text:
Home Articles The Nightstand American Conservatism, and the Socialist Specter Which Haunts It Still
American Conservatism, and the Socialist Specter Which Haunts It Still
Russell Arben Fox
[Cross-posted to In Media Res]
Back in February, Rod Dreher shared with his readers an idea for a new book: to introduce conservative Christians in America to "the warnings that people who grew up under socialism are sounding now to Americans about where our country is going….[this] is not primarily about economics, but rather about how the overall mentality of our culture, especially in our leading institutions, is preparing the way for socialism." This, predictably, led to a lot of argument in his comments section. What exactly, some of us asked Rod (and each other), was the "socialism" that existed under the old Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which he was referring to, and how is that related to what he sees happening in the Democratic party and corporate America and large educational institutions today–especially given that his concern, as he said, wasn't with economics? In subsequent posts Rod brought up multiple different possible interpretations of what "social conservatism" or "social justice" mean, and how they are or are not compatible with "socialism"–with none of it, on my reading, being especially coherent. Ultimately he recognized that using the word "socialism," when what he really wanted to get at was what conservative religious believers needed to know when confronted with an ideologically secular conformity–a conformity that many who experienced the tyranny of various communist parties in Russia and eastern Europe have analyzed thoughtfully and well–"obscures more than it illuminates." Rod didn't cite Alan Jacobs when he came to this conclusion, but he should have–because Alan, I think, had it right: Rod wasn't concerned about socialism; he was concerned about the individualistic, ideological premises of liberal capitalism itself being even further entrenched in our society. As Alan put it:
What [traditional Christians] are battling against isn't a form of socialism, cultural or otherwise. I would argue rather that it's the ultimate extension of the free market–a kind of metaphysical capitalism. The gospel of the present moment is, as I have frequently commented, "I am my own." I am a commodity owned solely by myself; I may do with this property whatever I want and call it whatever I want; any suggestion that my rights over myself are limited in any way I regard as an intolerable tyranny. That some kind of redistribution of access/prestige/attention and even economic resources might be needed to bring this gospel to those who have not previously been able to enjoy its benefits should not obscure for us what the core proclamation really is.
The fact that Rod saw the things he fears about ideological conformity as tied up with "socialism" is, unfortunately, a common mistake in America. Socialism is the bogeyman that conservatives of all stripes find easy to associate with all that distorts or corrupts those things they, in theory at least, hold most dear–namely, civil society, and the goods which social interactions in and through one's community, church, and family make possible. Given the rise of actually electable, self-identifying, democratic socialist politicians to national prominence in the Democratic party, it becomes doubly easy for Republican voters of all stripes (including many conservatives, however defined) to simply associate "socialism" which whatever cultural concerns they have with the Democratic party's platform, or the statements they hear from various Democrats or presumably Democratic-sympathizing interest groups and movements. Sometimes those associations are accurate–but usually they are not. It would be unfortunate if some of the genuinely interesting struggles taking place among conservative writers today, whether it be Daniel McCarthy's "new conservative agenda" or Rod's own call to eschew any revival of "zombie Reaganism," simply continued to fail to take socialism –meaning, very fundamentally, putting social equality and collective empowerment before individual interests and private property– seriously. To do so is to leave the right side of the rhetorical battlefield empty, and thus available for our idiot president to fill.
Timothy Carney's mostly excellent new book, Alienated America: Why Some Places Thrive While Others Collapse is a good example here. Carney is a talented writer, and he is clearly trying to set a higher bar for himself than the sort of conservative hackery he was content with in his earlier books. This book has a real thesis, and in exploring that thesis–the question of the "localized erosion of civil society in our country," which he forthrightly admits in the acknowledgments isn't at all new, but rather hews closely to the ground which important sociologists and thinkers like Robert Putnam, William Julius Wilson, and many others have already plowed (p. 301)–Carney brings out many solid and thoughtful arguments. Starting with the data which shows it wasn't necessarily the most economically distressed white voters who decisively supported Donald Trump in 2016, but rather was the white voters who lived in the towns and cities where the social dysfunction which regularly attends the lives of the economically distressed (pp. 58, 62), Carney wants to explore why some places in America, and not simply certain groups of people, suffer. By comparing data sets specific to particular places, supplemented with some on the ground reporting, Carney smartly connects the collapse of certain sorts of economic opportunities–"low-skilled but reliable jobs….[which were] one of the many training grounds for life"–with the emergence of large numbers of people (mostly white men) who, failing to make America's supposed meritocracy work for them, find themselves flailing:
For college-educated men, high-skilled jobs still exist in today's economy, and those jobs often demand and cultivate the same virtues. For the man who was or would have been a factory worker, though, there aren't the salaried jobs of the elites or the reliable factory jobs of the past. There is instead irregular and even unreliable work–contractor jobs, occasional gigs. These are the sorts of jobs that don't reward or cultivate reliability or commitment, in a large part because they don't offer reliability or commitment in return. they reflect more an on-again, off-again relationship of convenience…and perhaps they cultivate other habits: detachment, the default stance of constantly looking for a better deal, and a survival instinct that elevates self-preservation over loyalty (p. 82-83).
Leftist that I am, it is hard for me to understand how someone can notice the common denominator present in these places–the collapse of community, leaving in its wake far fewer examples of responsible citizenship and decent families and self-denying individuals; as Carney puts it explicitly, "the factory closing in Monessen destroyed Monessen as a community….[wiping] out the institutions of civil society"(p. 86)–and not come to the logical conclusion that the bulk of the problem is with what Jacobs rightly called "metaphysical capitalism": the acceptance of the supposedly overriding imperative to let individuals and corporations specialize and sort and relocate and maximize and all the other things which homo economicus does so well. Carney poignantly describes how this cult of meritocracy and profit hollows out the human relationships that used to attend many once-stable communities (pp. 40-41), how it breaks apart those institutions–the church congregation, the local diner–which provided the places and contexts where mutual support and the goods of civil society could be experienced (pp. 102-103), how it deprives work of dignity and turns us all into interchangeable cogs in the Gig Economy (pp. 182-183). Yet when he visited Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011, or activists working on the Sanders campaign in 2016, and saw the degree to which their actions in opposition to all of the above involved "building a mini-society" or "participating in community" or "making grass-roots connections"–in other words, when he himself acknowledged that the egalitarian aims of their work involved the strengthening of civil bonds, exactly the sort of thing that all good conservatives presumably cared about–he still couldn't help but basically discount them. "As progressives and socialists…[they] believed the solution to this real problem was centralizing power" (pp. 209-213). Is that really all that conservatives can see?
There are a couple of points in the book where Carney digs deep, and comes up with something perceptive about his own understanding of the world; maybe that understanding connects with why the socialism right in front of his face–at one point his own analysis leads him to praise the union-run unemployment insurance system of countries like Sweden and Denmark, and says the U.S. ought to do the same, putting labor unions in charge of distributing roughly $100 billion in welfare dollars every year! (p. 286)–can't be accepted in its own terms. In talking about Arlie Hochschild's Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the America Right, he quotes her statement that "the right can't understand the deep pride liberals take in their creatively designed, hard-won public sphere as a powerful integrative force in American life." He responds:
Hochschild…and others on the left perhaps can't understand that the folks of Trinity Baptist, Salt Lake City, and Oostburg see the church schools and the church slide as part of the public sphere and an integrative force. There's no admission charged on Sundays. The slides and coffee shops and concerts and sports teams at these churches tend to be open to all comers, and not merely believers. Even those who are exclusive when it comes to worship (see the Mormon temples) are inclusive when it comes to other events. The "gentiles" I met around Salt Lake City spoke fondly of bringing their kids to the monthly potlucks the local Latter-day Saints church would throw. The recovery aid programs that Hochschild described and that most churches have are open to all needy people. Homeless atheists or Catholics aren't turned away from Trinity Baptist. A mind-set that won't count these institutions as "public" is a mind-set that diminishes community and civil society (pp. 153-154).
Now as it happens, as a Mormon who lived in Utah for five years, I and friends of mine could relate numerous situations which would suggest that Carney's cheery portrait of Salt Lake City is hardly the whole story. No doubt similar stories could be told about any exclusive community attempting to balance its desire to maintain its identity while simultaneously being a good, civil society-contributing neighbor. This is one way in which Carney's writing and analysis, fine as it is, fails to grapple with the real difficulties of community-maintenance in the way which, say, Alan Ehrenhalt's The Lost City did–or, for that matter, Rod Dreher's own The Benedict Option. In both these works, as different as they are, the authors understand that the binding power which church institutions can contribute to civil society is unavoidably also an exclusionary one: that some doctrine, or standard, or authority, is going to have to be acknowledged, in one way or another, however "public" the church coffee shops or baseball leagues or recovery programs may appear to be.
Now, to the extent that such pluralism–that is, the various bodies, some of them being more open than others, all contributing in their own distinct ways to a healthy civil society–is experienced as a problem, it is arguably one which just takes us back to "metaphysical capitalism" again: the idea that "any suggestion that my rights over myself are limited in any way I regard as an intolerable tyranny." Of course, the liberal foundation of rights in this country, whatever its abuses, can't be cavalierly dismissed. But it is equally important to recognize where that doctrine leads, and to recognize that socialist principles can, and do, provide an alternative to it. Socialism (or democratic egalitarianism if you must) ought to be fruitfully pluralistic–and it usually is, as anyone who has spent any time in societies that embraced egalitarian principles, and made use of socialist policies to adhere to those principles, can probably tell you. But it is admittedly true that many types of socialism–particularly, but not only, the state socialist and communist parties which dominated much of the world for much of the 20th century–were unfriendly, to say the least, to any component of that pluralism which excluded, as of course churches often do, despite (or perhaps one could say "in connection with") their manifest role in providing for the development and the strengthening of social goods.
