Tuesday, October 29, 2019

The Warning Ghost by Newton Crosland


The Warning Ghost by Newton Crosland (as published in the Spiritual Magazine 1875)

Sir Hugh went forth and brought home a wife,
To share the joys and cares of his life.

Within eight years from their wedding-mom,
Six little chil&en to them were bom.

At last Death summoned her soul away,
And her body was buried in grand array.

Sir Hugh then married another wife,
But she made his home an abode of strife.

The lady he wed was a dismal dame;
Both proud and remorseless she became.

When into the castle-court drove she,
The six small children were sad to see.

When there they all stood in doleful doubt.
She railed at them sore and thrust them out.

Nor cakes nor mead to the children she ffaye,
But told them that "Nothing from her they'd haye."

She took their warm beds of velvet blue,
And said, "Some straw is enough for you."

She carried away their great wax-light,
And said, "Ye must lie in the dark all night."

The poor little things their sorrows told;
The Mother heard them under the mould.

When to her there came their cry of woe,
She said, "I must to my children go."

She implored the Lord with passionate prayer,
That she might succour her infants there.

She was so troubled with earnest grief,
He could not refuse this sweet relief.

The Lord at last gave her leave to go.
But bade her "Return when the cock should crow."

"When the cock ye hear in the morning prime.
Ye may not abide beyond that time."

Thus helped by heaven to work her will.
There throbbed through her heart a mighty thrill.

With her limbs so strong a spring she gave.
And rent the walls of her marble grave.

Straight through the gloaming away she stole,
Swift with the speed of a loving soul.

When she her old home approached nigh.
The dogs howled loud 'neath the darkening sky.

When she arrived at the castle-gate,
There was her daughter in piteous state.

"Ye are my daughter, why stand ye here?
How are thy brothers and sisters dear?"

"Ye can't be my mother — she's fair and red;
Ye are so white — like one from the dead."

"Oh, how should I be comely and red,
When I so long have been with the dead?"

When the Mother entered the chamber door,
The six little bairns were weeping sore.

She washed the one and caressed the other;
She brushed and combed the hair of another.

She dandled the fourth upon her knee.
And spoke to the fifth so tenderly.

The babe she lifted and fondly prest,
And sweetly nourished it at her breast.

Then she turned to her first-born, mournfully,
And said, "Bid your father come here to me."

When he came before her in grewful trim,
Thus in warning mood, she spoke to him.

"I left, for my children, cakes and mead;
Ye give them nothing but water and bread.

"I left them many a great wax-light;
Ye make them lie in the dark all night.

"I left them warm beds of velvet blue;
With straw ye starve them and make them rue.

"If ever I come on this errand again.
Thy fate, I vow, will be woeful then."

He fled from her in repentant fright,
And told what happen'd that haunted night.

Little Jenny, the maid, who lurked in bed.
Upraised herself from her pillow and said,

"Trust them to my care, dear lady, I pray;
To thy children I'll do the best I may."

With hushing look and listening smile,
The Mother lingered and watched awhile.

Hark, the cock doth crow! The Ghost doth glide
Away, in her narrow vault to hide.

To her selfish kin her mission is o'er';
Their harden'd hearts are touched to the core.

Whenever they hear the watch-dogs yell,
They feed the motherless children well.

Whenever they hear the blood-hounds bark,
They fear the Ghost is come through the dark.

When the ban-dogs howl in the evening gloom,
They think the Dead has riven her tomb.

And they bross themselves with a holy fear,
Lest the Warning Ghost should again appear.
For they shudder to think the dead are so near.


Monday, October 28, 2019

The Debt-Collector By Maurice Level (Conte Cruel Mystery Tale)


The Debt-Collector By Maurice Level (Conte Cruel Mystery Tale)

[Maurice Level, (August 29, 1875 – April 15, 1926) was the son of an Alsatian father, who was an officer in the French Army, and a mother from Lorraine, spent much of his youth in Algiers, but came to anchor in Paris to study medicine. His first conte cruel was written during a night-watch while he was house-surgeon at the Lariboisiere Hospital; it was accepted at once for Le Journal, and when a few weeks later a second story was dramatized for the Grand Guignol Theatre, he gave up medicine for literature. He has written over seven hundred contes, some of which have been dramatized, and he was also the author of several novels.]

RAVENOT, debt-collector to the same bank for ten years, was a model employee. Never had there been the least cause to find fault with him. Never had the slightest error been detected in his books.

Living alone, carefully avoiding new acquaintances, keeping out of cafes and without love-affairs, he seemed happy, quite content with his lot. If it were sometimes said in his hearing: "It must be a temptation to handle such large sums!" he would quietly reply: "Why? Money that doesn't belong to you is not money."

In the locality in which he lived he was looked upon as a paragon, his advice sought after and taken.

On the evening of one collecting-day he did not return to his home. The idea of dishonesty never even suggested itself to those who knew him. Possibly a crime had been committed. The police traced his movements during the day. He had presented his bills punctually, and had collected his last sum near the Montrouge Gate about seven o'clock, when he had over two hundred thousand francs in his possession. Further than that all trace of him was lost.

They scoured the waste ground that lies near the fortifications; the hovels that are found here and there in the military zone were ransacked: all with no result. As a matter of form they telegraphed in every direction, to every frontier station. But the directors of the bank, as well as the police, had little doubt that he had been laid in wait for, robbed, and thrown into the river. Basing their deductions on certain clues, they were able to state almost positively that the coup had been planned for some time by professional thieves.

Only one man in Paris shrugged his shoulders when he read about it in the papers: that man was Ravenot.

Just at the time when the keenest sleuth-hounds of the police were losing his scent, he had reached the Seine by the Boulevards Exterieurs. He had dressed himself under the arch of a bridge in some everyday clothes he had left there the night before, had put the two hundred thousand francs in his pocket, and, making a bundle of his uniform and satchel, he had weighted it with a large stone and dropped it into the river; then, unperturbed, he had returned to Paris. He slept at an hotel, and slept well. 

In a few hours he had become a consummate thief.

Profiting by his start, he might have taken a train across the frontier. He was too wise to suppose that a few hundred kilometers would put him beyond the reach of the gendarmes, and he had no illusions as to the fate that awaited him. He would most assuredly be arrested. Besides, his plan was a very different one.

When daylight came, he enclosed the two hundred thousand franc j in an envelope, sealed it with five seals, and went to a lawyer.

"Monsieur," said he, "this is why I have come to you. In this envelope I have some securities, papers that I want to leave in safety. I am going for a long journey, and I don't know when I shall return. I should like to leave this packet with you. I suppose you have no objection to my doing so?"

"None whatever. I'll give you a receipt."

