Editorial from ABC: Spain's Socialist Government Sucks Big Time

This is a translation into English of today's editorial in ABC, a Spanish newspaper. The Spanish original is below. 

The following is a short context: Spain has had the highest number of Wuhan virus deaths in the world per million inhabitants. 

The main reason was the government decision to ignore the epidemic until AFTER the March 8 feminist March, which was supposed to coincide with a new Feminist Law introduced by the Minister of Equality, Irene Montero. Montero happens to be Pablo Iglesias' common  law wife, with whom she has three children. Her previous labor experience was as supermarket cashier, and member of Parlament, a job she got thanks to her relationship with Iglesias.  Montero's inexperience and incompetence led to the law being scuttled by opposition by other government ministers, who openly explained it was unconstitutional and had numerous errors. 

So by March 8 the government had allowed the uncontrolled entry of travelers from China and Italy, including several thousand football fans who came from the Milan region,  where the virus was already spreading and killing hundreds of Italians. The government also failed to stockpile medicines, masks, gloves, etc, and eventually the epidemic was overwhelming hospitals. The government response was a national state of alarm, and orders for the population to stay home. This was continued for over two months, reduced the infections and deaths. It also destroyed the economy, and today Spain has the highest unemployment in Europe, over 20%. 

Here's the latest infections per million graph. It's important to understand the number of tests per million in Spain gas been very low, especially in March through June. 

In late June, they opened with little controls, and the result has been another spike in infections. The President, Sanchez, decided to take his August vacations as the infections and deaths climbed. Last weekend he returned from vacation, and yesterday gave a speech declaring the central government wasn't going to take action, that it was up to each Autonomous Region (similar to a US state) to ask for a State of Alarm and decide what to do. The argument made by legal scholars is that such a response is irrational and it's better to use a Public Health Emergency law passed in 1986. So as of right now everything is up in the air.

The translated text follows. The Spanish original is below: 

"  The accumulation of trifles with which Pedro Sánchez presented himself to public opinion after his vacation, and only after a general climate of unfavorable public opinion due to his indolence and lack of leadership in the face of the pandemic, shows to what extent the inactivity of the Government  it is intoxicating everything.  At the gates of the classic restart of the political course, the Government is paralyzed and blocked.  It only emits its well-known propaganda and demagoguery signals, and its capacity to unload responsibilities on others, in this case the autonomies, is scandalous.  Spain has a passive and disappeared government, and only the lie motivates it to continue governing.

 Ministers as representative of "sanchismo" as Carmen Calvo or José Luis Ábalos are absent, and they only resurface from time to time to promote revenge political projects that are not a priority against the crisis that is devastating Spain.  Margarita Robles emerges as the discordant minister, Irene Montero, as a star of the gossip magazines, and Alberto Garzón, unpublished in a Consumer portfolio that should never have ceased to be a mere general direction, only speaks to attack the constitutional system.  The Minister of Justice, failed in any management, only competes with Fernando Grande-Marlaska, burned since the beginning of the coronavirus crisis for his sectarianism and inability to manage such a relevant department.  In Universities, Manuel Castells does not seem to know yet that he is a minister and the rectors feel abandoned by him.  "He is leaving us alone in the return to class", they affirm, and demand a protocol that updates the last one, communicated three months ago.  Rutilating toll charges like Darias or González Laya are irrelevant for all intents and purposes.  In Tourism, there is no minister in Europe as disoriented as Maroto, and in Finance or Economy, Montero and Calviño continue to manipulate the data to glimpse non-existent green shoots.  In Science, Duque is a perfect stranger in an unsustainable situation, and in Labor, Díaz has made deception his day to day ... The evaluation of each portfolio is summarized in an absurdity that forces one to ask what the Prime Minister needs more for.  of a score of ministers in full recession.

 Sánchez knowingly lies, and despite this, society does not seem capable of reacting.  The fear of a new tragic phase of the pandemic is becoming noticeable.  Regarding the economic collapse, words are unnecessary and it is enough for each Spaniard to feel his pocket.  But in this climate, Sánchez still smiles with the arrogance of those who continue to boast of leading a long legislature instead of assuming that Spain is dying under his command."

