"We're Doing Fine on Our Own": How the Welfare State's Helping Hand Hurt Black Families

There is a lot of talk today about the disadvantages the black Americans suffer under in 2020. Some say that racial disparities today are largely the result of the injustices blacks suffered throughout American history, they say, "History has consequences." They are right about that, history absolutely has consequences, but the implication for black Americans is that all the consequences of the suffering of hundreds of years of slavery, discrimination, and racism have been all bad.

I believe the African American story is an inspiring American story that all Americans should learn from. Black Americans have accomplished a great deal for America, which has been made more extraordinary by the fact that they made these contributions during the horrors of slavery and under the oppression of racism and discrimination. It’s utterly inspiring!! All Americans should study the many triumphant hero’s and examples of early black American successes — American dream stories. 

On the subject of generational disadvantages among black Americans due to the long sufferings of slavery and the arduous climb to secure civil liberties, it should go without saying that black families in America have had more obstacles in their way than white families for many generations. The struggle has been profound!

Fifty years after emancipation, and under the continued poverty and discrimination they suffered during those times, the black American family was strong. In fact, black families were more “in tact” and more devoutly Christian than their white counterparts in 1920. A beautiful black culture of faith & family developed at that time. I believe it was their devotion to faith, family, hard work, and self-sacrifice that began changing racial perceptions leading up to the civil rights movement. Also, this period of time produced the principled — extraordinary leadership — of one of the most successful (if not the most successful) non-violent revolutions in world history!

Now, am I saying that discrimination and racism did black America a favor —NO — but I am saying that as blank Americans walked their own unique road they transformed not only America but the western world in the area of race relations. The world and history is full of people who suffered generational poverty and other cultural or racial discrimination and disadvantages, but none so grave as black Americans. For this reason their success story is all the more triumphant.

The principle of upward economic mobility is a quintessential American creation. Prior to American liberty and capitalism, if you were born poor you died poor, and unless some great accident of fortune just happened across your path, so did your children and your children's children. The idea of the American dream was legendary because of rags to riches stories, but as amazing as those stories are, for the vast majority of American immigrants economic upward mobility was a generational acquisition. The struggle was real. Many immigrant groups suffered discrimination, such as Asians, Irish, Jews, Mormons, and more -- of course no group endured anything like what black Americans suffered -- but these groups did make generational moves into the middle class. The fact that they were able to do that despite discrimination and persecution tells us something important about how negative history doesn't have to define our futures in a negative way.

It goes without saying, that no other racial or cultural group in America suffered more oppression than black Americans, and that they had to struggle longer to make their upward climb into the middle class. In a better world, in a better America, emancipation would have been the beginning of their generational climb in the American system. Under reconstruction it began to look like it was possible, but no sooner did the federal troops pull out of the south that black Americans feel under the dark despair of their racist neighbors. The extreme oppression, particularly in the south where black Americans lived in the largest numbers, made generation progress extremely slow. In 1940, 86% of black Americans still lived below the poverty line. What is extraordinary is what happens next. By 1960 only 47% black Americans lived below the poverty line. In 20 years the black community saw 40 point decline in poverty. The swiftest decline in poverty among any group and human history!! 

It’s important to note that the reduction in poverty was coming about without government intervention, without the poverty programs of the welfare state, that it was happening even before black Americans had secured universal suffrage. Some of the things that helped produce social progress I discussed previously, black America was doing fine on their own, they were spurred forward by the strength of their character and their future. Other things that helped with integration was that broadly states in the US were extending equal treatment to blacks, while southern states ruled by racist Democrats continued to “keep them in their place.” Federal integration was slower as Democrats continued to block civil right progress in national politics, but service in the military and the post war economic boom, were changing attitudes toward race in general played a significant part in producing a majority able to push through federal reform in the 50s and 60s.

What happens next is the most critical to understanding why the extraordinary progress black Americans had made began to stagnate among a verily significant number of poor blacks living in Americas inner cities. Black communities in the U.S. had come this far by faith, their faith and their families had been the bedrock of their success. At the culmination of the civil rights movement there was another revolution taking place that was going to cut a serious blow to black families still living below the poverty line. The disintegration of marriage in the late 60s and 70s stifled the extraordinary upward momentum that had showed promise in the 40s and 50s. Upward mobility among blacks slowed as family structures weakened. Instead of making their way out of these poor urban areas, as other racial and immigrant groups had done before, many black Americans were getting trapped in poverty with all it's social ills. 

Another extraordinary shift was taking place in American politics in the 50s and 60s. The Democrat party was losing it's constituencies. On one hand Americans had just fought a war against socialism, fascism, and were now at war with communism. The progressive era socialist had taken root in the Democrat party. This put the party out of touch with Americans who had been exposed to the evils of these systems of government in their experience in World War II. In addition, the country was becoming more racially integrated and was turning away from the racist politics that had characterized the Democrat party for over a hundred years. 

The Democrats had a perception problem and shrinking constituencies. This presented a challenge, but the solution was brilliant. Democrats recemented their power by doing a 180 on civil rights legislation, embracing the sexual revolution and anti-war hippies, and using their socialist ideology to sell a "helping hand" to poor black Americans. In other words, the Democrats capitalized on the revolution, re-branded socialism for the modern age, and became the benevolent Fathers of black America rather than the party of slave holders.

It became a powerful political narrative and cemented black Americans as a primary constituency of the Democratic Party for generations to follow. Democrats built a massive welfare state to address inequalities; yet, the disparities remained, and the anger and desperation escalated. For the black family the disaster deepened and so did the poverty trap. Today 75% of black children are born to single mothers, a key social indicator of nearly all social disparities seen in poor minority communities.

