history has taught me. TC is a professional historian, he may have learned something else.
Enjoying your book, BTW, TC (Going Downtown).. even though I was growing up then, I didn't pay much attention to all of that.
Good articles re: Musk and Ukraine intelligence- thanks!
War on the rocks - Rocks - subscribed to it
"If you're Elon Musk, you just violate law after law and the federal government goes [shrug]..."
Might there be any other names that could take the place of Musk's in that statement? And is it any wonder that when 'little earth people' such as me look at enough of this behavior from both the high-dollar scofflaws and the Feds, some would like to see a new sheriff in town. One who will do more than chew the scenery as Kurt Russell did on that train platform in 'Tombstone', and actually deliver on the message of "You tell 'em I'm commin', and hell's commin' with me"? And when a lying miscreant such as Donald Trump stands up and says "I'm your huckleberry", more than a few who may not actually be looking for a reincarnation of Bull Connor buy into to it for all the wrong reasons?
Not defending them. Just asking if it's really that big a mystery, as so many people seem to think.
Musk and his ilk and the Fed's lackadaisical and ineffective responses to their thumbing their noses at them, and by extension at the rest of us 'little people' (anyone remember Leona Helmsley?) to whom the rule of law is a real and concrete thing, is one of the many reasons we all find ourselves on the outskirts of the mythological old Wild West, wondering if another O.K. Corral is in the offing.
Postscript: If one requires a little evidence of the disparity of responses from the Feds toward certain classes of 'scofflaws' (whether intentionally scoffing or not):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/20/social-security-fraud-penalties/
What is going on with Musk right now reminds me somewhat of Donald Trump in the eighties and nineties. At the time, I concluded Trump was a horrible, lawless person. When he ran for president, I knew even before his infamous elevator ride that there was no way I would vote for him.
Musk is a horrible, lawless person as well.
For me it isn't their wealth that offends me. It is their VULGARITY.
Really couldn't agree with you more!! Trump...Musk...others of their ilk...though differing by degree and often individual motives, all seem cut from the same ugly bolt of cloth.
At one time, I think it was a common perception among us little people that rich people could simply 'buy' their justice, and as much of it and the exact kind that they needed or wanted. More and more it seems that they don't have to reach too far into their wallets, if at all (with the possible exception of Trump), since 'justice' amounts to whatever they want it to be for themselves in real time, any time, and the law and the rest of us who respect and live by it be damned.
More and more wealth and its concomitant 'power' concentrated into fewer and fewer hands is definitely not a good thing for many reasons! Not sure how you reconcile a 'healthy' capitalist economic system with that outcome.
I don't begrudge rich folks their fortunes if they came by them 'honestly', so to speak. In fact, I look at a lot of them and their lives and think if that's what having MONEY does for you, I'm glad I don't have any. It's what they do with all that money and power that I often resent. That, and the fact that our government kowtows to it at virtually every level, to the detriment of us all.
For those reasons, there may indeed be no "good" billionaires in a broad sense. But I don't know...Warren Buffet always seemed rather innocuous to me in that respect. Don't know a whole lot about him, but it's kind of hard to not like a guy at least a little bit who's got that kind of dough and doesn't seem to seek the limelight much or throw his weight around excessively, and for a while at least continued to live in a relatively ordinary home and drive around in a Jeep Wrangler.
Honestly, the problem is that this country has continually equated great wealth with great intelligence, and as such whenever someone deigns to criticize Musk, Bezos, Bill Gates or Larry Elison, etc., they are immediately shouted down.
Let me let all of you in on a little secret, as someone who deals with wealthy people on a daily basis in my job: RICH PEOPLE ARE NOT SMARTER THAN YOU!!
They are more willing to take risks, they are generally self-delusional, and very imaginative, but they are not smarter.
Remember that Elon Musk did not invent Tesla, he bought it, nor did Bill Gates invent the first Microsoft Operating System. Henry Ford did not invent the automobile; and John Rockefeller did not invent oil drilling, or refining.
So people need to stop cow-towing to these people; they use that as a way to beat down any criticism, regulation or oversight of their businesses.
I hate using this term, but at this point we as a society have now reached a tipping point: Someone needs to put these guys in their place, and only the government can do it!
I was watching Real Time and one of Bill Maher's guests was Adam Corolla. He fell for that fallacy repeatedly. He called Musk the "smartest man in the world."
Donald Trump is a poor man's idea of a rich man.
Elon Musk is a stupid man'd idea of a smart man.
I remember watching Jimmy Kimmel and Adam Carolla on "The Man Show" on Comedy Central (a show that could never see the light of day today...) and judging by their career paths it seems pretty clear which one of them had the brains in that outfit.