This isn't an argument that such civil bodies, once socially empowered, would or should never be changed by being more thoroughly economically integrated with the rest of society. Of course such bodies, churches included, can't do what they do alone; even Carney recognizes that without an economic foundation which protects good work–that is, without strong limits on the marketplace–communities will fail, and families and individuals will follow, with churches and other particularist, voluntary organizations usually being mostly powerless to slow that decline. (As John Médaille wonderfully put it, while conservatives insist that politics in downstream from culture, culture itself is "downstream from breakfast.") But perhaps if those who hope for the overthrow (or at least the significant modification) of capitalism wouldn't so often fail to understand the place of what could be, and historically often was, one of their key allies in preserving anti-capitalist, genuinely social and familial and egalitarian values in a community, conservatives–or at least those conservatives who are able to break away from the always-trust-the-market-first mentality of Cold War fusion conservatism–might realize that what they're looking for is something we socialists (or some of us, anyway) have been talking about all along.
Back in January, Erik Olin Wright, a brilliant and profoundly original socialist thinker, writer, and organizer passed away. His book Envisioning Real Utopias had an enormous impact upon me; when I first read it, I found myself explaining and re-explaining its ideas to myself and everyone I met for months. The most important thing it–and so many other of Wright's writings–did, I think, was explain how the Marxist shadow over socialist, anarchist, egalitarian, and all other utopian thinking has too often blinded thinkers on the left from recognizing something pretty obvious: that what we are looking to do is empower civil society, to make the mutual support communities provide stronger, to make our social and economic worlds more democratic. Hence we leftists need to be guided, first and foremost, by a "socialist compass," and we need to recognize everything that falls within that compass, including what he called "interstitial" entities and strategies–or in other words, what a non-sociologist might call the dozens, hundreds, thousands of initiatives and organizations (neighborhood co-ops, women's shelters, intentional communities, environmental groups, and many more) which provide spaces wherein civil society, and not capital, rules. He acknowledged that the more doctrinaire Marxist thinkers would see these as a distraction from the longed-for revolution, but insisted that their emancipatory potential is real (Envisioning Real Utopias, pp. 322-327). And as for those civil associations which strengthen community and provide shelter from the hyper-individualism of liberal capitalism through particularist, sometimes exclusionary, even religious means? Should they be crushed by the secularizing Red Guards of some new socialist movement? Well…no. As Wright explained:
A vibrant civil society is precisely one with a multitude of heterogeneous associations, networks, and communities, built around different goals, with different kinds of members based on different sorts of solidarities….It is tempting to deal with this…by somehow defining civil society as only consisting of benign associations that are consistent with socialist ideals of democratic egalitarianism….I think this is an undesirable response….There is no guarantee that a society within which real power rooted in civil society predominates would be one that always upholds democratic egalitarian ideals. This, however, is not some unique problem for socialism; it is a characteristic of democratic institutions in general. As conservatives often point out, inherent in democracy is the potential for the tyranny of the majority, and yet in practice liberal democracies have been fairly successful at creating institutions that protect both individual rights and the interests of minorities. A socialist democracy rooted in social empowerment through associations in civil society would face similar challenges…My assumption here is not that a socialism of social empowerment will inevitably successfully meet this challenge, but that moving along the pathways of social empowerment will provide a more favorable terrain on which to struggle for these ideals than does either capitalism or statism (pp. 145-148).
I can easily imagine many conservatives–and socialists too–seeing the forgoing as a lot of murky meanderings, neither promising of real social empowerment nor conserving genuine community stability. My guess is that Carney wouldn't touch it, despite it, on my reading, allowing for exactly the kind of economic support and community respect that his own analysis seems to point directly towards. For my part, I find it beautiful; it reads as a perhaps unintended, but nonetheless carefully thought out and genuinely expressed, olive leaf to everyone who wants civil bonds to flourish, equal respect to increase, and communities to be stabilized–in other words, to promote economic and cultural goods that most people need to lead fulfilling lives. Here's the truth, conservatives: socialists (at least those who haven't unintentionally absorbed a metaphysics which is more capitalist and individualistic than anything else) want those things, too. So as the threat of Trump leads some American conservatives to rethink what they believe and where they're going on, here's hoping that they'll realize that the socialism (or the "left conservatism") which keeps on haunting their own arguments is more a helpful ghost, than a specter to flee.
Tim Carney
Previous articleThe Power of Place
Next articleDairy Farmers, Nebraska, and the Common Good
http://inmedias.blogspot.com
Russell Arben Fox grew up milking cows and bailing hay in Spokane Valley, WA, but now lives in Wichita, KS, where he runs the History & Politics and the Honors programs at Friends University, a small Christian liberal arts college. He aspires to write a book about the theory and practice of democracy, community, and environmental sustainability in small to mid-sized cities, like the one he has made his and his family's home. He also blogs--irregularly and usually at too-great a length--on politics, philosophy, religion, socialism, bicycling, books, farming, pop music, and whatever else strikes his fancy, at In Medias Res.
A Conservative for Our Time
Poor Little Lamb
Sacred Reality: The Augustinian Vision of Goodness in Marilynne Robinson's Gilead
A Time for Local Democracy
Another Night Like All The Rest
Aaron March 22, 2019 At 8:12 am
I was reading with an open mind until you you lost me with this one: "…while conservatives insist that politics in downstream from culture, culture itself is "downstream from breakfast.""
There's another, even better phrasing of the principle being advocated here. That would be Dostoevskii's Grand Inquisitor's statement "first give us bread, then talk to us about righteousness." If that's the company you want to keep, fine, but count me out. The 800 lb gorilla in the room is always amount to asking which philosopher king will be granted the Power to make this happen. Sure, capitalism commodifies people, if we let it. So does socialism, by the inexorable logic of the base and the superstructure.
Russell Arben Fox March 22, 2019 At 9:05 am
So does socialism, by the inexorable logic of the base and the superstructure.
That I do not deny, Aaron. In fact, I think Wright's concluding comment underlines that–that if we want to maintain democratic freedoms, we have to recognize the ways in which any socio-economic can reduce our capacity as persons to act decently. The quote that set you off was from John Medaille, who I can't imagine anyone mistaking for a Grand Inquisitor, but yes, it's true: we're willing to admit (as Carney's own book makes clear!) that if we can't collectively take control of our own material structure, as opposed to leaving it in hands of the marketplace (talk about Power with a capital P!), then we don't think community stands a chance, not in the long run.
Aaron March 22, 2019 At 10:56 am
I doubt that community stands a chance either way. The only way to convince people who don't want to be convinced with with Power, at which point, the same human foibles that make market capitalism what it is with work their own havoc on a more socially oriented power structure. We can learn something from Russian serfs, I think (Russian and Soviet History being my doctoral degree): The power of the little guy consists in thinking small, not thinking big. We always win, probably not even most of the time, but then again, who has?
Aaron March 22, 2019 At 12:25 pm
Sorry: "We DONT always win…" I mistyped that.
John C Medaille March 28, 2019 At 10:39 pm
The Grand Inquisitor is saying something different, dealing with a different subject: he is speaking to ideologues who give all the answers but never anything people can use. But culture being "downstream from breakfast" deals with a different topic, and I don't it's too Marxist or too much of a stretch to note that all cultures are affected–and effected–by their material supports. A culture of agriculture is different from an urban, mechanized culture, just as a culture built on the family farm is different from one built on the factory farm.
One is free to prefer one or the other, but I think one would have to be blind to say that culture is not affected by the way we get our breakfast.
Brian Villanueva March 22, 2019 At 10:34 am
In the Demon in Democracy, Ryszard Legutko makes a strong connection between the "socialism" he grew up with in Poland, and the "liberal, democratic, capitalism" that now rules his nation (and ours.) Far from socialism being "a bogeyman" to hide the flaws of liberal capitalism, Legutko, who lived under both, sees many similarities.
I suspect that Vaclev Havel would also agree. While he might laugh at the angst level conservatives (particularly Christians) display at what is, compared to Havel's life, an insignificant level of persecution in America, I don't think he would be so sanguine about the future. To use Havel's green-grocer terminology the rainbow flag is the new "workers of the world unite" sign. Non-display will not send you to a gulag (sensitivity training is not comparable to a re-education camp), but such thought-crime can cost you your job, your business partners, your customers. Just ask James Damoore or Brendan Eich. Today's liberal-democratic totalitarians have learned well the lessons from yesterday's socialist totalitarians: economic ostracism is as effective than gulags and torture, but cheaper.
Regardless of Rod's choice to ditch the term "socialism" for his book, the line between Soviet "socialism" and Western "liberal democratic capitalism" is nearly a cut and dry as you would have it be.
James Damore and Brenden Eich were fired from private companies. Nothing that happened to them was novel, as large numbers of gays, lesbians, and feminists who lost their jobs for their personal lives back in the 1950's will be happy to explain to you. (Also, Damore was just flat wrong and offensive in his assertion that women are too stupid for computer jobs.) Private entities like Facebook and Twitter can do whatever they like. That they happen to like liberals a bit more than conservatives should tell you something about the tech market, as well as providing liberals quite a bit of schadenfreude in watching you all scream in pain because people are being mean to you. Conservatives have spent the last 30 years, since Rush Limbaugh became a thing, calling liberals the worst names on Earth. (Example: Limbaugh, a notably ugly male, said feminism only exists to make life easier for ugly women. I don't recall a lot of dissent from that opinion on the right.). After decades of insulting us, now does poor little Brian need a safe space away from the scary women and gay people?
Brian, the connection collectivist socialism and collectivist capitalism is collectivism. Capitalism has collectivized production to an extent that would astound a Stalinist bureaucrat, and most of the goods we buy are made by a few cartels dominating each and (nearly) every market. When you go into the grocery store, you see dozens of "competing" products in each category, only to find that the brands are all owned by two or three companies. And this is true is nearly major market segment, from banking to beer, from airlines (hub domination) to eyeglasses and eye care.