He assented, then began to think. A receipt? Where could he put it? To whom entrust it? If he kept it on his person, he would certainly lose his deposit. He hesitated, not having foreseen this complication. Then he said easily:

"I am alone in the world, without relations and friends. The journey I intend making is not without danger. I should run the risk of losing the receipt, or it might be destroyed. Would it not be possible for you to take possession of the packet and place it in safety among your documents, and when I return, I should merely have to tell you, or your successor, my name?"

"But if I do that . . ."

"State on the receipt that it can only be claimed in this way. At any rate, if there is any risk, it is mine."

"Agreed! What is your name?"

He replied without hesitation:

"Duverger, Henri Duverger."

When he got back to the street, he breathed a sigh of relief. The first part of his program was over. They could clap the handcuffs on him now: the substance of his theft was beyond reach.

He had worked things out with co d deliberation on these lines: on the expiration of his sentence he would claim the deposit. No one would be able to dispute his right to it. Four or five unpleasant years to be gone through, and he would be a rich man! It was preferable to spending his life trudging from door to door collecting debts. He would go to live in the country. To every one he would be "Monsieur Duverger." He would grow old in peace and contentment, known as an honest, charitable man—-for he would spend some of the money on others.

He waited twenty-four hours longer to make sure the numbers of the notes were not known, and reassured on this point, he gave himself up, a cigarette between his lips.

Another man in his place would have invented some story. He preferred to tell the truth, to admit the theft. Why waste time? But at his trial, as when he was first charged, it was impossible to drag from him a word about what he had done with the 200,000 francs. He confined himself to saying:

"I don't know. I fell asleep on a bench. . . . In my turn I was robbed."

Thanks to his irreproachable past he was condemned to only five years' penal servitude. He heard the sentence without moving a muscle. He was thirty-five. At forty, he would be free and rich. He considered the confinement a small, necessary sacrifice.

In the prison where he served his sentence he was a model for all the others, just as he had been a model employee. He watched the slow days pass without impatience or anxiety, concerned only about his health.

At last the day of his discharge came. They gave him back his little stock of personal effects, and he left with but one idea in his mind, that of getting to the lawyer. As he walked along, he imagined the coming scene.

He would arrive. He would be ushered into the impressive office. Would the lawyer recognize him? He would look in the glass: decidedly he had grown considerably older, and no doubt his face bore traces of his experience. No, certainly the lawyer would not recognize him. Ha! Ha! It would add to the humor of the situation.

"What can I do for you, Monsieur?"

"I have come for a deposit I made here five years ago."

"Which deposit? In what name?" "In the name of Monsieur . . ." Ravenot stopped, suddenly murmuring: "How extraordinary. I can't remember the name I gave."

He racked his brains—a blank! He sat down on a bench, and feeling that he was growing unnerved, reasoned with himself.

"Come, come! Be calm! Monsieur . . . Monsieur ... It began with . . . which letter?"

For an hour he sat lost in thought, straining his memory, groping after something that might suggest a clue. A waste of time. The name danced in front of him, round about him: he saw the letters jump, the syllables vanish. Every second he felt that he had it; that it was before his eyes, on his lips. No! At first this only worried him: then it became a sharp irritation that cut into him with a pain that was almost physical. Hot waves ran up and down his back. His muscles contracted: he found it impossible to sit still. His hands began to twitch. He bit his dry lips. He was divided between an impulse to weep and one to fight. But the more he focused his attention, the further the name seemed to recede. He struck the ground with his foot, rose, and said aloud:

"What's the good of worrying? It only makes things worse. If I leave off thinking about it, it will come of itself."

But an obsession cannot be shaken off in this way. In vain he turned his attention to the faces of the passers-by, stopped at the shop-windows, listened to the street noises: while he listened, unhearing, and looked, unseeing, the great question persisted:

"Monsieur? Monsieur?"

Night came. The streets were deserted. Worn out, he went to an hotel, asked for a room, and flung himself fully-dressed on the bed. For hours he went on racking his brain. At dawn he fell asleep. It was broad daylight when he awoke. He stretched himself luxuriously, his mind at ease; but in a flash the obsession gripped him again:

"Monsieur? Monsieur?"

A new sensation began to dominate his anguish of mind: fear. Fear that he might never remember the name, never. He got up, went out, walked for hours at random, hanging round the office of the lawyer. For the second time, night fell. He clutched his head in his hands and groaned:

"I shall go mad."

A terrible idea had now taken possession of his mind; he had 200,000 francs in notes, 200,000 francs, acquired by dishonesty, of course, but his, and they were out of his reach. To get them he had undergone five years in prison and now he could not touch them. The notes were there waiting for him, and one word, a mere word he could not remember, stood, an insuperable barrier, between him and them. He beat with clenched fists on his head, feeling his reason trembling in the balance; he stumbled against lamp-posts with the sway of a drunken man, tripped over curbstones. It was no longer an obsession or a torment. It had become a frenzy of his whole being, of his brain and of his flesh. He had now become convinced that he would never remember. His imagination conjured up a sardonic laugh that rang in his ears; people in the streets seemed to point at him as he passed. His steps quickened into a run that carried him straight ahead, knocking up against the passers-by, oblivious of the traffic. He wished to strike back, to be run over, crushed out of existence.

"Monsieur? Monsieur?"

At his feet the Seine flowed by, a muddy green spangled with the reflections of the bright stars. He sobbed out:

"Monsieur . . .? Oh, that name! That name!" He went down the steps that led to the river, and lying face downwards, worked himself towards it to cool his face and hands. He was panting; the water drew him . . . drew his hot eyes . . . his ears . . . his whole body. He felt himself slipping, and unable to cling to the steep bank, he fell. The shock of the cold water set every nerve a-tingle. He struggled . . . thrust out his arms . . . flung his head up . . . went under . . . rose to the surface again, and with a sudden mighty effort, his eyes staring from his head, he yelled:

"I've got it! . . . Help! Duverger! Du . . ."

The quay was deserted. The water rippled against the pillars of the bridge: the echo of the somber arch repeated the name in the silence. . . . The river rose and fell lazily: lights danced on it, white and red. A wave a little stronger than the rest licked the bank near the mooring rings. ... All was still . . .

See also The 300 Oldest Murder Mystery and Crime Books & Stories on DVDrom

Free Speech Decreases Bigotry and Creates Economic Progress


In 1553, Michael Servetus, a Spanish physician, was ruthlessly sentenced to death and burned at the stake. Servetus was persecuted by John Calvin—the father of Calvinism—who labeled Servetus a heretic and wanted to silence his dissenting viewpoints. In the end, Servetus paid the ultimate price for his right to speak freely.