Trivia note: After Carolla and Kimmel left the show and Joe Rogan became a cohost...
We sometimes need to look at how we misuse words in making false assumptions. For instance, both sides talk about the "elites" -- they mean different things, but in general they mean those with power over the rest of us and those with more money than the rest of us. Actually, neither are those things makes anyone "elite" in the proper sense of the word. It has come to mean, through collective misuse, "those are are superior to the rest of us" because of wealth or social standing or power or allegedly intelligence. Actually, an "elite" is someone who honestly is the best at something, the most skilled at something. And none of the very wealthy or powerful or political are elite in that sense, unless by the best you mean the most ruthless or the most corrupt or the most willing to do anything for power and wealth. Remember the bumper sticker "The moral majority is neither"? Well, the so-called elites are not either. The tipping point is leaning to the down side. Either we are a nation of law and order and laws and equality. Or not. So far, it's not.
I've seen many examples of the equation of rich = smart to which you refer. And in my younger days I had a somewhat similar view. As a working-class guy living in a blue-collar milieu, it seemed only natural to assume that anyone who could accumulate a large fortune had to be pretty darned smart, and a lot smarter than me. Took some 'living' to figure out that wasn't the real difference.
But I've known a lot of guys over time who held that view and never bothered to examine it in any significant way, if at all. Guess it didn't bother them to see themselves as less smart or intelligent than someone else based on the size of their bank account, a point of view I can certainly no longer understand, and haven't for a very long time now.
I'm no genius, but I'm smart enough to know that a lot of rich folks aren't either. If a few more folks like me would wake up to that fact, it might not be as hard to "put these guys in their place" as it might be otherwise, since they might just change their view about how our government kowtows to these people, and why.
I'm reasonably certain that any penalty that can be given to Musk has already been written into his calculations. What you need to realize is that Musk is not selling boring machines , cars or trips to mars. He is selling stock in all those ideas and selling stock to the next sucker has so far made him the wealthiest man in the world.
I'm a fan of Elon Musk's companies but much less so of Elon himself. More and more his approach to rules and authority is to game them a la Donald Trump. In fact, I'm thinking that Musk has been directly inspired by Trump's flouting of the rules. Throw enough chum in the waters and there's no way that the supposed regulators can keep up.
Of course, the fault really lies with our regulators: Congress for Trump, the SEC for Musk. Still, no reason to like Musk or Trump for showing us the gaps in our systems. It seems it's the end of innocence in so many realms of human life. Perhaps we need new laws along the lines of "Thou shalt not game the system." Unfortunately, this will only throw the matter to the courts which have their own gaps. We are doomed.
We have all the laws we need. The enforcers just don't do their job, whether Congress of local sheriffs. They prefer to be among those who get away with everything.
(Frankly, if every woman in America stopped having sex with any man in America, SCOTUS would come right back into line regarding women's rights!: Just one example. etc. etc. etc.)
It is bad actors who generally resent regulations. Nearly all regulation came about because of bad actors. a good modern example is the article in yesterday's Bulwark about unwritten rules. Sooner or later a trump comes along, and voila--a new regulation is born.
I hear you but I know of at least one instance in which Musk is justified in resenting regulations. He has had a hard time selling Teslas direct to consumers in some states because they have laws protecting car dealerships. Even though Teslas have been on the market for at least a decade, this is still the case in a few states. I know that would piss me off and I'm generally a stickler for rules.
Then the thing to do is look into why dealer protection was written into law and address that. https://altdriver.com/gearhead/car-dealership-regulations/ The simplistic "down with regulations" in the Trump 2-for-1 policy is almost always foolish because the unthinking loss of regulation only invites the bad actors to immediately resume their bad actions.
More anecdotes. Every car company has lawsuits. A moments reflection on what automated driving entails will inform you that it is bound to have such cases, regardless of where the fault lies.
The problem is Tesla is using its purchasers to filed test its AI. I wonder how many owners who so like their Teslas know that. There is a very wealthy fellow named Dan O'Dowd running a quixotic campaign for governor of California because he wants to publicize one issue. Mr. O'Dowd runs a software company that creates the behind-the-scenes operating systems in a number of consumer products including cars. He is beyond furious that Tesla is testing its auto-drive software on public roads with unsuspecting Tesla buyers at the wheel thinking all is well and already safety-tested.
As far as I know, it is with permission of the Tesla owners. It is true that they almost certainly do not completely understand the risks but how could they? Even Tesla doesn't know the risks with any kind of certainty. That still doesn't mean that Tesla is reckless. I think some have unreasonable expectations of the process. It's not like Tesla could test them 100% using their own test drivers and promise no problems after delivery.