It both cases, it is not owners but bureaucrats who run the collectives, nominally on behalf of the people (either citizens or shareholders) but actually in behalf of their own interests. Despite claims that "private property" forms the dividing line between the two systems of collectivism, such property has little economic importance in the United States; the heights of the economy, and most of the depths, are owned and operated by collectivist bureaucrats. One might have said, at one time, that the Soviet Union was different because the economic and political bureaucracies were the same, but they distinction is rapidly disappearing, or has disappeared, as the corporations increasing dominate the government.
"the connection between"
John J. Turner March 22, 2019 At 12:25 pm
As a Kansas farm boy in the 1950's and early 1960's, I saw a lot of informal, voluntary community spirit keep farmers alive, finding fair ways to share labor and equipment to get their harvests accomplished in a timely manner. That began to change in the 1960's as some of the farmers spent their weekdays at airplane plants in Wichita earning the money to afford their weekend farming habit, and the forms of cooperation had to shift accordingly, but community spirit was still present.
Was it at any point socialism? Not in any formal or ideological or bureaucratic sense, but it was based in valuing of community ties and with working toward equal justice by fair sharing of labor, equipment, and capital. Let's call it "voluntary communitarian values."
Were those ties sealed in any social structures apart from the shared equipment and labor? One point of social solidarity was the neighborhood 4-H club and women's home demonstration unit that both met in an abandoned country school house that set on the corner of our farm; the building was actually owned by another neighbor who allowed it to be used for the community meetings. A few of the neighbors attended the same village church about five miles away, while others who attended church did so in one or another of the usually larger churches in the county seat and public school town about nine miles away. Still, there was a sense of common Christian faith among most neighbors.
By the 1960's the women's home demonstration unit dissolved because most of the women were working outside the home and the 4-H club had moved its meetings to town, because it had expanded its base to include some town members, and meeting in town allowed members to come to the meeting from their after-school activities.
Many of the residences in the old farm neighborhood are no longer there.
Russell Arben Fox March 22, 2019 At 1:43 pm
Let's call it "voluntary communitarian values."
I like it. As Wright put it at another point in his book, "transcending capitalism imagines a world in which the voluntarily coordinated collection action of people in civil society can spontaneously achieve sufficient coherence as to provide for social order and social reproduction without the necessity of the state" (p. 146). That's not the whole story, obviously, just as your anecdote surely isn't the whole story either. But they're both talking about the same thing, I think.
Brian March 22, 2019 At 12:55 pm
An exemplary example of the "No True Socialist" thinkpiece.
Kind of like the "No True Conservative" argument, right Brian?
Brian March 24, 2019 At 8:38 am
Hey, you know me, I'm a distributist, passionate advocate of Belloc and Chesterton as the prophets we should listen to.
There are no advocates for that who anyone pays attention to anyway, so we don't have to deflect away from anything…
D.W. Sabin March 22, 2019 At 5:16 pm
If I could manage to think that today's so called "conservatives" are any less totalitarian than todays so-called "liberals" in the U.S.A., I might get more exercised about people crying "socialist" in a crowded theater. But, I recently overheard a Brit guffaw when he heard a couple of yanks talking about America becoming socialist. The Brit maintained the workaholic American wouldn't know the first thing about being a proper socialist, they would miss the indoctrination session too often working late or mountain biking or pursuing competition shopping..
As to Utah, one of my favorite Stegner quotes is "if I'm ever in a disaster, I hope its within a days drive of Utah". I think he said this a bit after the Teton Dam broke and there were traffic jams in southern Idaho of supplies and citizen volunteers from Utah going to help by nightfall the day of the disaster. Having grown up there, I love it too much to inflict myself upon it. The fact remains however that the Mormons, as much as I may have antagonized them for sport in my youth seem to intrinsically know how to operate socialistically within a capitalistic system while maintaining conservative republican cred and a profoundly distinctive community culture. Though I loudly chafed at them while there, I was never at hazard of being shipped off to the gulag. I don't think I ever heard a Utahn complain about living in "flyover country" either. The current Republican party does not deserve their general loyalty.
The yammering republicans or their talking heads who cry "socialist" about American Democrats might just as well substitute any of a hundred descriptive words to satisfy their aims…..and vice versa. The national discourse is reduced to "us" vs. "them" which is, to be precise, the perfect totalitarian atmosphere for the real danger of authoritarianism. Just as Gandhi replied "Its a nice idea, somebody should try it" when queried about his opinion of "western civilization", somebody, by all rights could say the same thing about the Soviets and their Socialism. Industrial Totalitarianism is the real problem and either political party in this country now is easily seduced by its blandishments.
Best to you , you commie pinko Mr. Fox
Rob G March 23, 2019 At 10:04 am
"Industrial Totalitarianism is the real problem and either political party in this country now is easily seduced by its blandishments."
I agree, but I'm not so sure I'd describe it as "industrial," as it also includes post-industrial Big Tech as a major, perhaps THE major player. I'm currently reading Shoshana Zuboff's The Age of Surveillance Capitalism and it's pretty darn scary. I tend to come down with Del Noce here: the "technocratic Right" has co-opted the "cultural Left," resulting in something like the old "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" mentality on steroids.
From my own perspective, the development of Information Technology is just another phase of the much longer Industrial Totalitarian Era. Though not without benefits, the slavish devotion to the cult of "efficiency" that does not factor in so called "external costs" is the get out of jail free card for the Industrial Totalcrats.
Rob G March 25, 2019 At 6:26 am
True, but Zuboff argues that the IT universe has pushed capitalism into not just a new phase but a new form, in which it's not our labor or our "stuff" that ties us to the system, but our actual behaviors and their predictability. The tangibles have become secondary.
You're much too kind, D.W. I wish I could wear the commie pinko label fully, but alas, that remains more an aspiration than a reality for me, but I genuinely appreciate the compliment nonetheless. Our aims must stand beyond our grasp, or what's a heaven for, and all that, right?
Karen March 23, 2019 At 8:44 am
I generally enjoy Fox's work, however any time I read anything advocating community preservation I get very, very nervous. I'm a feminist, and I strongly believe that the best society encourages women to be educated, marry later, and own our own property and income. Patriarchy is tyranny, always and in every single instance. How do you preserve communities without allowing domestic tyrants?
How do you preserve communities without allowing domestic tyrants?
It's a hard question, Karen; I don't have, and I'm fairly confident no one has, a definitive, one-size-fits all answer. Which, of course, goes both ways: if the way to prevent domestic tyrants is to stop preserving communities, then obviously we should also end all domesticity in the first place, break up all families, and every child should be raised in a commune which is fully supervised in order to maintain complete egalitarianism. Since, of course, no egalitarian person really imagines that such a Harrison Bergeron/Brave New World solution would ever be desirable, I think we simply admit, as egalitarians, "Damn, families are hard." And then we do our best to teach and model egalitarianism and police for possible sociopathy and violence as much as we can in light of basic democratic freedoms. Same thing goes for communities, I suppose. The references I make in the post to Wright are really on point here; he directly addresses the simple fact that lots and lots of civil society will always be inegalitarian, resulting in, if not wholly tyrannical communities, then at least the continual possibility of tyrannical and abusive relationships. In his view, if you believe that existence of these conditions and possibilities are so intolerable as to necessitate that all social empowerment and egalitarianism be provided only and entirely through a revolutionary state, and never through voluntarily chosen or inherited communities, then you've just left the "social" out of "socialism" entirely. And I agree with that. I'm a liberal communitarian, to be sure, but I am a communitarian, and so the fact that their are, and always have been, and always will be, bad and oppressive communities, while terrible, does not make me think that civil society should therefore never be part of our thinking as we seek to build just and democratic localities.
Karen March 23, 2019 At 10:43 pm
You could start by making sure that very few hierarchies exist anywhere, and that those that have to exist are weak, focused on very specific functions, and strictly limited in time. For families, make sure fathers don't have special rights — no family wages, no more wives taking their husbands' surnames, kids will always get hypenated surnames, all propery acquired during marriage is titled to both spouses and both spouses have to agree to any sale or mortgage. Encourage late marriage, never before 18, rarely before 25. If women are already adults with some years of independent living before marriage, they will be harder to reduce to domestic slaves. If you weaken the role of fathers, I'll accept your communities.
"You could start by making sure that very few hierarchies exist anywhere, and that those that have to exist are weak, focused on very specific functions, and strictly limited in time."
Fine idea, except for the rather obvious fact that the ongoing enforcement of the notion itself requires a hierarchy. As I explained to the progressive Catholic nuns who attempted to convert me to feminism as an undergrad, hierarchy is an inescapable condition, being an utterly natural one. Kick it out the door it will come back through the window. Say what you want about "patriarchy," but trying to defeat it by attacking hierarchy per se is a fool's game. You might as well attack the food chain for being inegalitarian.
Rob G.,
hierarchy is an inescapable condition, being an utterly natural one. Kick it out the door it will come back through the window….You might as well attack the food chain for being inegalitarian.
Yeah, I'm going to push back on this at least a little bit–not necessarily because I think you're wholly wrong (there obviously is a hierarchical component to many relationships that exist throughout the natural world), but because it sounds to me, perhaps wrongly, that you're slipping something socially normative into your natural description here. Okay, yes, the food chain is inegalitarian. And? Did Jesus, or Plato, or Confucius, or John Locke, or Thomas Jefferson, or Dorothy Day , or Wendell Berry, ever use the fact that hawks eat mice as relevant to the social order? Of course not. (I'm thinking here of C.S. Lewis's hypothetical response to those who argued that insisting upon limits in one's sexual behavior is "unnatural"; "so is not murdering your neighbor and stealing his wife" he wrote, or something to that effect.) If your point is simply that Karen's railing against hierarchies is going to involve an endless, difficult pushing against the natural, fallen human existence we're all part of, fine. But if you're suggesting that fact of our natural, fallen human existence is a reason to not attack any particular hierarchy, expose its harms against human equality and thus mutual flourishing, and seek to replace it with or reform it in the direction of a social relation that is more Christian and just, then I'd say your argument is an unpersuasive one.
