Read the transcript of this interview with Cornel West at RealClearPolitics and my remarks might make sense.

More than one sort of “social experiment” is going on in the United States as has been recognized from its very beginnings. The experimentation isn’t limited to capitalism vs. socialism. There is also, for example, an ongoing experiment as to whether a multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-confessional country can exist without tyranny or tearing itself apart. The worst thing that might happen to him is if he were to convince people that experiment were the one that is failing.

Again and again this morning I have heard one black journalist or other pundit after another say things which can be summed up as “this stuff doesn’t happen to white people”. While I sympathize with their pain, I also think they’re wrong. This stuff doesn’t happen to people who don’t have encounters with the police. If I were to resist the police or argue with them or run away, I would be slammed to the ground just as fast as anybody else. It’s not because they’re not white. It’s because they’re not blue.

As I think I’ve mentioned before one of my college roommates became a police officer and over the years I’ve had the opportunity of social interactions with police officers pretty frequently. IMO a “laager mentality” or siege mentality is pretty common among police officers. Their self-image is basically Fort Apache. They’re the cavalry and everybody else are the hostiles—you, me, everybody who isn’t a police officer.

Here in Chicago there are three paths to becoming a police officer: you can have a four year college degree, you can have an associates degree and a couple of years of military service, or you can have a high school diploma and more years of military service. We need to end military service as a qualification for becoming a police officer, especially under the present circumstances. Men and women can go straight from being MP in Afghanistan to the police academy. We should hardly be surprised if they see everyone as hostiles because that’s what they’ve been living with.

The Wall Street Journal looks at the carnage:

MINNEAPOLIS—Riots took hold of U.S. cities Saturday night, as protests over the death of George Floyd turned violent across the country for a second night in a row.

Protesters lighted cars on fire in New York, Seattle and Philadelphia. In Los Angeles, demonstrators kicked in the windshields of police cars, torched a police outpost in an outdoor shopping mall, and looted Nordstrom and Ray Ban stores. Police shot rubber bullets and swung their batons at demonstrators.

In Minnesota, where protests began this week after the death of Mr. Floyd in Minneapolis police custody Monday, Gov. Tim Walz pleaded with residents to obey an 8 p.m. curfew. Mr. Walz said he was fully mobilizing the state’s National Guard after a night of rioting and violence, leaving open the possibility of requesting federal troops; forces from other states had also been readied to deploy to Minnesota.

[…]

Protests also turned violent in Miami, Philadelphia, Chicago, and other cities.

In New York, videos posted online showed a police car driving into protesters in Brooklyn. New York City Police Department officials said Sunday morning more than 340 people were arrested in protests across the city Saturday. That compares with the department total of 208 people arrested Friday. The officials said 47 police vehicles were vandalized in Saturday’s demonstrations, including a number of vehicles that were set on fire, and 33 NYPD officers were injured.

In Washington, D.C., protesters near the White House hurled items including fireworks at the police, and law enforcement used pepper spray on the crowd. The District of Columbia National Guard was activated to help the U.S. Park Police with the protests, the guard said in a statement on Facebook on Saturday night.

I do not find the notion that three months of lockdowns are irrelevant to the rioting and looting or, indeed, to the police reaction credible. The most modest lesson that should be drawn is that, if you impose a lengthy lockdown, you’ve got to be prepared for civil disorder as the lockdowns are removed. Tensions and boredom build. They will seek an outlet.

What began with demonstrations in Chicago rapidly degenerated into rioting and looting. ABC 7 Chicago reports:

CHICAGO (WLS) — Downtown businesses began the large task of cleaning up Sunday morning, after violent protests erupted across the city Saturday.

Many convenience stores, fast food chains and clothing stores had windows knocked out or graffiti strewn across their facades. Crews could be seen boarding up windows and cleaning buildings early Sunday.

Most of the bridges connecting the Loop to River North remained up, and numerous lane and road closures remained in effect.

Chicago police said they could not immediately provide additional information related to the protests Sunday but said mass arrests were taking place. Those in custody were being transported to various stations across the city.

At least four people were shot, one fatally, amid the protests. The fatal shooting happened about 11 p.m. in River North.

The number of homicides in Chicago in 2020 has already exceeded the toll in either 2019 or 2018 and is well on its way to meeting or exceeding the number in 2017. Last night we received a call informing us of a citywide curfew, the first of my recollection.

There are also some reports of so-called “protesters” actively impeding police officers and firefighters, jamming police frequencies, or even setting fire to police cars. That isn’t protest; it’s rioting. I urge the media to stop sugar-coating things. Rioters are rioters; looters are looters.

I would also point out that if, as a demonstrator, you impede the police you have assumed an affirmative responsibility to restrain rioters including by force. I have also heard of some incidents of that taking place for which kudos and thanks.

None of this should come as a surprise and it’s only partly about the homicide that took place in Minneapolis. Chicagoans have long-standing grievances against the police, too, and the reforms that have taken place have not been sufficient to redress those grievances. One of the reasons that Lori Lightfoot was elected mayor was in the hope that she would bring reform.

Grievances even just grievances don’t justify rioting and looting. Businesses that have been barely struggling by during the lockdown including those that have continued to pay their employees now have an additional burden imposed on them.