We also know that self-driving has the potential to reduce accidents compared to human drivers. This is hard to measure right now as self-driving is mostly only used on highways where it is probably already safer than human drivers. It also requires that the driver be ready to take over if needed but that's often violated. Perhaps it is unreasonable to expect this of a human driver. It is just not something people are good at. As with all technology, buyers have to be smart.
I don't own a Tesla but I've thought of getting one but I'm not sure I would get the FSD option. Still, I don't object to it being an available option. It will get better and better and it won't take long before it is better than a human driver. It's probably there now assuming the driver follows the rules.
"Then there's that guy in the Tesla/Mercedes Benz/Beemer, whipping from lane to lane right in front of you, driving fast in the rain. THAT guy is why there are traffic laws."
LOL! That's why there are traffic laws that also never seem to be enforced when it comes to the guy in the Tesla/Mercedes/Beemer class.
Meanwhile the poor guy observing all the traffic rules with a "tail light out" gets stopped, vehicle searched and sometimes shot dead by police in fear of their lives.
I'm still waiting for that to happen to a rich white guy.
It is not quite the either/or you imply. Insurance companies are in the business of knowing which cars get ticketed for speeding, https://insurify.com/insights/car-models-with-the-most-speeding-tickets-2021/ or which cars cars were involved in accidents. https://insurify.com/insights/auto-brands-most-car-accidents/
I've heard comments like that but Teslas have held up well in reviews and in polls of their owners. I'm going to go with that over anecdotes from Tesla/Musk haters.
If you have access to Consumer Reports' ratings, please share the owner surveys. In the meantime, CR says, "The Model 3 has swift acceleration and remarkably agile handling. Though the front seats are comfortable, the ride is very stiff and choppy, and the rear seat is too low and uncomfortable. The Long Range version is rated at 358 miles of range. It takes 12 hours to charge on a 32-amp, 240-volt connector. The controls are very distracting because even simple tasks, such as adjusting the mirrors, must be performed using the large center-mounted touch screen. The Autopilot system can maintain the car's speed and keep it in its lane, but it isn't designed to react to all driving conditions, so drivers must remain constantly engaged. There is no proper BSW; instead, images of nearby cars are displayed on the center screen, which diverts the driver's attention. "
"2021 Tesla Model Y review: Nearly great, critically flawed.
The Tesla Model Y seems like the complete package, but its active safety suite is so fundamentally flawed that the whole dish is completely ruined." https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/reviews/2021-tesla-model-y-review/
We cannot assume his negative view of Tesla is ad hominem.
"Tesla owners like their car brand the most, Infiniti struggles, study says"
"Consumer Reports rounded up responses from owners, and unsurprisingly, Tesla owners really like Tesla."
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/tesla-owners-like-their-car-brand-the-most-infiniti-struggles-study-says/
That is one data point to consider, but again I wish I could the actual CR report. What exactly do owners like? Do they even know about Tesla's ability to remotely interfere with its software similar to the Deere kill switches in tractors. Remember those kill switches are there as a measure against farmers, not Russian looters.
There are two sides to most of these issues. Over-the-air updates make a lot of sense to me. With most cars, you can't get any upgrades without an associated recall or going to your dealer and complaining. You can't even get the maps in your navigation unit updated without paying $200. On the other hand, a bad update will definitely ruin your day or your car. As with the Deere kill switch, it all depends on the details of one's particular situation. In general, you want to get updates as soon as possible for security and reliability reasons.
Good to see the articles about Elon and the Russians lined up. We've been believing the BS from both entities for too long.
Walter Lippmann's term "public opinion" is a century old and one of his lesser peers at the time was Edward Bernays, who literally wrote the book on "Propaganda" in 1928, and shepherded many of these post WWII corporate public relations efforts. At least Bernays curbed the excesses of some of his German fans--who were influenced by his thinking in the '30s and 40s--when he represented tobacco and other industries in the 50s and 60s. While it is unfair to compare the consequences of Bernays (and others) PR efforts in the US, to the 1930-40 German implementation of his ideas, the long term results of Bernays PR tactics do rhyme with the outcome of the German propaganda tragedy . Because while the propaganda tools were more subtle, millions still died because people lied.
And here we are sixty years after the 1960s, with digital targeting tools, AI created messaging and faux videos on the horizon. What a frightening playground for the new practitioners of deceit. I HOPE YOU HAVE A GREAT DAY!
After reading this, how can I possibly avoid it?
Was actually having a pretty good one. Until that last paragraph! Would like to say 'thanks", but think I'll just go on and have that 5 o'clock Highball now instead.
Many thanks for writing up the Musk piece at length and as a succinct linear narrative. The Twitter saga is tough to follow for non-finance-guru lay readers like me. The fact that much of what Musk is doing with the Twitter buy doesn't make sense only adds to the difficulty.