The grim history of Michael Servetus shows us that we should not forget how valuable freedom of expression is. Today, freedom of expression is, to a large extent, imperiled by neglect. An emerging demand for restrictions on the right to freely express our thoughts is gaining ground, and a large fraction of American millennials are willing to wrap up minorities with protective layers of limitations on freedom of speech while governments around the world are calling for desperate measures to deal with the predicament of “fake news.” So why is free expression so important, and why should we insist on it?
One of the most cited texts on this subject is John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty in which he expounds on the meaning of free expression. The utilitarian approach put forth by Mill provides a strong defense for the freedom of expression, and Mill argues that human progress is inextricably linked to the right to freely express one’s self. For, he argues, by oppressing the pluralism of opinions, we risk suppressing the truth:
”(..)If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”
If we curtail the free expression of undesired viewpoints because we regard them as inferior, fallible, or immoral, we deprive ourselves of prospective inventions, ideas, and breakthroughs.
Looking at the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, numerous of formerly undesired scholars and writers are today acknowledged for their influence on modern societies. Who would have predicted that? Similarly, most Christians would disagree with Servetus’ unitarian rejection of the Trinity, but what did the religious community achieve by silencing him? As Mill argues, human beings are fallible, and assumptions should accordingly be subject to scrutiny and contradiction—otherwise, the foundation of our knowledge will be reduced to mere pretensions and superficial premises.
Freedom of expression is vital to human flourishing because new ideas are necessary to sustain economic growth.


We can also prove Mill’s thesis by looking at empirical evidence. In fact, evidence (and here) shows that freedom of expression is positively correlated with growth. Why? The reason is actually quite simple: it allows for people to exchange ideas freely. If disruptive ideas are silenced, they will remain beneath the surface of arbitrary censorship forever. Conversely, if people can interact freely, ideas will breed, as Matt Ridley notes.

Put in other words: freedom of expression is vital to human flourishing because new ideas are necessary to sustain economic growth. But if we insist on interfering with the right to exchange knowledge and experiences, how shall new ideas permeate the surface of civilization?
Some proponents of restrictions on freedom of expression, however, argue that minorities should not be exposed to offensive speech. The absence of limitations on free expression incite hostility and hatred towards minorities, it is argued. Hence, students, policymakers, and well-meaning pundits advocate various forms of censorship. Unrestricted speech, they emphasize, causes great harm to the vulnerable and creates a fertile environment for intolerance. Is it not plausible, though, that unrestricted speech leads to greater tolerance, rather than promoting intolerance?
We can examine this by comparing the United States and Europe. The First Amendment offers strong protections for freedom of expression. In contrast, numerous European countries provide weak protection. Many countries have adopted hate speech laws criminalizing offensive speech while countries such as Germany are strengthening existing laws. Such laws are aimed at deadening hateful speech and intolerance.

Americans seem to be more tolerant despite—or because?—of their strong legal protection of freedom of speech.


You should think that countries with strict hate speech laws are, on average, more tolerant because they disallow the dissemination of bigotry. The data available, however, shows the contrary—as noted here, the supposition that far-reaching protection of freedom of expression increases intolerance does not seem to resonate with reality. In fact, Americans seem to be more tolerant despite—or because?—of their strong legal protection of freedom of speech. As shown by Pew, US citizens are more in favor of free expression compared to Europe and other continents. Moreover, American attitudes towards diversity are more tolerant than Europeans’.

Those findings are rather interesting, and it suggests that countries like the US with well-protected freedom of expression are actually more tolerant. A plausible explanation could be that a solid legal protection of freedom of expression enables spiteful people to exhibit their bigotry. When exposed to dissenting viewpoints, people are given the opportunity to weigh and assess arguments. This will inevitably encourage some people to distance themselves from blatant intolerance. An additional effect is that the exposure to extremist speech elicits increased self-control when it comes to anti-social behavior, thus promoting tolerance in society. This thesis comes from The Tolerant Society, in which Lee Bollinger introduced the supposition that our tolerance towards others is increased when confronted with extremist speech and pluralism.
The destiny of Michael Servetus shows that restrictions on freedom of expression require serious deliberations. By persecuting and silencing dissent, we not only encourage conformity, we also deprive future generations of innovations and ideas to the detriment of human progress. As John Milton noted in Areopagitica:
Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye.
Filip Steffensen
Filip Steffensen
Filip Steffensen studies political science at Aarhus University, Denmark. He is affiliated with various domestic organizations promoting classical liberalism and is a representation of Liberal Alliance Youth. He is 21 years old. 
This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

Saturday, October 26, 2019

Free Speech Guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights


Free Speech Guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

From the UDHR:

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Something for the censor-happy tech giants to think about.

From Leaves of Healing by John Alexander Dowie 1904
"I have a right to continue to speak...If you do not want to hear me speak you have a right to go out, but you have no right to stay here and prevent my speaking. Those who do not wish to hear me speak tonight ought not to have come into this meeting
I have a right to speak. You have no right to interrupt me."

From Freedom and Its Fundamentals By Charles T. Sprading 1923
"If a man has a right to think, he has a right to speak; if he has a right to speak, he has a right to publish his thoughts. Complete freedom of speech means the liberty to denounce or ridicule; it is not only the freedom to say something complimentary of the good, but things uncomplimentary of the bad. Liberty to oppose is as necessary as liberty to uphold."

See also: Free Speech IS the Speech You Hate - Quotations on Freedom of Expression

John Stuart Mill once wrote, “If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

Friday, October 25, 2019

A Haunting Story of The Dead Valley


The Dead Valley by Ralph Adams Cram 1895

I have a friend, Olof Ehrensvärd, a Swede by birth, who yet, by reason of a strange and melancholy mischance of his early boyhood, has thrown his lot with that of the New World. It is a curious story of a headstrong boy and a proud and relentless family: the details do not matter here, but they are sufficient to weave a web of romance around the tall yellow-bearded man with the sad eyes and the voice that gives itself perfectly to plaintive little Swedish songs remembered out of childhood. In the winter evenings we play chess together, he and I, and after some close, fierce battle has been fought to a finish—usually with my own defeat—we fill our pipes again, and Ehrensvärd tells me stories of the far, half-remembered days in the fatherland, before he went to sea: stories that grow very strange and incredible as the night deepens and the fire falls together, but stories that, nevertheless, I fully believe.

One of them made a strong impression on me, so I set it down here, only regretting that I cannot reproduce the curiously perfect English and the delicate accent which to me increased the fascination of the tale. Yet, as best I can remember it, here it is.

"I never told you how Nils and I went over the hills to Hallsberg, and how we found the Dead Valley, did I? Well, this is the way it happened. I must have been about twelve years old, and Nils Sjöberg, whose father's estate joined ours, was a few months younger. We were inseparable just at that time, and whatever we did, we did together.