Original text: 

"El cúmulo de naderías con las que Pedro Sánchez se presentó a la opinión pública después de sus vacaciones, y solo tras un clima general de opinión pública desfavorable por su indolencia y falta de liderazgo frente a la pandemia, demuestra hasta qué punto la inactividad del Gobierno está intoxicándolo todo. A las puertas del clásico reinicio del curso político, el Gobierno está paralizado y bloqueado. Solo emite sus conocidas señales de propaganda y demagogia, y resulta escandalosa su capacidad para descargar responsabilidades en otros, en este caso las autonomías. España tiene un Gobierno pasivo y desaparecido, y solo la mentira le motiva para seguir gobernando.

Ministros tan representativos del «sanchismo» como Carmen Calvo o José Luis Ábalos están ausentes, y solo resurgen de vez en vez para promover proyectos políticos revanchistas que no son una prioridad contra la crisis que está asolando a España. Margarita Robles emerge como la ministra discordante, Irene Montero, como estrella de las revistas del corazón, y Alberto Garzón, inédito en una cartera de Consumo que jamás debió de dejar de ser una mera dirección general, solo habla para arremeter contra el sistema constitucional. El ministro de Justicia, fallido en cualquier gestión, solo compite con Fernando Grande-Marlaska, quemado desde el inicio de la crisis del coronavirus por su sectarismo e incapacidad para gestionar un departamento tan relevante. En Universidades, Manuel Castells no parece saber aún que es ministro y los rectores se siente por él abandonados. «Nos está dejando solos en la vuelta a clase», afirman, y reclaman un protocolo que actualice el último, comunicado hace tres meses. Rutilantes cargos de cuota como Darias o González Laya son irrelevantes a todos los efectos. En Turismo, no hay en Europa una ministra tan desorientada como Maroto, y en Hacienda o Economía, Montero y Calviño siguen manipulando los datos para atisbar brotes verdes inexistentes. En Ciencia, Duque es un perfecto desconocido en situación insostenible, y en Trabajo, Díaz ha hecho del engaño su día a día... La evaluación de cada cartera se resume en un despropósito que obliga a preguntarse para qué necesita el presidente del Gobierno más de una veintena de ministros en plena recesión. 

Sánchez miente a sabiendas, y pese a ello la sociedad no parece capaz de reaccionar. El miedo a una nueva fase trágica de la pandemia empieza a ser notable. Respecto al desplome económico, sobran las palabras y basta con que cada español se palpe el bolsillo. Pero en este clima, Sánchez aún sonríe con la prepotencia de quien sigue presumiendo de liderar una legislatura larga en lugar de asumir que España agoniza bajo su mando."

Insult and Intimidation

A while ago I heard from Diaz Villanueva something about the use of intimidation and insult, and I thought that in the roll of climate change things have already reached that level.  And that of course is an extension of the left's hold on institutions of modern society that it should never have had.  And why am I writing this?  Because the record on the left in the last 100 years has been awful..

And where am I going?  The fact is that insult and intimidation are our daily bread, and that of course will not allow a reasonable debate to find answers that make sense.  For my part, I have realized that I am old, and that it is not really worth fighting in this area, although I know that what they are proposing will go very wrong.

 So I leave them to continue living and, in a few decades, when they understand why they live in such miserable conditions, and if it is possible to speak freely (something that I doubt, because this has gone to hell and civilization is going towards a 1984 more  horrible than Orwell imagined) ... then try to teach young people that they must free themselves and never repeat the stupid things we did in the first decades of the 21st century.

A Scientist needs your help

A Scientist Needs Your Help (from Quillette.com)

Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov was a Soviet geneticist, botanist and agronomist, and collector of one of the world's largest seed banks, who was sentenced to death in July 1941 for defending scientific truths about genetics. While he escaped his death sentence, he lived the last twenty years of his life in a Soviet labour camp, disgraced and ostracised. His crime was to have criticised Lamarckian inheritance--the notion that changes to an organism in its lifetime can be passed on to offspring via genetics. Because Lamarckian inheritance emphasised the importance of the environment it was the favoured evolutionary theory among the socialists and communists of the time, and thanks to the advocacy of Trofim Lysenko, scientists who departed from this orthodoxy were shunned, persecuted, and in the case of Vavilov, sent to a gulag. When the siege of Leningrad occurred, Vavilov and a group of botanists who were holed up in a secret vault, famously chose to starve themselves before consuming their seeds, which they were preserving for the sake of humanity. While Vavilov died in obscurity, he is now recognised as one of the greatest Russian scientists of all time. Thankfully in 2020, geneticists are not forced to conform to pseudoscientific orthodoxies, no communist dictatorship exists in the West, and nobody is at risk of being sent to a labour camp to spend decades of their life in obscurity. Lysenkoism does not prevail, and scientists accept the reality of Mendelian genetics, most of the time. Nevertheless, ideas of environmental determinism do remain surprisingly persistent. Pseudoscientific ideas that deny biological or evolutionary truths are discussed in Quillette on a weekly basis. If you are reading this now, you will be familiar with them. The most recent example we have highlighted was the “controversy” surrounding JK Rowling for emphasising the reality of biological sex. Today, another scientist is being persecuted for discussing scientific truths. His name is Stephen Hsu, and he does not work in Russia, or China, but in the United States of America, at Michigan State University. He is being targeted by a Twitter mob and group of post-graduate students for his research and writing, and is being misrepresented and slandered as a “racist” and “sexist” despite condemning racism and sexism repeatedly in his public blog posts and interviews.