Karen March 25, 2019 At 10:07 am
Yes, hiearchies do exist, but how are you sure we have the correct ones now? Electra Waggoner Biggs once defended her exceptional, unearned economic privilege in an interview by saying that if we made everyone equal tomorrow, in a couple of years some people would be rich and others desparate again. Ms. Biggs, and all others who say this, left out the key question: the ones who became rich after the Great Levelling likely wouldn't be the same people we have in power now.
I specifically stated that hierarchies can exist provided that the are limited in time and to a specific purpose. That allows for any job or function and excludies hereditary positions of power and the patriarchal family.
Russell, my argument is with that form of feminism which seeks to overturn patriarchy by arguing that all hierarchies are necessarily unjust. My response is that while hierarchy per se is natural, and thus good, not all instances of it are just. Efforts should be made to challenge unjust hierarchies, not in trying to get rid of the concept as a whole, which can't be done.
"That allows for any job or function and excludies hereditary positions of power and the patriarchal family."
I do not accept as fact that patriarchy is a necessarily unjust manifestation of hierarchy.
How is a system that puts a person in power over a group of people entirely because that person has a penis NOT unjust? The whole justification for patriarchy is that men will destroy everything if they aren't in charge of everything, which from my reading is giving in to bullying.
Rob G March 25, 2019 At 12:28 pm
"How is a system that puts a person in power over a group of people entirely because that person has a penis NOT unjust?"
Not all males are fathers.
"The whole justification for patriarchy is that men will destroy everything if they aren't in charge of everything"
That makes no sense.
So what is your justification for patriarchy?
Also, 'not all males are fathers' is a complete non sequitur from my question: how is it just to award all leadership and power in society based on possession of a penis?
David Naas March 25, 2019 At 2:24 pm
Just to toss in a random number or two — both article and comments are marvelous, BTW — Wikipedia's definition: Hierarchy (from the Greek hierarkhia, "rule of a high priest", from hierarkhes, "president of sacred rites") Which word we have adapted to all forms of organizational ranking.
But we don't exactly show respect for any "hierarchy", including the ecclesial ones. Rather, the opposite.
Also, nothing has been said about females of the species who become members of a hierarchy. Do they suddenly acquire penises? The former head of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori might have a thing or two to say about that.
In this vein, what of Her Majesty, Elizabeth II?
She reigns but does not rule. She leads, but does not govern. She remains at once the most "conservative" of Monarchs, and also the most innovative of Sovereigns. She has forged her own path, having had no guide to lay out her course, and withal has been Queen, wife, mother, granny, and the most beloved person in England. She was in Service in WW2. And if England is to survive, it will be due to her. How does she fit into this "Hierarchy" nonsense?
Jefferts Schori's position is exactly the kind of hierarchy that should continue to exist: chosen by the people most affected by it, limited in time, designed for a very specific function.
So long as monarchs function entirely as marketing ambassadors for their countries and hold no actual power, and so long as their countries accept the expense of maintaining a monarch, I'm okay with it.
The hierarchy I most want to see destroyed and forgotten is the traditional family. Fathers should have no power whatsoever over anyone over the age of 18 in their household, and whatever power they have over the ones under 18 should be exttremely restricted.
A review of your postings in this section shows a certain vehemence which does not appear to come from any theoretical abstraction, but from personal experience. Forgive the presumption, but what you appear to be consistently saying is that all males automatically think with their penises (an obviously very bad thing), and are incapable of thinking vaginally (an obviously very good thing). Therefore all men can and must be silenced or ignored, and certainly forced into submission. If that is indeed your position, you will have already discounted whatever I may have to say. However, as a soi disant "conservative", however heretical, I cannot agree to a radical theoretical restructuring of society based on whatever pains you may have endured in your life. It is simply not a necessary nor sufficient justification for what you endorse. Misusing concepts of "power" and "patriarchy" do not provide sufficient cover for a declared program of emasculation (get rid of all those nasty penises).
But then, I am a crude and rude hick from the sticks, not a guilty middle-cl;ass white liberal, whose subservience to identity politics is based on a fear that I am not worthy to possess my life. On the contrary, I was raised by a Mother who provided the main economic stability in my childhood home, as my Daddy was a drunk and sometimes working carpenter. We were far from "middle-class', and barely qualified for the lower tier of the lower class. Mother did the heavy lifting, and it killed her too young, she never saw her 71st birthday. So when my daughter got into her teenage years, she asked, "Dad, are you some kind of a feminist?" She asked that because I was urging her to tolerate no nonsense from boyfriends or employers. (I need not define "nonsense" do I?) My reply was, no, I want you to stand up for yourself as a human being, and not allow yourself to be put down for being a "girl". I said that ardent "feminists" seemed to be middle-class women who wanted to be men, with business careers and family dominance, and seemed rather sad when they had achieved the goals which others (the "feminist" thought-leaders)had set for them. I further explained that such were as bad as the "men" who wore their .45 caliber "manhood" in a leather holster on their hip. (Arizona being an Open Carry State.) The point, if there is one, is that ideology is no substitute for thinking, whether it is Marxism, Freudianism, Libertarianism, or Feminism.
Now, I am sure you might, perhaps, have a rebuttal to my misogynistic screed, it is your prerogative. But, to be perfectly honest, unless is is something marvelously new, be advised I have been monitoring the "feminist" position since somewhere in the mid-Sixties. I do not react like a Pavlovian dog to cliche-laden shibboleths.
Again, apologies for being so disagreeing.
If you loved your mother for her work and raised your daughter to be a competent adult, then you are a feminist whether you want the label or not. (And yes, lots of feminist writing is terrible, jargony, incoherent dreck, rather like most business writing.) I dislike any system that awards privileges for accidents of birth, including the 'privileges' given to traditional women of being weak, stupid, cowards who never have to make any decisions. All adults should be expected to be strong, capable, prudent, educated, and polite. Patriarchy allows men to be brutes and women to be idiot weaklings.
Thank you for an intelligent response. My (admittedly provocative) earlier post was designed to discover if you were an ideologue or a rational person. I have suffered too often from those who allow their ideology, and jargon, to do their thinking for them, that (all too often), I tend to react badly. If I offended, my grievous apologies.
And your last sentence speaks volumes. If I am a "feminist", so be it. Brutes and idiots are not among my social circle. What I see, to employ an analogy from my former employment, is that male and female are two equal and necessary poles of an engine. The engine requires both to operate, and one is not "superior" to the other. In point of fact, if one pole becomes dominant, the engine will rapidly fault and possibly melt down. The engine in this example is, of course, society.
About my daughter. as noted, she was taught to take nuthin' from nobody. This led, in her later teenage and early adulthood years, to the expected clash between us. (We both are too stubborn for our own good, presumably. My good wife is more of a conciliatory counselor.) Her "poor attitude" led to some interesting problems at her work, when she was with CPS. Her passion is to protect and defend children even at the cost of bureaucratic distress. She became a supervisor, and within a year was reprimanded for being "pushy". Her husband (she met a good man) and I both told her, do as you please, we will support you. She did just that, and now has retired to be a grandma herself. (Sometimes, fighting a bureaucracy is futile.) My poor grand-kids (and the great granddaughter). With her after them to "stand up", and me cheerleading, heaven only knows how they will turn out.
But I guarantee, they won't take nuthin' off of nobody.
Leroy See March 26, 2019 At 2:29 pm
This "discussion" reminds me of why I chose not to become part of academia and it's endless posturing. The feeling tone started ok but then degenerated to discourse about sex lives of sluts and predatory males as respondents responded one to another by including mind reading, or something else, as well as abundantly cited favorite works. If this is an example of how this site and publication engenders community and commonality it is time to re-think this discussion in terms of whether or not positions became polarized beyond redemption to the detriment of civil discussion.. If it had happened on the proverbial front porch of the general store where people who live together have to get along together afterwards perhaps its feeling tone would have been positive in spite of deeply felt opinions. After all, we are all members of the larger community that breathes air and has to eat food and drink water or die, a biological fact often lost in the fray..
sorry for the typo… its and it's are different and know it…
So much for pondering community.
Reading this, I am put in mind of the poor sap standing outside his wife's Hogan somewhere down in the Four Corner's region in the early nineteenth century after having spent a bit too much time trading stolen livestock with the Spaniards over there to Santa Fe and not serving the family unit to his mother-in-law's standards, clutching his Ah-hoohaw amidst his few possessions cast about him and damned put out that he is henceforth rejected by said wife and is now required to return to his own mommy in disgrace while the kids are required to forget dad in favor of ma's brother. I wonder if said Dineh stand accused of Pudenda Tyranny?
I've always enjoyed that Paul Klee political cartoon illustrating two monstrous looking men with muttonchops circling one another warily with the caption: "Two men approach one another, each presuming the other to be of superior rank".
Though I certainly understand the issues and am loathe to make light of them, anybody who has resided in any worthwhile community anywhere will clearly agree that "isms" and "ists" are the death knell of any community because all sense of humor will have long gone, replaced with the usual resentments, justified or not…. that have destroyed community since Gronk hit Grunk over the head with a large shin bone. Patriarchy vs. Matriarchy becomes irrelevant as soon as the Ism and Ist Bus arrives. Best to erect a boxing ring then or maybe a stone casting pit.