"Once a week it was market day in Engelholm, and Nils and I went always there to see the strange sights that the market gathered from all the surrounding country. One day we quite lost our hearts, for an old man from across the Elfborg had brought a little dog to sell, that seemed to us the most beautiful dog in all the world. He was a round, woolly puppy, so funny that Nils and I sat down on the ground and laughed at him, until he came and played with us in so jolly a way that we felt that there was only one really desirable thing in life, and that was the little dog of the old man from across the hills. But alas! we had not half money enough wherewith to buy him, so we were forced to beg the old man not to sell him before the next market day, promising that we would bring the money for him then. He gave us his word, and we ran home very fast and implored our mothers to give us money for the little dog.

"We got the money, but we could not wait for the next market day. Suppose the puppy should be sold! The thought frightened us so that we begged and implored that we might be allowed to go over the hills to Hallsberg where the old man lived, and get the little dog ourselves, and at last they told us we might go. By starting early in the morning we should reach Hallsberg by three o'clock, and it was arranged that we should stay there that night with Nils's aunt, and, leaving by noon the next day, be home again by sunset.

"Soon after sunrise we were on our way, after having received minute instructions as to just what we should do in all possible and impossible circumstances, and finally a repeated injunction that we should start for home at the same hour the next day, so that we might get safely back before nightfall.

"For us, it was magnificent sport, and we started off with our rifles, full of the sense of our very great importance: yet the journey was simple enough, along a good road, across the big hills we knew so well, for Nils and I had shot over half the territory this side of the dividing ridge of the Elfborg. Back of Engelholm lay a long valley, from which rose the low mountains, and we had to cross this, and then follow the road along the side of the hills for three or four miles, before a narrow path branched off to the left, leading up through the pass.

"Nothing occurred of interest on the way over, and we reached Hallsberg in due season, found to our inexpressible joy that the little dog was not sold, secured him, and so went to the house of Nils's aunt to spend the night.

"Why we did not leave early on the following day, I can't quite remember; at all events, I know we stopped at a shooting range just outside of the town, where most attractive pasteboard pigs were sliding slowly through painted foliage, serving so as beautiful marks. The result was that we did not get fairly started for home until afternoon, and as we found ourselves at last pushing up the side of the mountain with the sun dangerously near their summits, I think we were a little scared at the prospect of the examination and possible punishment that awaited us when we got home at midnight.

"Therefore we hurried as fast as possible up the mountain side, while the blue dusk closed in about us, and the light died in the purple sky. At first we had talked hilariously, and the little dog had leaped ahead of us with the utmost joy. Latterly, however, a curious oppression came on us; we did not speak or even whistle, while the dog fell behind, following us with hesitation in every muscle.

"We had passed through the foothills and the low spurs of the mountains, and were almost at the top of the main range, when life seemed to go out of everything, leaving the world dead, so suddenly silent the forest became, so stagnant the air. Instinctively we halted to listen.

"Perfect silence,—the crushing silence of deep forests at night; and more, for always, even in the most impenetrable fastnesses of the wooded mountains, is the multitudinous murmur of little lives, awakened by the darkness, exaggerated and intensified by the stillness of the air and the great dark: but here and now the silence seemed unbroken even by the turn of a leaf, the movement of a twig, the note of night bird or insect. I could hear the blood beat through my veins; and the crushing of the grass under our feet as we advanced with hesitating steps sounded like the falling of trees.

"And the air was stagnant,—dead. The atmosphere seemed to lie upon the body like the weight of sea on a diver who has ventured too far into its awful depths. What we usually call silence seems so only in relation to the din of ordinary experience. This was silence in the absolute, and it crushed the mind while it intensified the senses, bringing down the awful weight of inextinguishable fear.

"I know that Nils and I stared towards each other in abject terror, listening to our quick, heavy breathing, that sounded to our acute senses like the fitful rush of waters. And the poor little dog we were leading justified our terror. The black oppression seemed to crush him even as it did us. He lay close on the ground, moaning feebly, and dragging himself painfully and slowly closer to Nils's feet. I think this exhibition of utter animal fear was the last touch, and must inevitably have blasted our reason—mine anyway; but just then, as we stood quaking on the bounds of madness, came a sound, so awful, so ghastly, so horrible, that it seemed to rouse us from the dead spell that was on us.

"In the depth of the silence came a cry, beginning as a low, sorrowful moan, rising to a tremulous shriek, culminating in a yell that seemed to tear the night in sunder and rend the world as by a cataclysm. So fearful was it that I could not believe it had actual existence: it passed previous experience, the powers of belief, and for a moment I thought it the result of my own animal terror, an hallucination born of tottering reason.

"A glance at Nils dispelled this thought in a flash. In the pale light of the high stars he was the embodiment of all possible human fear, quaking with an ague, his jaw fallen, his tongue out, his eyes protruding like those of a hanged man. Without a word we fled, the panic of fear giving us strength, and together, the little dog caught close in Nils's arms, we sped down the side of the cursed mountains,—anywhere, goal was of no account: we had but one impulse—to get away from that place.

"So under the black trees and the far white stars that flashed through the still leaves overhead, we leaped down the mountain side, regardless of path or landmark, straight through the tangled underbrush, across mountain streams, through fens and copses, anywhere, so only that our course was downward.

"How long we ran thus, I have no idea, but by and by the forest fell behind, and we found ourselves among the foothills, and fell exhausted on the dry short grass, panting like tired dogs.

"It was lighter here in the open, and presently we looked around to see where we were, and how we were to strike out in order to find the path that would lead us home. We looked in vain for a familiar sign. Behind us rose the great wall of black forest on the flank of the mountain: before us lay the undulating mounds of low foothills, unbroken by trees or rocks, and beyond, only the fall of black sky bright with multitudinous stars that turned its velvet depth to a luminous gray.

"As I remember, we did not speak to each other once: the terror was too heavy on us for that, but by and by we rose simultaneously and started out across the hills.

"Still the same silence, the same dead, motionless air—air that was at once sultry and chilling: a heavy heat struck through with an icy chill that felt almost like the burning of frozen steel. Still carrying the helpless dog, Nils pressed on through the hills, and I followed close behind. At last, in front of us, rose a slope of moor touching the white stars. We climbed it wearily, reached the top, and found ourselves gazing down into a great, smooth valley, filled half way to the brim with—what?

"As far as the eye could see stretched a level plain of ashy white, faintly phosphorescent, a sea of velvet fog that lay like motionless water, or rather like a floor of alabaster, so dense did it appear, so seemingly capable of sustaining weight. If it were possible, I think that sea of dead white mist struck even greater terror into my soul than the heavy silence or the deadly cry—so ominous was it, so utterly unreal, so phantasmal, so impossible, as it lay there like a dead ocean under the steady stars. Yet through that mist we must go! there seemed no other way home, and, shattered with abject fear, mad with the one desire to get back, we started down the slope to where the sea of milky mist ceased, sharp and distinct around the stems of the rough grass.