"If we have learned any policy lesson well over the past 25 years, it is that for children living in single-parent homes, the odds of living in poverty are great. The policy implications of the increase in out-of-wedlock births are staggering." ~ Brookings Institution

For several generations many black Americans have grown up in this construct built by the left in America. They have been generationally convinced that Republicans are racist and don't care about the plight of black American, because Republicans opposed the welfare state policies, and this makes them appear careless of the plight of poverty in black America. However, conservatives sincerely believe that liberal policies have hurt not helped minorities become upward mobile, that they have contributed to single motherhood, generational poverty, crime, and other lost social progress. In maybe the greatest political irony of American history, black Americans have turned against the party of abolition, emancipation, and civil rights and adopted as their political fathers the party of Jim Crow.

By the year 2020 a growing number of black Americans have begun to rebel against the lock step loyalty for the Democratic party. They have been examining the history and asking critical question about the authenticity of the Democrat narrative and the effectiveness of their governance. Cities and states governed by Democrats for 50 years have gotten economically worse and suffer from extreme crime rates. Black Americans who leave the Democrat party have their "blackness" questioned and are treated like traitors of their culture, they are Uncle Toms.

Another Righteous Movement for Abolition is Needed NOW!

The democratic campaign issue over reparations for slavery has once again brought the discussion of American slavery to the forefront of the public square and has even carried the debate from the campaign trail to the halls of Congress. The backlash from the democratic rhetoric on race in America has a backlash from conservatives and once again the false issues raised by politicians vying for power are inflaming divisions among Americans, divisions that are born from ignorant sound bite politics. I have no interest in taking on the subject of reparations, because frankly it's an absurd topic, but what I feel compelled to write about are irritating ironies that continually come to mind as I observe the discussions of slavery and race issues in our highly partisan public square.

There are critical truths about slavery that are completely lost in the modern consciousness and these truths will remain buried until Americans are provided a clear historical perspective and a clear view of our own times. Ironically, Americans today overwhelmingly repudiate and denounce slavery as a great evil, and condemn American generations of the past for their complicit involvement in the practice of slavery, or the ineffectual opposition to it, yet blithely ignore the reality that slavery continues in our time. This paradox is even more profound when you consider that our universal outrage over early American slavery is the product of a value set that wouldn’t have come to be if it hadn’t been for the American political revolution and the founding of the United States of America, which came to us, ironically, through generations of disaffected slave owners.

In the black libertarian's book, “The Thomas Sowell Reader,” Thomas Sowell provides some valuable perspective and historical context about slavery in the chapter titled “Twisted History”:

“Of all the tragic facts about the history of slavery, the most astonishing to an American today is that, although slavery was a worldwide institution for thousands of years, nowhere in the world was slavery a controversial issue prior to the 18th century. People of every race and color were enslaved – and enslaved others. White people were still being bought and sold as slaves in the Ottoman Empire, decades after American blacks were freed.

"Everyone hated the idea of being a slave but few had any qualms about enslaving others. Slavery was just not an issue, not even among intellectuals, much less among political leaders, until the 18th century – and then it was an issue only in Western civilization. Among those who turned against slavery in the 18th century were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry and other American leaders. You could research all of the 18th century Africa or Asia or the Middle East without finding any comparable rejection of slavery there. But who is singled out for scathing criticism today? American leaders of the 18th century.

“It is clear from the private correspondence of Washington, Jefferson, and many others that their moral rejection of slavery was unambiguous, but the practical question of what to do now had them baffled. That would remain so for more than half a century.

“That question was finally answered by a war in which one life was lost [620,000 Civil War casualties] for every six people freed [3.9 million]. Maybe that was the only answer. But don’t pretend today that it was an easy answer – or that those who grappled with the dilemma in the 18th century were some special villains when most leaders and most people around the world saw nothing wrong with slavery.

Most Americans are familiar with the oft repeated proverb, "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it," and yet they are not so aware that we are repeating the complacent attitudes of the past toward one of the most vile human crimes, slavery. The September 2003 issue of National Geographic had an article, titled “21st Century Slaves,” about the millions of people still enslaved around the world right now.

“There are an estimated 27 million men, women, and children in the world who are enslaved — physically confined or restrained and forced to work, or controlled through violence, or in some way treated as property.

"Therefore, there are more slaves today than were seized from Africa in four centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade [11 million total, and about 450,000, or about 4% of the total, who were brought to the United States]. The modern commerce in humans rivals illegal drug trafficking in its global reach—and in the destruction of lives.”

But where is the moral indignation about that? While modern Americans vilify past generations as evil racist and advocate for social justice in our times by goading white Americans to feel and act upon a sort of “white guilt,” the horrors of slavery continue right under our distracted metaphorical noses. Rather than spending valuable rhetorical space trying to “repair the past,” we should look to the conditions of human suffering in our own day and fight the battles for human justice that need fighting in the here and now.

This month the U.S. State Department released a report that listed the top three nations of origin for victims of human trafficking in 2018 were the United States, Mexico and the Philippines. While the liberal media continues to focus on a race war in America and publish stories about political leaders calling for reparations for slavery, Fox News reported on the “tremendous numbers of kids... being sold as sex slaves today in America.” And is exposing a great modern evil in the human trafficking of child sex slaves in which 50 percent to 60 percent of victims are “coming out of the foster care industry.”

We must stop living in an endless outrage over the crimes of past generations and wake up to the blood on the hands of our own generation!! “We have a major issue here in the United States” Geoff Rogers, co-founder of the United States Institute Against Human Trafficking (USIAHT), said in an interview with Fox News. “The United States is the No. 1 consumer of sex worldwide. So we are driving the demand as a society.”