"Patriarchy vs. Matriarchy becomes irrelevant as soon as the Ism and Ist Bus arrives."
Tru dat, as the kids say. And the numerous posts here (and elsewhere) by Karen demonstrate beyond dispute that she has made anti-patriarchy into an "ism" of the first rank.
"the farther we go to down the comment box trail, the farther off topic and farther from common courtesy we tend to stray."
Offensive lunacy occasionally calls for a response in kind, especially when neither civility nor common sense seem to work.
Tom Springer March 26, 2019 At 8:30 pm
Yes D.W., the farther we go to down the comment box trail, the farther off topic and farther from common courtesy we tend to stray. Nonetheless, kudos to you for writing about the best 104-word sentence that I've seen this side of St. Paul's epistles. (That man was in serious need of a copy editor; perhaps oak gall ink was too expensive to waste on periods?) To your other point, I'm all for "'ists" and "isms" as long as the people who wear those labels can shelve them long enough to unite around something of common value to a community. A new school, for instance, or a nature preserve open to the public. As to the latter, I've found that working with people of all stripes while clearing autumn olive on a spring morning makes political differences recede and our everyday humanity come to the forefront. Similarly, I don't know anything about Karen, where she lives or what she does for a living. While I disagree with her about 60 percent of the time, I always admire her courage and conviction in the back and forth with her Ah-hoohaw-equipped interlocutors. Per Leroy See, if this front porch was made of tung and groove yellow pine, instead of pixelated fairy dust, I bet we'd have a more congenial discussion with some good beer and wood-fired pizza to close the deal. As hierarchies go, that might make for an enjoyably flat one.
D.W. Sabin March 28, 2019 At 9:22 am
In prolix we trust Mr. Springer. I am a Punctuaphobist which, along with an abuse of sentence structure includes a predilection for tardiness that reveals anti-social tendencies. Well, ok , so "tendencies" sugarcoats it.
While planning this coming year's Autumn Olive Fatwa, make sure to remove the plants later in the season so you can harvest the fruits as they are nicely sweet and tart , great in pancakes or on vanilla ice cream or maybe stewing for a while in a glass of frozen Stoly. Not that I would know much about Frozen Stoly . It was never around long enough to quite reach the frozen state. There is nothing quite so pathetic as a wretch standing outside his freezer trying to will the vodka to a properly syrupy state but giving up in favor of the Moloch efficiency. Drunks are many things but one thing above all else, they are efficiently drunk. However, back to the point….the Autumn Olive fruits are nothing like their Russian cohort and you have to beat the birds to them, revealing why thy are so widespread from the days our beloved Connecticut Department of Transportation specified them for Highway r.o.w. plantings. I discovered how tasty the things were a few years ago after having been introduced to the delights of Persian Barberry fruits by an Iranian couple in a Halifax Farmers Market. They taste like dried cranberries. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the fruits of the noxious thug Korean Barberry that is spread everywhere. I tried them after the Persian ones proved out well and discovered that the plant from the Korean branch of the Axis of Evil produced odious little wads of pulp that possess the taste of Turpentine with hints of WD-40. The White Tail refuse to touch them and so the only thing that takes them out are Goats who seem to like them with Poison Ivy. Nonetheless I am Cosmopolitan in my fruits.
Regardless of my runonandon comment, I support the right of Karen to say whatever she damned well pleases anytime she cares to. You are right that pacific agreement gets old fast. Kind of like packaged disagreement in that regard, the Great Noise of our Fake News yammering away about nothing at all but doing it with enflamed conviction. Fauxvda, CNN and MSNBC throwing bricks at one another as they describe a burning dirty underwear dump of extra large jockey shorts in apocalyptic terms is turning the nation into a bunch of dyspeptic rubes joined in mutual disagreeability. In fact, "Fake" is an entirely insufficient descriptive, like our food, it should be called "Junk News", like a Twinkie, best taken with a dessert wine like Italian Swiss Colony in the big green jug.
Karen April 11, 2019 At 3:31 pm
Tim H March 28, 2019 At 10:58 am
On the factory closing and moving somewhere else . . .
Leftists are great about throwing out a nice tragedy that happens in markets but they never seem to be able to think it through the rest of the way. First off, do factories never close in socialist paradises?
But secondly, I honestly don't understand what you want to happen. You sort of throw it out there and leave it hanging. We can all agree its tragic. But what is the alternative?
Ultimately what a market does for you is tell you about real material scarcity. Are you suggesting you know how better to use the resources involved that factory? Are you suggesting the factory stay open and lose business ( charging a higher price than the other folks)? Or are you saying the firm should stay open and charge less for their product but still pay the same money to the workers? Or what?
This is the problem with the left mindset in general. They "problemitize" but follow up with rest of the issue. Yes, the factory closing is tragic. But there is no such thing as perfect security this side of death. It's not like we haven't ever seen a factory close. You have freedom. If you fear the factory closing, then do something to help yourself. Be more productive. Get an online business. Learn a new trade. Offer the firm new ways to be productive. Leftists also never recognize the problem in a comparative setting.
It's really only in the last hundred years or so that we've even been able to stop and take a breath as a species. The vast majority of humans in history have lived in fear of starvation or other terrible death.
But now because folks have a chance to breath – due largely to free markets – all of a sudden we are supposed to solve a problem – community disruption – that has plagued us for a million years or so.
Please folks let's stop carrying on about the problems of "metaphysical capitalism" and look at least a bit to the fact that all of your children will actually grow up due to material prosperity provided by markets. Let's have a little more gratitude that if the damn factory does close, I can move somewhere else and survive rather than be stuck due to social or political structures preventing it.
I get that this massive explosion in wealth has created problems for community. I do. But this notion that the golden goose called free markets is the cause of our problems and we should therefore give over our economic life to some economic planner is plainly stupid. These planners have no crystal ball. They cannot see how to allocate resources to their most highly valued use like a million individual transactions can. The market collects all those transactions and boils them down to price so resource need can be compared. There is no better way to account for scarcity – a fundamental physical fact. Go read I-Pencil again. The way is forward with free markets and a can do approach to solving problems of community.
Go read I-Pencil again. The way is forward with free markets and a can do approach to solving problems of community.
I teach "I, Pencil" regularly; it's a great essay. Also a radically limited one, for exactly the reason you mention: it boils everything down to price. Coordination and productivity can happen when price is taken out of the picture, whereas other goods like community attachment, environmental sustainability, and social welfare too often disappear entirely when the rule of price is unchalleneged. So, on the balance, I say give me the "inefficiency" and other flaws of a market subject–probably not entirely, but not minimally either–to community standards, democratic regulations, and place-defending economic coordination. Reject any or all of that, and you're a liberal individualist, or so it seems to me–someone not fundamentally concerned about conserving anything.
John C Medaille March 29, 2019 At 1:51 pm
The problem with boiling everything down to price is that it ignores the externalities, and all products without exception have externalities because all production depends on a social system that is prior to the market, and on physical infrastructures which the market cannot provide, but which must be supported by the market. Products that do not "pay their fair share" of the necessary civil and physical infrastructure as in fact receiving a subsidy from them not reflected in the price.
And this is prior to the problem of externalities such as pollution, social dislocation, subsidies, cartels, etc.
The succinct statement of the problem: to provide "spaces wherein civil society, and not capital, rules." If that's socialism, we all need to become socialists.
It's the conservative thing to do.
Tim H March 28, 2019 At 9:29 pm
As long as one can exit with one's feet from your civil society, call it anything you want I guess. I'm all for culture that promotes good ends chosen by consumers in markets. You can exhort. You can argue. You can even holler or joke. As long as its voluntary.
"Please folks let's stop carrying on about the problems of 'metaphysical capitalism' and look at least a bit to the fact that all of your children will actually grow up due to material prosperity provided by markets."
There is a difference between "markets" and capitalism understood as a system. Very few critics of the latter reject the idea of markets in general.
"I'm all for culture that promotes good ends chosen by consumers in markets….As long as its voluntary."
If the only way one can truly opt out is to get off the grid and move to a cabin in the woods, how voluntary is it, really? And what do you do when the ends "chosen by consumers in markets" move the culture in a direction that undercuts the very freedoms that allow us to choose the good in the first place?
I know of very few critics of contemporary capitalism that view state action as some sort of cure-all. Yet mainstream conservatism is full of people who think the "free market" can fix everything. Note that conservatives such as Richard Weaver and Russell Kirk were pointing out the problems with this view as far back as the 40's.
Good observations, Rob.
John C Medaille March 29, 2019 At 7:48 am
ISTM that there are two mistakes here. The first is confounding "capitalism" and "the market." The terms are not synonymous, but contraries. Wherever capitalism advances, the market retreats as production is gathered into collectives that displace markets, here just as in the Soviet Union of old. And the second is that "coercion" is insufficiently specified. When one group owns all the means of production, everyone else must work for them or starve.
That's coercion.
Yep. People make bad, often harmful decisions when under undue economic duress. I've found Albino Barrera's work on "economic compulsion" to be very helpful here.
D.W. Sabin April 3, 2019 At 9:31 am
Whenever I hear a so-called conservative mention the so-called free market, I get an urge to reach for my knife because as Mr. Medaille points out, "coercion" is never very far from said so-called free market. The proximity of coercion is, in fact altogether too frequently inversely proportional to the distance of external costs from any accurate accounting going into the published statistics of said so called free market.