"I put one foot into the ghostly fog. A chill as of death struck through me, stopping my heart, and I threw myself backward on the slope. At that instant came again the shriek, close, close, right in our ears, in ourselves, and far out across that damnable sea I saw the cold fog lift like a water-spout and toss itself high in writhing convolutions towards the sky. The stars began to grow dim as thick vapor swept across them, and in the growing dark I saw a great, watery moon lift itself slowly above the palpitating sea, vast and vague in the gathering mist.

"This was enough: we turned and fled along the margin of the white sea that throbbed now with fitful motion below us, rising, rising, slowly and steadily, driving us higher and higher up the side of the foothills.

"It was a race for life; that we knew. How we kept it up I cannot understand, but we did, and at last we saw the white sea fall behind us as we staggered up the end of the valley, and then down into a region that we knew, and so into the old path. The last thing I remember was hearing a strange voice, that of Nils, but horribly changed, stammer brokenly, 'The dog is dead!' and then the whole world turned around twice, slowly and resistlessly, and consciousness went out with a crash.

"It was some three weeks later, as I remember, that I awoke in my own room, and found my mother sitting beside the bed. I could not think very well at first, but as I slowly grew strong again, vague flashes of recollection began to come to me, and little by little the whole sequence of events of that awful night in the Dead Valley came back. All that I could gain from what was told me was that three weeks before I had been found in my own bed, raging sick, and that my illness grew fast into brain fever. I tried to speak of the dread things that had happened to me, but I saw at once that no one looked on them save as the hauntings of a dying frenzy, and so I closed my mouth and kept my own counsel.

"I must see Nils, however, and so I asked for him. My mother told me that he also had been ill with a strange fever, but that he was now quite well again. Presently they brought him in, and when we were alone I began to speak to him of the night on the mountain. I shall never forget the shock that struck me down on my pillow when the boy denied everything: denied having gone with me, ever having heard the cry, having seen the valley, or feeling the deadly chill of the ghostly fog. Nothing would shake his determined ignorance, and in spite of myself I was forced to admit that his denials came from no policy of concealment, but from blank oblivion.

"My weakened brain was in a turmoil. Was it all but the floating phantasm of delirium? Or had the horror of the real thing blotted Nils's mind into blankness so far as the events of the night in the Dead Valley were concerned? The latter explanation seemed the only one, else how explain the sudden illness which in a night had struck us both down? I said nothing more, either to Nils or to my own people, but waited, with a growing determination that, once well again, I would find that valley if it really existed.

"It was some weeks before I was really well enough to go, but finally, late in September, I chose a bright, warm, still day, the last smile of the dying summer, and started early in the morning along the path that led to Hallsberg. I was sure I knew where the trail struck off to the right, down which we had come from the valley of dead water, for a great tree grew by the Hallsberg path at the point where, with a sense of salvation, we had found the home road. Presently I saw it to the right, a little distance ahead.

"I think the bright sunlight and the clear air had worked as a tonic to me, for by the time I came to the foot of the great pine, I had quite lost faith in the verity of the vision that haunted me, believing at last that it was indeed but the nightmare of madness. Nevertheless, I turned sharply to the right, at the base of the tree, into a narrow path that led through a dense thicket. As I did so I tripped over something. A swarm of flies sung into the air around me, and looking down I saw the matted fleece, with the poor little bones thrusting through, of the dog we had bought in Hallsberg.

"Then my courage went out with a puff, and I knew that it all was true, and that now I was frightened. Pride and the desire for adventure urged me on, however, and I pressed into the close thicket that barred my way. The path was hardly visible: merely the worn road of some small beasts, for, though it showed in the crisp grass, the bushes above grew thick and hardly penetrable. The land rose slowly, and rising grew clearer, until at last I came out on a great slope of hill, unbroken by trees or shrubs, very like my memory of that rise of land we had topped in order that we might find the dead valley and the icy fog. I looked at the sun; it was bright and clear, and all around insects were humming in the autumn air, and birds were darting to and fro. Surely there was no danger, not until nightfall at least; so I began to whistle, and with a rush mounted the last crest of brown hill.

"There lay the Dead Valley! A great oval basin, almost as smooth and regular as though made by man. On all sides the grass crept over the brink of the encircling hills, dusty green on the crests, then fading into ashy brown, and so to a deadly white, this last color forming a thin ring, running in a long line around the slope. And then? Nothing. Bare, brown, hard earth, glittering with grains of alkali, but otherwise dead and barren. Not a tuft of grass, not a stick of brushwood, not even a stone, but only the vast expanse of beaten clay.

"In the midst of the basin, perhaps a mile and a half away, the level expanse was broken by a great dead tree, rising leafless and gaunt into the air. Without a moment's hesitation I started down into the valley and made for this goal. Every particle of fear seemed to have left me, and even the valley itself did not look so very terrifying. At all events, I was driven by an overwhelming curiosity, and there seemed to be but one thing in the world to do,—to get to that Tree! As I trudged along over the hard earth, I noticed that the multitudinous voices of birds and insects had died away. No bee or butterfly hovered through the air, no insects leaped or crept over the dull earth. The very air itself was stagnant.

"As I drew near the skeleton tree, I noticed the glint of sunlight on a kind of white mound around its roots, and I wondered curiously. It was not until I had come close that I saw its nature.

"All around the roots and barkless trunk was heaped a wilderness of little bones. Tiny skulls of rodents and of birds, thousands of them, rising about the dead tree and streaming off for several yards in all directions, until the dreadful pile ended in isolated skulls and scattered skeletons. Here and there a larger bone appeared,—the thigh of a sheep, the hoofs of a horse, and to one side, grinning slowly, a human skull.

"I stood quite still, staring with all my eyes, when suddenly the dense silence was broken by a faint, forlorn cry high over my head. I looked up and saw a great falcon turning and sailing downward just over the tree. In a moment more she fell motionless on the bleaching bones.

"Horror struck me, and I rushed for home, my brain whirling, a strange numbness growing in me. I ran steadily, on and on. At last I glanced up. Where was the rise of hill? I looked around wildly. Close before me was the dead tree with its pile of bones. I had circled it round and round, and the valley wall was still a mile and a half away.

"I stood dazed and frozen. The sun was sinking, red and dull, towards the line of hills. In the east the dark was growing fast. Was there still time? Time! It was not that I wanted, it was will! My feet seemed clogged as in a nightmare. I could hardly drag them over the barren earth. And then I felt the slow chill creeping through me. I looked down. Out of the earth a thin mist was rising, collecting in little pools that grew ever larger until they joined here and there, their currents swirling slowly like thin blue smoke. The western hills halved the copper sun. When it was dark I should hear that shriek again, and then I should die. I knew that, and with every remaining atom of will I staggered towards the red west through the writhing mist that crept clammily around my ankles, retarding my steps.