This is not the slavery of the past that was generally the result of the primeval demands of labor, this is an evil of debauched ease, an outgrowth of licentious sexual appetite born of the degraded morality of our world. EndSlaveryNow.org reports that, “The United States is a source, transit and destination country for sex trafficking victims. Trafficked men, women and children are typically taken to brothels, escort services, massage parlors, strip clubs or hotels and are prostituted on the streets or forced to participate in pornography. Primary countries of origin for foreign victims in FY 2013 were Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand, Honduras, Guatemala, India and El Salvador. Americans may also be trafficked within the U.S. or sent to other industrialized states such as the Netherlands, Germany and Japan.” In today’s slave trade people, especially young people and children, are taken out of the world’s poor and disadvantaged population and sold into slavery, and mostly not to farm or do house work, but to be used as sex slaves.

It’s not that we shouldn’t be outraged by the slavery of the past, it’s that we get the realities of the past wrong while ignoring the realities right in front of us. We judge past generations as though we stand on a firm moral high ground, but if we would open our eyes we’d discover we are sinking in a sandy foundation.

When American children learn about the sad realities that African Americans were taken into slavery to exploited for labor in the New World and that slavery continued even after American Independence because of the economic impact of abolishing slavery, it is incomprehensible to them that people they were taught to revere, such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, could possibly have been slave owners. However, these same students have no idea how many of their “modern heroes,” many in the entertainment industry which has close ties to America’s pornography and sex industry, are involved in the exploitation of humans in an ever growing industry of human trafficking.

Forbes recently reported the massive scope of the slave industry today, “Slavery is alive and well in the land of the free. With human trafficking now a multi-billion-dollar industry worldwide and cases increasing in the United States... Human trafficking is estimated to bring in global profits of about $150 billion a year—$99 billion from sexual exploitation, according to the International Labor Organization... “This is not only a dominant issue, it’s an epidemic issue,” Cindy McCain, who chairs the McCain Institute’s Human Trafficking Advisory Council said. “It’s also something that is hiding in plain sight. It’s everywhere—it’s absolutely everywhere.”

Today we hear a constant cultural chatter about reparations for the failings of past generations but we are failing to even fight the battles against the slavery of our times. Rather than talking about white guilt and the reparations for the slavery of the past we should be spending our resources and spilling our own blood to end the slavery that continues to ravage the lives of people today. America’s issues with slavery are not buried in the battles of the past, they are alive in the streets of our cities under our sleeping consciousness. It’s far past time that Americans stopped expending our political and social energies on artificial social and race divisions and begin to pull together in a righteous movement for the abolition of the despicable forms of slavery still existent in our world today.

On Conspiracies in the COVID crisis

This is something that came to me a week ago... that I’ve been trying to hold onto and it gives me peace:

I believe the devil is at work in the hearts of men and that there are conspiring men and women who seek to overthrow freedom and bring this world into either destructive chaos or total tyranny, and so far as they destroy liberty and prop up their own power they could care less which.

As such, we must be eternally vigilant and ever working to teach true principles of freedom, stand up to authoritarian, totalitarian, and anarchy world views and the tactics (social and political) that lead to them. We can’t bring down these organizations and ideologies without God’s help, we aren’t powerful enough, — and tyranny is always better organized than freedom, that truth can be very scary at times — but God IS powerful, more powerful then ALL and he is organized. He organizes us one heart at a time, as each faithful freedom loving person goes about the work of their daily life and is obedient to God & his prophets, as we do each day, each moment, what His Spirit asks us to do he will organize his forces of righteousness against that great and abominable tyranny and it will fall. Their plans will be frustrated, but God’s plans cannot be frustrated.

For me these are verses that help me deal with conspiracies I see and remind me that God will bring them down.

“And it came to pass that I saw and bear record, that the great and spacious building was the pride of the world; and it fell, and the fall thereof was exceedingly great. And the angel of the Lord spake unto me again, saying: Thus shall be the destruction of all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, that shall fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” — 1 Nephi 11:36

“And the blood of that great and abominable [organization], which is the whore of all the earth, shall turn upon their own heads; for they shall war among themselves, and the sword of their own hands shall fall upon their own heads, and they shall be drunken with their own blood.”

“And every nation which shall war against thee, O house of Israel, shall be turned one against another, and they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord. And all that fight against Zion shall be destroyed, and that great whore, who hath perverted the right ways of the Lord, yea, that great and abominable [conspiracy], shall tumble to the dust and great shall be the fall of it.” — 1 Nephi 22:13-14

— EMPHASIS: “And they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord.”

This pit they are digging now to destroy the freedom of God’s children, to bring the world into subjection, this pit of Godless technocracy... this pit... they will fall into this pit!! Not us, not the church of the Lamb! That church, God’s church will not fall into that pit. I believe that with my whole soul! I believe that if we follow Christ, if we follow his servants, we WILL be at peace — peace in Christ — and victory through Christ.

Fear, fear is an enemy of faith. I believe that through the Spirit we will be given discernment enough to know what to do and how to FIGHT in GOD’s way, and that if we trust in Him without fear he will bring to light what we need to know about these secret works of darkness. I believe that God will do that for us, that he will be our forward in this battle with evil, and that it is enough that he can see all their designs. He will reveal just what is necessary for us to know, and that is what I pray for and work for. I want to be ready spiritually so that I will have spiritual discernment, spiritual strength, and God’s peace and victory.