Willis Renuart April 10, 2019 At 6:06 pm
Very enjoyable essay. I had no idea that socialists could be so conservative! I learned that anarchist can be very conservative too from James Scott's Seeing Like a State. He convincingly argues that the more power a state has (like control over the means of production) the more it devastates civil society. Socialists and conservatives have similar goals, but I'm not sure we would want the same policies. I agree that institutional responsibility should be more broadly distributed to smaller groups so that families, neighborhoods, schools, and religious groups may be reincorporated into community. It is the scale and not the ownership of large institutions (especially governmental ones) that is the problem. Sometimes scale is unavoidable, but public policy should favor small and local so long as the country can compete effectively. I an essay for the Front Porch earlier this year, I wrote: "Engaging and successful institutions require the meaningful participation of their members, and the alienation that so many across the political spectrum have written about is, at its core, the failure of institutions to connect with the people they serve." Do you agree, and what is the first step you would take to empower communities?
Willis Renuart April 11, 2019 At 7:28 am
I would vote for a socialist platform that called for universal healthcare, vouchers for education (including higher ed and preschool), and more neighborhood control of criminal justice.
American Conservatism, and the Socialist Specter which Haunts it Still – Enjeux énergies et environnement April 17, 2019 At 7:59 am
[…] [Cross-posted to Front Porch Republic] […]
American Conservatism, and the Socialist Specter which Haunts it Still - Resilience April 17, 2019 At 8:00 am
richard W. burcik April 17, 2019 At 4:17 pm
Prof. Fox:
You wrote in part that "Back in January, Erik Olin Wright, a brilliant and profoundly original socialist thinker, writer, and organizer passed away. His book Envisioning Real Utopias had an enormous impact upon me; when I first read it, I found myself explaining and re-explaining its ideas to myself and everyone I met for months. The most important thing it–and so many other of Wright's writings–did, I think, was explain how the Marxist shadow over socialist, anarchist, egalitarian, and all other utopian thinking has too often blinded thinkers on the left from recognizing something pretty obvious: that what we are looking to do is empower civil society, to make the mutual support communities provide stronger, to make our social and economic worlds more democratic. Hence we leftists need to be guided, first and foremost, by a "socialist compass," and we need to recognize everything that falls within that compass, including what he called "interstitial" entities and strategies–or in other words, what a non-sociologist might call the dozens, hundreds, thousands of initiatives and organizations (neighborhood co-ops, women's shelters, intentional communities, environmental groups, and many more) which provide spaces wherein civil society, and not capital, rules. He acknowledged that the more doctrinaire Marxist thinkers would see these as a distraction from the longed-for revolution, but insisted that their emancipatory potential is real (Envisioning Real Utopias, pp. 322-327). And as for those civil associations which strengthen community and provide shelter from the hyper-individualism of liberal capitalism through particularist, sometimes exclusionary, even religious means? Should they be crushed by the secularizing Red Guards of some new socialist movement? Well…no. As Wright explained:
Your essay was a paean to Prof. Wright and his dreadful book "Envisioning Real Utopias". Unfortunately, you failed to mention that Dr. Wright's tome was entirely too long and was rambling in its organization. Nor did you address Wright's arrogant tone, incomprehensible jargon, as well as, as the fact that he discusses only Karl Marx, himself and his wife's ideas. Indeed you did not mention that what Erik Olin Wright "… wanted to achieve (in his book) was a clear elaboration of workable institutional principles that could inform emancipatory alternatives to the existing world" and that he failed completely in this mission.
Worst of all you did not cite Prof. Russell Jacoby's 2011 review of "Envisioning Real Utopias" in the winter edition of Dissent Magazine. Perhaps you failed to mention Jacoby's evaluation of Wright's book because according to Dr. Jacoby "With (Erik Olin) Wright that sociological tradition, alas, is dead." Jacoby later continued "The book is startling and depressing evidence of what has happened to American academic Marxism, at least its sociological variant, over the last 30 years. It has become turgid, vapid, and self-referential." Not finished, Jacoby insisted that "Wright has to be given credit for parading his anti-capitalist sensibilities, but his critique reads like a lecture at the hootenanny weekend of the Socialist Hiking Club, Berkeley chapter." Apparently, Prof. Russell Jacoby considered Erik Olin Wright to be a pettifogger and jackass.
How did you miss all of this?
Richard W. Burcik
Russell Arben Fox April 17, 2019 At 5:16 pm
Thanks for the e-mail!
Your essay was a paean to Prof. Wright and his dreadful book "Envisioning Real Utopias"
1)	No it wasn't. I brought up Wright and his book in the final two paragraphs as a way to bring my much more extensive engagement with Timothy Carney's "Alienated America" to what I thought was a good conclusion. I do have paean's to Wright's book elsewhere on my blog, but you'd have to follow the links I included to find them.
2)	"Envisioning Real Utopias" isn't dreadful. You may think so–as well as think it is "long," "rambling," "arrogant," and "incomprehensible"–but I don't. (Well, long and jargon, yes, undisputedly. But the rest? Strong disagreement from me.)
you did not cite Prof. Russell Jacoby's 2011 review of "Envisioning Real Utopias" in the winter edition of Dissent Magazine
1)	I didn't mention it because, again, I wasn't really engaging Wright; I was engaging Carney and the general phenomenon, as I see it, of various conservative writers failing to appreciate what I have called the "left conservative" possibilities within socialist thought, broadly construed.
2)	I didn't mention it because I am, in fact, familiar with that review, and I found it, at the time that I read it, churlish, defensive, and weirdly judgmental. (Indeed, it seemed to me the sort of review that a "pettifogger and a jackass" would write, interestingly enough.) I suppose I might reconsider that judgment if I read it again today, but that is the reaction I remember having at the time. In fact, I'm pretty certain I said as much, and may have explained why I felt so, in those aforementioned blog posts which actually were primarily about Wright, and not something else.
Patriotic Subversives: Distributism as a Political Problem
Politics & Power July 1, 2019
The Gain is Gloss: Thanks to FPR and Its Readers
Local Wonderings in Wichita
Culture, High & Low January 20, 2015


People are usually looking for short-term loans when they need money very fast. Everyone can apply for a long-term loan in a bank, but it requires more time for waiting. Banks prefer to pay loans only to persons with a comparatively good credit history.
Short term payday loans are usually smaller, but it is much easier to get them. Borrowers need only to send information about them and what amount they need. Lenders make their decision and pay money to borrowers in short terms, the time is necessary for this decision is much shorter than when applying to banks.
Borrowers don't need to specify for what they need money. They may use it for buying food and devices, paying taxes, and helping their friends. There could be many reasons to apply for short-term payday loans so lenders understand that they should make their decisions fast and pay to those who need it.
The term for small loans is about a few weeks. Customers should understand their responsibility when asking for money and consider if they will be able to pay the money back until the specified day.
Our lending works as a platform for short-term loans online. People can apply for money in a few seconds, by filling simple forms and waiting for a decision. Loans are usually sent to clients on the next working day after applying and can be used for everything they require.
Many systems are just intermediaries between lenders and borrowers. It increases the time needed for payout and makes rate interests higher. Intermediaries may also be not very responsible and cheat on their borrowers or lenders.
Our system differs from them and offers low rate interest. We are direct lenders, so the process of getting loans is much faster and easier for clients. It works even for borrowers with bad credit history if they are going to pay more responsible.
Our company needs only a little bit of information about borrowers. This information is used to make a decision if a specific amount of money can be sent to the client that wants it. Borrowers also should send us bank card numbers or other requisites for paying.
Short term payday loans have a lot of benefits because of which thousands of people use them. They become even more popular than bank credits, especially when it comes to borrowers with bad credit history and those who don't want to wait.
Low-interest Borrowers need to pay fees, but their size is usually minimal. It is easy to pay what you borrowed in a few weeks even including all the charges.
Easy application. Borrowers don't need to fill large forms, gather a lot of documents, and spend hours of applying for loans. The process is automated, and the company needs only basic information that is necessary for paying, such as the name of a borrower and needed the amount of money.
Fast money transfer. It takes a few hours or a little bit more until money are received by borrowers. It's an excellent opportunity for those who need this money very fast.
Bad credit history. If a person didn't pay responsibly earlier, it doesn't mean that he or she is not responsible now. The company also helps unemployed people to get money if banks don't want to work with them for different reasons.
Direct lenders. If borrowers want to communicate with lenders or need additional information, they can use the website's help. Direct payments help to make the process even faster and let borrowers use low rate interests.
Our application system is automated, and the application process is easy for borrowers. If you interested in short-term loans online, you can get them easily by using our system. That is why many people use it now and get benefits from low rate loans.
To apply, just open our form. It is effortless and contains only information that is needed to ensure that clients will pay responsibly. When the form is filled, just send it and wait for the decision of the company. We understand that this decision should be ready very fast.
Be careful when filling the form with your data. The amount will be paid only if personal data is correct. You should also check your bank requisites because if they're incorrect, money can go to another person.


Another great listing SOLD in a wonderful community in North Oxnard, California. This property was Co Listed by David Tovar of Exit Castillo and SOLD in May 2015.
This is a 3 BEDROOM 2 BATH Single Family Home located at 2315 Jardin Drive within the Rio Lindo Community of Oxnard. This property SOLD for Top Dollar and seller received 94% of List Price. It SOLD faster than the average time on the market. It sold within 55 days. Seller was very happy with the results. They buyers area a young couple and are very happy with this being their first home. The transaction was very smooth with very little problems. The appraised value came in below what the seller was asking for but all parties agreed to settle for the appraised value.


text:
Sunanda Pushkar case: Shashi Tharoor called Meher Tarar 'My darlingest' – 2 min read
India August 20, 2019August 20, 2019
File Photo/IANS
New Delhi: Former Union minister Shashi Tharoor had addressed Meher Tarar as "My darlingest" in letters written to her by the Congress leader, the prosecution told a Delhi court on Tuesday while justifying its charges against Tharoor of abetting the suicide of his wife Sunanda Pushkar.