"And as I fought my way off from the Tree, the horror grew, until at last I thought I was going to die. The silence pursued me like dumb ghosts, the still air held my breath, the hellish fog caught at my feet like cold hands.

"But I won! though not a moment too soon. As I crawled on my hands and knees up the brown slope, I heard, far away and high in the air, the cry that already had almost bereft me of reason. It was faint and vague, but unmistakable in its horrible intensity. I glanced behind. The fog was dense and pallid, heaving undulously up the brown slope. The sky was gold under the setting sun, but below was the ashy gray of death. I stood for a moment on the brink of this sea of hell, and then leaped down the slope. The sunset opened before me, the night closed behind, and as I crawled home weak and tired, darkness shut down on the Dead Valley."

Thursday, October 24, 2019

The Fallacy of Equality by Henry Strickland Constable 1897


The Fallacy of Equality by Henry Strickland Constable 1897

The first-class poets are wise men as well as poets. Though Shakespeare excels all in imagination, it never "gets between his legs and trips him up." He was no slave to false theorizings of a preponderating imagination. Shakespeare was " all there"; so he saw truth and understood human nature as it is. We may say somewhat the same of Goethe.

Shakespeare says:—

"Take but degree away, untune that string,
  And mark what discord follows."

Thus Shakespeare truly saw that equality and sameness mean discord and disorder. But the Socialist-Radical is for compulsory equality. Then the Socialist-Radical is for compulsory discord and disorder. Connected with this is, no doubt, the unceasing state of discord, disorder, and revolutions and civil wars we find among the equality-worshipping Latin races.

Pope says:—

"Order is Heaven's first law, and, that confessed,
  Some are, and must be, greater than the rest."

This, again, means that equality and disorder go together.

A field has twenty horses in it. No two of these are equal. But they soon learn which is master, and in what order they stand; and then there is peace. If it were not so, there would be incessant fighting.

In the animal world there is first the homogeneous jelly-fish —that is, a creature with no organs; no head, no heart, no liver, and, indeed, no stomach even to speak of. Gradually evolution to higher types takes place, and then separate organs make their appearance. Thus, progress in living beings means increasing diversity of organs and functions, and the loss of homogeneous uniformity. So it is in a nation. An extremely savage tribe is homogeneous, like the jelly-fish; there is no diversity, there are no rulers, no classes; one man is like another; there is a dead level of degradation—the equality, in fact, worshipped by the Socialist-Radical. As society advances differences arise, till at length we come to the innumerable varieties and inequalities of conditions of character and of life that we see in highly-developed communities, some very few individual men rising till they have to be called by metaphoric expressions such as "angelic," "divine," "godly," etc. This progress is caused, in a very great degree, says science, by survival of the fittest in the struggle of life going on generation after generation. And the more liberty and keenness of competition exist, the more rapidly and completely this progress takes place.

Hitherto the love of liberty, at the necessary expense of equality, has been greater in England and America than in other countries, and thence diversity, or inequality, is greater in England and America than in other countries. But what may be the case in future no one can tell. The Socialist-Radical party in all countries, and all times, hate what Mr. Herbert Spencer calls the highly-differentiated conditions (inequality) of advanced civilization; and their envy and hatred inspire them with such intense energy that no one can ever foresee what civilization they will succeed in destroying next.

Freedom and its necessary accompaniment, inequality, are nature's laws and contrivances for raising men above savagery, or what in civilized countries are called the manners and customs of the criminal classes. On the other hand, destruction of liberty for the sake of getting the equality of brutes and savages is the law of the Radical, the Socialist, and the weaker races. Can we wonder that the Teutonic races are out-competing such races in peopling the earth? Celtic effeminacy, envy, class-hatred, and war against liberty, in order to get equality, may bring a nation down; but, take the world through, Teutonic manliness, liberty, and individuality must win, and do win.

"Freedom," says W. S. Lilly, "is rooted and grounded in inequality. Egalitarian Jacobinism, or Radicalism, is the negation of liberty. Collective despotism is as much an infringement of my rights and freedom as individual despotism, and of the two it is far the worse."

"The safeguarding of personal liberty," says Mr. Bayard, the American, "is the true seed of progress. The marvellous progress of America can only be accounted for by the freedom permitted to each individual citizen."

Without inequality there is no civilization, nothing higher than the lowest, dirty, predatory, homicidal, adulterous savage. Immediately the exceptionally-intelligent savage invents a spade inequality commences, the capitalist comes into existence, and the contrast between "the classes" and "the masses" begins.

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

John Polidori on The Vampyre


The following is from the Introduction to Polidori's 1816 book, The Vampyre:

THE superstition upon which [The Vampyre] is founded is very general in the East. Among the Arabians it appears to be common: it did not, however, extend itself to the Greeks until after the establishment of Christianity; and it has only assumed its present form since the division of the Latin and Greek churches; at which time, the idea becoming prevalent, that a Latin body could not corrupt if buried in their territory, it gradually increased, and formed the subject of many wonderful stories, still extant, of the dead rising from their graves, and feeding upon the blood of the young and beautiful. In the West it spread, with some slight variation, all over Hungary, Poland, Austria, and Lorraine, where the belief existed, that vampyres nightly imbibed a certain portion of the blood of their victims, who became emaciated, lost their strength, and speedily died of consumptions; whilst these human blood-suckers fattened—and their veins became distended to such a state of repletion, as to cause the blood to flow from all the passages of their bodies, and even from the very pores of their skins.

In the London Journal, of March, 1732, is a curious, and, of course, credible account of a particular case of vampyrism, which is stated to have occurred at Madreyga, in Hungary. It appears, that upon an examination of the commander-in-chief and magistrates of the place, they positively and unanimously affirmed, that, about five years before, a certain Heyduke, named Arnold Paul, had been heard to say, that, at Cassovia, on the frontiers of the Turkish Servia, he had been tormented by a vampyre, but had found a way to rid himself of the evil, by eating some of the earth out of the vampyre's grave, and rubbing himself with his blood. This precaution, however, did not prevent him from becoming a vampyre [the universal belief is, that a person sucked by a vampyre becomes a vampyre himself, and sucks in his turn] himself; for, about twenty or thirty days after his death and burial, many persons complained of having been tormented by him, and a deposition was made, that four persons had been deprived of life by his attacks. To prevent further mischief, the inhabitants having consulted their Hadagni, [Chief bailiff] took up the body, and found it (as is supposed to be usual in cases of vampyrism) fresh, and entirely free from corruption, and emitting at the mouth, nose, and ears, pure and florid blood. Proof having been thus obtained, they resorted to the accustomed remedy. A stake was driven entirely through the heart and body of Arnold Paul, at which he is reported to have cried out as dreadfully as if he had been alive. This done, they cut off his head, burned his body, and threw the ashes into his grave. The same measures were adopted with the corses of those persons who had previously died from vampyrism, lest they should, in their turn, become agents upon others who survived them.