In this current crisis and with these current threats let’s pray for wisdom to teach correct principles in a way that will reach the hearts of those who are confused and let us pray that we will be given the spirit of discernment so that we are not deceived in these turbulent and troubling times, and also let’s pray for the faith to follow God’s servants, the prophets even when they ask us to submit to the powers of our governments, because that may be exactly how this plays out. It’s certainly starting that way. We may not understand why but we must have faith in God’s way, his timing, his plan. Like the Saints in previous generations who submitted to the injustices that took their land and lives because God’s prophet told them to. Or the Saints in Russia who submitted to the law and worshiped in secret and waited for God to work his miracles on their behalf. I pray for that kind of faith and obedience, that kind of spiritual strength.

Until it’s Safe Means NEVER

It seems to me in our COVID haze we’ve allowed the media to transport us from a “flatten the curve” proposition to a “until it’s safe” world. When leaders decided we must shutdown the world and isolate ourselves two months ago we were told that it was absolutely imperative that we flatten the curve to give ourselves time to prepare the healthcare system. We saw what was happening in Italy (a poor comparison to the U.S.) and imagined what might happen if hundreds of thousands couldn’t get the proper care. So even though this shutdown seemed a fantastical overreaction in historical terms, we listened to the medical experts, believed their models, and cooperated with their plan.

Somewhere between then and now a new supposition has crept in and a new impossible standard has replaced “flatten the curve.” We now live in the “until it is safe” world. Now I hear my friends talking about how they won’t go back to normal until we can prove it’s “safe.” Under this standard the shutdowns and forced isolations could continue a VERY long time. They are echoing the media and political leaders. Already the cost of this shutdown method of addressing the health risks has been WAY TOO HIGH!! — It’s true there is a lot we don’t know about COVID — but we know for certain that some people who get it die AND the vast majority recover. We also know who is at the highest risk of death.

With the exception of New York City and a few hot spots, we have not seen the healthcare system stressed and we have made huge strides in preparation in a few months. Now, instead of collapsing healthcare systems from COVID, we see hospitals empty, healthcare workers furloughed, empty field hospitals and mercy ships being decommissioned, and countless needy and non-COVID ill waiting to seek medical care. We’ve flattened the curve with the unintended consequence of flattening then healthcare system in a different way.

We are told that this is good news because we are winning the battle against COVID. We are told that COVID is under control as a direct result of national shutdowns, isolation, and social distancing but we are warned that the situation is fragile and if we “open up” too quickly or too soon it will be very deadly. The problem with repeating these claims a second time is that we now have data that supports a reasonable doubt In the underlying “flatten the curve” supposition.

Around the world we have countries responding to COVID in their own unique ways which has created a valuable laboratory from which to gain understanding about how the virus behaves in relation to our behavior. In the US this same local response has been a valuable way to measure (though not perfectly) the nature of this virus. Reasonable medical professionals and scientists have observed that shutdowns and social isolation mitigations have not been statistically significant of COVID lethality. Yet, leaders say the shutdowns, isolation, social distancing, mask wearing, must continue but their language has undergone a subtle shift. 

The oft repeated call to “flatten the curve” has been replaced with assurances that these strict measures are needed to keep us safe and save lives. The hash tag that most illustrates this shift is #StayHomeSAVEaLIFE. Now in some U.S. states Governors are clamping down on their shutdown orders under the newly shifted supposition that we can’t return to normal until its “safe.” It’s no longer a “flatten the curve” proposition, and clearly the health of our healthcare system is no longer the aim, since we are damaging that as well as all other business activity in the U.S. No, the supposition has shifted and there are many state and local leaders who passionately want the shutdowns, isolation, social distancing, and mask wearing to go on until it’s “safe,” and even then they speak of not going back but rather settling into a new normal. Not only is it an impossible standard it is subject to extreme interpretation — Is “until it’s safe” code for until we have a vaccine and everyone is vaccinated? OR is it simply — “until it’s safe” means NEVER.

CDC Sets a False Choice for Opening Schools

The CDC released "considerations for schools for ways in which schools can help protect students, teachers, administrators, and staff and slow the spread of COVID-19." The CDC frames these "Guiding Principles" in a false premise that may likely lead to a paradigm shift far more detrimental to children's physiological, social, and educational health then COVID is to their physical health.

The preface to these "guiding principles" begins with this statement, "The more people a student or staff member interacts with, and the longer that interaction, the higher the risk of COVID-19 spread." It's a fact but followed by some very extreme measures to prevent that spread would indicate that the CDC believes the risk for significant spread is the reality. Clearly the CDC believes that the close interaction of children in natural ways will lead to COVID spread on a scale that would warrant a serious consideration of highly irregular and intrusive measures to prevent children from being infected and transmitting COVID to others. These "guiding principles" are therefore presented under a false premise. The data on COVID and how children contract and pass the virus does not support this premise.

The general data as well as a multitude of studies have shown that the vast majority children who test positive have mild to no symptoms. Children have shown to be less likely to contract COVID and less likely to pass it to adults. An Australian study recently released impressive data confirming what we have suspected from the start of the pandemic. Australia tracked eighteen infected children from fifteen schools for six weeks, only two of their 863 close contacts became infected. A transmission rate of less than 1%. This isn't the only finding with similar results. Schools in England have not completely closed during the COVID pandemic, they remained open for children of "key workers" and those with special needs. The children were not made to practice strict social distancing or mask wearing, but their daily interactions with both their teachers and peers, as well as their working parents who were regularly exposed to the general public, did not result in any marked outbreaks attributed to children passing COVID. Some schools in England will begin opening schools this week with no masks required and with regular interactions with their teachers and other students.