You can read the case against Professor Hsu here (keep in mind that many of these allegations are misrepresentations and exaggerations of his work) and Stephen's reply to the charges here. I have been informed that Professor Hsu’s job is at risk, and that he may lose his livelihood as early as this Friday. The mob demanding Hsu's defenestration is being led by a student named Kevin Bird, through his capacity as the President of Michigan State University’s Graduate Employee’s Union. Bird has said that he is targeting Hsu because he holds an administrative position as the Head of Research and Graduate Studies, yet no evidence of any bias in Hsu’s professional activities, let alone sexual or racial discrimination, has been presented, as far as I am aware. On the contrary, many women and people of colour who’ve worked with him have testified to his professional integrity. Bird describes himself as a "democratic socialist” and can be seen on social media celebrating arson and vandalism:

Several esteemed academics including Richard Haier and Robert Plomin have signed a counter-petition in defense of Stephen Hsu here. I am writing to you today, to ask that if you are an academic, could you please add your name to the counter-petition, to protect Stephen, but to also defend academic freedom and open inquiry, the foundational principles on which all scientific progress rests. --Claire Lehmann Editor-in-Chief

Letter from a black history professor

G. Floyd's murder is execrable but he is an example of non-discrimination.  He had a scholarship to the University.  He left his studies at the second year and embarked on a criminal path.  He did not take advantage of the opportunities that the system provided.

Here's a letter from a black history professor, who wrote it anonymously. The letter is being posted in several sites, but soon thereafter it's erased. 

Dear profs X, Y, Z

"I am one of your colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley. I have met you both personally but do not know you closely, and am contacting you anonymously, with apologies. I am worried that writing this email publicly might lead to me losing my job, and likely all future jobs in my field.

In your recent departmental emails you mentioned our pledge to diversity, but I am increasingly alarmed by the absence of diversity

of opinion on the topic of the recent protests and our community response to them.

In the extended links and resources you provided, I could not find a single instance of substantial counter-argument or alternative narrative to explain the under-representation of black individuals in academia or their over-representation in the criminal justice system. The explanation provided in your documentation, to the near exclusion of all others, is univariate: the problems of the black community are caused by whites, or, when whites are not physically present, by the infiltration of white supremacy and white systemic racism into American brains, souls, and institutions.

Many cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself, such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly. These people are not racists or 'Uncle Toms'. They are intelligent scholars who reject a narrative that strips black people of agency and systematically externalizes the problems of the black community onto outsiders.

Their view is entirely absent from the departmental and UCB-wide communiques.

The claim that the difficulties that the black community faces are entirely causally explained by exogenous factors in the form of white systemic racism, white supremacy, and other forms of white discrimination remains a problematic hypothesis that should be vigorously challenged by historians. Instead, it is being treated as an axiomatic and actionable truth without serious consideration of its profound flaws, or its worrying implication of total black impotence.

This hypothesis is transforming our institution and our culture, without any space for dissent outside of a tightly policed, narrow discourse.

A counternarrative exists. If you have time, please consider examining some of the documents I attach at the end of this email.

Overwhelmingly, the reasoning provided by BLM and allies is either primarily anecdotal (as in the case with the bulk of Ta-Nehisi Coates' undeniably moving article) or it is transparently motivated. As an example of the latter problem, consider the proportion of black incarcerated Americans. This proportion is often used to characterize the criminal justice system as anti-black. However, if we use the precise same methodology, we would have to conclude that the criminal justice system is even more anti-male than it is anti-black.