This monstrous rodomontade is here related, because it seems better adapted to illustrate the subject of the present observations than any other instance which could be adduced. In many parts of Greece it is considered as a sort of punishment after death, for some heinous crime committed whilst in existence, that the deceased is not only doomed to vampyrise, but compelled to confine his infernal visitations solely to those beings he loved most while upon earth—those to whom he was bound by ties of kindred and affection.—A supposition alluded to in the "Giaour."

But first on earth, as Vampyre sent,
Thy corse shall from its tomb be rent;
Then ghastly haunt the native place,
And suck the blood of all thy race;
There from thy daughter, sister, wife,
At midnight drain the stream of life;
Yet loathe the banquet which perforce
Must feed thy livid living corse,
Thy victims, ere they yet expire,
Shall know the demon for their sire;
As cursing thee, thou cursing them,
Thy flowers are withered on the stem.
But one that for thy crime must fall,
The youngest, best beloved of all,
Shall bless thee with a father's name—
That word shall wrap thy heart in flame!
Yet thou must end thy task and mark
Her cheek's last tinge—her eye's last spark,
And the last glassy glance must view
Which freezes o'er its lifeless blue;
Then with unhallowed hand shall tear
The tresses of her yellow hair,
Of which, in life a lock when shorn
Affection's fondest pledge was worn—
But now is borne away by thee
Memorial of thine agony!
Yet with thine own best blood shall drip;
Thy gnashing tooth, and haggard lip;
Then stalking to thy sullen grave,
Go—and with Gouls and Afrits rave,
Till these in horror shrink away
From spectre more accursed than they.

Mr. Southey has also introduced in his wild but beautiful poem of "Thalaba," the vampyre corse of the Arabian maid Oneiza, who is represented as having returned from the grave for the purpose of tormenting him she best loved whilst in existence. But this cannot be supposed to have resulted from the sinfulness of her life, she being pourtrayed throughout the whole of the tale as a complete type of purity and innocence. The veracious Tournefort gives a long account in his travels of several astonishing cases of vampyrism, to which he pretends to have been an eyewitness; and Calmet, in his great work upon this subject, besides a variety of anecdotes, and traditionary narratives illustrative of its effects, has put forth some learned dissertations, tending to prove it to be a classical, as well as barbarian error.

See a wikipedia entry of this book here

Read or download the book here

Listen to the audio here






Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Nickel and Damned: Barbara Ehrenreich's View of America


When Barbara Ehrenreich’s book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America came out last year, I knew it would be the perfect foil to another book I used in my classes, The Millionaire Next Door, by Thomas Stanley and William Danko (1996). Don’t ever say that academics don’t have a sense of humor.

At any rate, Ehrenreich must be given credit for at least entering the world of minimum-wage work, rather than sitting in her comfortable study or pontificating from a lofty perch at a think tank. The woman did get her hands dirty, quite literally. At times, a little less dirt and a little more scholarship might have been useful.

Ehrenreich conducted a live experiment in which she worked at minimum-wage jobs, living, as best she could, in whatever circumstances those wages would afford. She worked in Florida as a waitress at a greasy spoon, sometimes for $2.43 an hour, plus tips. Soon, she augmented her job with other work, such as housekeeping. Having satisfied herself with that part of her experiment, she moved on to Maine, where she toiled as a maid, and finally completed her research with a stint in Minnesota at Wal-Mart. She concluded that if she could have maintained her two-job regimen, and if she had no dire or sudden illnesses, she could have just barely gotten by. Despite her occasional genuinely funny quips—her exposition on feces, as a maid, is something to behold—her overall message is incredibly depressing and drenched in hopelessness. If her assessment is accurate, it is impossible to get by in America in low-level jobs. That’s if.

Fortunately for many Americans—and for virtually all people who find themselves in these jobs—Ehrenreich’s analysis has fatal flaws. Since it is certain this book will become the basis for many other “can’t-get-by” studies that pass for policy analysis, it is worth analyzing her weaknesses in some detail.

First and foremost, Ehrenreich pretended to be a minimum-wage worker. She acted in a role for a few months. Critics might see this as supporting her position, but I think it blows up the entire foundation. The purpose of work is not to get by, but to get ahead. This is a critical distinction: how Ehrenreich looks at her work and life, and the reality of the situation. Most people, no matter what the job of the moment, see it as a way to get ahead later. Yet Ehrenreich did not even try to move up. She lied about her education and credentials at the outset so as to not prejudice the employers, either favorably (by giving her higher-paying positions) or negatively (“What’s wrong with you that you can’t find a gig with all your education?”). She apparently doesn’t see this as a slap in the face for all those “proletarians” with whom she identifies who struggle to get that GED, or to get a college education at night.

Not only did she not try to advance, but she never sought out others who had. We learn about the private, sometimes tragic, lives of many of her co-workers, but never find anyone who made it into management, who left for greener pastures, or who even made it to the top of the low-level wage ladder. Quite the contrary, none of her managers are appealing: they are all greedy, petty, stupid, egotistical, and uncaring.

Since Ehrenreich’s story involves personal experience as fact, my own background must be equally valid, if dated. When I turned 15, I got a minimum-wage job at Der Weinerschnitzel—the hotdog version of McDonald’s. Almost instantly the manager (who was, as best I could tell, neither stupid or uncaring) was willing to make me an assistant manager. It had something to do with being able to remember to turn the sign off before I went home. Soon, I left the “dog house” for a better job, as a carryout boy at a local (and locally owned) grocery store. At the time I saw that as my big break: I started at $3.35 an hour, plus overtime, plus double time on holidays. Several women worked as cashiers there and had been there for years. Word got out that they earned more than $10 an hour! Again, while the managers did not baby us—they expected hard work and good habits, as well as a smile—we were well treated, and, for the day, well paid. It was an interracial staff, both among the carryout boys and the management. But no one there, unless someone was aiming at a managerial position, planned to stay at the grocery store his entire life. It was, as most minimum-wage jobs are, an entry-level position designed to train people in basic skills (working a cash register, counting change, stocking, taking inventory, ordering, and above all, being polite and energetic).

Wouldn’t Go Hungry

There was a flip side to Ehrenreich’s self-imposed limits: “I had no intention of going hungry.” Harsh as it may be, though, there is a powerful incentive when one goes hungry. It was exactly that kind of incentive, both in positive terms of advancing and in negative terms of utter failure, that rendered her experiment unrealistic.

If Ehrenreich missed this important (fundamental?) element to the world of minimum-wage work, or any work for that matter, what else did she miss? Plenty.