"There is a letter written by Tharoor to Tarar addressing her as 'My darlingest'. Such type of language was used. There are various letters which shows how intimate Tharoor and Tarar were to each other," said Public Prosecutor Atul Srivastava while accusing Tharoor of cruelty.
Objecting to the reading of the letters, senior advocate Vikas Pahwa, appearing for Tharoor, said that the letters are personal in nature and that the prosecution is only using a part of it, hence, they should be read in-camera.
Special CBI Judge Ajay Kumar Kuhar has posted the matter for hearing on August 31 while directing the prosecution to properly arrange all the documents in the case.
The prosecution further told the court that there were 15 ante-mortem injuries on Pushkar's body.
"The post-mortem conducted by All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) opined that the cause of death was poisoning. The report also says that there were 15 ante-mortem injuries on her body," the Public Prosecutor said while reading out the report.
The post-mortem further mentioned that the injuries were due to a blunt force which could be the result of a scuffle. The injuries ranged from 12 before the death to almost four preceding death.
The court is hearing arguments in the death of Pushkar in which her husband and Congress leader Tharoor is an accused. The court had in July allowed the application moved by the prosecution asking to share contents of the chargesheet with experts whom they want to consult before the arguments.
The court had however directed the prosecution to maintain a record of the experts with whom the chargesheet is shared.
Pushkar was found dead under mysterious circumstances in a suite of a Delhi hotel on the night of January 17 in 2014. The couple was staying in the hotel as their house was undergoing renovation.
Meher Tarar, Shashi Tharoor, Sunanda Pushkar
Chidambaram "key conspirator" in the INX media case: HC
Chhota Rajan, 5 others get 8 year jail for attempted murder – 1 min read
Congress leader Shashi Tharoor (File Photo)
Modi, Shah can defuse anti-CAA protests, but won't: Tharoor
Shashi Tharoor named for Sahitya Akademi Award 2019
Citizenship Bill fundamentally unconstitutional: Shashi Tharoor

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
praams praams.com
Home/newzealand/Workers find 1,000 human teeth in the building wall of the United States
Workers find 1,000 human teeth in the building wall of the United States
Workers in a building in Georgia in the United States have only fired a wall that thousands of human teeth fall on them.
THE Valdosta Daily Times reported on the creepy hits, saying the workers opened the wall and had at least 1000 human teeth.
The building found out it was home to the dental office at the beginning of the 1900s, although this does not fully explain the discovery.
The discovery began at the beginning of the week when the workers set up a new commercial location in the city center.
The wall was on the second floor of the building.
At the beginning of the 1900s, a drug store on the first floor of the building was also found to have provided teeth whitening services.
Officials in town are now trying to figure out why hundreds of human beings are going to be inside the building wall.
A photograph of the toothpicks sent to Facebook was later viral because people could not believe the real story happened, especially so close to Halloween.
Five months house arrest for high-performing former police officer
Justin Timberk and Jessica Beale reveal the name of their second son
There are growing warnings that the stock market bubble could burst
Quiz: Noon Challenge: January 17, 2021 – Stuff.co.nz
The new report portrays the cyberpunk 2077 development troubles, crisis and the "almost fake" E3 • Eurogamer.net
The global virus death toll is two million
Powered by https://praams.com | Designed by praams


text:
You are here: Home / Crime / Courts / Trumpeter swans shot in Northwest Iowa, reward offered
Trumpeter swans shot in Northwest Iowa, reward offered
Someone has shot and killed a pair of endangered trumpeter swans in northwest Iowa. D-N-R Conservation Officer Gary Biederman says the two rare birds were found Tuesday near Pickeral Lake in Buena Vista County and they'd been dead a few days.
Biederman says the swans were on private property on a restored wetland, about 150 yards from the road. One had a collar. It's believed they were a mated pair that successfully nested last year in the area. He says the fatal shots were likely delivered with a high-powered rifle.
Biederman is asking for the public's help. He says "I take very much offense at somebody doing this. The common public might say "Well, hunters did this," no, no, criminals did this with guns…and they should be prosecuted to the fullest." Biederman says the D-N-R has been releasing trumpeter swans in Iowa for about ten years.
A 45-hundred dollar reward is posted for the tip that brings an arrest and conviction. Anyone with information about this crime is urged to contact D-N-R Game Warden Brent Koppie at 712-260-1010 or the D-N-R tipline at 800-532-2020.


hand carved coffee table furniture hand carved coffee wood curved antique console table hand carved chinese coffee table.
hand carved coffee table antique hand carved coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved table small side table hand carved with brass and copper inlay hand carved table hand carved coffee table with glass top.
hand carved coffee table handmade antique hand carved coffee table with 4 stools hand carved chinese coffee table with stools.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table from rustic handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table inspired carved coffee table enlarge image japanese hand carved coffee table.
hand carved coffee table rustic handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table hand carved chinese coffee table with stools.
hand carved coffee table carved coffee tables carved coffee table hand carved coffee table carved coffee table antique burr walnut carved coffee tables antique hand carved chinese coffee table.
hand carved coffee table baroque luxury furniture style hand carved coffee table solid wood small table hand carved coffee table with glass top.
hand carved coffee table image 0 sherlyn handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table coffee tables by woo design hand carved chinese coffee table with stools.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table fight scene antique hand carved wood coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table tables for sale download wood primitive vintage handcrafted sherlyn handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table thumbnail hand carved teak and glass coffee table hand carved coffee tables furniture.
hand carved coffee table handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table large square style hand carved coffee table for sale antique hand carved wood coffee table.
hand carved coffee table antique hand carved coffee table excellent condition sherlyn handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table antique hand carved coffee table rustic handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table catchy carved coffee table with wooden hand carved coffee table wooden hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table dublin.
hand carved coffee table vintage mid century morn hand carved coffee table end tables from hand carved coffee table with glass top.
hand carved coffee table antique hand carved coffee table amazing craftsmanship hand carved coffee table dublin.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee tables low table brilliant brand new coffee tables inside century hand carved coffee hand carved coffee tables antique hand carved chinese coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table fresh coffee tables ideas glass top hand carved coffee table rustic handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table handcrafted philippines hand carved coffee table.
hand carved coffee table hand carved tribal carved coffee table from hand carved coffee table with glass top.
hand carved coffee table hand carved coffee table rustic handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table square hand carved coffee table classic elegant high quality furniture handcrafted coffee table.
hand carved coffee table feather inlay ee table hand carved antique wood hand carved ee table tables furniture hand carved coffee tables furniture.
hand carved coffee table image 0 antique hand carved coffee table.
hand carved coffee table century hand carved coffee low table with elephant scene for sale hand carved coffee table from germany.
hand carved coffee table hand carved teak wood coffee table international caravan hand carved teak wood coffee table international caravan hand carved coffee table with glass top.
hand carved coffee table low table outstanding beautiful oriental coffee table innovative oriental coffee table intended for hand carved coffee table attractive hand carved coffee table with glass top.


Everytime I eat something my stomach READ MORE 1 answer. DynacinMinocinMinocycline Hydrochloride Oral Cap: 50mg, 75mg, mg.
Here's a step-by-step tutorial on how to create desktop shortcuts for your favorite web pages using Google Chrome. This tutorial will show you in a few simple steps how to create a website shortcut on your computer's desktop in Windows 7, 8 and 10 using your favorite web browser. You can use any web browser you want, like Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Microsoft Edge, Internet Explorer. This post talks of how you can create web page shortcut using Edge browser on Windows 10 desktop. You can also create a Desktop App of.
How to Make Chrome Shortcuts on Your Windows Desktop Another way to create website shortcuts on your desktop in Windows is to. Learn how to easily make a shortcut on your desktop that will open Firefox and take you to a favorite website. How to Create a Desktop Shortcut of Website in Google Chrome Information Google Chrome lets you easily keep track of your favorite websit.
The other advantage of creating website or webpage shortcuts on desktop is that you can launch your favorite webpages with a click without. Creating a desktop shortcut to a website you frequently visit is useful. It allows you to double-click the icon from your desktop to launch the. If you visit or reference a web page on the Internet a lot, then Left click Shortcut to Desktop.


text:
Reissuance of Executive Order 110 (2010) Regarding Allocation of a Portion of the Commonwealth's Share of the Calendar Year 2009 National Limitation for Qualified School Construction Bonds Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Importance of the Initiative
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. No. 111-5, 123 Stat. 355) was enacted on February 17, 2009 ("ARRA"). Section 1521(a), Title I, Division B of ARRA added Section 54F to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended ("IRC"), to provide for the issuance of qualified school construction bonds ("QSCBs"). QSCBs are tax credit bonds that are designed to bear no interest and may be issued to finance the construction, rehabilitation, or repair of a public school facility or for qualifying public school facility land acquisitions ("Qualified Projects").
IRC Section 54A(d)(2) requires that 100% of the sale proceeds of a QSCB and the investment earnings thereon (the "Available Project Proceeds") must be spent within three (3) years from the date of issuance of the QSCB (the "Expenditure Period") to pay the costs of Qualified Projects or issuance costs. To the extent less than 100% of the Available Project Proceeds are spent on such costs within the Expenditure Period, a pro rata portion of the QSCB is deemed to be a "nonqualified bond" under IRC Section 54A and the issuer is required to redeem the nonqualified bond within 90 days after the end of the Expenditure Period. The requirements described in this paragraph will be referred to collectively below as the "Expend-or-Redeem Requirement."