Mayor Lightfoot has a challenge ahead of her. She needs to show both more grace and more leadership than she has lately.

Like most of us I think I have been horrified at the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis by a police officer, caught on video, and the aftermath of rioting, looting, and destruction there. The center of the rioting appears to be just a few blocks from where one of my siblings and spouse had their first house and where their kids grew up. I am hearing reports that some of the greatest destruction is being wrought by agents provocateurs, people who don’t live in the neighborhood, and are acting less from outrage over racism and more from a more generalized hatred.

Among the many tragic aspects of the whole matter is that the businesses that are being destroyed in the rioting are ones on which the people who live in the neighborhood depend and which will not soon be rebuilt.

Now I hear that there has been rioting in Atlanta, New York, and Los Angeles.

There are so many moving parts in these riots. Racism, an us vs. them attitude I have found quite prevalent among police officers in which “us” means police officers and “them” is everybody else. Don’t discount the long lockdowns. It’s like when you remove the cap from a bottle and the bottle explodes.

I’m afraid it will be a long, hot summer.

Speaking of Taiwan you may find this piece by Charu Sudan Kasturi at OZY analyzing President Xi’s recent moves, especially as they relate to Taiwan, interesting. I agree with this passage:

What better way to get people to rally around the flag and the leader than to create the threat of an external enemy? China knew that its proposed law for Hong Kong would spark criticism and threats of punishment from the West. That in turn allows Beijing to paint the U.S. as a villain looking to erode China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong.

China is doubling down on this approach, with tensions also rising along its largely disputed border with India, where New Delhi has accused the People’s Liberation Army of repeated infiltration over the past week. It’s a growing crisis that the West has largely ignored so far, but fits in with Beijing’s overall posture these past few days.

but there’s a considerable portion of it about which I am skeptical. For example:

But Beijing’s moves aren’t only about Hong Kong. Its real target is Taiwan, and political legitimacy in mainland China for President Xi Jinping, whose credibility has taken a beating over his handling of the coronavirus crisis.

The reason that I am skeptical is reflected later in the piece:

China is doubling down on this approach, with tensions also rising along its largely disputed border with India, where New Delhi has accused the People’s Liberation Army of repeated infiltration over the past week. It’s a growing crisis that the West has largely ignored so far, but fits in with Beijing’s overall posture these past few days.

I find the notion that provoking tensions along the China-India border, cracking down on Hong Kong, and saber-rattling against Taiwan are all focused on Taiwan. I don’t think they’re three different things but all the same thing—increased aggression coupled with a sense of urgency.

Which brings me to this:

For all its bluster, China knows it can’t hope to regain Taiwan as a part of the motherland anytime soon. But it also can’t afford to see the self-ruled territory gain greater diplomatic weight. So it’s responding with its own stern messages — both direct and indirect.

I wonder what would lead him to say that? I don’t think that China is sending messages. I think it’s moving to reclaim what it sees as its rightful property.

If my suspicions are right, expect China to start rattling its saber in the direction of Vladivostok. There may even be a pretext as, for example, trying to prevent the spread of COVID-19 into its northeastern province.

I’m a bit late to this party but you might find the interview above from France 24 of Chen Chien-Jen, Vice President of Taiwan and, coincidentally, an epidemiologist, as informative as I did. He quite discreet but the interview is quite damning of the WHO and mildly critical of China.

Heaven knows there are a lot of things to complain about in what President Trump says and does or fails to say or do. IMO the lamest complaint is about the lack of a national plan for dealing with COVID-19. What earthly good would such a plan be other than to be something else for journalists to complain about and something else for state and local authorities to ignore? The reality is that under our system the federal government has precious little way of compelling the states to do anything and the primary responsibility for domestic matters resides in state governments which in turn supervise local governments which are generally strictly subordinate to them.

Whenever I hear such complaints I always think the same thing. “Complete the following sentence. President Trump should declare nationwide martial law because…” That’s what a national plan would take.

Those who think the federal government should be running everything in the country are betraying their blissful ignorance of how governments in the U. S. actually work. States are responsible for practically everything. The federal government is responsible for relatively little other than the military and foreign policy. As Pete Fisher aptly put it 20 years ago the federal government is an insurance company with an army.

I was disappointed by Sadanand Dhume’s Wall Street Journal column on the increased tension on the India-China border, largely fomented by China. I just didn’t see much value-added in it except for this:

Nitin Pai, co-founder of the Takshashila Institution, a Bangalore-based think tank, says Beijing’s aggressive stance toward India, as reflected in its current provocation on the border, is part of the country’s “sharper and more confrontational” foreign policy in the Covid era. Since the start of the pandemic, China has found itself embroiled in spats with, among others, the U.S., Australia and Taiwan. It has also stepped up naval patrols in the disputed South China Sea.

Mr. Pai says Beijing is being foolish by choosing confrontation with India, a nation of 1.3 billion people with a median age of 27. “They are going to live for a long time, and they are going to remember you as an enemy,” he says. “You may win a mountain peak or a valley, but you are going to make enemies for life.”

I’ve said it before. I just don’t understand China’s sudden change not merely in policy but in the time horizon of its actions. Previously famous for taking a longer view President Xi seems to be considering only the near term. Why the rush? Is he running out of time?