This trend is not a stand alone trend, many countries did not respond to COVID by completely closing schools. Tiawan, Sweeden, and Denmark kept schools completely open throughout the pandemic without seeing any evidence that children were a driver of COVID spread. A nine-year-old boy who contracted Covid-19 in Eastern France did not pass the virus on despite coming into contact with more than 170 people. So why would the CDC begin the conversation of opening schools in the U.S. under the premise that there is a significant risk of COVID spread from children or among children in schools while the rest of the world is reporting that the risk of coronavirus spreading in schools is "extremely low?" Are they concerned about children dying? Is that a reasonable concern?

The truth is that COVID children have been mercifully speared. Not only have we seen that children aren't putting their close contacts at risk of contracting COVID, but we also have solid data that children are not at high risk of being harmed from COVID either. A study in the Journal of American Medical Association; Pediatrics reported that only 48 children -- TOTAL -- were admitted to the ICU in the U.S. in a three week period from March 14 to April 3. Compare that to the number of adults admitted to the ICU in that same period and you will see how astonishing low that really is. 83% had an underlying condition and the fatality rate for children admitted to the ICU with COVID was 5% compared to the variable death rates of 50-60% for adults admitted to the ICU with COVID. Not only has death from COVID among children been extremely low, children are at significantly greater risk of dying each year from the seasonal flu then from COVID, and yet we have never considered it acceptable to cancel lunch and recess, make children wear masks all day, or separate children from their friends in order to create a sterile learning environment to prevent yearly deaths from the seasonal flu.

As if there is a complete disregard for the overwhelming data on COVID in child populations the CDC publishes a long list of "things to keep in mind" as schools consider whether to reopen. Among the things that schools should consider are measures to socially isolate children in verily extreme ways, especially in light of the COVID facts. This photo graphic has circulated Facebook, highlighting some of the extremes in the CDC "guiding principles."

Do these sound like reasonable considerations in light of the data?

Besides the misspelling of the word "guidelines" by the creator of this poster, which has been highly criticized as a way to undermine the message of the poster, the poster doesn't contain one guideline that isn't in the CDC's published document. That didn't stop Facebook from placing a warning over the photo. 

Is it misleading? Is the CDC recommending these measure be taken by schools? 

Yes. Read the document for yourself. Look at how the CDC lays out these "guiding principles" and CONSIDER THE PARADIGM THE CDC IS SETTING UP. After making a statement that infers that COVID presents a risk significant enough to warrant schools to consider their guiding principles, it then builds a false frame from which we will now discuss these measures. This is how the CDC categorizes the risk assessment for the school setting:

• Lowest Risk: Students and teachers engage in virtual-only classes, activities, and events.

• More Risk: Small, in-person classes, activities, and events. Groups of students stay together and with the same teacher throughout/across school days and groups do not mix. Students remain at least 6 feet apart and do not share objects (e.g., hybrid virtual and in-person class structures, or staggered/rotated scheduling to accommodate smaller class sizes).

• Highest Risk: Full sized, in-person classes, activities, and events. Students are not spaced apart, share classroom materials or supplies, and mix between classes and activities.

Let me Interpret

• Lowest risk: SCHOOLS REMAIN CLOSED! 
• More Risk: Schools open but only if schools implement highly restrictive measures.
• High Risk: Schools open and children interact in natural ways.

The supposition here: IF SCHOOLS OPEN and choose to take on "more risk," they MUST do so in ways that will prevent "high risk" behavior. 

The “More risk” category is the category that contains the suggestions that appear in the graphic shared on Facebook. The graphic that has been dismissed as misleading under the charge that the creator cherry picked the most restrictive suggestions merely focus on those considerations that most directly impact the experience children will have on a day to day basis. The "high risk" category is framed as unacceptable, therefore it is the purpose of the entire document to present restrictions, "principles" as the CDC likes to call it for a softer affect, for this "more risk" category we are entering as we consider opening schools in the fall.

It is apparent from the false premise in the first place, and the frame for which they identify risk in the second, that the CDC does not support children returning to school in the fall under natural and normal interaction. I do not believe it is misguiding to represent this document as the CDC promoting the implementation of socially isolating measures under the false premise of preventing greater spread of COVID. The document discourages natural social interactions by categorizing them as leading to a high risk of COVID spread, and they do this knowing full well that the data doesn't support the tone they are setting for this national discussion.

The silver lining...

“Schools can determine, in collaboration with state and local health officials to the extent possible, whether and how to implement these considerations while adjusting to meet the unique needs and circumstances of the local community... Implementation should be guided by what is feasible, practical, acceptable, and tailored to the needs of each community." (CDC "Considerations for Schools)

Possible, feasible, practical, acceptable?

Most of the suggestions made in the document related to the personal interactions of students with their educational environment aren't practical, feasible, acceptable, and highly unlikely to be possible in practice. Does that mean the CDC is recommending schools choose to open in the "high risk" category? It's more likely that they are setting up a false choice.

It's a great thing that state and local leaders are free to choose the feasible, practical, and acceptable “high risk” opening and give children a more normal and mentally healthy learning environment, but the set up is in. The CDC has drawn up a document that puts governments and schools who choose not to implement socially isolating policies in a compromised position and guaranteeing they will be charged in the court of public opinion with the great crime of being highly irresponsible, the facts be damned!

SO WHY? Why would the CDC in the US go far beyond what experts in other countries have recommended, what even the WHO has recommended, and far beyond what the data indicates is necessary, and set up a social paradigm where a school that opens in a natural normal way is acting in a “high risk” fashion? Why would the CDC frame the guiding principles that will feel uncomfortable, frightening, and extreme to children as the principles of moderation? Ponder those questions.