One of the conditions for the valid issuance of QSCBs is the receipt of an allocation of the national limitation under IRC Section 54F(c) sufficient to cover the QSCBs to be issued (a "Volume Cap Allocation"). IRC Section 54F(c) creates a national limitation of $11 billion for each of calendar years 2009 and 2010. IRC Section 54F(d)(1) requires the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury to make allocations to the states in proportion to the respective amounts each state is eligible to receive under Section 1124 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333) for the most recent federal fiscal year ending before the calendar year. Pursuant to Notice 2009-35 of the Internal Revenue Service (IRB 2009-17, dated April 27, 2009) (the "Notice"), the share of the calendar year 2009 national limitation allocated to the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Commonwealth" or "Virginia") is $191,077,000 (the "2009 Commonwealth Share").
IRC Section 54F(d)(1) also provides that the national limitation amount allocated to a state for any calendar year shall be allocated by a "state agency" to issuers within the state. The Notice provides that eligible issuers of QSCBs include states, political subdivisions as defined for purposes of IRC Section 103, large local educational agencies that are state or local governmental entities, certain "on-behalf-of" issuers and certain conduit financing issuers. Neither Virginia nor federal law provides any process for making allocations of the 2009 Commonwealth Share to eligible issuers.
From the $191,077,000 2009 Commonwealth Share Executive Order 90 (2009) made a Volume Cap Allocation to the Virginia Public School Authority ("VPSA") in an amount sufficient to cover QSCBs to be issued by VPSA to finance certain qualifying projects in certain localities that were on the Literary Fund First Priority Waiting List approved by the Virginia Board of Education. On November 13, 2009, VPSA issued its $61,120,000 School Tax Credit Bonds (Qualified School Construction Bonds), Series 2009-1 (the "2009 VPSA QSCBs"), pursuant to such Volume Cap Allocation. Since that time, additional net qualifying costs for the Lylburn Downing Middle School project in the City of Lexington have been identified and the Virginia Board of Education has added additional projects to the Literary Fund First Priority Waiting List (such additional projects, together with the Lylburn Downing Middle School project, will be referred to below as the "FPWL Projects"). The City of Lexington, together with the localities in which the other FPWL Projects are located, will be referred to below as the "FPWL Localities."
On October 14, 2009, Governor Kaine announced the availability of a portion of the 2009 Commonwealth Share remaining after the issuance of the 2009 VPSA QSCBs to local school divisions of certain localities through a competitive evaluation process to finance energy efficiency improvements and renovations, as well as renewable energy projects, for public school buildings. Working cooperatively, the Department of Education and Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy supervised an application process that concluded on November 12, 2009. Subsequently, each application and project was evaluated against criteria including annual energy savings, project payback period, shovel readiness, and composite index. The projects that were selected and the localities in which such projects are located will be referred to below respectively as the "Energy Projects" and the "Energy Project Localities" and, together with the FPWL Projects and the FPWL Localities, the "Awarded Projects" and the "Awarded Localities."
On January 13, 2010, Governor Kaine issued Executive Order 110 (2010) to allocate to VPSA pursuant to IRC Section 54F(d)(1) a portion of the 2009 Commonwealth Share sufficient for VPSA to issue a face amount of QSCBs at one time or from time to time to produce for each of the Awarded Projects listed therein an amount of net sale proceeds up to the maximum amount of the qualifying costs specified therein.
Since January 13, 2010, VPSA and this office have received a number of requests and comments from the Awarded Localities, their respective school divisions and other interested parties concerning Executive Order 110 (2010). Many of these requests have been for changes in the Awarded Projects and the allocations between Awarded Projects and many of the comments have pointed out potential problems in satisfying the Expend-or-Redeem Requirement. In response to these requests and comments and by virtue of the powers invested in me by Article V of the Constitution of Virginia and Section 2.2-103 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, as Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I hereby reissue the previously-issued Executive Order 110 (2010) in the form of this order to amend and restate the Volume Cap Allocation to VPSA of a portion of the 2009 Commonwealth Share sufficient for VPSA to issue a face amount of QSCBs at one time or from time to time to produce for each of the Awarded Localities listed below an amount of net sale proceeds (the "Maximum Net Sale Proceeds") up to the maximum amount of specified for all of the Awarded Projects (in aggregate) of each Awarded Locality, which projects are the first priority use of the Maximum Net Sale Proceeds and the investment earnings thereon (the "Local Available Project Proceeds"). This order further (i) directs the Department of Education and the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy to establish a procedure to ensure use of the Local Available Project Proceeds of each Awarded Locality on energy efficiency improvements and renovations, as well as renewable energy projects, for public school buildings within the Awarded Locality to the extent such proceeds are in excess of the amounts needed to complete all of the Awarded Projects of such Awarded Locality and (ii) establishes an expiration date for the Volume Cap Allocation made to VPSA pursuant hereto.
The FPWL Localities and FPWL Projects:
Maximum Net Sale Proceeds
Virginia Beach City
Great Neck Middle School
John Battle High School
Abingdon High School
Patrick Henry High School
Holston High School
Meadowview Elementary School
Wallace Middle School
Glade Spring Middle School
William N. Neff Center
Hopewell City
Hopewell City High School
College Park Elementary School
Lexington City
Lylburn Downing Middle School
New Price's Fork Elementary School
The Energy Projects and the Energy Project Localities:
Amelia County Public Schools
Arlington Career Center
Greene County Technical Education Center
Nathanael Greene Elementary School
Ruckersville Elementary School
William Monroe High School
William Monroe Middle School
Belfield Elementary School
Greensville County High School
Wyatt Middle School
Greensville Elementary School
Hampton City
Division Wide Lighting Upgrade Initiative
Acquinton Elementary School
Hamilton Holmes Middle School
King William High School
Cool Spring Primary School
Lancaster Middle School
Lancaster High School
Martinsville City
Martinsville Middle School
Albert Harris Elementary School
Patrick Henry Elementary School
MCPS Energy Performance Contract
Hylton High School
Benton Middle School
Sudley Elementary School
Marumsco Hills Elementary School
West Gate Elementary School
Vaughan Elementary School
Swans Creek Elementary School
Sinclair Elementary School
Signal Hill Elementary School
Potomac View Elementary School
Parkside Middle School
Occoquan Elementary School
Neabsco Elementary School
Minnieville Elementary School
Kerrydale Elementary School
Samuel L. Gravely, Jr. Elementary School
Glenkirk Elementary School
Gar-Field Senior High School
Fannie W. Fitzgerald Elementary School
Cedar Point Elementary School
Brentsville District High School
Bennett Elementary School
Belmont Elementary School
Bel Air Elementary School
Ashland Elementary School
Alvey Elementary school
Tyler Elementary School
Yorkshire Elementary School
Gainesville Middle School
Woodbridge Senior High School
Woodbridge Middle School
Mary Williams Elementary School
Victory Elementary School
Stonewall Jackson High School
Rockledge Elementary School
Osbourn Park High School
Marsteller Middle School
Leesylvania Elementary School
Godwin Middle School
Forest Park High School
Ellis Elementary School
Coles Elementary School
Bull Run Middle School
Buckland Mills Elementary School
Bristow Run Elementary School
Beville Middle School
Battlefield Middle School
Potomac Middle School
Gar-Field High School
Preston Park Elementary School
Monterey Elementary School
North Fork Middle School
Peter Muhlenberg Middle School
Signal Knob Middle School
Ashby Lee Elementary School
W. W. Robinson Elementary School
Triplett Business and Technical Institute
Strasburg High School
Courtland Elementary School
Chancellor Elementary School
Lee Hill Elementary School
Salem Elementary School
Career and Technical Center
Courtland High School
Spotsylvania High School
Massaponax High School
Battlefield Elementary School
Brock Road Elementary School
Courthouse Road Elementary School
Robert E. Lee Elementary School
Smith Station Elementary School
Chancellor Middle and High School
Thornburg Middle School
Stafford County Public Schools
Rockhill Elementary School
Abingdon, Holston, Patrick Henry
John S. Battle High Schools
Washington & Lee High School
Grafton-Bethel Elementary School HVAC Project
The Maximum Net Sale Proceeds are listed in the aggregate and the Local Available Project Proceeds attributable thereto must be used to finance one or more of the Awarded Projects listed for such Awarded Locality and at least completing the project work described in the approved project application for each Awarded Project undertaken; provided, however, that an Awarded Locality is not obligated to undertake each of the Awarded Projects listed for such Awarded Locality. Each Awarded Locality may distribute its Local Available Project Proceeds among its Awarded Projects as the Awarded Locality deems to be in the best interest of the Awarded Locality.
The Department of Education and the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy are to establish a procedure to ensure that the Local Available Project Proceeds are used to finance energy efficiency improvements and renovations, as well as renewable energy projects, for public school buildings within the Awarded Localities ("Additional Projects") to the extent such proceeds are in excess of the amounts needed to complete all of the Awarded Projects. Such Additional Projects (i) must be Qualified Projects, (ii) must be able to utilize the unspent Local Available Project Proceeds within the relevant Expenditure Period and (iii) should be evaluated against the following criteria: annual energy savings, project payback period, shovel readiness, and composite index.
By September 1, 2010, VPSA shall provide to the Chief of Staff the completed Internal Revenue Service reporting form or forms (then in effect for the QSCBs) for those QSCBs issued pursuant to the Volume Cap Allocation made to VPSA pursuant to this order. Any portion of such Volume Cap Allocation not used by September 1, 2010, will be deemed waived by the VPSA and the pertinent Awarded Localities, and upon such waiver, the Commonwealth shall be authorized to re-allocate the waived Volume Cap Allocation in any reasonable manner as it shall determine in good faith and in its discretion.
I hereby authorize the Chief of Staff to provide certificates of compliance with IRC Section 54F(c) as may be requested by the VPSA.
This Executive Order shall be effective as of June 10, 2010, without any further act or filing and shall remain in force and effect so long as IRC Section 54F shall remain in effect, unless sooner rescinded or amended by further executive order.
Given under my hand and under the Seal of the Commonwealth of Virginia this 10th day of June, 2010.
/s/ Robert F. McDonnell