One is struck by the utter absence of marriage in this book. Most of Ehrenreich’s sob-story examples are women who are single with children or are “living together.” This is not a minor point. Charles Murray and others have demonstrated irrefutably that the single most important factor correlated with increasing wealth is marriage. Yet the author scarcely mentions marriage, as if it had no bearing on how some of her co-workers got where they were. One sees the subtle implications of this in her apparently unwitting choice of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which show that private household workers earn $23 a week less than the poverty level “for a family of three.” A family of three is either a married couple with one child or a single-parent (usually a woman) with two kids. If the latter, this statistic almost by itself suggests that if there were two wage-earners, they would make well above the poverty level. In other words, the controlling factor is marriage, not wages.

Another thing is absent in the book: accumulated wealth. Everyone has something. Usually it’s a house and “stuff,” but most people, even poor people, have cars, televisions, VCRs, jewelry, or other items that constitute wealth. For Ehrenreich’s experiment to “succeed” (for her to “not get by”), she had to begin with no wealth. She excludes a car from her equation and has no house, no tangibles, nothing to sell. Thus she began her experiment at a lower point than most of her subjects, many of whom at least owned cars and trailers (while Ehrenreich was renting transportation and living space at high weekly rates). Moreover, age is key to accumulating wealth: a 30-year-old has more stuff than a 20-year-old; a 50-year-old more than a 30-year-old; and so on. Part of “moving up” entails acquisition of things that you no longer have to purchase on a daily, or weekly, basis.

Ehrenreich’s job choices, even within her narrow selections, were rigged to ensure the answer she wanted. She never took higher-paying jobs. Waiting tables can be low-paying, but it can also be quite lucrative. Waitresses at good restaurants and bars can pull in $100 a night, and in more upscale areas many times that. She might counter that she was too old or not good-looking enough for such gigs, but the elderly and, shall we say, “seasoned” ladies who occasionally wait on me at the pancake house or in some of the nicer restaurants are not Hollywood starlets. While it is true that Hooters has its own “look” when it comes to servers, most other establishments have no problem hiring older men or women, as long as they are clean and dependable.

In some places, often when producing statistics that either are extremely controversial or barely believable (“30 percent of the workforce toils for $8 or less”), Ehrenreich relies on studies from predictably “liberal” think tanks. There is nothing wrong with that, if you also cite the other, conflicting evidence. How permanent are workers in this 30 percent? Not very, if most minimum-wage jobs are any indicator. Likewise, she claims that in “a survey conducted by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 67 percent of the adults requesting emergency food aid are people with jobs.” But her notes don’t refer to any such study, only a Detroit News secondhand referral, which may, or may not, have gotten the details right. Again, though, the impression Ehrenreich gives is one of a massive subculture of minimum-wage peons, rather than the more accurate image of an escalator, in which some at the bottom rise all the way to the top, some get off on the second floor, and so on.

Where Are the Taxes?

While Ehrenreich spends many of her 200 pages detailing how she scrimped, cut corners, or otherwise tried to squeeze blood out of a Ding Dong, there is scarcely a word about taxes. The omission is staggering, especially considering her obsession, at times, with earning the additional 30 cents that one job offered over another. Consider this: Uncle Sam takes 10–25 percent of any worker’s paycheck, right off the top, under “withholding.” Gone. History. Vanished. In my state of Ohio, the government in Columbus takes another cut, around 6 percent. Dayton, where I work, and Springboro, where I live, also want their “take,” slicing off yet another half a percent. And there is unemployment paid to the state—again, all coming right off the top. Then there is the Social Security and Medicare “contribution.”

For middle-class employees these deductions are painful. But for low-income people they are nearly fatal. Most of Ehrenreich’s co-workers would have had double the pay if not for the government’s secular tithe. Maybe we can’t get by without taxes, but let’s assume, for a moment, that the federal tax rate was 15 percent. That would have saved most of Ehrenreich’s colleagues up to 73 cents per hour (at $7.25). And how about if we assume that there is no state tax, as in New Hampshire? That would add another 43 cents per hour. Social Security is a true luxury to people who need bigger paychecks now: would it not be wiser to let them keep their money at the front end? And unemployment? How many minimum-wage workers do you know who draw unemployment? Let’s say that these “forced contributions” account for another 20 cents per hour. Merely by omitting these onerous taxes and other “contributions,” we could give a hypothetical $7.25 per-hour employee a raise of up to $1.36, making the job $8.61. Spread over a 45-hour week (we’ll assume a hard worker wants a little overtime), that could be an extra $61.20 per week, or an incredible $244.80 per month. This alone would have paid half the rent on a good apartment, not the sleazy motels that Ehrenreich had to frequent.

More taxes? Try this: the FICA “contribution” is paid half at the front end by the employee, but also half at the back end by the employee, even though the employer supposedly pays it. It is still the employee’s money, but diverted from wages. Moreover, Ehrenreich disparages benefits and other “perks” as being preferred by employers because they are easier to take away in a crunch. She completely misses the obvious: to a point (I realize you cannot eat benefits), it is much more valuable to take a benefit than an extra dollar in salary. Consider health insurance. Employers can give an employee a dollar in benefits, a dollar that the employee could have used to purchase his own health care. But the benefit is pretax income; a dollar in benefits equals a dollar. After taxes, the dollar would be worth only about 65 cents to the employee.

There are even more tax issues that Ehrenreich carefully avoids when doing her survival assessments. If there is a tax incentive for home ownership, there is a corollary tax penalty for renting. There is a double tax penalty for renting motel rooms, which Ehrenreich had to rent until she could get an apartment, because most states tax them. What is troubling is that on multiple levels, and repeatedly, Ehrenreich refuses to even acknowledge, let alone consider, the impact of taxation on even the lowest-paid Americans because, apparently, it doesn’t fit her mold.

Ehrenreich’s proposals are predictable: a higher minimum wage, more welfare, more unionization. She admits that “nobody bothers to pull all these stories together” to proclaim a widespread state of emergency. That is precisely the point: these are disparate, isolated, and usually temporary stories, and when economists have “pulled them all together,” they have not found anything near the minimum-wage hell to which Ehrenreich’s denizens are damned. She wants to blame a “conspiracy of silence” for misrepresenting the “failure” of welfare reform, but the fact is that welfare reform, and minimum-wage work, have been studied extensively. Both the statistics, and the human success stories, reveal a different—and better—reality than the one Barbara Ehrenreich visited briefly in her search for “evidence.”
Larry Schweikart teaches history at the University of Dayton.
Larry Schweikart
Larry Schweikart
Larry Earl Schweikart is an American historian and professor of history at the University of Dayton. He is the author of more than a dozen books; his best known popular book is A Patriot's History of the United States.