SO YES, it’s voluntary. YES, it’s not the law. YES, some schools may choose not to follow these guidelines — THANK HEAVEN — but how does that excuse the way this discussion is laid out by the leading institution for public health in the U.S.. How does that excuse the way these guidelines will be used to put social and legal pressure on states and local leaders to make a false choice between the "safer" paths and the “high risk” option?

MARK MY WORDS — This stuff has a HUGE impact in decision making on a local level and it will be covered by the media nationally to judge which states and communities care the most about the safety of their children. 

I believe we need graphics like the one getting traction on Facebook, and now censored by Facebook, because it is necessary to push back against this kind of paradigm and follow the facts about COVID, and what is natural and logical about life, so that our children are not needlessly traumatized. I hope that our state and local leaders won’t rely heavily on these guidelines because socially isolating children is not a healthy way for children to interact in a learning environment, or any environment.

The Next COVID Mantra: #WearMasksSaveLIVES

Do a quick internet search on the subject of mask wearing as a measure to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and what you will find will depend on the date the article was printed. There is a marked change of course in the middle of April when the expert advice abruptly shifted from the message that there is no reliable medical evidence supporting the wearing of face masks to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, to the universal recommendations that all wear face masks (facial coverings of any sort) as a measure that could protect others from asymptomatic spread based on emerging data about the asymptomatic spread of SARS-CoV-2. The validity of viral spread as a primary reason for this shift in health policy is seriously undermined by the lack of scientific evidence (which you have to dig deeper to find) and makes it far more likely that these recommendation are largely social in nature.

I've spent a great deal of time (I've got a lot of that these days) researching the science behind viral transmission, what is known or believed about how SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted, and what the established science is on face coverings for the prevention of viral spread. It's been a good course of study for me and I've learned a lot about a subject I knew very little about in March when I rarely concerned myself with getting sick.

I'm not at all a germaphobe. I'm one of those, "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger," kind of moms. I rarely use antibacterial products and short of a good hot water and soap cleaning I'm not a fan of harsh chemicals as a regular cleaning product. I've not worried about my kids getting sick because their dog licked them in the mouth or because they played in the mud. I never quite understood my "mom friends" who would call to inform me their child had a cold before we got together for a play date. It's just a cold after all.

Needless to say, the pure panic over the pandemic has seemed like a major over-reaction to me. Still, I get that SARS-CoV-2 is as much as 4 times more deadly than the yearly flu for certain segments of the population and is proving much more contagious and that warrants a unique attention. Though early models predicting millions dead by August were significantly overstated, Dr. Fauci’s predictions of 150,000 to 200,000 COVID deaths by August is likely to be realized. Now that the western world has caused massive economic damage with shutdown and stay at home orders this spring, they can hardly go back to that tact, especially when comparisons between strict and flexible states doesn’t demonstrate a clear connection between strict policies and fewer deaths. States are looking for a new mitigation that might provide some reduction in COVID spread and universal masking is the next go to plan.

Will universal mask wearing effective in reducing COVID spread? Does the science support it?

It is very important that ongoing COVID-19 decision-making relies on science-based data and not placating public perception. Let's take a look at the science. First, scientist are conflicted which is to be expected but that doesn't mean there isn't plenty of science to base decisions on. The WHO and CDC have for years acted upon conclusions that the science doesn’t support the effectiveness of universal masking as a reliable method of reducing viral spread. The most surprising finding I discovered the more I dug into the subject was that even the wearing of surgical masks in medical settings has no bearing on viral spread. The body of research tends to support former conclusion of the WHO and CDC that the universal wearing of cloth or surgical masks will not be effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, there is some indication that viral spread could be reduced somewhat when masking is required in targeted areas and situations, and in population dense areas targeting transmission vectors would prove to be rational health policy. Similar to the failures of “one-size-fits-all” shutdown when stay at home order, universal masking orders will prove a useless draconian overreach.

Understanding the efficacy of face masks starts with a basic knowledge of virology:

• Size makes a difference, and viruses are much smaller than bacteria and range in size from 0.01 micron to 0.3 micron. The SARS CoV-2 virus responsible for COVID-19 infection is 0.1 micron. Cloth masks only filter 5.0+ microns, 50 times larger than COVID. Transmission of viral particles is inevitable despite the wearing of face masks. The extent to which face masks have been found effective, is dependent on the capture of larger expectorated water droplets in close proximity, but viral particles are also dispersed in small droplet and aerosol form from ordinary behaviors.
• The wearing of dust, cloth, or surgical masks provide no protection from the inhalation of viral particles lingering in the air: "Talking, breathing, coughing, and sneezing create aerosol particles (a suspension of particles in the air) in a range of sizes, with viable infectious organisms present in both small and large particles. Smaller particles (less than 5 µm) will remain in the air for many minutes or even hours, it is believed that SARS-CoV-2 remains airborne for 3 hours. 
• Smaller particles are more affected by diffusion than gravity, thus making them more likely to remain airborne. In the absence of air currents, airborne particles will disperse slowly throughout a space. Crowded less ventilated areas become vectors for viral transmission.
• The lateral aerosol spray from coughing and sneezing is redirected to the edges of a face mask covering. Thus, the practice of coughing or sneezing into the crook of your arm provides a better barrier to dispersal of particles, in both cases both aerosol particles and water droplets will escape, but their will be less lateral projection when using ones arm.
• Masks may be marginally effective when an infected person is in close proximity to others for extended periods of time (at the very least 5 minutes, with most standards being 15 minutes): Since close proximity and duration of exposure are significant factors in viral spread social distancing in public establishments is most effective in the reduction of viral spread. Wearing masks while briefly brushing by people in a store will provide no distinguishable protection from contracting SARS-CoV-2.
• Higher doses of infectious particles are more likely to result in infection and disease. Close proximity to people with more severe symptoms in relatively enclosed spaces presents the the greatest risk. Exposure to a dose of more widely dispersed infectious particles in larger well ventilated areas, or from the excretion of asymptomatic persons is unlikely a driver of COVID spread. Thus, People who eventually developed severe symptoms are more likely to transmit the disease to others than are those who had mild symptoms. For this reason the more effective health policies relate to preventing those with symptoms from being in close contact with others.
• It is suspected but not clear that SARS-CoV-2 can be spread by people before they have symptoms. It’s still an open question whether asymptotic persons are spreading SARS-CoV-2, but it is sound science that asymptotic spread is not a primary driver of COVID exposure. Inhalation of particles near the source is the most important mode of transmission which makes social distancing the most effective measure in preventing viral spread.

