Diogenes the Libertarian Attends a School Board Meeting

 

Diogenes the Libertarian Attends a School Board Meeting

©2021 Ross Williams

In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards.

– M Twain

Much has been said about last summer's edict from Merrick Garland, the newest Shyster General, regarding his FBI hotline to report domestic terrorist parents whose terrorism consists of objecting to the Critical Race Theory curriculum being taught in public schools, and which really isn't Critical Race Theory at all – pinky swear – even though it waddles and quacks just like Critical Race Theory. But what do we do when someone on a school board assaults a private citizen parent at one of those meetings? Is there an FBI hotline for that?

Glastonbury Connecticut has a public school, and a school board which controls it. Last year, during the needless bunkering of the human race due to a bad cold bioengineered by our good friends in the Chinese Communist Party, the school board of the Glastonbury public schools used the largely hidden mechanisms of online “public fora” to change the school's team mascot from “Tomahawks” to “Guardians”. The new iconography depicts a knight's helmet.

But rest assured, this move was not done out of political correctness or [god forbid!] wokeness. No, on the contrary, it was done simply because it was “the right thing to do” “at this time in our history”. And what makes it “the right thing to do”? Why, the fact that the term and symbolism of 'tomahawk' is racist. And what makes it racist? The fact that the woke say it is.

Never mind that the reflexive eradication of notionally racist conditions is pretty much the definition of woke political correctness. That doesn't matter. Leftists have a rock-solid rejoinder to that: it isn't because leftists say it isn't. Their logic, such as it is, is all wrapped up in sensitive solipsism.

Note to the pious preeners: changing a school's iconography to a knight isn't any more “the right thing to do” than keeping it a tomahawk. First, there's the whole Crusades thing, in which responding – with medieval knights – to the peaceful Turkish muslims' conquest of large swaths of the Byzantine Empire with military force was considered exceptionally rude. Second, there's the minimization of women through chivalrous, courtly elevation upon a vapid pedestal that Nth-wave feminists consider highly offensive and objectionable “at this time in our history”.

Be all that as it may, the school board received enough blowback from the public they claim to serve that they consented to revisit the issue. The subject of team mascots apparently has community relevance in Glastonbury whereas CRT indoctrination and labcoat fascistry does not. So a few days prior to this writing, the school board convened a meeting to air the objections to their previous resolution. During a recess in that meeting, a 53 year-old citizen approached Ray McFall, a 57 year-old ex-Marine elected to one of eight seats on the Glastonbury school board.

Words were exchanged – loudly. Profanity erupted. And the two, who most describe as being nose-to-nose to begin with, engaged in a trivial tussle. McFall shoved the citizen. The citizen responded by clocking McFall who, true to his name, fell to the floor.

A blonde woman stepped in between them, though she declined to assist Humpty Dumpty in regaining his feet, but many accounts [often given by city councilman John Cavanna] claim that city councilman John Cavanna intervened in the fight, stopping it in its tracks. I see statewide or national office in city councilman John Cavanna's future.

In any event, leftists who claim that “tomahawk” is axiomatically racist because they say it is are attempting to claim that this exceptionally minor scuffle was the fault of the citizen. They give two reasons for believing this:

1] the citizen was all up in the face of the school board dude, and

2] some video shows that the two, who are fairly trim considering the propensity for middle-aged male pot-bellying, were not merely nose-to-nose, but also navel-to-navel. And since the conversation was instigated by the citizen, the navel-nubbling was the citizen's doing, and would constitute the initial assault, thus making McFall's shove a form of self defense.

These notions would be laughable if they were not offered seriously. Given that they are offered seriously, these notions are most accurately described as grasping bullshit.

McFall is an elected official in a constitutional republic which purports to have civil rights. Among those civil rights is the right to say what you want, to or about the government or its agents, elected or otherwise, to their face, in their face, or behind their backs, without the government or its agents being able to do a damned thing about it. Leftists only need to hearken back to their gang accosting of Rand Paul on the streets of DC, and their other flash-mobbings “at this time in our history”.

Next, there isn't a non-contact sport in existence which would interpret passive belly bumping, even if it did occur, as a game infraction. Basketball, baseball, soccer. It's called “incidental contact”. For incidental contact to be considered a legal harm under the criminal side of a free society's laws, you pretty much have to demonstrate that one person charged at the other, like a Sumo rassler, gut forward, with the implied purpose of knocking the other guy out of the circle. That didn't even come close to happening.

Besides, it would make a horrible legal precedent the next time there's a close encounter on a crowded commuter train – assuming there will ever again be a crowded commuter train. The next woman who gets jostled, tits first, into a horny male next to her will not be able to complain when the guy grabs her ass and won't let go. It wasn't incidental contact; it was her making a sexual advance on him. He simply reciprocated.

So lefties, dry your eyes and stop trying to nail yourselves to your wet-noodle cross. The victim-blaming game is old and tiring.

Here's the answer:
If you don't want a citizen jumping in your face, then don't be an elected official. If you still want to be an elected official, expect citizens to jump in your face – no matter what position you take on the weighty matters confronting you. And when they jump in your face, they have the right to do it in a free society [if, though, you want to propose that our society is not, or should not be, free then all bets are off]. You, as an elected official, do not have license to shove a citizen who is in your face, but you do have the obligation to take it.

For what it's worth, these also apply to unelected government officials as well, which the leftists of BLM and their anarchist Auntie Fey minions demonstrated hundreds of thousands of times over during the 2020 Summer of Love.

If these conditions aren't to your liking as an elected official, please use one of the several options available to you:

1] stop being an elected official

2] move to a nation in which elected officials have license to do whatever they want, such as Iran or Russia, and get elected there

3] stop doing the foolish things that cause citizens to jump in your face after you do them.

It really is not that difficult.