*University of Minnesota summary of studies has a detailed explanations of the differences between aerosol and droplet defusing of viral particles and the impact of this spread on viral transmission.

Dr. Lawrence W. Gernon, Professor of Global Health, Global National Security & Policy Insitute, UNM wrote:

"While wearing a mask is an individual’s choice, understanding the level of protection and transmission is key. These masks offer no additional protection to the common-sense public health measures of social distancing, and, most importantly, frequent hand washing. Dust and Cloth face coverings may help keep saliva and mucous generated by the wearer from reaching others and surfaces... They are not respirators and do not offer any respiratory protection for particles less than 100 microns and are only intended for splash protection. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% vs. medical masks 44%, and moisture retention may result in increased risk of infection."

Let's talk about whether simple cloth face coverings and masks protect others from the spray of your saliva and mucous and whether that alone provides a reasonable measure of protection to others against viral spread. This is the mantra forming around face mask wearing, "Wear it not to protect yourself but to protect others." Is that true? Well, the science that supports that supposition is weak, Some laboratory studies put the level of self protection at zero but have a wide range for the level of communicable protection, from as low as a 2% increase in communicable protection to 25% for ordinary cloth masks. But don't get too excited about that 25% number, there are Studies of performance in real-world settings that put the more optimistic numbers from in lab studies in serious doubt.

I'm sure you've heard lots of news talking about the influenza pandemic of 1918/19, and heard experts, politicians, and media making comparisons between the COVID-19 pandemic and Spanish flu. Pictures of people during that pandemic wearing their cloth masks are posted all over media stories these days, no doubt to give us the impression that we should also dawn our masks. The problem is, that's not the whole story.

Studies seeking a reason for the failure of cloth masks required for the public in stopping the 1918 influenza pandemic, found that the number of cloth layers needed to achieve acceptable efficiency made them difficult to breathe through and caused leakage around the mask. These studies found no well-designed studies of cloth masks as source control in household or healthcare settings. In sum, given the paucity of information about their performance as source control in real-world settings, along with the extremely low efficiency of cloth masks as filters and their poor fit, there is no evidence to support their use by the public or healthcare workers to control the emission of particles from the wearer.

There is not a sound scientific basis to push policies that require the general public wear face masks and coverings all day at school, work, or when they are out in public in most settings. In spite of that, many respond to this reality by saying, "But what can it hurt? And if it helps even a little, isn't it worth it?" Well, the answer might be that it hurts more than it helps when you consider potential side effects, but that is another essay.

Pandemic Precautions that are Science Supported:

While I have spoken out strongly against the reactions to the pandemic that have shut down the world economy, destroying livelihoods and putting many more lives at risk in a myriad of ways, I have personally followed recommendations for social distancing from people outside my immediate social circle and have been more attentive to hand-washing, not touching my face, and reducing symptoms that might cause coughing or sneezing (such as taking my allergy meds).

The only time I have worn a mask, when I went to the doctor, I was surprised at how often I touched my face and how hard it was to breath, and I only wore my mask for an hour. No wonder I see so many employees in stores struggling to keep them on and keep their hands away from their faces. It's impressed on me what Dr. Fauci said about face mask early on, that a recommendation for wide use of them would most likely lead to more risky behavior and be a hindrance to more effective measures in reducing viral spread. In other words, wearing masks may be a physiological placebo that ends up doing more harm than good.

 

Throughout the pandemic I have supported well reasoned mitigation’s surrounding the most vulnerable and vector points for viral spread. I have not denied the efficacy of canceling large crowded social and sporting events, reducing viral spread at private gatherings that can be augmented or suspended without larger economic impacts, and science based measures such as social distancing, heightened hygiene, and the careful protection of at risk populations. 

As face masks are concerned, if a densely populated city could reduce the communicable spread of SARS-CoV-2 even by 10% over the population by requiring masks in vector points of viral spread such as public transit, airplanes, crowded spaces, and indoor spaces with poor ventilation then it would be a worthwhile effort. 

I oppose universal mask wearing edicts that ignore the science and use the heavy hand of the law to force compliance. Not only are these kinds of laws impractical to enforce they are illogical authoritarian reactions to the pandemic are reordering the relationship between government and citizens, destroying our economy, exploiting deep divisions within our nation’s social fabric, and undermining the public confidence in the institutions and leadership of America.

Thoughts on the Brutal Killing of George Floyd

The brutality of George Floyd's death is astounding. George's pleas for mercy were ignored after what appears to be a peaceful arrest of an unarmed black man. — I realize that the vast majority of policemen and women in America are the good guys, that they have an extremely difficult job putting their lives on the line everyday to keep the peace — that having been said, Mr. Floyd appears from all views of his killing to have been cooperating with police after being arrested for a petty non-violent crime. Even if George Floyd had been difficult or had been resisting police without threatening the lives of the police or others, that could not justify his treatment or excuse his death.

For many black Americans who live precariously between the hardened criminals in their neighborhoods and the suspicion that falls on them because they fit the description of such criminals, they must endure regular suspicion from police and sometimes disdainful, degrading, and/or aggressive policing. The calloused killings of unarmed black men that have been highlighted in the news over then last several years have cut deep and have critically endanger the fragile relationship that already exists between police and minority communities. Thus, we have wide spread protests after each questionable or unjustified killing and unfortunately rioting often accompanies these moments of outrage. Of course rioting in response to criminal acts and police brutality is an opportunistic crime and just adds violence to violence, rioting is criminal and riots are not protests, but I lived near Baltimore during the 2016 protests in response to the death of Freddy Grey and I know first hand that the peaceful protest were widespread but barely made the evening news because the destruction of riots makes for better news. Often people like me, who live far from these urban centers in safe neighborhoods, those like myself who have never been wrongfully harassed by the police, who hasn’t been wrongfully accused or had suspicion fall on me because of the way I look, struggle to fully appreciate the realities minorities face in very different circumstances, with very different daily experiences.

Amy Swearer of the Heritage Foundation struck the right tone this morning when she wrote, "Sometimes, an officer’s actions are so grotesque, cruel, or mind-boggling that the benefit of the doubt no longer can be extended." We have all seen in the video of Floyd’s death that it can’t be explained by circumstance, that we needn't wait for more details because "no additional information ever could justify what the public has witnessed." From what we have seen, what could possibly make it necessary or in any way justified for this policeman to hold George Floyd to the ground, knee to neck, in this extreme way and disregard his pleas for mercy, OR for his fellow servicemen to look on as it is being done, not just look on, but provide cover in front of a pleading crowd and allow this to continue for 5 minutes. It’s sickening to watch.

I am happy to see that there will be a thorough investigation and that the local authorities have requested an FBI investigation, as I would expect in any such case. Unjustified killings of civilians by police gives rise to violent riots and retribution killings of innocent police. BOTH are wrong and both MUST STOP!! The problem is that justice in those rare cases of wrongful police killings won't solve the undercurrent that sustains the fragile tension between police and minority communities. We must see a change that balances safety and justice for all. I've been thinking about our American founders who were so concerned about building a justice system that would be abusive, as the English system had proven to be, that they created a system that would rather 10 criminals go free than for one innocent man to be convicted of a crime he didn't commit or suffer cruel and unusual punishments. It seems that we need more commitment to that principle today. For the civil society to endure, for liberty to persist, EVERYONE must be assured of JUST and EQUAL treatment under the law! This is a fundamental principle of American liberty. We must protect the sacred liberty of LIFE fist and foremost.

I realize these examples of police brutality are statistically small, and that there are different ways of analyzing the statistics. Some experts say the data suggests that white cops are more likely to shoot black people because of racial bias, while other studies have shown that the race of a police officer did not predict the race of the citizen shot. In other words, some have concluded that black officers were just as likely to shoot black citizens as white officers were and that is evidence that these shootings are not racially motivated. I see problems in the way these raw data is analyzed on both sides of the argument, in fact, I hate that we have sides and that we have to argue about it at all. Regardless of the statistics the experiences that people have in real life, on the street of our cities -- the experiences of both citizen and police in these highly charged environments -- mean something beyond what the statistics can tell us. The wrongful deaths that occur during policing may be small statistically but they are not small in their impact on ALL of us. Statistics of police brutality and killings don't tell the whole picture of how policing and race interact with each other.

Does the Media Message Help or Hurt?

I think there is a valid concern that the media has a singular narrative and that the singular story is dangerous because it results in more divisiveness rather than giving communities a chance to work toward mutual understanding. The media coverage has at times jumped the gun too fast to try the most extreme cases of brutality in the court of public opinion before enough of the facts are known. When they do this they magnify extreme cases of police brutality outside of tempered context and facts. When every story is a charge of systematic racism even when the facts don't back up the narrative, the coverage lacks nuance and context that would build bridges rather than leave our cities in ashes. Despite universal condemnation for the brutality of George Floyd's death by local leaders in Minnesota and across the country, the media will frame the act of these policemen as proof of systemic racism. Is it a fact that there is systematic racism in the Minneapolis police department? I don't know, but will the media try to find out before they brand the story that way? I'm pretty sure the due diligence in journalism will be absent and so the cycle will continue.

The pernicious cycle of high crime rates in poor minority communities, suspicion falling on people merely because they "fit the description," mistrust and mistreatment that goes both ways in the fragile relationship between police and the community, and the salacious way the media fuels the divisions for a singular narrative are road blocks to progress. Instead of building bridges by addresses the underlying causes, what we get is brutal backlash riots against property and innocent life and police being executed in revenge. Heaven forbid that more of the same happens in reaction to Floyd's death. 

Please don't misunderstand me. I think it would be equally wrong for the media to ignore or downplay cases of police brutality. It’s extremely important to realize that bad cops undermine public confidence and well being and make it MUCH harder for the majority of police who do their jobs honorably to continue to serve and protect. I realize the difficult task of covering this story in a way that communicates both the hard realities of police brutality in predominately urban minority communities and finding a balance that doesn't throw all police under the bus. The sometimes disdainful, degrading, and brutal actions of some police has a profoundly negative impact on people in these communities and those who are sworn to serve and protect them. It is precisely because ALL lives matter — BLACK & BLUE lives matter — that we MUST change the conditions that lead to these unjust killings.